AN ANSWER TO THE Discourse OF Mr. WILLIAM SHERLOCK, TOUCHING The Knowledge of Christ, and our Union and Communion with Him.  
By EDWARD POLHILL of Burwash in Sussex, Esquire.  
LONDON, Printed for Ben. Foster, and are to be sold by most Booksellers in London. MDCLXXV.   

TO THE READER.  
IN that excellent Piece the Soul of Man (which is too great for this lower World, and in the very Frame of it aspires after an Infinite Good) the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or uppermost Room is the Understanding; and among all the Truths, which are the Furniture thereof, none are so rich, as those Theological ones, which are drawn out of the Golden Mines of Scripture. Arts and Sciences are in comparison but the Poor of the Mind, the Riches and Treasures of Knowledge lie in Evangelical Mysteries; these outshine the Sun, and outweigh the Earth: They have the highest Certainty, as coming down immediately from heaven; and withal the noblest Tendency, as leading us thither: Infinite Truth is the Fountain, and infinite Goodness the Centre of them. These, when in their Lustre, make a spiritual Day, and derive such a pure Influence upon the Hearts and Lives of Men, as moulds them into the Divine Image, and thereby makes them meet for the bliss-making Vision in Heaven. No sooner can these be under an Eclipse, but there will be a Night and a Chaos of confusions; the Path of Life and Happiness will be wrapped up in darkness; black Legions of Errors and Corruptions will creep forth, and pious Souls will wish for the day, I mean, for a fresh Illustration of Truths from that sacred Spirit, which at first breahed them out into the World; and, after all the Clouds and dark Veils put upon them, can bring them forth in their Oriency and true Glory. These to Believers are as Pearls and sacred Jewels, dearer than the Apple of their Eye, nay, than their own Souls: They build upon them by Faith, espouse them by divine Love, lay them up in a pure Conscience, distil the Virtue of them into a holy Life; and, if it were possible, they would have none of the sacred Light put out, nor the least Jot or Tittle of those Truth's fall to the ground. O what a rate did the famous St. Austin and others set upon God's special Effectual Grace! How highly did the heroical Luther value the Point of Justification! Jacente articulo Justificationis jacent omnia, saith he, as if a Christians All were in it. When such Truths are violated, Christians, how meek soever in other things, must earnestly contend, and not give place, no, not for an hour; here, if ever, Luther's pia & sancta pertinacia is in season.  
Not to stay any longer on the excellencies and great Concerns of Evangelical Truths, which no tongue of Men or Angels is able fully to express. I shall now speak a little touching Mr. Sherlock's Book. When I read it, I thought myself in a new Theological World; Believers appearing without their Head for want of a Mystical Union, stripped and naked for lack of imputed Righteousness; the full treasures of Grace in Christ, which have supplied all the vessels of faith, emptied out of sacred his person, & transfused into the doctrine of the Gospel; as if according to Pelagius all Grace were in doctrine only: The holy Spirit, the great Origen of Graces and Comforts, in its Illumination seems to be superfluous, in its Testimony to Believers an Enthusiastical Fancy, and in the work of Regeneration, if any, at most but a partial Co-cause, parting stakes with the Will of Man: Faith in Abel and Enoch lying as low as Natural Principles; in Noah and Abraham raised up a little to particular Revelations, but not so high as the Messiah: In Christians standing off and at a distance from Christ its dear Object, not daring to lay hold on, or so much as touch him, to draw any Virtue from thence. As if Socinus had hit it right, when he said, Christi apprehensio merum commentum & inanissimum somnium est. The immutable Love of God, the only Cement of the Church, seems to be turned off from Persons to Qualities, and towards Persons to be as variable as the fickle Will of Man is; and yet he is immutable still, he loves for the same Reason, or, as Socinus saith, Non sine causa mutat. The Pontifician Thesis' touching Justification by inherent Righteousness, seems to be revived a fresh, and that in a way less tolerable than among the Romanists: They, though they would have inherent Righteousness come in for a share, yet allow the Imputation of Christ's passive Obedience; but in the New Scheme, inherent Righteousness takes up all the room, and leaves none for imputed. The Drollery and sarcastical Reflections in the Book are but the Cover of it; within there is a dark Eclipse upon many excellent Truths which hitherto have been owned in the Churches of Christ, and particularly in our own. Among other Truths none have had a greater share of suffering than those two, touching our Mystical Union with Christ, and the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us; both which are to me very momentous. The Mystical Union hath I suppose, been generally received in the Church. Indeed Gregory de Valentia once cavilled at it, as if it were Mysterium Calvinisticum; and yet he seems to own it, when he saith, Animum nostrum posse per fidem corpus Christi, etiam ut in coelo existens, atque adeo ut est extra Sacramentum manducare. He that denies the Mystical Union, cannot hold the head Jesus Christ, from which all the body by joints and bands hath nourishment ministered, Col. 2.19. Take away that Union, and Christ is a Head of no Influence, the Joints and the Bands, which were made to convey divine Nutriture from him, are but empty Titles, and signify no more than those Conduit-pipes do, which are severed from the Fountain. Again, he that denies the Mystical Union, must lose that piece of his Creed, the Communion of Saints; their Communion among themselves primarily depends on their Union with Christ the Head, from whom the whole body is fitly joined together and compacted, as the Apostle tells us, Eph. 4.16. All the Harmonies in the Body Mystical hang on its Union with the Head; without this Believers could have no Communion one with another, save in this only, that they must all die one common death, by being severed from their Head: The living Stones, once off from their Foundation, can hang no longer together in the spiritual Building, but must totter down into a Chaos of Confusion. Moreover, he that denies the mystical Union, must turn off the Believer from his true standing: according to the Gospel, the Believer is a man in Christ; he is built on him, as on a Foundation; he subsists in him, as the Branches do in the Vine; he hath vital Influences from him, as the Members have from the Head; he is acted by his divine Spirit in all the pure ways to heaven, and all this is his security, his preservation in Jesus Christ: But take away the Mystical Union, he is a man out of Christ, he stands upon his own bottom, he subsists by himself alone, he receives no influences from Christ the Head, nor is acted by any higher Spirit than his own; and in such a case, the next news we hear of him must be an utter downfall. But to say no more of the Mystical Union; that other Point touching the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us, hath also been ever owned in the Church; he that denies it, must, I fear, in the consequent, overturn the Law, the Gospel, and the Satisfaction of Christ. He must overturn the Law; for he must own a Justification without a Righteousness answering thereunto; inherent Righteousness being imperfect, and imputed a Nullity, there is nothing to answer the Law, and yet we are justified, which is as much as to say, the Law is no Law: If it be a Law, none can be justified without a Righteousness adequate to it; if we may be justified without such a Righteousness, the Law is no Law, which is what the Antinomians would have: That a Law should be in force, and a man should be justified without an adequate Righteousness, and that before a most righteous Judge, who judgeth according to truth, is utterly impossible. Again he must overturn the Gospel, and that upon a double account: The one is this: He must subvert the Promises of Justification made in the Gospel; the Promises run thus; That we shall be justified by Christ's blood, made righteous by his obedience; that his blood shall cleanse away sin, and purge our consciences from dead works; and how can these be fulfilled without an Imputation? To say, that Christ's Blood founded the Covenant, will not serve the turn; these are Promises of a Covenant founded already, and a founded Covenant doth not promise the founding of itself. Christ's blood as it founded the Covenant, is precedent to the Promises, and by it as such the Promises cannot be fulfilled; for than they should be fulfilled before they were made, or at least in the making of them: It remains therefore that Christ's righteousness must be made ours by imputation, & thereby the promises may be made good to us. If the Promises mean as they speak, than we must be justified by Christ's blood & obedience, which infers Imputation; if the Promises (how plain, how emphatical soever the words be) mean not, that we shall be justified by Christ's Blood or Righteousness, than Christ shed his Blood for us, that we might be justified without it; he satisfied for us, that we might be pardoned without a satisfaction, which is an odd reflection on his satisfaction, if not a total evacuation of it. The other is this; he must pervert the Conditions of the Gospel from their true end and scope: These Conditions were in infinite Wisdom accommodated and attempered to the death of Christ which founded them, they were made to be subordinate and subservient to Christ's satisfaction and the glory of it: The Faith required in them was not intended to be the matter of our Justification, and in that notion to discharge and justify us; the main scope and end of those conditions was to show upon what terms Christ's righteosness and satisfaction should discharge and justify us. Now as long as these conditions are made but conditions, as long as Faith keeps its proper station, all is well and as it ought to be; but if those conditions be advanced above their own station, if our inherent righteousness be made the very matter of our Justification, as indeed it must if imputed Righteousness be denied, than the conditions of the Gospel are corrupted and perverted from their true end, they are no longer subordinated to Christ's satisfaction, but made to set up our inherent Righteousness in the room of it, they show no longer upon what terms Christ's satisfaction shall discharge us, but how our own Righteousness may do it, which is plainly to pervert the conditions of the Gospel. Moreover he must overturn the satisfaction of Christ: Touching this three things are considerable, viz. Christ's surrogation in our room, God's acceptation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on our behalf, and the operation of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in our discharge; none of which can stand without an imputation. The first thing is Christ's surrogation, he suffered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 20.28. in stead of many; he was our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, putting his Soul in the room of ours, or else he could not have satisfied for us. Now that Christ should suffer in our room and stead, and his sufferings should not be accounted or imputed to us, is a contradiction; take away Imputation, and you take away Surrogation; take away Surrogation, and you take away Satisfaction. The second thing is God's acceptation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on our behalf: Christ's Sacrifice was a sweet-smelling savour unto God, Eph. 5.2. God accepted it on our behalf, or else Christ could not have satisfied for us. Now that Christ's sufferings should be accepted by God as on our behalf, and yet that they should not be accounted or imputed is utterly impossible; so far as Christ's Satisfaction was accepted by God for us, so far it must be imputed to us; if it was accepted only for a remissibility, than it is imputed no further; but then remission will be without satisfaction, which is what the Socinians would have; but if (as the truth is) it was accepted for Remission and Justification to be dispensed upon believing, than it is imputed to that end, actually to justify and discharge us: Take away Imputation, and you take away Acceptation, and with it Satisfaction. The third thing is the operation of Christ's satisfaction in our discharge. Satisfaction is destructio obligationis, it doth really and properly discharge him for whom it is made: accepted absolutely, it discharges him immediately; accepted on terms it discharges upon the performance, and that as properly and really, though not so soon as in the other case; its virtue and efficacy, which was suspended by the condition, breaks forth into effect upon the performance; this is the nature and property of Satisfaction: A Satisfaction which doth not discharge, doth not satisfy, that is, in plain terms, it is no Satisfaction. Now the satisfaction of Christ doth no discharge us immediately, but upon believing, which is the Evangelical Condition; and how doth it do it? Surely one of these two ways, either it discharges us merely as it founded the Covenant, or else as it is made ours by Imputation; the former cannot be, it founded the Covenant before our believing, & if it do no more after, it discharges us not, for it doth as much before believing (before which it discharges not) as after: It founded the Covenant for those that perish, at least so far, that upon believing they might have been justified; & if it do no more for those that are saved, it discharges us not; for it doth operate as much and as far towards the discharge of those that perish, who are never discharged, as of those that are discharged and saved; which plainly shows, that it properly discharges none at all: and if it discharge not, it satisfies not, that is, it is no satisfaction. It remains therefore, that Christ's Satisfaction is made ours by Imputation, and so doth discharge us: If it discharge us, it must be made ours by Imputation, and if it discharge us not, it is no Satisfaction. Socinus, who denied Christ's Satisfaction, had reason to deny imputed Righteousness; and he, who denies imputed Righteousness, must in the consequent deny Christ's Satisfaction, nay, he must set up another satisfaction in stead of it. In Justification there must be some Righteousness or other, to be the matter of our Justification, and to discharge us before God; if the imputed Righteousness of Christ be not such, than our own inherent Righteousness must be the very thing, that must discharge us and satisfy for us; that indeed must be the satisfaction much rather than Christ's, because it properly actually discharges us, which Christ's doth not: Unless we say with the Socinians, that there is Remission without Satisfaction, there must be somewhat to be a Satisfaction, and what that is very obvious: That which is the matter of our Justification, that which doth properly discharge us, that is the Satisfaction: if Christ's Righteousness imputed be not it, our inherent Righteousness must be such; and yet alas! what a poor thing is it to be so advanced? It's own defects call for a pardon, and how should it justify or discharge us? May that, which wants a pardon itself, justify; or may it first be pardoned it self, and then justify its Subject in which it is? Both are absurd: Before it is pardoned itself, it cannot justify; and after it is pardoned, it is very odd, that it should give that which itself once wanted. Not to be tedious; I have endeavoured to return an Answer to Mr. Sherlock's Book, not out of Passion or disrespect to his Person, who is my acquaintance, and for whom I have respects; but merely out of love to the Truth, which is dearer to me than all Relations. I have for the most part set forth his words at length; and where sometimes for brevity's sake I have contracted them, it hath been my care to be just to every thing of Emphasis or Argument. The Lapses in this my Answer beg the Readers pardon, and the Truths in it call for his consent: If any thing in it tend towards the clearing or establishing of sacred Truth, it is enough for him, who is  
A Wellwisher to the Truth, EDWARD POLHILL.   


THE INTRODUCTION.  
CHAP. I.  
ALL Error hath some appearance of Truth, 
Mr. Sherlock.  it being impossible to believe a plain and undisguised falsehood.  
It is so indeed: 
Answer.  The old Fable is true, Truth first presented herself to the World, and went about to seek entertainment; but finding none, she resolved to leave Earth, and take her flight to Heaven. But as she was going up, she let fall her Mantle, and Error waiting by, snatched it up, and ever since hath gone about in it. Every erroneous Opinion, which walks about in the dress and appearance of Reason, tells us, that the opposite Mysteries are retired up to their great original above, there to complain against an unbelieving World, for the hard usages found here below.  
The first and fundamental mistake is in a confusion of Names, 
Mr. Sherlock.  in a doubtful and ambiguous use of Words, especially in Matters of Religion; men consider nothing but the sound of words, and from thence form such uncouth Idaea's of Religion, as are fitted to the meanness of their understanding, or gratify their natural Genius and Disposition, or are calculated to serve an Interest; and thus the Gospel of our Saviour is defaced and obscured, by affected Mysteries and Paradoxes, and senseless Propositions; and Christ the brightness of his Father's Glory is represented with a thicker Veil upon his Face, than Moses.  
How truly this general Charge is laid at the Door of those Worthies, 
Answer.  whom this Author opposes, must be tried by the instances of the after Discourse; in the mean time, I fear, that some men following the tinkling of their own reason, shape such Idaea's of Religion as cast smiles and flatteries upon corrupt Nature, and strangely darken the Gospel by clearing away those Mysteries, which are the glory of it, and stand above the level of humane reason, as pregnant proofs of the Divinity of the Gospel, and fit objects for the exercise of Faith.  
If we believe some men; 
Mr. Sherlock.  There is as irreconcilable a difference between the Religion of Christ's Person, and of his Gospel, as between the Law and Grace: for the Gospel of Christ is as severe a dispensation as the Law, which dooms all men to eternal misery, who live not very innocent and virtuous lives; but the Person of Christ is all Grace, a mere refuge and sanctuary for the wicked and ungodly, that is, (as he after explains it) for impenitent and incorrigible sinners.  
Christ at odds with his Gospel! 
Answer.  Absit: The reason is untrue on both sides. That the Gospel is as severe a dispensation as the Law; (which surely calls for no less than sinless obedience) is untrue in itself; that the Person of Christ is a refuge for impenitent sinners; is not so much as truly affixed upon the Opposites; their Writings deny it, their hearts abhor it as prodigious. He that goes about to deduce it from their words, will have as little success, as that attempt had, which would have extracted the Spirits of Turcism out of the Writings of Reverend Calvin. What he means by virtuous and innocent lives, I know not; the Pelagian Julianus ushers in his Fabricius, Fabius, and Scipio, as very virtuous men, and lifts up their Chastity, Mercy and Justice, as true Virtues, and well pleasing to God. Will this serve the turn? St. Austin can by no means endure it, but breaks out in a holy passion, O inimici gratiae; solo vocabulo Christiani! May there be true virtue in animo fornicante à Deo? or can a man be just sine fide Christi? Or is that virtue, in which God is not served? Hoc est, unde vos maximè detestatur Christiana Ecclesia, thus that excellent Father. The Author's sense in this matter will be further seen in his after-discourse about natural Faith.  
Faith in Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and hope in Christ are expounded of a fiducial reliance and recumbency on the Person of Christ for salvation, in contradistinction to obedience to his Laws; which sets up a Religion of the Person of Christ, in opposition to the Religion of his Gospel.  
If these pregnant Phrases (of Faith in Christ and Hope in Christ) do not make him the Object of Faith, 
Answer.  I know not what can; when the Socinians disputed among themselves, whether Christ were the Object of Worship, and so of Faith; it was a very hard case on the one side, that he (according to their Principles) but a mere creature should be the object of faith; on the other, that so many pregnant places of Scripture should be eluded; but had they found out a way to interpret such Phrases (as believing and trusting in him) in a sense abstractive from his Person, they might all have concluded that he was not the object of faith. The Author, as to a faith of recumbency on him and his merits, seems to conclude the same; for though he speak of trusting in Christ and his blood, he interprets himself thus, expecting to be saved according to the terms of the Gospel Covenant, that is, by believing and obeying the Gospel of Christ, pag. 24. The whole is placed in believing and obeying the Gospel: Obedience, as I take it, is no part of Faith. Works show forth Faith, James 2. and so are distinct from it; Faith produces Obedience, Hebrews 11. and surely it doth not produce itself; We are married to Christ, that is, by Faith, that we might bring forth fruit unto God, Rom. 7.1. And me thinks, Faith, which is the espousal, should not be the Progeny: Abraham's faith only is admitted in Justification, Romans 4. And his works (though done after conversion) are excluded, as being no part of it. When Socinus said, that, Christo credere idem significat, atque illi obedire: The Learned Calovius tells him; That it is but a mere Fiction, to prevent the Article of Justification, and transform Faith into Works: And withal adds, that, Credere in nullo idiomate idem est, quod obedire, Obedience being no part of Faith; that which remains is only, believing the Gospel, which is a Dogmatical Faith, such as believes the Gospel to be true, and inter alia, Jesus Christ to be the Messiah and Saviour. But, alas! This is so far beneath a faith of recumbency, such as in the Apostle is styled, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, faith in his blood, Rom. 3.25. that the very Devils are capable of it, who yet never shall have the least drop of that atoneing blood sprinkled on them In our Author the whole terms of the Gospel are believing and obeying it: Obeying it, is not so much as a part of faith: Believing it is a part of faith, but far short of recumbency; and how the Author leaves any room at all for recumbency, I see not, if Faith, which uses to rest in the wounds of Christ, may be only totally lodged in the Evangelical Axiom's; I fear that Christ will be at odds with the Gospel; which (contrary to its Native Genius, which is to elevate faith unto him our Great Redeemer) reserves all of it to itself. But to go on, the Author saith, That they are for a recumbency on Christ in contradistinction to obedience to his Laws, which sets up a Religion of the Person of Christ in opposition to the Religion of his Gospel. I answer, They make true faith contradistinct from obedience, not that faith is alone in existence, as if it had no holy fruits of obedience hanging, on it, but that it is alone in the matter of Justification: And this I think is the Doctrine of Protestants, and Fathers. Which made Erasmus, as I have him quoted by the Reverend Morton, say, Haec Vox, sola fides, tot clamoribus lapidata hoc seculo in Luthero, reverentèr legitur & auditur in Patribus; if faith, though alone in justification, do yet spread forth itself into holy obedience; I hope the Gospel is not in the least opposed by such a recumbency, as gives Christ the glory of his blood and righteousness. But now we must hear the significations of the word (Christ.)  
First, 
Mr. Sherlock.  Christ is originally the Name of an Office, which the Jews call the Messiah, or Anointed. Jesus Christ was anointed with the Holy Ghost and Power, which was his consecration to the Mediatory Function, and virtually contained all those Offices of Prophet, Priest, and King, which are not properly distinct Offices in Christ, but the several parts and different administrations of his Mediatory Kingdom; after which, the Author describes those Offices to us.  
The Socinians, 
Answer.  who deny the Satisfaction of Christ, have some reason (according to their corrupt Principles) to jumble all the Offices of Christ together, that the oriency of his Priestly Sacrifice might not appear; yet are they castigated for it by Calovius, and others; and Arnoldus calls the Racovian Catechist, Hostis crucis Christi, upon that account: But why our Author, who owns the Sacrifice and Satisfaction of Christ, should confound them, I know not; I conceive the Offices of Christ are distinct, though he, who had them all, performed them in such a just Decorum, as became him, who had all of them in himself: Though he triumphed upon the Cross: and what he preached was a Law; yet Teaching is not Reigning, nor is either Sacrificing: In his Prophetical Office, Salvation was explicated: in his Priestly, purchased; in his Kingly, applied: The first removes Ignorance, the second expiates Gild, and the Third subdues Corruption. In the Authors description of these Offices, the Reader may make some Observations: In that of the Prophetical Office, he mentions his outward preaching, but passes over in silence that internal illumination of the Spirit, which to me is the life of the other, without which no man can spiritually discern the things of God. Hence Reverend Bishop Reynolds, speaking of the Opinion of Episcopius, that an unregenerate man may understand such things, sine lumine supernaturali, is bold to censure the same as wicked words; In that of the Priestly, he tells us; That Intercession is the Power of a Regal Priest to expiate and forgive sins: I take it, Christ on Earth had power to forgive sins, and did expiate them by his once offered Sacrifice on the Cross. But may we call it Intercession? Or, is Intercession here below? I ever took it to be above, and to be Christ's Appearance in Heaven for us, and his presenting his meritorious Sacrifice to his Father in our behalf. When the Racovian Catechism describes his Intercession by his Power to avert Wrath, Arnoldus censures it thus, Quis unquàm tam inepta, stolida, insulsa super claros Scripturae textus glossemata vel somniare posset? Interpellare Christi in coelis nihil aliud esse quam potestatem? Quae rei vel verborum saltem cognatio? In that of the Kingly, he saith, That he conquers the minds of men by the Power of his Word and Spirit, and reduces them into Subjection; by (Minds) I hope he takes in Wills too, and all is excellent well, may it but stand so; but afterwards the Author denies irresistible Grace, and then the Conquest is but ad nutum creaturae, at the pleasure of the conquered; the conquered, if he please, may be Conqueror, and the Conqueror must drop his Crown into his Hand: and shall we call this a Conquest? Or if we may, is it such, as becomes the Throne of the Son of God, or the design of a Church? After he hath laid the Foundation of his Kingdom in his own blood, must he enter precariously, and at the Nod of his Subjects? After the Author hath gathered up all the Offices of Christ into his Royalty, and proclaimed him Conqueror over minds and wills, must all depend on the will of man? It is a very hard case, if any thing could be so to the Almighty. Should such a thing be, that of St. Austin must fall out, fallitur Deus, 
De Corrept. cap. 7.  vincitur Deus, the Conquest and Royalty too must fail.  
Christ signifies the Person invested with this Office, and, 
Mr. Sherlock.  (which I take for a new Notion) he saith, in the Gospels he is always called Jesus, in the Epistles he is as familiarly called Christ.  
I suppose this Notion cannot be made good. 
Answer.  In the Gospels he is sometimes called Christ (without Jesus) Thus in the accounting of the Generations from Abraham, Matth. 1.11. Thus in the enquiry touching his Birth, Matth. 2.4. Thus in John's bearing of high Works, Matth. 11.2. and, to name no more, Thus it is in Peter's Confession, Matth. 16.16. The matter is not great, I suppose him, in all the Offices to which he was anointed as Christ, to be really a Jesus. There can be no mistake in the Person (as the Author adds) by what name he be called, whether it belong to his Office or Nature, or circumstances of his Life and Fortune, if there be but one, to whom that name belongs. Fortune; I wonder at that word. St. Austin repent that ever he had used it; 
Retract. l. 1. cap. 1.  Where Providence is, Fortune is not. Were Fortune tolerable among the little Gnats and Flies; sure it cannot be so in the Great Concerns of Jesus Christ: however, it may be proper enough, if the result of his Merits and Conquests finally hang on the Lottery of man's will.  
Christ signifies the Gospel and Religion of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  as Moses signifies the Writings and Laws of Moses, and the Prophets, the Writings or Sermons of the Prophets, Luke 16.29. and 31. and then he gives some Scripture-instances for it.  
Possibly sometimes Christ may signify the Gospel or Doctrine of Christ; 
Answer.  but I shall a little consider the instances; the first is that, Gal. 6.15. In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature, that is, saith the Author, in the Gospel and Religion of Christ, nothing is of any value to recommend us to the favour of God, but a new creature, a holy and virtuous life; unto which I answer, those words, (in Christ Jesus) may be fairly construed, to a man in Christ, one who (as it is in the former Verse) is crucified to the World; Thus judicious Calvin upon the Words, Ratio est, cur sit mundo crucifixus, & mundus illi, quia in Christo, cui insitus est, solùm nova valet creatura; and upon the parallel place, in this Epistle, In Christ Jesus, neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love. St. Jerome hath it, His qui in Christo Jesu vivere volunt; and St. chrysostom, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he that puts on Christ, need not be curious in such things. When the Author in his way saith, Nothing recommends to God, but a new creature, I hope he doth not exclude the Merits and Righteousness of Christ; and when afterwards he contradistinguishes the Gospel from the Law, I hope under the latter the new Creature was requisite. The next instance is, Col. 2.8. After the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ; where, saith the Author, after Christ, is opposed to traditions and rudiments, and so must signify not the Person, but the Gospel; that is, Have a care lest ye be corrupted with the opinions and superstitions of men, which are inconsistent with the Christian Philosophy: unto which I shall only say, After Christ, is, as I take it, after Christ himself, the great Doctor of the Church, in whom, as the Apostle tells us, are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, ver. 3. and, in whom, as he speaks, dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, ver. 9 Quid igitur opus est extra hunc alia aut documenta aut adjumenta salutis quaerere, saith the excellent Davenant? such an admirable Teacher may well be opposed to all the Philosophers in the world: Neither is the Author's Reason, That Christ is here opposed to traditions and rudiments, and so must signify the Gospel, of any value; for if we observe what the Apostle saith ver. 4. This I say, lest any man should beguile you, and, what he saith in the beginning of this 8. verse. Beware lest any man spoil you through Philosophy, it is as clear as the light, that the opposition is between Persons; between the Persons of seducing Philosophers, and the Person of Christ the great Teacher. We may further observe, That the Author, who honours the Gospel with the Title of Christ, doth somewhat degrade it, by calling it Philosophy, which I ever took to be but of natural Extraction, and not, as the Gospel, of supernatural Revelation; however, it is more tolerable to call, than make it so, by introducing into the Christian Religion those Dogmata Philosophica, touching Free Will and inherent Righteousness, which as Bp Davenant notes, are drawn ex Ethicis Philosophi, non ex Epistolis Pauli. The next Instance is, that in the 6. Verse of the same Chapter, As you have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him: By receiving of Christ, is meant believing on him, as appears, Joh. 1.12. Bishop Davenant observes a great Emphasis in the words; Non dicit accepistis Doctrinam Christi, sed Christum; 
Expos. in Epist. ad Col.  per fidem enim non modò percipimus Doctrinam Christi, sed vivificum nostrum Salvatorem recipimus, & in corda recondimus ad salutem. By walking in Christ, I understand, with the same Author, living juxta hanc fidem & juxta ductum Spiritus Christi: but saith the Author, It is only to obey the Doctrine of Christ as you have been taught; for the next Verse saith, being established in the faith, as ye have been taught: I answer, The next Verse saith not only, established in the faith, but rooted and built up in him, that is, in Christ; and the teaching, which is inward as well as outward, was, that they might adhere to Christ as well as to his Doctrine. The last Instance is Eph. 4.20, 21. But ye have not so learned Christ; if so be ye have heard him and been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus: Now what (saith the Author) can learning Christ signify but learning the Gospel? and how could they hear him in any other sense, or be instructed in him, as the Original carries it? To which I answer, Learning of Christ here is not a mere Notion, but a Practical Knowledge of him, such as the Apostle mentions, That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable to his death, Phil. 3.10. And whence had they this Learning? they heard him, and were taught by or in him; not from the personal Preaching of Christ in the flesh, but in and by his Ministers and holy Spirit: I add, his holy Spirit, because the Gospel alone cannot do it; which made St. Austin say, 
De Praed. Sanct. cap. 8.  Cùm Evangelium praedicatur, quidam credunt, quidam non credunt; sed qui credunt, praedicatore forinsecùs sonante, intùs à Patre audiunt atque discunt; qui autem non credunt, foris audiunt, intùs non audiunt, neque discunt: that such is the Learning meant here, appears from the after words, As the truth is in Jesus; Truth is in the Gospel notionally, but in Christ practically; all Graces being exemplified in him, and the true learners are conformed to his Image, and, as the Apostle hath it in the next Verses, they put off the old man and put on the new, and so are assimilated to his Death and Resurrection.  
It is acknowledged by all, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that Christ sometimes signifies the Church, which is his Body: Thus we must understand those Phrases, of being in Christ, engrafted into Christ, and united to Christ.  
It is acknowledged by all, 
Answer.  that Christ sometimes signifies the Church; how then can he charge those whom he opposes, that wherever they meet with the word Christ in Scripture, they always understand by it the Person of Christ, pag. 4? As for the Phrases, of being in Christ, etc. I shall reserve them till I come to the Mystical Union. To what the Author infers from the various significations of the Name Christ, That such mistakes have been occasioned thereby, that some are very zealous to advance Christ's Person to the prejudice and reproach of his Religion, I shall only say, It is not so.  
Instead of the substantial Duties of the Love of God and Men, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and an universal Holiness of Life, they have introduced a fanciful Application of Christ to ourselves, and Union to him, set off with those choice Phrases, of closing with Christ, and embracing Christ, and getting an interest in Christ, and trusting and relying and rolling ourselves on Christ.  
Fanciful! 
Answer.  alas! that a Christian, a Divine, should let drop such a reproachful word, on so sacred a thing as the Application of Christ! Without this, the excellent Scripture must, I fear, labour under very odd Glosses; such as these: A Believer may be in Christ, and out of him; he may put him on, and off at the same time; he may have Communion with him, without Union; and feed on him, without so much as reception; Christ may dwell in the Believer at a Distance, and abide in him without the least approach: Which are such kind of Absurdities, as a man would hardly name, for fear of grating pious Ears and Hearts. But this is not all: Without this, true Faith, which, as Learned Dr Ward observes, is uppropriativa Christi, must forfeit its Nature,, unless it can appropriate without Application; and Christ, its precious Object, must lose the Virtue of his Blood and Merits, unless they can heal at a distance: For what shall we say? May an unapplied Christ, be in us the hope of Glory? or may his unapplied Obedience make us righteous? or his unapplied Blood justify us? or his unapplied Death reconcile us to God? It is not for ordinary Capacities to apprehend it: However, if Application fail, may the Universal Holiness of Life, which the Author speaks of, consist? Our Saviour tells us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, separate from me, ye can do nothing, Joh. 15.5. In which words the Melevitan Fathers observe a great Emphasis; Non dicitur, sine me difficiliùs potestis facere, sed sine me nihil potestis facere: And how any man should, either not be separate from an unapplied Christ, or lead a Life of Universal Holiness, in such a statu separato, I cannot imagine: But what speak I of Universal Holiness? Never any man, off from that divine Root of Grace, hath, since the Fall, bore so much as a Blossom of true Sanctity.  
Instead of Obedience to the Gospel and Laws of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  they have advanced a kind of Amorous and Enthusiastic Devotion; which consists in a passionate love to the Person of Christ, in admiring his personal Excellencies, Fullness, Beauty, Loveliness, Riches, etc. the foundation of all which Riddles and Mysteries, is, that they may make the Person of Christ almost the sole Object of the Christian Religion.  
To slight the Fullness, 
Answer.  Beauty, Loveliness, Riches of Christ, is very hardly tolerable among Christians; and to question, why they so passionately love such an one, is, as the Philosopher told him, who asked, why men were so taken with outward Beauty, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a blind man's question: none but the spiritually blind can wonder at the loving of one altogether lovely. But these men are for an Amorous and Enthusiastic Love; Amorous! all Love is so; but what in a gross and carnal way? No, it is far from those Men, who are not at all a kin to Castalio, who (as is said) called the Song of Solomon an obscene Ballad; not relishing that divine Love between Christ and the Church, which all along is portrayed therein, in Allegories and beautiful colours: Enthusiastic! why so? possibly because it is a thing inspired from the Spirit, it is so; Scriptures and Fathers will own such a blessed Enthusiasm, Ipse nobis fidem & amorem sui inspirat, saith the Arausican Council: But (which is the fundamental mistake) they make the Person of Christ almost the sole Object of the Christian Religion: I confess, and it is no shame to say so, they esteem themselves complete only in Christ; they trust in him; they love and obey him; their acceptance is in his Merits, therir assistance from his Spirit; their Graces hang on him, as Beams on the Sun; their good Works are perfumed with his sweet-smelling Sacrifice: they look on him as their great All, and do all they do in him and for him. Quicquid oratur, docetur, vivitur, extrà Christum, est Idololatria coram Deo & peccatum, said Luther.   

CHAP. II.  
THose men who talk so much of the Person of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  frequently without any Sense, and Generally without any just Ground from Reason or Scripture, are very clamorous, and alarm the world with strange jealousies and fears, as if there were a Party of men started up, who design to make Christ useless.  
What! without Sense, Reason, 
Answer.  and Scripture too? Alas, poor inconsiderable Creatures! What need such strong impetuous opposition be made against them? or how are such men likely to alarm the World with fears? But for the thing itself, I hope the Author designs not to make Christ useless; but what he doth towards it, in denying the Mystical Union, let Bishop Davenant say; 
Exp. in Col.  Quicquid de obtentâ Gratiâ, sanctificatione, de obtinendâ vitâ aeternâ homines sperant, merum ludibrium & insomnium est, si non sint in Christo & Christus in illis; jam verò Christus in nobis & nos in illo sumus, cùm vinculo Spiritûs & Fidei per Spiritum impressae in cordibus nostris unimur huic capiti nostro: What in denying Imputed Righteousness, the Church of England tells at large, in the Homily touching the Salvation of Man; I shall quote but one passage: Christ is now the Righteousness of all them that truly believe in him; 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; forasmuch as that, which their infirmity lacked, Christ's Justice hath supplied; Which plainly implies a necessity of Imputed Righteousness. What in bringing in internal Holiness into Justification, the reverend Hooker saith, The Church of Rome, in teaching Justification by inherent Grace, doth pervert the Truth of Christ. There are other things, but I leave them to the Reader's observation in the After-discourse.  
All Religion is founded on a belief of God's Goodness: 
Mr. Sherlock.  Natural Religion was founded on those natural Evidences of the divine Bounty and Goodness, in making and governing the World: The Mosaic Religion, on those miraculous Deliverances God wrought for Israel, and that particular Providence which watched over them: The Christian Religion, on the Incarnation, death and Resurrection of the Son of God.  
The Christian Religion is founded so, but dated much sooner than the Incarnation; 
Answer.  it was in Essence, though not in Name, under the old Testament: all along there hath been but one Faith, one Mediator, one Name under Heaven, one Foundation of Salvation: The Gospel was preached to us, as well as unto them, Heb. 4.2. Through the grace of the Lord Jesus we shall be saved even as they, Act. 15.11. They all drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rook was Christ, 1 Cor. 10.4. He is that Petra, unde omnes credentes salutem hauriunt, as one glosses on those words: Salvation streams from him yesterday, to day, and for ever; he that will seek any other Fountain of Life, must be saved Platonicè or Catonicè; which to say, is to depreciate the Christian Religion, and render it as cheap as any other.  
He is our Saviour in no other sense, than as he is our Mediator, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and he mediates for us as our Priest, that is, in virtue of that Covenant which he sealed with his blood.  
He sealed the Covenant with his Blood, 
Answer.  but did not turn over his Mediatory Office to it; he mediates in virtue of his Blood and Merits, being not, as Socinus would have it, a mere Internuncial Mediator, but a Redeeming, atoning, and Reconciling one: He ratified the Covenant by his Blood, but so, that we have redemption through his blood, Eph. 1.7. peace through his blood, Col. 1.20. and cleansing from sin in his blood, 1 Joh. 1.7. Hence, as the learned Lubbertus hath observed, the Blood of Christ differs from other in a way of transcendent excellency; other blood hath been used in confirming Covenants, but Christ's confirms the Covenant, and besides expiates and purges away sin; There is one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, saith the Apostle, 1 Tim. 2.5. and how he mediates, the next Verse tells us, Who gave himself a ransom for all: The blood of Christ purges the Conscience, saith the Apostle, Heb. 9.14. and then adds, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, For this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament, that he might purge away our sins. What the Author afterwards subjoins, These men trust in the person of Christ, without any Promise, nay, in contradiction to it; they quit his Promise, and rely and roll upon his Person, is utterly denied, till proof be made of it. The good men opposed are far from believing, that they shall have any thing without a Promise; neither do they quit his Promise, when they rely upon his Person and Blood: And yet that Reliance is, as I have before shown, a Faith far higher, than that dogmatical one which believes the Gospel, and is distinct from Obedience. When the Author sums up the Terms of the Gospel, only in believing and obeying, he falls short, in omitting that Faith of Recumbency, required therein under the Command of Faith, which is more than a dogmatical Faith, and distinct from Obedience, which is the fruit, but no part thereof.   

CHAP. III.  

Sect. 1.  
WHen God chose Abraham 's Posterity, 
Mr. Sherlock.  to be his peculiar People, he did not design to exclude the rest of the World from his care and Providence, and all possible means of Salvation, as the Apostle argues, in Rom. 3.29. Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Which Argument, if it have any force in it, must prove God's respect to the Gentiles before the preaching of the Gospel, as well as since; because it is founded on that Natural Relation God owns to all Mankind, as their merciful Creator and Governor; which gives the Gentiles as well as Jews an Interest in his Care and Providence: This plainly evinces, that all those particular favours, which God bestowed on Israel, were not owing to any partial fondness and respect to that People, but the Design of all was, to encourage the whole World to worship the God of Israel.  
What the Author means by all possible Means of Salvation, 
Answer.  I know not: Surely God could have given as great Means to all other Nations as he did to Israel, who was exalted above them all, in Laws, Revelations, Miracles, Protections, Symbols of the Divine Presence, in so signal a manner, that the Jews doubt not to say, That the seventy Souls, that went down with Jacob into Egypt, were worth as much as the seventy Nations of the World. As for that of the Apostle, Rom. 3.29. Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: The Apostle, in the precedent Verse, concludes, that the only way of Justification is Faith; in this he shows, that the one way of Justification was open to Gentiles, as well as Jews; in the next Verse he infers, that it is one God who justifies both of them in a way of Faith. He speaks not of being the Gentiles God, in respect of Care and common Providence. but in respect of extending this way of Justification to them, upon their coming in to Christ, who was that blessed Seed of Abraham, in whom all Nations were to be blessed: However till the Gospel came to them, they sat in darkness and in the shadow of death, aliens from Israel, strangers from the Covenant, without God, without Christ, without hope; seeing no further than Nature, and that desperately corrupted, and not knowing whether there were any such thing as Grace, or Glory, the Centre of it. As for Israel, I wonder that any man should deny Gods special Love to that people: What! did he call them his firstborn, his peculiar treasure, the apple of his eye, without special Love? Did he sever them from other people to be his own, Levit. 20.21. choose them to himself above all people on the earth; set his love upon them, and that merely because he loved them, Deut. 7.6, 7, and 8. Verses, and all this without special Love? Were theirs the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the promises, Rom. 9.4. and all this without special Love? He hath not dealt so with any nation, saith the Psalmist. To call this special Love partial fondness, is to me a presumption not unlike that of the old Pelagians, who charged a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or unjust Partiality upon God's special Grace towards his own people; upon whom St. Austin made some such tart Returns as these: Tolle quod tuum est & vade; Anon licet mihi quod volo facere, 
Li. 2. ad Bonifac. cap. 7.  hic tota justitia est, hoc volo; O homo, tu quis es qui respondeas Deo? with a great deal more on God's behalf. But, saith the Author, The end of all those particular favours, was, that all Nations might worship the God of Israel: Suppose so; if such particular favours to Israel above all other Nations argue not a special love to Israel, what can do it? God loves all Creatures (as the Schools speak) Vno & simplici actu Voluntatis: And if particular favours do not prove his Love special, we must say, that he loves Worms as much as Angels, and Oxen, whom comparatively he cares not for, as much as Men, upon whom his Love hath been set above all other Creatures.  
Joh. 14.6, 7. Jesus saith, I am the Way, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the Truth and the Life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me. If you had known me, you should have known my Father: and henceforth you have known him and seen him; that is, I alone declare the true way to Life and Happiness; no man can thoroughly understand the Will of God but by learning of me: Whoever knows me, whoever is acquainted with the Doctrine and Religion I preach, knows my Father also, that is, is thoroughly instructed in God's Mind and Will.  
Christ is the Way, 
Answer.  the Truth and the Life; how so? He declared the true way to Life and happiness. Is this the all of it? Is he only the Declarer and not the Author of Life? Doth he not work it in us by the power of his Spirit and Grace? Hath he not purchased a place in heaven for us by his Blood? and doth he not consecrate a new and living Way thither through the Veil of his Flesh? It cannot be denied. Hear the Learned Bishop Wren against the Racovian Catechist. Vidit Dives in inferno, ubi sinus Abrahae erat, sed monitus est de magno Chasmate intercedente nè possint congredi: Via arboris vitae extabat, sed ab acie versatilis gladii custodita: Aeger ad Bethesdam positus diu jam vider at viam in stagnum, sed movere se clinicus non poterat: Nôrunt & piae foeminae viam in sepulchrum Domini; pariter nôrunt saxo obturari: Ipsi denique Parenti horum Barjesu ostensa est à Paulo conversionis & reconciliationis via; verùm ille eò se caeciorem factum ducéque plus egentem indicavit. Respondeat igitur, an viam Christus, quam ostendit, aperuit? an Pontem paravit trajiciendo Chasmati? an versatilem avertit gladium? saxum revolvit? clinicum excitavit? caecum collyrio beavit suo? Reconciliationis hae primariae partes sunt; sine his praeviis, nihil est omnis conversio, frustrà via omnis convertendi, incassum omnis viae ostensio. And afterwards speaking of Christ being the way, he shows how he was so; Non solùm quòd revelavit iis, quae Deus volebat eos scire, sed etiam quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Luc. 2.14. (vel eapropter) constitutus, quae ab hominibus sine ipso praestari non poterant, pro ipsis praestiterit; sanguinisque sui merito ità viam ad Deum Patrem perpurgavit, communivit, illustravit, ut nos jam ab ipso veluntatem Dei edocti, veréque ad Deum conversi, per fidem in sanguine Christi, Propitiatione eâ perfrui possimus. Thus he very excellently .. I know no need at all for such an Interpretation as takes the Will of the Father for himself, or the Doctrine of the Son for himself: the thing is plain: He that knows the Son, in whom dwells all fullness of the Godhead bodily, must needs know the Father also.  
To know God is to know the Will of God, concerning the Salvation of Mankind; 
Mr. Sherlock.  to know Christ is to understand the declaration of God's will, that is, the Gospel which he preached; which is therefore called the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ, 2 Cor. 4.6. that is, that glorious manifestation God hath made of himself by Christ: For the face of Christ signifies all that, whereby he made himself known, as a man is known by his face; that is, his Laws, Religion and Miracles, whereby it appeared that he was the Son of God.  
In the knowledge of God and Christ, 
Answer.  God and Christ are the Objects, the Gospel is the outward Medium: Hence it appears, that to know God and Christ is, in propriety, no more to know the Gospel, than the Object of Knowledge is the Medium; properly we know God and Christ by the Gospel. As for that of the Apostle 2 Cor. 4.6. I conceive he discourses of somewhat more than external Revelation, even that of internal Illumination, set forth there by the Creation of the first Light, and shining in the heart, which gives the Light of the knowledge of the Glory of God in the face of Christ, that is, in the Person of Christ, who is God manifest in the Flesh.  
God was seen in Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  Joh. 14.9. He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father, that is, in plain terms, the Will of God was fully declared to the World by Christ; upon which account too (as well as with respect to his Divine Nature) he is called the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express Image of his Person, Heb. 1.3. (And a little after he adds) It is plain, that in this sense Christ is called the Image of God, 2 Cor. 4.4. Lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, which is the Image of God, should shine unto them: Where Christ's being the Image of God comes in very abruptly, unless we understand it in this Sense, That he is the Image of God with respect to the glorious Revelations of the Gospel, which contain a faithful account of God's Nature and Will.  
He that hath seen me hath seen the Father, 
Answer.  that is, saith the Author in plain terms, The Will of God was fully declared by Christ: Thus the Racovian Catechist understands the words, de cognition eorum quae dixit & fecit Jesus; but if we consider our Author's interpretation, there being God's Will and Christ's Declaration both in the Gospel, the result of the words is this, He that hath seen the Gospel, hath seen the Gospel. The plain sense of the words is, That he that hath seen Christ, the perfect Image of God, hath seen the Father. That Heb. 1. The brightness of his glory and express image of his person, imports, as I take it, that he was, according to the eternal Generation, Lumen de Lumine, as the Nicene Creed hath it; and in his Incarnation, instar Speculi, as a Glass representing the Majesty and Philanthropy of God unto us. In those words, 2 Cor. 4.4. Lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them, that, of Christ's being God's Image, comes in as a Reason why the Gospel is so glorious, viz. Because it shows forth Christ, who is the substantial Image of God, and in his Incarnation, a rare Mirror of the Divine Perfections: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith St. chrysostom on the place, through him, that is, through Christ, thou seest the Father.  
Whereas God formerly was known by the Light of Nature, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and Works of Creation and Providence, and partial and occasional Revelations of his Will made to the World; now the only true Medium of knowing God is the knowledge of Christ. 
Answer.   
Ever since that Protevangelium or first Charter of Salvation (The seed of the woman shall break the Serpent's head) which pointed out Christ, and was understood so to do, there hath been a knowledge of Christ in the Church; though not in that Meridian splendour which broke out after his Incarnation. He was Abraham's Seed, Jacob's Shiloh, Job's Redeemer, Moses' Prophet, and David's Messiah. Among the Jews almost every thing looked at Christ; the Tabernacle, Laver, Altars, Shewbread, Veil, Ark, Propitiatory, Manna, Passover, Priests, Washings, Anointing, Sacrifices shadowed forth him who is the Substance and Compleature of them all; And no doubt but Believers under the Old Testament looked beyond those outward Veils and Covers, and saw him lying and wrapped up therein.  
Joh. 17.3. This is life eternal, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent, that is, The only way to eternal Life is to know the Nature and Will of God; and the only certain way to attain the knowledge of God is by knowing Christ, whom God sent into the world to publish the everlasting Gospel. And a little after he saith, When we speak of the knowledge of Christ, we must consider him as our Prophet; and so to know Christ signifies to know his Gospel.  
In that Text, 
Answer  Joh. 17. God and Christ are the express Object of Knowledge, the Gospel, not there mentioned, is the outward Medium thereunto; the Knowledge there spoken of is, as I take it, not a mere Notional knowledge, but such a Practical one, as is (which is more than a Way) Eternal Life itself, in the first fruits of it; Heaven itself dawning in that inward divine Light, which is the Firstborn of the New Creature, as the outward Light was of the old. Christ as a Prophet is the great Origin of all our knowledge of him; but whole Christ, or Christ in his Royal and Priestly Offices, as well as in his Prophetical, is the object of our knowledge: Truly to know Christ as a Prophet, is to know him to be such, not only in the Gospel or external Revelation, but in internal Illumination also: He opens the eyes, Psal. 119.18. or (if the Author laugh at this Psal. as he doth at that other, quoted pag. 105.) he doth (as St. Luke tells us) open the understanding to understand the Scriptures, Luk. 24.45. He doth not only dispense the Scripture or Gospel, but the holy Unction or teaching Anointing, which St. John mentions, 1 Joh. 2.20. and 27. or that Spirit of wisdom and revelation, which St. Paul prays for, for the Ephesians, Eph. 1.17. To what the Author adds afterwards, as if some did clamour, that Christ were not preached, unless named in every sentence, I shall only say, Those whom the Author opposes, do not worship Letters or Syllables, no, not those which make up the sweet Name Jesus; But wherever there is aliquid Christi, they own and honour it, seeing his Sceptre in every Command, his Charter in every Promise, his Spirit in every Grace, his Purchase in every Glimpse of Eternal Life; and where such a divine Sense is, they must own him though unnamed.   

SECT. 2.  
AFter this account of the knowledge of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  it will be necessary to examine another Notion, of the knowledge of Christ, which contains a greater Secret, than at first one would imagine; and that is an acquaintance with the Person of Christ, which, if we will believe some men, is the only Fountain of saving knowledge.  
Christ the only Fountain of saving knowledge? 
Answer.  Yes doubtless, he is so, and of all saving Graces too, or else he could be no Head, at least not a vital one, to his Church: It is infinitely below him to be a Caput mortuum, affording no influences of Grace to his people. Acquaintance with Christ is a sacred precious thing, no more to be sought among mere Notions, than the living are to be sought among the dead: It imports no less than a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Communion with Christ, a having all Grace from him: Take away this, and all the New Creatures in the World must die in a moment, being no more able to subsist without him, than a Ray can be without a Sun, or a Stream without a Fountain. Take away this, and immediately we sink into the Dregs and foul Error of Pelagius, who, besides that Liberum Arbitrium, which however adored, is but mere Nature, placed all Grace in External Revelation. This is evident, because if Graces come not down from him and his Spirit, nothing remains but External Revelation: 
De great. Christi contr. Pel. & Cel. cap. 24  Upon which Error St. Austin passes this Censure; Legant & intelligant, intueantur atque fateantur; non Lege atque Doctrina insonante forinsecùs, sed internâ atque occultâ, mirabili ac ineffabili potestate operari Deum in cordibus hominum, non solùm veras revelationes, sed etiam bonas voluntates: Desinat igitur Pelagius & seipsum & alios fallere, contra Dei Gratiam disputando. And here Christ, I fear, may be again at odds with his Gospel, if, contrary to its primitive Institution, which was to be an Organ or Ordinance under the free-breathing Spirit of Christ, if it assume all the Dispensation of Grace to itself. But if we may not have acquaintance with Christ himself, may we have one with the Gospel? No, I doubt not, the Gospel tells us, That the Spirit reveils the things of God, 1 Cor. 2.10. and by necessary consequence, the Gospel will lead us unto Christ for that Spirit, and to communion with him; which is the thing opposed by the Author, but to me so precious, that before I would open my lips against it, I would put myself under the penance of Severus Sulpitius; who, having sullied himself with Pelagianism, afterwards repent, and devoted himself to perpetual silence, ut peccatum, 
Spond. Ann. An. 430.  quod loquendo contraxerat, tacendo emendaret. But now we must see the Pious Learned Dr. Owen brought upon the Stage.  
The Dr. tells us, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that Christ is not only the Wisdom of God, but made Wisdom to us; not only by teaching us wisdom (by his Doctrine) as he is the great Prophet of his Church, but also because by knowing of him we become acquainted with the Wisdom of God, which is our Wisdom: To which purpose he applies that Text, which speaks of the Doctrines of Christ, to his Person, Col. 2.3. For in him dwell all the treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge.  
A little before those words, 
Answer.  the Doctor's Design (by which in all Candour his After-discourse should be construed) appears to be, that all Wisdom is laid up in Christ, and that from him alone it is to be obtained, who is so hardy as to deny it? He that knows him, becomes acquainted with one, in whom dwell all the treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge, and from whom are derived all the Riches of Understanding in the Saints. As in the corporal vision of an Object, there is requisite a Light in the Air, and another in the Eye; so in this intellectual Vision, there is external Revelation and internal Illumination; and both are from Christ. Cui Veritas comperta sine Deo? 
De Anima cap. 1.  cui Deus cognitus sine Christo? cui Christus exploratus sine Spiritu sancto? cui Spiritus sanctus accommodatus sine Fidei Sacramento? saith Tertullian. By that, Col. 2.3. In him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, is, as I take it, meant the Person of Christ; the very same, which is pointed out, Ver. 9 In him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead; Ver. 10. in him ye are complete; Ver. 11. In him ye are circumcised; and Ver. 12. With him ye are buried in Baptism, and with him ye are risen, through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead: I can very hardly understand all these of the Gospel, neither did I ever find that it was raised from the dead. But now let us hear the Author's Inference.  
So that our acquaintance with Christ's Person signifies such a knowledge of what Christ is, hath done and suffered for us; 
Mr. Sherlock.  from whence we may learn those greater, deeper and more saving Mysteries of the Gospel, which Christ hath not expressly reveiled to us; for so the Doctor adds, That these Properties of God, Christ hath reveiled in his Doctrine, in that Revelation he hath made of God and his Will, but the Life of this Knowledge lies in an acquaintance with his Person, whereby the express Image and Beams of this Glory of his Father doth shine forth, that is, that these things are clearly, eminently and savingly only to be discovered in Christ: So that, it seems the Gospel of Christ makes a very imperfect and obscure discovery of the Nature, Attributes and Will of God; and a little after: This sets up a new Rule of Faith above the Gospel, acquaintance with Christ.  
Doth our Acquaintance with Christ teach us Mysteries not reveiled in the Gospel? No, by no means; neither doth the Doctor say so; Red verba mea & vanescet calumnia tua, saith St. Austin to Julian. The Doctor saith, those Properties are reveiled in the Doctrine: And in a Sentence interposed by the Doctor, but omitted by the Author, he saith, The knowledge of them is exposed to all; but saith the Dr. The life of this knowledge lies in acquaintance with Christ: So it is; he is God manifest in the Flesh, and so a rare Mirror of the divine Perfections; and withal he is the Great Illuminator by his Spirit, and so opens our eyes to see the Mysteries in Christ and the Gospel: Without this Illumination the outward Revelation gives not a saving Knowledge. It may be the Author will smile at me; but hear St. Austin: 
De Praed. Sanct. c. 8.  Valdè remota est à sensibus carnis haec Schola, in quâ Deus auditur & docet; gratia ista secreta est, gratiam verò esse quis ambigit? Hear Bishop Davenant; 
Exp. in Col. cap. 2.  Tales illuminationes fieri, & talem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imprimi fidelium animis non credunt mundani, experiuntur tamen pii. The Gospel is a perfect outward Revelation, and Rule of Faith, yet our blindness needs an inward Illumination, that we may spiritually discern the Mysteries therein. But now the Author will show us, what Additions these men make to the Gospel, from an Acquaintance with Christ's Person; and first upon the doctor's words, That the knowledge of God, the knowledge of ourselves, and skill to walk in Communion with God, in which three is the sum of all true Wisdom, are obtained and manifested in and by the Lord Christ. The Author observes, that [by] is fallaciously added, to include the Revelations Christ hath made. To which I answer; The Dr. never excluded outward Revelation; but this alone cannot give saving knowledge: All Wisdom is in Christ, as the Mirror of divine Perfections, and by Christ, as the great Illuminator by his Spirit. We should use outward Revelation in the very same posture as Zuinglius did, who, understanding from St. Peter that the Scripture was not of private Interpretation, 
Mel. Ad. in vit. Zuing.  In coelum suspexit, doctorem quaerens Spiritum, looked up to heaven, seeking the the Spirit for his great teacher.  
Had Christ never appeared in the World, 
Mr. Sherlock.  yet we had reason to believe, that God is Wise, and Good, and Holy, and Merciful, because not only the works of Nature and Providence, but the Word of God assure us, that he is so. And a little after he adds; And is not this a confident Man to tell us, That the love of God to sinners, and his pardoning Mercy could never enter into the heart of man, but by Christ, when the Experience of the whole World confutes him; for, whatever becomes of his new Theories, both Jews and Heathens (who understand nothing at all what Christ was to do in order to our recovery) did believe God gracious and merciful to sinners.  
The Jews knew God to be gracious and merciful, 
Answer.  very true, but through the promised Messiah, whom the Believers among them saw slain in every Sacrifice; or else, which is hard to believe, they knew not the meaning of that Service, or did it not in Faith. The Gentiles, as I conceive, had some Glimmerings of pardoning Mercy in his Patience towards them, sparing Mercy being an hint of pardoning; but this Patience was founded on the Sacrifice of Christ, though unknown to them. God upon the Fall of Angels made a short work, and immediately cast them down into Chains; and that he did not so with Men, is only owing to the Sacrifice of Christ. As for the Dr. I suppose, as to the Jews, he will fully concur with me; and as to the Gentiles, I must concur with him, for he saith, pag. 91. That pardoning Mercy which is reveiled in the Gospel, shines not with one Ray out of Christ; the Mercy in the Gospel expressly relates to the Satisfaction of Christ, and as such they knew it not; though that Patience, which gave some glimpse of it, was founded on that Satisfaction.  
The Doctor tells us, 
Mr. Sherlock.  That in Christ God hath manifested the Naturalness of his Justice in punishing Sin, in that it was impossible that it should be diverted from sinners without the interposing of a Propitiation; that is, God is so just, that he cannot pardon without Satisfaction. Now this is such a Notion of Justice as is perfectly new, which neither Scripture nor Nature acquaints us with.  
Perfectly new! 
Answer.  how so? How many grave Divines and worthy Champions against the Socinians have affirmed, That God, such is his infinite Sanctity and Righteousness, cannot pardon sin without a Recompense or Satisfaction? And how strongly have they urged it out of Scripture and Reason! In Scripture God is set forth as a Righteous God, a Judge of the World, who will do right; one who cannot look upon iniquity, who will by no means clear the guilty; his punishing sin is attributed not merely to his Will or Decree, but to his just Nature. Thus the terrible Tempest comes down upon the wicked, because the righteous Lord loveth righteousness, Psal. 11.6, 7. Thus the vials of wrath are poured out, because God is righteousness, Revel. 16.5. In God an hatred of Sin is as essential as a love of Holiness; and in this hatred is tacitly included a velle punire, as some Divines speak; and upon that account sin cannot go unpunished. The Subjection of a Rational Creature to its Creator is indispensable, and this Dependence, so far as it is broken off by sin, must be salved up by punishment. Should God punish merely from his Will, than it seems, Sin or no Sin, is all one to him. God is in his own Nature no more moved with Impieties and hellish Blasphemies, than if there were none; the punishing them or absolving them is but an indifferent thing. Socinus upon that Text, absolvendo non absolvet, saith, That God, as propense as he is to mercy and forgiveness, absolves no rebels and impenitent persons remaining in that estate: Yet, if he might pardon without a Satisfaction, might he not do it without Repentance also? The very Pagans knew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the just judgement of God, or that he would punish sin; and this not from the revealed Will of God, but from the natural Principles and Sculptures graven in their hearts; which shows that the punishment is not merely from God's Will. If Sin could have been pardoned without Satisfaction, why was the only beloved Son of God made a Curse? Why did he fear, and tremble, and bow, and sweat, and pray, and die upon a Cross, as the Dr. pathetically expresses his Passion? It seems all this might have been spared. But saith the Author, All Mankind hath accounted it an act of goodness to remit injuries, without exacting punishment; and he is so far from being just, that he is cruel and savage, who will remit no offence, till he hath satisfied his revenge: That part of Justice, which consists in punishing offenders, was always looked on as an instrument of Government; and therefore the exacting or remitting punishment was referred to the wisdom of Governors, who might spare or punish as they saw reason for it. Unto which I answer, The Comparison between God and Man holds not in all things: A Man may renounce his Dominion over his Servant, but God cannot renounce his Dominion over his Creature; that, whilst a Creature, must be subject unto him. A man (saith the Author) is cruel, who will remit no offence till he hath satisfied his revenge: But, I hope, God is not so, who never did, hath or will remit any the least offence without satisfaction; a man may remit a private offence without it, but may a Magistrate remit a public one in all cases? No, surely, sometimes Justice and the Common Good calls for punishment; Deus non vult, ut Princeps scelerato Legum publicarum violatori poenam commeritam remittat, saith the Learned Camero: God is here considered as a Magistrate, as the great Judge of the World, and that he cannot remit without satisfaction, is not out of Impotence, or Cruelty, but because of the supreme Perfection of his Justice and Sanctity.  
After the terrible discovery of the Naturalness of God's Justice, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the Doctor makes some amends for it; for now in Christ, the Nature of God is discovered to be love and kindness; a happy change this, from all Justice to all Love! But how comes this to pass? why, the account is very plain, because the Justice of God hath glutted itself with revenge on sin, in the Death of Christ: And a little after; God is Love and Patience, when he hath taken his fill of revenge, as others use to say, that the Devil is very good, when he is pleased.  
What! 
Answer  doth God glut himself with Revenge? or is he, as the Devil good when he is pleased? I tremble at the Expressions, and verily believe, that the Dr. would have laid down his neck upon the Block before he would have uttered them. Revenge or Vengeance in God is nothing but pure immaculate Justice: Glutting with Revenge is an Expression fit for malicious Men, or for Devils rather, but not at all for God: God out of Christ is a consuming Fire, but in Christ a gracious Father, reconconciling the World unto himself. Not that there is a change in the unchangeable One; but, according to his wise and gracious Decree, his Justice was satisfied in Christ, and through that Satisfaction his Love and Kindness sweetly stream out to Men: He that dares deny this must forfeit his Christianity. But if the Dr. did not utter these horrid words, may any such thing be drawn from him by consequence? This the Author would hint; for saith he, The Dr. speaks very honourably of God; Whatever, saith the Dr. discoveries were made of the Patience and Lenity of God unto us, yet if it were not withal reveiled, that the other Properties of God, as his Justice and Revenge for sin, had their actings assigned them to the full, there could be little Consilation gathered from the former; That is, saith the Author, he would not believe God himself, though he should make never so many Promises of Grace to sinners, unless he were sure, that he had first satisfied his revenge. To which I answer, Doth the Dr. by [Discoveries] intent Promises of Graces? No certainly: In his very entrance into the Discourse of Patience, he tells us his Design, viz. to prove, That the Glimpses of Patience shining out in works of Providence are exceedingly beneath the discovery of it which we have in Christ; and both before and after the words quoted, he gives Instances of God's Goodness in the Rain & fruitful seasons, & he shows what kind of Patience he intends, that is, A not immediate punishing upon the offence, not a word or tittle of Promises: Neither is it at all imaginable that he could mean them; for he, who holds a necessity of Satisfaction, as the Dr. doth, could not so much as think one single thought of a Promise to be the object of his Faith, or indeed at all to be, without a crucified Christ, in whom God's Justice was satisfied. And for the Glimpses of Patience shining out in Works of Providence, which are common even to the poor Pagans, I may well say, that they are little, very little consolations in comparison of those which Christians have: Pagans may see God forbearing, but Christians see him fully satisfied in the Blood of Christ: Pagans see God forbearing, but they cannot tell how long he may do so, or how soon his wrath may come dashing down upon them; but Christians know that they are delivered from the wrath to come, and so God's Patience is very sweet to them. But the Author goes on in his charge: The Doctor saith, that the nature and end of God's Patience and Forbearance, is, God's taking a course in his infinite Wisdom and Goodness, that we should not be destroyed notwithstanding our sins; the Justice of God being satisfied, the greatest sins can do us no hurt, we shall escape notwithstanding our sins: But the Gospel instructs us, That without holiness no man shall see God: Thus the Author. To which I answer. Surely we shall escape notwithstanding our sins, or else we cannot escape without pure sinless perfection, and notwithstanding our greatest sins, or else they exceed God's Mercy and Christ's Merit: But what, without Repentance and Holiness? No, by no means, the Doctor means no such matter, but saith expressly, That the end of God's patience is, that his Will concerning our Repentance and Salvation may be accomplished, and quotes that of St. Peter, 2 Pet. 3.9. God is long-suffering to us ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance; and surely where true Repentance is, holiness of Life will follow.  
As for the Wisdom of God, 
Mr. Sherlock.  no doubt but the Gospel of Christ makes glorious discoveries of it; but if Justice be so natural to God, that nothing could satisfy him but the death of his Son, the Redemption by Christ may discover his Justice or Goodness, but not his Wisdom; It requires no great Wisdom to choose, when there is but one possible way.  
No doubt, 
Answer.  untraceable is the Wisdom hid in Redemption, great the Mystery, God manifest in the Flesh: And what if there were but one possible Way of Redemption or Salvation, and that only in and by the satisfactory Death of Christ? Is this an Eclipse of the divine Wisdom? No, that one possible Way lay so deep, that no wisdom of Men or Angels could have started a thought of it; nothing less than the infinite Wisdom of God could have found it out, or brought it forth to the World.  
Upon the Doctor's words, 
Mr. Sherlock.  We learn our disability to answer the Mind and Will of God, in all or any of the obedience he requireth, the Author adds, that is, It is impossible for us to do any thing that is good, but we must be acted as Machines' by an external force, by the irresistible power of the Grace and Spirit of God; this is a new discovery, we learn no such thing from the Gospel. And pag. 109. the Author saith, After all the noise they make about coming to Christ, they mean being carried thither by an omnipotent and irresistible power; and to the same purpose in other places.  
That there is such a thing as irresistible Grace, 
Answer.  such as surely arrives at the Effect, is a great Truth; the Gospel shows forth the Glory of it, there it is set forth thus: It takes away the stony Heart, that is, the very resisting Principle: It writes the Law in the Heart, that is, it gives such an inward Principle, as answers to the outward Command: It draws, opens, quickens, regenerates, new-creates and conquers the Heart, carrying it away by a translation into the Kingdom of Christ: It gives the very Willing, the very Believing, the very Acting, causing us to walk in his Statutes; and all this in a way of Power, greatness, and exceeding greatness of Power, such as raised up Christ from the dead, Fph. 1.19. And if this be not irresistible Grace, I know not what is. St. Austin clearly owns such a Grace, 
De Praed. Sanct. c. 8.  Haec Gratia (saith he) quae occultè humanis cordibus divinâ largitate tribuitur, à nullo duro corde respuitur; Ideò quippe tribuitur, ut cordis duritia primitùs auferatur. The Fathers in the Arausican Council tell us, That believing, willing, desiring, endeavouring, labouring, watching, praying, seeking, knocking, and all is from Grace, Can. 6. And that we may know how the Work of Grace is wrought, they call it, Mutatio dextrae excelsi, A Change wrought by the right hand of the most High, Can. 15. Our Church, in the Homily concerning the Coming down of the holy Ghost, speaking of the Conception of the Lord Christ, as a marvellous matter, adds, But where the holy Ghost worketh, there nothing is impossible, as may farther appear by the inward Regeneration and Sanctification of Mankind; and withal calls Regeneration or the new Birth, The Great Power of the holy Ghost. The incomparable Bishop Usher asserts, 
Mist. of Incarn. pag. 43.  That no less power is requisite to the effecting of the new Creature, than was at first to the producing of all things out of nothing; and what can this be less than an irresistible Grace? Should there be only resistible Grace, those Prayers in Scripture, Turn thou me, and I shall be turned, Jer. 31.18. and, Turn us unto thee, O Lord, and we shall be turned, Lam. 5.21. must have but a sick Consequence; And those two great Petitions in the Lord's Prayer, Thy Kingdom come, and Thy Will be done, seem, as Mr. Rous observes, to run after this rate, Lord, let thy Kingdom be at my pleasure, and thy Will at the will of my , whether that shall come, or this be done. In very deed, the great Design of a Church to be purchased by Christ's Blood, gathered by his holy Spirit, and crowned with Glory in Heaven, though it cannot but be more estimable than all the Providences in Nature, must be a mere Pendant on the fickle Will of Man. But the Author urges upon the Doctor, That it is impossible for us, according to his Principles, to do any thing that is good, that is, I suppose without Faith in Christ, without which, our Church in her Homily of good Works declares, that no good work can be done: I take it for a very Truth, That from the first good Thought to the last Act of an holy Life, all that is truly good must come from Grace: But, saith the Author, This turns us into mere Machines'; and pag. 379. he glosses upon one of his Opposites, as if Christ were to make us willing against our will: Unto which I answer, The very same was cast into St. Austin's dish by the Pelagians; Sub nomine, inquiunt, 
Ad Bonisacdib. 2. cap. 5.  Gratiae it a satum asserunt, ut dicant, quia nisi Deus invito & reluct anti homini inspir averit boni & ipsius imperfecti cupiditatem, nec à malo declinare, nec bonum posset arripere: To which, as a mere Calumny, St. Austin returns, That a man may as well call St. Paul, fati assertorem, for saying, It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. Indeed it is a very strange charge; doth Grace destroy Nature, or may we be willing against our Will? It is impossible: That of the Schoolman may reconcile the matter, Voluntas humana induci potest ab agente creato, mutari ab agente increato, 
Bona●●●● in 〈◊〉. 2.25.  cogi à nullo: The Will, without ceasing to be itself, cannot be compelled; but Grace changes it without Coaction, breaks off its Chains without destroying its Liberty, and per suavissimam omnipotentiam makes the unwilling Will willing.  
But still there is a more glorious Discovery behind, that is, 
Mr. Sherlock.  The glorious end whereunto Sin is appointed and ordained, (I suppose the Dr. means by God) is discovered in Christ, viz. for the demonstration of God's Vindictive Justice in measuring out to it a just recompense of reward, and for the praise of God's glorious Grace in the pardon and forgiveness of it; that is, It could not be known how just and severe God is, but by punishing sin; nor how good and gracious God is, but by pardoning it: And therefore lest his Justice and Mercy should never be known to the World, he appoints and ordains Sin to this edd, that is, Decrees that men shall sin, that he may make some vessels of wrath, and others vessels of mercy: This is a Discovery which Nature and Revelation could not make; for Nature would teach us, that so infinitely a glorious Being as God is, needs not sin and misery to recommend his Glory and Perfections; and that so holy a God, who so perfectly hates every thing that is wicked, would not truckle with Sin and the Devil for his glory; and that so good a God had much rather be glorious in the happiness and perfection and obedience of his Creatures, than in their sin and misery: And Revelation tells us the same thing, That God delights not in the death of a sinner, but rather that he should return and live, that is, He had rather there were no occasion for punishing, than be made glorious by such acts of vengeance: Vindictive Justice and pardoning Mercy are but secondary Attributes of the Divine Nature, and therefore God cannot primarily design the glorifying of them; for that cannot be without designing the sin and misery of his Creatures, which would be inconsistent with the goodness and holiness of his Nature. And afterwards pag. 57 He appointed sin for the glory of his Justice and Grace, and (since nothing can withstand the Decrees of God) it pleased God that Man should sin, but when he hath sinned, he is extremely displeased with it, and now his Justice must be satisfied: This falls hard on those miserable Wretches, whose ill fortune it was, without any fault of theirs, to be left out of the Roll of Election, and who have no way to satisfy divine Justice, but by their eternal torments.  
It is, I suppose, agreed by all, that God did willingly permit the entry of sin upon the World of Angels and Men: he could have kept all the Angels up in their primitive Station, and then there would have been no Tempter to Man; or, had their been one, he could have sent the holy Angels to warn him from the late downcast of their fellows, against his own, and to tell him, that the poison would come from the Serpent; or, if not that, he could have sent him such strong auxiliaries of Grace as should have out wrestled the temptation; he could, no doubt, as easily as he confirms the Saints and Angels in Heaven; he could for ever have barred out sin, but he would not, he freely suffered it to come in, only the question is, How he did it? Whether there be only a nude Permission, such as leaves the event pendulous and uncertain, till Man's Will hath determined; or whether there be a Preordination of the Event, so that it falls out infallibly, Deo permittente and Creatura liberè agente? Two things constrain me to believe the latter: The one is this, That without a Preordination, the Event of sinful Actions must be casual, and what then shall become of Providence? The Moment's, which hang upon those Events, are great and weighty. Multitudes of Angels, Courtiers of Heaven, turn Apostates; out of their Fall comes a Tempter, who at one blow draws Man and all his Posterity into sin; that entering into the world makes way for a glorious Redemption by Christ: The Four first Monarchies roll about upon the Lusts and Ambitions of Men; The poor Church, like the Ark, floats upon the waters, and now and then a storm of persecution comes dashing down upon it; Errors and Heresies successively break forth as so many Torrents ready to carry away every Article of our Creed, and what mighty Concerns are these? Admirable are the Methods and Mysteries of Providence in and about such Events; Joseph's Brethren sell him into Egypt, and the Church is provided for in the famine; Absalon goes in to his Father's Concubines,, and David is visited for his Adultery; Judah and Tamar commit Incest, and this way came the holy One into the flesh; The wicked Jews crucify the Son of God, and out comes the great Work of Redemption; Persecutors scatter the Church, and God by this means scatters the Gospel, Act. 8. In such Actions as these the Light shines out of Darkness; God's Mercy, Justice, Wisdom, Holiness, Power, break forth out of Man's Cruelty, Injustice, Folly, Filthiness and Weakness: In every Ataxy God hath a secret Order; either an Order of Penalty, Sin punishing Sin; or an Order of Conducibility, Good coming out of Evil. Nullum est malum in mundo (saith profound Bradwardine) quod non est propter aliquod magnum bonum, & forsitan propter aliquod majus bonum. The Concerns being so great, sit down and consider; May such Events be casual? Did Angels and Man fall by chance, or could that Providence, which is waky over Hairs and Sparrows, sleep over such a Concern? Or if it could, must not the great work of Redemption, pendent on a casual Fall, be casual also? May Fortune ring the changes over Empires and Churches, or cast out Persecutions and Heresies, as roving Meteors to do her pleasure? May lots be cast upon the Genealogy and Passion of Christ, or the Acts of God's Mercy, Justice, Wisdom, Holiness and Power shining out in such Events hang upon a Peradventure? May the Alwise and Almighty God sit, complicatis manibus & oculis conniventibus, as Amyraldus speaks, whilst such vast and wonderful Concerns are in agitation? Methinks no sober Man can in Reason think it credible. For my own part, did I once believe a Lottery of such Events, I should think that my next Fancy would be, That Epicurus his Atoms by a lucky Hit made up that World, which is so fortuitously governed in the very great Concerns of it: He that allows not a determining stroke of Providence in such things, May, as Bishop Davenant saith, avoid the suspicion of Stoicism or Manicheism, but very hardly of Atheism. This is the first thing: These Events, if unordained, must needs be casual, and without a Providence. Neither is this to be salved by Divine Prescience; Prescience, as it is infallible, is of things future and of determinate Verity; and casual unordained Events, not being such, are no fit Object for it: This made Episcopius doubt, whether Prescience or at least the knowledge of it were necessary. But might such a thing be of mere Casuals, yet Prescience is not Providence. Had the Epicurean Atoms rallied themselves into a World, the Event, though foreseen, could not have been claimed by Providence as its own, but must have been left to those Ethnic Names of Chance or Fortune; and to the same, must every unordained Event be left, over which there is nothing but mere Prescience. The other thing, which constrains my Belief, is, That the holy Scripture, from whence we must take our truest Measures, expressly, emphatically own such a Preordination of the Event; not to insist on that Counsel of Ahitophel, which yet observably hits the Mark, only as God will have it, to chastise David in the Concubines, but not to destroy him in the pursuit; I shall instance in others; God turned his heart to hate his people, Psal. 105.25. God put it into their hearts to give their kingdom unto the Beast, Rev. 17.17. It was of the Lord to harden their hearts, Josh. 11.20. The cause was from the Lord, that Rehoboam harkened not, 1 Kings 12.15. Touching Absolon's Incest, God saith, I will do it, 2 Sam. 12.12. Touching the lying Spirit, he saith, Go, and thou shalt prevail, 1 Kings 22.22. Antiochus' tears and blasphemes like a Devil, but that which was determined was done, Dan. 11.36. The Jews crucify the Lord of Glory, but God's hand and God's counsel had determined it, Act. 4.28. In such pregnant Scriptures can there be any thing less than a determining Providence, or what other interpretation is tolerable? May we interpret such emphatical places only of a nude Permission, which leaves the Event pendulous and incertain? It cannot be; 
De Scient. 219.  the very Jesuit Ruiz will here confess, Dei voluntate, decreto, consilio, definitione fieri peccatorum actiones significat Scriptura: But, which is more valuable than Ruiz, the Sensus fidelium (which is one of the best Interpreters of Scripture) runs this way: It was not you that sent me, saith Joseph: The Lord hath taken away, saith Job: The Lord hath said, Curse, saith David: Thou hast ordained them for judgement, saith Habbakkuk of the Chaldees: Still they look up to the hand of Providence in such Events. And in truth, what else can they do in such cases? May they fear, trust in, or depend on Man? He is but a Creature, and there is a Curse in it: Shall they fear, trust in, or depend upon God? A God he is, but such Events fall not under his Providence. In a word; These things give me such satisfaction in this Point, that if Humane Reason could object what I could not answer, I should yet adhere to the Truth, saying with St. Austin, Petrus negat, Latro credit, O altitudo! quaeris tu rationem, ego expavescam altitudinem; tu disputa, ego credam. However I shall consider what the Author saith; and first he tells us, That such an ordaining is not consistent with God's Holiness: To which I answer, I confess this Objection in the Remonstrants looked to me, primâ fancy, as a piece of Tenderness towards God, lest any blot should light on the holy One; they frame God's Decrees upon Prescience, and suffer Man's Will to go foremost in the Event of sinful Acts: But remembering, that even in the Event of good Actions, they frame Gods Decrees upon Prescience also, and let Man's Will take the Primacy, it appeared to me, that the great Centre of all was no other than the Will of Man; and from such a Centre, I despaired that any Divine Attribute should be truly glorified. Indeed, after the Scripture hath so often and pregnantly asserted a determining Providence over such Events, for man to say, That God is holier than so, is a piece of fondness like that of the Masoreths, who in the Hebrew Bible have put in some words in the Margin, as cleanlier than those in the Text: Nothing can be vainer than to imagine that Man should be able to draw the Picture of God's Holiness fairer than he himself hath done in Scripture; or that what is spoken there touching his Providence, should in the least reflect upon his Holiness. But for a fuller Answer, I say, God's Providence, which in sinful Actions, is, as I take it, operative of the Entity, permissive of the Malice, dispositive of the Order, & preordinative of the Event, doth in none of these cast any blot on his Holiness. As to the Entity, God acts but as becomes the First Cause; Arminius himself would have it,  totus act us ritè Providentiae subjiciatur, quà actus efficienti, quà peccatum permittenti Providentiae. As to the Malice, God is but a Permissor: Sin in the abstract hath only a deficient Cause, viz. the Creature, that, as defectible in itself, hath redire ad non esse à sell, and, as under a Law distinct from itself, may fall short of it: But God, who hath no other Law but his own Perfection, and can no more decline from his Rectitude than his Being, is a mere Permissor. As to the Order, God disposes it; here instead of a Blot, the Glory of God breaks forth, in that he hath his holy Line in the midst of the Ataxies of men; either an Order of Penalty, such as becomes him as the Prima Justitia; or an Order of Coducibility, such as suits him as the Prima Sapientia. In the Sale of Joseph Man was cruel, but God merciful: In the Act of Judah and Tamar, Man was unclean, but God holy, aiming at the Messiah in it: In Rehoboam's rough Answer, Man was foolish, but God wise, to accomplish his word: In the Assyrian Tyranny, Man was unjust, but God righteous to correct his people: In the strong Delusions sent to those that love not the Truth, Man was weak, but God strong in Spiritual Judgements; and, to name but one more: In the Crucifixion of Christ, there was Malice, Blood and Wickedness on Man's part, but Love, Justice and Righteousness on God's; one Attribute or other of his glitters in the Event, with no more taint than is upon the pure Sunbeams by their converse in unclean places. It's true, God needs not Sin to recommend his Glory, no, nor Virtue or Holiness in the Creature; but sure he uses Sin that way, and that so holily, that it deserves a more reverend Expression than trucking with sin and the Devil. As to the Event God preordains it. I confess the Event of sinful Actions is evil in itself, but in some respect it may be good to a third person: 
Confess. li. 9 cap. 8.  A railing Servant wrought a cure upon Monica, as St. Austin relates: Nay, in some case it may be good to the sinner; 
De Civit. l. 14. c. 13.  Audeo dicere superbis esse utile, cadere in aliquod apertum manifestúmque peccatum, unde sibi displiceant, qui jam sibi placendo ceciderant, saith the same Author: And again on those words, Omnia cooperantur in bonum, Rom. 8. he adds, Etiam si deviant & exorbitent, 
De Correp. cap. 9  hoc ipsum eis faciat proficere in bonum, quia humliores redeunt & doctiores; But however the Event be evil to the sinner, it is not so to God as Ordinator. The Event of Adam's Fall was evil to him, but, as it made way for the Redeemer, was not so to God; which made one cry out, O foelix culpa, quae tantum meruit Redemptorem! The Event of the vile Affections in the Gentiles was evil to them, but, as it was punitive of their Idolatry, was not so to God: Hence St. Austin saith elegantly, Tradit Deus in passiones ignominiae, 
Contr. Jul. lib. 5.  ut fiant quae non conveniunt, sed ipse convenienter tradit; even those inconvenient Affections were convenient for God's Justice to inflict on them. Is it not good that Sin should be punished with Sin? The Scripture plainly affirms it; and if the Event may be good as to God, because of the Order of just penalty, why may it not be such because of the Order of wise Conducibility? God by his holy Ordination 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Dion. de Diu. Nom. cap. 4:  as far as that Ordination is: Hence the Apostle puts a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the Event of Heresies; 
Dial. de Ver. cap. 8.  and Anselm puts a Debet esse upon the Event of Sin; and St. Austin lays it down clearly, 
Euch. cap. 96.   sent & mala bonum est, aliter nullo modo esse sinerentur ab omnipotent bono; every thing is good so far as ordinated by him: In this sense the Medes are God's sanctified one's without sanctity in themselves, and Events are good without goodness in themselves; that which is evil in Specie, may be good in Ordine, and so far as it is good, it is a fit Object for his Will; especially seeing it is ordained to come to pass, Deo permittente on the one hand, and Creaturâ liberè agente on the other. On such Terms as these, I may say, Deo ordinante, pulchra sunt omnia. But, saith the Author, The Creature cannot act freely, for nothing can withstand the Decrees of God. To which I answer, God's Providence is ever salvative of the Creatures Liberty, inferring not a necessity of Coaction, but Immutability: Instances in Scripture are abundant; Antiochus blasphemes according to his own will, yet it was determined, Dan. 11.36. The Chaldees march in violence and in the pomp of freedom, insomuch that the Text saith, That their judgement and dignity proceeded of themselves, yet God had ordained them for judgement, Hab. 1. The Kings in Revel. 17. gave their Kingdom to the Beast, and what freer than gift? yet God put in their hearts to do so: The Jews freely crucified Christ, yet God's hand and counsel was in it. After such pregnant Scriptures, ought we not to acquiesce in this Truth, That God's Decree and Man's Liberty may consist together. Cajetan is an excellent Pattern for us, who, laying down the Common Opinion, That Humane Acts are evitable as to us, but inevitable as to Providence; and then mentioning some distinctions to reconcile the matter, piously concluded, that he would captitivate his Uunderstanding in obsequium fidei; and so we should all. Having so prolixly spoken of the Ordination of such Events, a very little may serve as to the End; when God preordains such Events, to be sure he doth it in great Wisdom and Reason, some End there is in it: If any will say, it was done, quià Voluit, I am content, his Will is never irrational; if he will say further, that it was for his Glory, I am satisfied, that is the supreme End; if he will yet go on and say, it was for the manifestation of his Justice and Mercy, I cannot tell how to assign a better End; if the after-use made of Sin may interpret God's meaning, that shows forth the Illustration of both those Attributes: The Apostle tells us, That God is willing to show his wrath and power in some, and to make known the riches of his glory in others, Rom. 9 Suppose there were no Ordination, but only a nude Permission, a man may ask, Why did God permit such an Apollyon as Sin to enter the World? Why suffered he so many glorious Angels to fall into sin, and immediately, without any place for Repentance, to sink into Chains of Darkness for ever? There is scarce any appearance but of mere Sovereignty & Justice in it: Why suffered he Man and all his Posterity with him to fall into sin and wrath? It is plain, that the work of Redemption, in which Justice and Mercy were both showed forth, was ushered in upon it. It's true, as the Scripture saith, That God delights not in the death of a sinner; not in death, as it is the misery of the Creatute; not in the death of a repenting sinner, his Repentance, which is there opposed to Death, is more grateful: However, the sins of men fall under his Providence, and, without repentance, their death, as an act of Justice, will be grateful to him, insomuch that he will laugh at it, Prov. 1. There are behind yet two other Expressions; the one puts the Doctor's Opinion into odious colours, after this manner: It pleased God that Man should sin, but when he had sinned, he is exceedingly displeased at it: But upon the very opening of it, all vanishes into nothing; God's holy Ordination was his pleasure, but Man's Sin is hateful and provocative of wrath. This cannot be strange to any one versed in Scripture: The Assyrian Tyrant was the Staff and the Rod in God's hand, sent by him against his people; yet when the work was done, God would punish the fruit of his stout heart, and kindle a fire under his Glory: God's Hand and God's Counsel was in the Crucifixion of Christ, and yet what an horrible tempest of wrath came down on the Jews for it? The other Expression is this; This falls hard upon those miserable wretches, who without any fault of theirs were left out of the Roll of Election: To which I answer; It is very hard if God may not have his Royal Prerogative of putting in or leaving out whom he pleases in the Book of Life; the Apostle is clear, He will have mercy on whom he will, & whom he will he hardens, Rom. 9 And if any murmur he must hear, Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? As if the Apostle had said. If thou hadst, O Man, but any Sentiments of thy own Nothingness, or true Rays of the divine Glory, thou wouldst never dare to implead thy Maker: Thou wouldst not endure to see a little Fly or Ant, had it Reason enough, to draw an Earthly Prince into question, and wilt thou do so to the great Lord of Heaven and Earth? There is no Commune Jus, or Common Measure between him and thee to warrant such a presumption.  
This is not enough, 
Mr. Sherlock.  said the Doctor, that we are not guilty, we must also be actually righteous; not only all sin is to be answered for, but all righteousness is to be fulfilled: Now this Righteousness we find only in Christ, we are reconciled to God by his Death and saved by his Life; that actual Obedience he yielded to the whole Law of God is that Righteousness whereby we are saved; we are innocent by virtue of his Expiation, and righteous with his Righteousness. Upon which words the Author infers; This is a mighty comfortable discovery, how we may be righteous without doing any thing that is good or righteous; but the Gospel tells us that he is righteous who doth righteousness; that without holiness no man shall see God; that the only way to obtain pardon of sins, is to repent of and forsake them: The only thing that gives a right to the promises of future Glory is to obey the Laws and imitate the Example of our Saviour, and to be transformed into the Nature and likeness of God.  
The Doctor is no enemy to Holiness, 
Answer.  but cannot assign it an Vbi in Justification; no more doth our Church, who, in the Homily touching the Salvation of Man, saith, All men are sinners and breakers of the Law, therefore can no man by his own Acts, Works and Deeds (seem they never so good) be justified and made righteous before God, but every man is constrained to seek for another Righteousness; which afterwards is declared to be Christ's fulfilling the Law and making satisfaction. In Justification no other Righteousness can take place but that Active and Passive one of Christ, which answers the pure and righteous Law in every point: He that doth righteousness is righteous, that is, his doing shows, but doth not make him righteous in Justification. Repentance is an Evangelical Condition, but no Cause of Pardon: Holiness and Obedience are the way to Glory, but not the Cause of it: A Transformation into God's Image makes us meet for Heaven, but the Righteousness of Christ alone purchased a Title for us. As to what the Author adds, Though our Obedience be not perfect, if it be sincere, we shall be accepted for the sake of Christ; I answer, Our Obedience is accepted, but not to be the matter of our Justification; Christ's Righteousness alone is that which answers the Law for us.  
The third part of our Wisdom is to walk with God, 
Mr. Sherlock.  saith the Doctor, and to that is required Agreement, Acquaintance, a Way, Strength, Boldness, and aiming at the same Ends; and all these with the Wisdom of them are hid in the Lord Jesus: The sum of which, saith the Author, in short is this, That Christ having expiated our sins, and fulfilled all righteousness for us, though we have no personal righteousness of our own, but are as contrary to God as darkness is to light, and death to life, and an universal pollution to an universal holiness, and hatred to love; yet the Righteousness of Christ is a sufficient, nay, the only foundation of our agreement; and upon that of our walking with God; though St. John tells us, If we say we have fellowship with him and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth.  
Christ the sufficient and only Foundation? 
Answer.  No doubt he is so; who can, who dares lay any other? Had not he satisfied divine Justice, there could have been no room for agreement or walking with God, but as cursed Exiles we must have gone to our own place in the lowest Hell: But what Foundation is he? Is he such an one, that profane persons, contrary to God, as Darkness to Light, Death to Life, Pollution to Holiness, and Hatred to Love, may, whilst such, agree or walk with God? Is he such, that such wicked ones, walking in darkness, may have fellowship with him, contrary to that of the Apostle? Or that such may, as the Author's phrase is, become bold, and look Justice in the face, and whet their knife at the Counter-door, all their debts being discharged by Christ? Doth the Dr. say so, or mean any such thing? No surely; hear what he saith, not in remote places, but upon this very point: God is Light, we darkness, he Life, we dead sinners, he Holiness, we defiled, he Love, we hatred; surely this is no foundation of agreement, or upon that, of walking together; nothing can be more remote than this frame from such a condition: The foundation then of this is laid in Christ, he is our peace, he slew the Enmity in his Body on the Cross, he made an atonement with God; God lays down the Enmity on his part, and proceeds to slay the Enmity on ours: We receive the Atonement, lay down our Enmity to God, and have access unto the Father: Christ gives us an Understanding to know him that is true; he consecrates a new and a living way into the holiest of all; and this way is no other but himself, he is the Medium of communication between God and us; all influences of Love, Kingness, Mercy from God to us are through him; all our returns of Love, Delight, Obedience to God, are all through him; nay, all our Strength is from him, by the Spirit of life and power he bears us on eagle's Wings in the paths of walking with God; and in him we come to have an aim and design at God's Glory. Thus and much more saith the Dr. in that place, his excellent words need no Apology; let the curious Palate taste them at the Fountain, and then tell me, if there be any Tack or Tincture of those black Consequences hinted by the Author; if there be any print or footstep of any such thing as this, That profane men, without any personal sanctity, in a state of contrariety to God, may, whilst such, walk or have communion with him: Nay, let any unprejudiced Reader say, if the contrary do not appear; the Dr. saith, Nothing can be more remote than this frame from such a condition, as agreement or walking with God; and as there are influences of Love, Kindness and Mercy from God so there are returns of Love, Delight, Obedience from us. Afterwards, the Dr. speaking only of designing God's glory, the Author with the same candour glosses thus; That is, I suppose, we design it by trusting to the Expiation and Righteousness of Christ, without doing any thing ourselves; not a jot or tittle of this appears in the Doctor.  
God (according to the Dr.) is so naturally just, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that he could not pardon without Satisfaction; That is, saith the Author, he is so just, that he hath not one dram of Goodness in him, till is Vengeance be satisfied, which is a glorious kind of Justice.  
What! not a dram of Goodness? 
Answer.  How then did he send his Son into the World? Was there not a dram in that Act immense Love? Or did not that precede Satisfaction? Both are undeniable: If God's being so naturally just, as not to pardon without Satisfaction, argue that there is not a dram of Goodness in him before Satisfaction, what doth his being decretively so just? In this latter he might have waved such a Decree, but he would not; neither doth he pardon any man without a Satisfaction.  
Justice being satisfied, 
Mr. Sherlock.  a comfortable Scene appears; now God embraces sinners, and accounts them perfectly innocent in Christ's Satisfaction: But this is not enough, the Law must be fulfilled, as well as his Justice satisfied; we must be righteous as well as innocent; otherwise we may escape punishment, but can expect no reward: (though, I confess, I should have thought, that Christ had satisfied for sins of omission together with sins of commission: And as by his satisfaction for doing what we ought not to do, we are reputed by God, as having never done any thing amiss; so by his Satisfaction for our neglecting what we ought to have done, we might by the same reason be reputed by God perfectly righteous, to have done all that we ought, to have kept the whole Law; but it seems this was not sufficient) 〈…〉 and therefore as Christ's satisfaction is imputed to us for the forgiveness of sins; so his righteousness is imputed to us, to make us perfectly righteous.  
God in his infinite wisdom redeemed the world, in such a way, 
Answer.  as was perfectly completive of the Law; we in our lapsed estate were double debtors to the Law; as rational creatures we owed perfect Obedience, and as sinful creatures, eternal sufferings; the Law calls for punishment, but that is not all, it calls for perfect Obedience, that it did primarily before sin entered, and that it doth unalterably: The after-sin did not dissolve the obligation; Now Christ's righteousness was every way completive of the Law; as active, completive of the mandatory part of it, as passive, of the minatory; these two ought not to be divided or severed the one from the other: Now the Author's Argument, which is this, That his satisfaction being for all sins of Omission, as well as Commission, must needs make us perfectly righteous; runs upon an Hypothesis, which I think is not to be admitted: viz. That Christ's satisfaction may be considered apart, or severed from his Obedience; his active and passive righteousness both together, taken in conjunction, are, as I conceive, a perfect completure of the Law, and do both expiate our sins, and make us perfectly righteous before God; But further, Innocent and Righteous are not altogether the same: Hear the eminent Dr. Featly, 
Sac. Nem. 33.34,  There are two sorts of causes in Courts of Justice, criminal and civil; in criminal its true, idem est esse insontem & justum, it is all one to be innocent and just, but not in civil, where Justice hath respect to a reward; in that regard a guiltless man is not necessarily a just man, that is, a deserving man; It was not enough for Demosthenes to plead for Ctesiphon, that he was an harmless man, and therefore aught to have the Crown, but that he was a deserving man, and by Law ought to have it. God is said to be a righteous Judge, not only in inflicting punishments, but in conferring rewards, and Crowns of Glory: Justification hath respect to both; two questions are put to us at God's Tribunal: First, why shouldst thou not be condemned to Hell for thy sins? The answer is, Christ hath satisfied for me: Secondly, Why shouldst thou receive a Crown of Glory, sigh thou hast not fulfilled the Law? The answer is, Christ hath fulfilled the Law for me; both these are expressed by Anselm, in his Book de modo visitandi infirmos, si dixerit, meruisti damnationem, dic Domine, mortem Domini nostri Jesu Christi obtendo inter me & mala merita mea, ipsiusque meritum offero pro merito, quod ego debuissem habere, nec haheo; He that is free from the guilt of all sins of omission, and commission, is righteous in regard of punishment and guilt; but not so righteous, as to have a title to a Crown of Glory, the taking away of guilt doth not necessarily put merit: Thus that learned man. Our Church in the Homily of the salvation of mankind, puts Christ's satisfaction, and his fulfilling the Law together in justification; not ascribing all to satisfaction.  
Now God and sinners may agree very well, though they have guilt enough, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and he justice enough to destroy a world; yet there is no danger, since Christ hath satisfied justice; and though he be infinitely holy, and sinners abominably filthy, yet there is no fear he should loathe and abhor them, when they are clothed with the white and spotless robes of Christ's righteousness: They are very secure, that neither their past sins, nor present habitual impurities can do them any hurt, they shall be saved notwithstanding their sins.  
Those who are in truth clothed with Christ's righteousness, 
Answer.  are secure, if any thing can do it, against the wrath of God; But are those rich robes worn by impenitent sinners, rolling in their beloved lusts? Or do those robes go alone without the sanctifying Spirit? Who, among those the Author opposes, ever spoke or meant so? And why are such odious hints cast forth? The Papists indeed have charged some such things upon Protestants in the point of justification, which made Chemnitius enter his protest thus, 
Exam. Cone. Trid. 129.  Express damnamus Simonis Magi blasphemiam, qui finxit hominibus gratis fide salvatis liberum esse, ut agant quaecunque velint, seriò abhorremus à Basilidis blasphemiâ, qui finxit ita nos fide salvari, ut universa libido indifferenter usurpari possit. But why one Protestant should draw up such a charge against another, I cannot but wonder; however the Author triumphantly concludes, These are those fundamental doctrines, with which these men have blessed the world, from a pretended acquaintance with Christ's person; which ought to be called the Religion of Christ's person, in opposition to the Religion of his Gospel: To which I shall only say, that I leave others to judge, whether any such thing as that opposition hath been made good hitherto.  
Christ having satisfied and fulfilled the Law, we have nothing to do, 
Mr. Sherlock.  but to get an interest in his satisfaction and righteousness; he is very ignorant of Christ, who hopes that any thing else will avail him to salvation: All which the Author speaks, as the sense of his Opposites.  
Is there nothing to do after getting into Christ? Who ever said, 
Answer.  or meant so? Is there no walking in Christ? Are there no fruits of Holiness and Righteousness to be brought forth? Or are those mere unprofitable things, and of no avail? None of the Opposites ever owned any such thing, however I confess none of our good works must take Christ's Prerogative, or sit down in the room of his merits and righteousness.  
Now that we may come to Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  (saith the Author, pointing at his Opposites) It is absolutely necessary, that we be sensible of our lost condition; we must work our fancy into great terrors and agonies, and a dismal fear of the wrath of God, and his natural justice; the spirit of bondage must go before the spirit of adoption, without this we shall never value Christ, the promise of ease is made to the weary, those only shall be satisfied, who hunger and thirst after imputed righteousness; now being stung with sin, it is time to look up to Christ to see his fullness and perfection.  
All this in a Drollery! 
Answer.  and are we come to that pass, that we can sport ourselves at such things as these? Need we prove that there are such things as broken hearts, or repentant tears, or sorrow for sin? Are these the workings of fancy or imagination? When Genesius was mocking on the Stage at the Christian mysteries, 
Spond. Ann. Domini 303.  he was on a sudden so wrought on, by the Grace of God, that he did seriò agere quod jocis actitabat: May the Author speed no worse, while he makes himself merry with this, and other Divine things: Let us seriously consider doth sin hang so lose on us, that we can shake it off easily without so much sense or sorrow? Are we so propense to Christ, that we will go to him without a feeling of our wants? Why, or wherefore should we do so? Will we go to him for righteousness, who can work out one at our finger's ends, or for regenerating grace, who can dispatch the matter our selves, or for a supply of our wants, who feel no such matter? Our Saviour spoke indeed of the weary and heavy laden: Such as Grotius saith, Peccati onere suspirant, & ad libertatem aspirant: But according to our Author, it seems to signify little; the Apostle speaks of a spirit of bondage, but some it seems, never felt any such thing: Afterwards the Author speaking of their comforting Souls, afraid to come to Christ thus, Doth not God justify the ungodly? Did Christ take our flesh, and not our sins upon him? Compare your distress and Christ's compassion, your wants and Christ's fullness, your unworthiness and Christ's freeness, etc. He adds, And now if Christ do not prevail above thy fears, thou art not worthy to be acquainted with him. But now let Mr. Shepherd that excellent practical Divine come upon the Stage.  
If thou objectest (saith Mr. Shepherd) what have I to do with Christ? 
Mr. Sherlock.  who have such an unholy, vile, hard, blind, and most wicked heart; O dishonour not the Grace of Christ, thou canst not come to Christ, till laden and separated from sin, but no more sorrow for sin, no more separation from sin is necessary to this closing with Christ, than so much as makes thee willing, or rather not unwilling, that the Lord should take it away; know if thou seekest for a greater measure of humiliation, thou showest the more pride, who will rather go into thyself, to make thyself holy and humble; than go out of thyself unto the Lord Jesus to take away thy sin; thou thinkest Christ cannot love thee, until thou makest thyself fair, upon which serious words, the Author after his merry way tells us, The reason of all this is very plain from our acquaitance with Christ; he is our Physician, and we must go to him with all our diseases and sores about us; he a fountain, and we must go to him with all our filthiness, to be cleansed; he is all fullness, it is not fit to carry any thing to him, he is our righteousness, and we must leave our own behind us, he is all beauty, we must not carry any to him, all we have to do, is to go to Christ weary and sick, and filthy, and naked, stripped of every thing but our sins and impurities, to receive ease and health, and fullness and beauty from him.  
The Author hints, as if according to Mr. Shepherd, 
Answer.  a man must go to Christ indulging his Lusts, and wallowing in them, with all his sores running, and filthiness allowed, but how untrue is this? Mr. Shepherd saith expressly, Thou canst not come to Christ, till thou art loaden, and separated from thy sins; thou canst not be ingraffed into this Olive, unless thou be'st cut off from thy old root; thou must be made willing, or rather not unwilling, that the Lord should take away thy sin: To come weary and sick, and naked to Christ, is not to come indulging our sins, but groaning under them; if there be no wants or sense of them, how or why should we come to Christ? Should we come to him, to show him the garments which nature made, the innate or acquisite virtue, and excellency which is in us? Should we open our treasures, and tell him that we are rich, and increased in Goods, and have need of nothing? this is the way to be spewed out of his mouth: The Philosopher being asked, what God was a doing, could say, that he was busy in elevatione humilium, & superborum dejectione: We must go to Christ weary and heavy laden under our sins, but surely not stripped of them altogether; could we strip off the guilt and power of these without Christ, we might be our own Saviour's and Sanctisiers, Christ would have little or nothing to do for us: But saith the Author, We must receive Christ by Faith, and then what a blessed change is there in us! For, though we continue as we were, we have all in Christ: What! may we receive Christ, and be as we were? Doth he bring nothing at all with him? May we receive him, and not have his righteousness imputed, and his spirit imparted to us? It is utterly vain and impossible: But now a touch for worthy Mr. Watson.  
Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  as Mr. Watson hath it, saith to a believer, with my body, yea, with my blood I endow thee; and a believer saith to Christ, with my soul I thee worship; As if, saith the Author, Christ and a Believer were married by the Liturgy.  
I suppose our Church intended some such thing, 
Answer.  and I mean it in good earnest; for in the Communion Service, she tells us, That we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us; we be one with Christ, and Christ with us; and excellently prays, That our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our Souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us: Sure such passages import a near Union and Communication between Christ and believers: But saith Mr. Watson, When a Soul is united to Christ, no condemnation can fall upon him; a woman being married, her debts light upon her husband: O blessed privilege! saith the Author, And who would be afraid of running into debt with God, when he hath such an Husband to discharge all; and then how vile and impure soever men are, their comfort is, they are married to Christ, and his beauty is put upon them: To which I answer, No men are more afraid to run into debt with God, than those, who taste of that Grace, which forgives all; and drink of that blood, which pays for all: Our love to Christ is a pure principle of Obedience, and his love to us is a Divine inflammative of ours, because he will discharge all, shall we be presumptuous and extravagant? Some Gallants in Queen Elizabeth's time, hoping for some Church-lands, run out desperately, crying out, Solvat Ecclesia; but shall believers, who have passed through the pangs of the new birth, and tasted the hidden Manna of God's love, sin on and say, Solvat Christus? Nothing is, nor can be more unnatural, because they know themselves espoused to such an husband as Christ, shall they be adulterous? Because Christ will be their friend, shall they be enemies? These are strange repugnancies indeed: As to what the Author adds, How vile and impure soever men are, their comfort is, they are married to Christ; those words (how vile and impure soever men are) are none of Mr. Watson's, but added by the Author; after which rate one may turn any thing into non sense, or blasphemy.  
And to crown all, 
Mr. Sherlock.  when they are once ingraffed into Christ, they are secure to eternity; Christ is not divided, a member cannot be lost, the union cannot be dissolved.  
This indeed is that, 
Answer.  wherein the Covenant of Grace lifts itself up above the Covenant of works; in that of works, the stock was in man's hand; but in this of Grace, it is in Gods; in that there was no promise of perseverance, but in this there are many such promises, God shall confirm you unto the end, 1 Cor. 1.8. He will put his fear in their hearts, that they shall not departed from him. Jer. 32.40. The Apostle praying for the Thessalonians, that they may be preserved blameless unto the coming of Christ, immediately adds, Faithful is he that calleth you. who also will do it. 1 Thess. 5.23, 24, Evidently God undertakes it, and engages his faithfulness in it; shall we take the matter out of God's hand into our own, or turn about to the old Covenant? Shall we take these promises conditionally? Then we must utterly evacuate these promises; for they must run thus, if we will persevere, we shall persevere, and so much was true under the old Covenant, and without any promise at all: Mr. Watson argues thus, If any branch be plucked away from Christ, it is either because Christ is not able to keep it, or because he is willing to lose it: But saith the Author, May not sin dissolve the union? What if the believer will not stay with Christ? I answer, This doth not at all answer the Argument from Christ's power; Hath he not power to prevent sin from being, or from being final? Hath he not power to strengthen believers, in that which is good, or if they lapse, to raise them up again? If so, his promise cannot fail, his faithfulness will make it good; neither doth sin committed, un-saint a believer, as the Author hints; this was the remarkable difference between the two Covenants; in Adam one sin expelled perfect holiness, but in believers it doth not extinguish inherent Grace, though imperfect; still there is a seed of God abiding in them, a well of water springing up unto everlasting life; through Grace they shall be revived again: But saith Mr. Shepherd, Christ hath taken upon him to purge his Spouse; upon which the Author, If she be not purged, whose fault can it be but his own? To which I answer, Christ hath undertaken to purge believers, but not so as to prevent all lapses; when they are purged, it is merely of Grace, but when they sin, it is of their own: By such lapses God lets them know, as he did Hezekiah, what is in their heart.  
Let us now consider the consequential, 
Mr. Sherlock.  conjugal affections, the Soul must be enamoured with Christ, sick of love to him, he is maximè diligibilis, the very abstract and quintessence of beauty; you must delight in his embraces, thirst after more intimate acquaintance with him, follow him from one ordinance to another, and never be satisfied unless you meet with him in ordinances, there they hear of his Beauty, Riches, Fullness, All-sufficiency, of all truths they savour the truths of Christ best.  
And what needs all this? 
Answer.  These truths are too plain to be denied, and too sacred to be laughed at.  
Such sanctified Souls loathe all dull, 
Mr. Sherlock.  insipid, moral discourses, which are perpetually inculcating duty, and troubling them with a great many rules for a good life: Which Mr. Watson calls the acquaint points of virtue and vice. For this is not to enjoy Christ in ordinances.  
I suppose they cannot loathe discourses of duty; 
Answer.  For as our Author tells us a little after, they make Obedience to Christ their husband, a conjugal act, and in order to that they must hear of duty; Only I take it, they had rather hear duty spread before them, in a plain Scriptural dress, than in curious speculations of mere humane reason: They would have duty inculcated, but not so perpetually, as to exclude the preaching up of that Divine Grace which enables thereunto, without this they despair of doing any thing aright; but saith the Author, It is very hard to find a proper place for Obedience in this new Religion; for this is not necessary at all, to our coming to Christ, and closing with him; nay, it is a great hindrance to it, for we must bring nothing to Christ with us, the marriage is consummated without it, and then we have less need of it than before, for than we are adorned with Christ's Beauty, holy with his holiness, delivered by his expiation, righteous with his righteousness, which gives us an actual right to Glory; we need no righteousness of our own to save us, which were to suppose a defect in the righteousness of Christ; unto which I answer, Though a man, with his arms of rebellion in his hands, cannot possibly, whilst in that posture, close with Christ; yet I take it, Faith, which espouses Christ, doth precede true Obedience: Without faith, saith the Apostle, it is impossible to please God. Heb. 11.6. Without saith, saith our Church in the Homily of good works, All that is done of us is but dead before God, although the work seem never so gay and glorious before man, even as the picture graven or painted, is but a dead representation of the thing itself, so be the works of all unfaithful persons before God, they do appear to be lively works, and indeed they be but dead, not availing to the everlasting life; they be but shadows and shows of lively and good things, and not good and lively things indeed, thus our Church excellently; which tells us what manner of Obedience we can bring to Christ: After our espousals to Christ by faith, Obedience follows as a fruit and effect of Faith; though the Author fasten this opinion expressly on those whom he opposes, calling them in sport, intimate acquaintances of Christ; yet our Church tells us in the twelfth Article, That good works do spring necessarily out of a true and lively Faith: Christ's righteousness makes us righteous in Justification, but doth it thence follow, that Obedience is needless? No sure. It is a thing noted in the Papists, that they confound Justification and Sanctification together; but we must not do so, if it be necessary to do Gods will, or promote his Glory, or to give evidences of our Faith in, and gratitude to Christ; or to walk in the way to Heaven and Salvation, than such is Obedience; but the Author cannot understand this gratitude, unless our Righteousness and Obedience be due to Christ in thankfulness to him for saving us without Obedience and Righteousness, which is just as broad, as long, and we get nothing by the bargain: To which I answer, our Obedience is a due gratitude to Christ, who saves us by his Blood and Righteousness, and and that without a perfect, personal, sinless Obedience in ourselves; and withal, it is necessary as a proof of our faith, and as the way to Heaven, which our Saviour hath chalked out to us.  
The Soul (saith Dr. Owen) consents to take Christ on his own terms, 
Mr. Sherlock.  to save him in his own way, and saith, Lord, I would have had thee and salvation in my way, that it might have been partly of mine endeavours, and as it were by the works of the Law; but I am now willing to receive thee, and to be saved in thy way, merely by Grace, that is, Without doing any thing, without obeying of thee, as the Author doth interpret him.  
Without doing any thing, 
Answer.  without obeying of thee: Is this the Doctor's meaning? Do his words import so? Nothing more remote from him; he shows how the Soul closes with Christ, and takes him on his own terms; it will not now be justified by its own works, or legal righteousness, but by Christ and his righteousness; it will not now endeavour in its own strength, but under the dust of Grace; this is his plain meaning: For before the words quoted, he speaks of accepting Christ as Lord and Saviour, and after them, of giving up ourselves to be ruled by the Spirit, which cannot be without Obedience: It's true, the Author calls this a pretty compliment, but the Doctor speaks it as his serious judgement: In the eighth Chapter of the book quoted, he tells us, Obedience is indispensibly necessary, if God's Sovereignty is to be owned, if his Love to be regarded, if the whole work of the ever blessed Trinity for us, in us, be of any moment, our Obedience is necessary: Thus fully the Doctor, who yet is here construed by the Author to exclude Obedience; what measure this is let others judge.  
The Soul gives up itself to be ruled by the Spirit of Christ, to be passively, 
Mr. Sherlock.  not actively good, to submit, as needs it must, to the irresistible working of the Divine Spirit, and to obey, when it can rebel no longer: (Thus the Author sports with his Opposites.)  
Touching irresistible Grace, 
Answer.  I have spoken before; the Soul in the first act of Conversion is merely passive, but after the Divine Principles infused, acta agit, it moves under the sweet influences of the Spirit, without whose inspiration, as our Church tells us in the thirteenth Article, Works done are not pleasant to God, yet that inspiration doth not, as the Author hints, force the will of man, but sweetly lead it in a way congruous to its liberty. And now the Author shuts up this Section thus: I have given thee Reader, an entire scheme of a new Religion, resulting from an acquaintance with Christ's person, in all its principles and practices; I think there needs no more to expose it to the scorn of every considering man, who cannot but discover, how inconsistent the religion of Christ's Person, and of his Gospel are. To which I shall only say, the Author hath done his endeavour to expose his Opposites to scorn, but how new their Religion is, how inconsistent with the Gospel, and how just the scorn, I leave to considering men to determine.   

SECT. III.  
THese men pretend to learn a Religion from Christ's Person, 
Mr. Sherlock.  but this is at best to build Religion upon uncertain conjectures, or ambiguous reasons; suppose them to be cautions, yet what assurance can they have, that their inferences are true; and as a reason of this the Author afterwards adds, There is not a natural and necessary connexion between the person of Christ, and what he did and suffered, and the salvation of Mankind, the Incarnation, Life, Death, Resurrection of Christ were available to those ends, for which God designed them; but the virtue and efficacy of them doth depend upon God's Institution and Appointment; and therefore can be known only by Revelation: We cannot draw a Conclusion from the Person of Christ, which his Gospel hath not expressly taught, because we can know no more of the design of it, than what is there revealed.  
They learn from Christ's Person, 
Answer.  but what, without the Gospel? No, by no means; without this, they cannot, pretend not to know, whether there be such a Person as Christ or no, or what are the Ends of his Incarnation, Life, Death and Resurrection: These depend upon God's appointment, and that is set forth in the Gospel: But having the Gospel as an outward Medium, they see Christ and many Mysteries in him, who is the Mirror of divine Perfections, and the great Illuminator by his Spirit. But, saith the Author, they (such is their intolerable presumption) shape Religion according to their Fancies, and stuff it with an infinite number of Orthodox Propositions; none of which are to be found in express Terms in Scripture, but are pretended to be deduced from thence by such imaginary consequences, from some little hints of things; and is not this unpardonable in those men, who cry down Reason as a profane and carnal thing, and yet lay the Foundation of their Religion on some little shows and appearances of Reason? To which I answer, The harsh Censure of Eccius made Vrban a Germane Divine cry out, O infaelicem Urbanum, 
Melch. Adam in vit. Urb.  si Eccii calculo caelum datur & negatur! Miserable were these Men, if they were to stand or fall by the Author's Judgement. These Men, as the Author tells us, pag. 98. abound with Scripture, stuff their Books with it, and talk of little else; yet, alas! they shape Religion according to their Fancies: If they urge express Scriptures, they consider only the sound of words. Pag. 2. If they urge Scripture-consequences, they stand upon little hints and appearances of things; Reason they cry down as a profane and carnal thing, and yet they found their Religion on little shows and appearances. Oh unhappy Men! But the best is, all this, to say no worse, is but mere Accusation; each of them can plead Not guilty to it, and say, as urban to Eccius, Hominis judicium audio, Christi tribunal expecto: They are Men who desire to set every thing in its due place, Fancy below Reason, and Reason below Scripture; upon which last, as the unerring Rule they stand, like the Karaei among the Jews, so precisely, that they are not willing to admit any thing in Matters of Religion which is not found there; according to that of Origen, Sicut aurum, quod fuerit extra Templum, non est sanctificatum, sic omnis sensus, qui extra Scripturam, non est sanctus.  
When men argue from the Nature of of God, 
Mr Sherlock.  his Works and Providences, from the Nature of Mankind, and those eternal Notions of Good and Evil, and the essential Differences of things; that is, from plain and undeniable Principles, which have an unchangeable nature, and so can bear the stress of a just Consequence, this is carnal Reason.  
I cannot imagine that they call or think it so: 
Answer.  Principles of natural Theology carry a Divine Stamp on them; yet I conceive these in Discourses, if taken within their proper Sphere of Natural Light only, may not wear that Crown set on the Head of the Gospel, to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The ministration of the Spirit, as the Apostle speaks, 2 Cor. 3.8. Should a Man preach such Principles only, without setting forth Christ and the regenerating Spirit, he would scarce be worthy to be called a Spiritual Evangelical Divine. But now the Author gives a Scheme of Religion deducible from an Acquaintance with Christ's Person; I am glad that he owns any such thing, and shall not have much to say upon it.  
When we consider, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that this heavenly Ambassador and Mediator is no less than the Son of God, by whom the Worlds were made, we may reasonably conclude, that he came upon no less Design than of universal Goodness; for he can have no temptation to Partiality, as being equally concerned in the Happiness of all men; and we cannot imagine, why he should lay a narrower design of Love in the Redemption, than in the Creation of Mankind: When in the first Creation he designed all for Happiness, that in this new and second Creation he should design only the Happiness of some few, is to make him less good in Redeeming, than in Creating Mankind.  
Christ in his Coming and satisfactory Sufferings had a respect to all Men, 
Answer.  so far as to procure for them Salvation on Gospel-terms, but he had not an equal respect to all; it being utterly unimaginable that he should have as great a respect to those in the Pagan World, who have no Christ, no atoning Sacrifice, no Promise of Life and Salvation revealed to them, as he hath to those in the Church, who have all these glorious Objects evidently set forth before them: Greater Donations argue greater degrees of Love; or else, which is very hard to believe, God loves all Creatures alike, notwithstaneing that he measures out his Goodness to them in a very various and different manner, to some more, and to others less. But because the Author hath before laid down a good Rule, That the Virtue and Efficacy of Christ's Death doth depend on God's Institution and Appointment, and therefore can be known only by Revelation, I shall apply myself only to the Scripture: There, as we find, he died that he might gather together the Children of God that were scattered, Joh. 11.52. He gave himself for his Church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it, Eph. 5.26. He gave himself that he might purify to himself a peculiar people, Tit. 2.14. He laid down his life for his sheep, so as to bring them into his fold and make them hear his voice, Joh. 10.15, 16. He redeems some from among men, Rev. 14.4. And out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, Rev. 5.9. All which Scriptures do emphatically show, that Christ had a special respect in his Death unto his own above others. But further; Christ by his precious Blood founded those Evangelical Promises, of taking away the stony Heart, writing the Law in the Heart, and putting his holy Spirit there; but did he found them for all men? What, for those whom God will harden, Rom. 9? What, for those Pagans, who have not so much as the Law before them in the Letter, nor that Gospel which is Vehiculum Spiritûs sancti? How, or which way, or by what means can such Promises be made good to them? How shall they be regenerate without the holy Spirit, or have that without the Gospel? It is not at all credible; such special Promises in the Covenant founded by his Blood, speak a special respect to his own Elect. The Author's Reason from Creation cannot hold good: The lapsed Angels had their share of Goodness in Creation, but none at all in Redemption: God, who is the Great Donor of his Son to the World, may give him with what Respects and to what Intents he pleases; and, if he have special purposes in it, no man may presume to say, that he is partial or less good than he ought to be.  
Christ's Death and Sacrifice for sin seals the Covenant of Grace and Pardon to all penitent and reformed Sinners, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and seals the irrevocable Decree of Reprobation against all others.  
God's Decree of Reprobation may be taken two ways; 
Answer.  either for an Act of Preterition, not giving men saving Grace, but leaving them to final Sin; or for a Decree of Damnation: In this latter God looks on Men as final Sinners, and reveils his Justice in their Condemnation: In the former he doth not look on men as final Sinners, but pass them by and leave them to themselves to become such; and in this he shows forth his infinite Sovereignty in dispensing Grace as he pleaseth.  
This made the Divine Goodness so restlessly zealous, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and concerned for the recovery of mankind; various ways he attempted in former ages, but with little success; but at last God sent his own Son our Lord Jesus Christ into the world, to be the great Shepherd and Bishop of Souls, to seek and to save that which was lost.  
Various ways attempted! 
Answer.  what distinct and separate from Christ? Was not Christ in the first plot and design of our recovery? Was not he the Lamb slain, from the foundation of the world? Immediately after the Fall, he was promised in the Seed of the woman, and after that first Gospel, the light was still a breaking out in a succession of Promises and Sacrifices: Various ways, saith the Author, were attempted to little Success; what! was it to any success at all? Was ever any one lost son of Adam saved without a Christ, without a Satisfaction? No Christian ears will endure such an opinion; however, God having a design in those ways, as the Author imports; why did not those plots take effect, and save Christ the labour of coming in the flesh? May it become his infinite wisdom to attempt this and that, and at last light upon the right way? Or may it comport with his infinite power to be posed and nonplussed, and that in so great a concern, as Man's recovery? To think so, is, as S. Austin saith, To hazard the first Article of our Creed, 
Euchir. cap. 96.  Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem: And, if in those various ways there could be an obstacle to the Almighty, what might it be? Was it for want of a satisfaction? No, according to our Author that was not necessary, God might have pardoned without it; or was it because the corrupt obstinate Will of man did frustrate those designs? Very well, after that last greatest design by Christ, may it not do the same? According to our Author, God as passionately desirous, and restlessly jealous as he is in this matter, affords yet no higher than suasory resistible Grace; and let any judge, how reconcileable such opinions are with infinite wisdom or power, or indeed with the Scripture, which tells us, That he doth whatsoever he pleases: Psal. 115.3. It's true, the great Grotius glosses on that place thus, Ideò homo libertatem habet, quia Deus voluit, which is true within the Text; but if that liberty be of so vast a latitude, that it may frustrate so great a design, as that of Salvation by Christ, the truth of the Text cannot possibly consist.  
Those sins, which are not expiated by the Sacrifice of Christ, as none are, 
Mr. Sherlock.  till we repent and reform, shall certainly be expiated by the death of the sinner.  
I conceive that Christ expiated our sins upon the Cross, 
Answer.  but that expiation avails us not, till it be applied by faith; He gave himself a ransom for all. 2 Tim. 2.6. But all do not repent and believe, such as continue in their hardness and unbelief cannot have the benefit of that ransom, but fall into death eternal, ever suffering, but never able to satisfy or expiate their sins.  
If our Faith in Christ have reform our lives, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and rectified the temper of our minds, and made us sincere lovers of God and goodness; though we are not acquainted with those artificial methods of repentance, have not felt the workings of the Law, nor the amazing terrors of God's wrath, nor the raging despair of damned Spirits; and then all on a sudden, as if we had never heard any such thing before, have had Christ offered, heard his wooings, and made a formal contract and espousal with Christ, and such like workings of a heated fancy, and religious distraction; though our Conversion be not managed with so much art and method, we are never the worse Christians for want of it.  
Certainly it is very sad, 
Answer.  saith a worthy Divine, That scoffing at the doctrines of repentance and humiliation, which was wont to be a badge of profaneness, should be adopted into religion: The Author tells us a little before, Christ and his appearance were not designed to cause tempests and earthquakes in our minds; without such artificial methods of repentance; saith the Author, our lives may be reform, and minds rectified; but what saith the Scripture? Our Saviour preached up repentance. S. Paul tells us of a spirit of bondage, going before the spirit of Adoption. S. James would have sinners be afflicted, and mourn, and weep, and to turn their laughter into mourning, and their joy to heaviness, and to humble themselves in the sight of the Lord, that they may be lifted up: And what saith Reason? Sin of all things in the world, calls for sorrow, sorrow was made for sin, if for any thing at all; sin is so intimately in us, that it will not easily come out, being contracted with joy, it must be dissolved with sorrow: The hard heart, unless melted by the fiery Law, will not run into the Gospel-mould; nor will the proud heart, unless bowed down under the weight of sin and wrath, ever stoop under the Divine command; the new creature is not born without pangs, nor the inward Circumcision, which cuts off the dear, but corrupt flesh of the heart, done without some anguish; self-judging ushers in justification before God, and despair in ourselves a lively hope in our Saviour: On all hands we are summoned to methods of repentance; the groaning Creation shames us into that posture, and the indwelling sin presses us into it; the broken Law calls for a broken heart, and the storm of wrath black in the threatening, for a trembling one; a crucified Christ asks a mourning eye, and an exalted one gives it: Why the Author should call these penitential acts, artifices, or effects of ignorance, or think them unnecessary or improper, under the Gospel, I see no just reason at all for it.   

SECT. iv  
THese men abound in Scripture, 
Mr. Sherlock.  but they accommodate Scripture-expressions to their own dreams and fancies, being possessed with Schemes and Ideas of Religion; whatever they look on, appears of the same shape and colour wherewith their minds are tinctured; if any word sound like the tinkling of their own fancy, it is no less than a demonstration, that that is the meaning of the spirit of God; every little shadow confirms them in their preconceived opinions: As Irenaeus observes of the Valentinians, that they used one artifice or other to adopt all the speeches of our Saviour, and Allegories of Scripture, malè composito phantasmati, to the contrived figment of their own brain: These acquaintances of Christ, first contrive their religion, and possess their fancies with their private opinions, and then read the Scripture with no other design, than to find something there to stamp Divinity on their own conceits; they dote upon words and Metaphors, and Allusions; they found their Religion on obscure Texts, or mystical interpretations of plain Texts, and by the help of distinctions, and glosses, curtailing of Texts, transplacing of words and Commas, or separating a single sentence from the body of the discourse, make the Scripture speak their sense as plainly, as the Bells ring what every boy will have them; which is to deal with Scripture; as Irenaeus observes, as if a man should take a picture of a King, which consisted of an artificial composition of precious stones, and transplace all those stones into another form; as suppose of an Ape, and then should persuade silly people, that that was the King's picture: At this rate we may find the Alcoran in the Bible, as well as make so many Books different and contrary to each other, from the various composition of twenty four letters: These acquaintances of Christ: (And who may better make bold with him than they) pervert the Gospel to serve their opinion; there are two ways of expounding Scripture in great vogue among them: First, By the sound and clink of words, which is all some men understand by a form of sound words: Secondly, When this will not do, they reason about the sense of Scripture from their own preconceived notions, and prove that this must be the meaning of Scripture, because otherwise it is not reconcileable to their dreams, which is called expounding Scripture by the Analogy of Faith.  
It is the observation of that excellent man, 
Answer.  Jerome of Prague, in his defence before the Council of Constance; That many worthy men have been unjustly condemned, such as Socrates among Pagans, Isaiah and other Prophets, nay, Christ and his Apostles: The Author hath put in a long grievous charge against these good men; but the Reader will observe, that it is a general one, and I suppose, he will hang by his belief, till proof be made by the after-instances: As for the Valentinians, these men have nothing to do with them or their Aeones; they were very high flyers in their knowledge and perfections: And as I find in the Magdeburgenses, they held, That men, 
Cant. 2. cap. 5.  especially those of their own Sect, naturâ salvos fieri, were saved by nature; Which, whether it may have any affinity with the natural faith allowed by the Author, I know not: But now let us hear out Author's instances, and first for their expounding Scripture by the sound of words, If they find any words, saith the Author, which chime to the tune of their private conceits, they clap their own sense on them.  
Thus when Christ is said to be made wisdom to us, this is a plain proof, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that we must learn all our spiritual wisdom from an acquaintance with his Person, though some duller men can understand no more by it, than the wisdom of those Revelations Christ hath made to us of Gods will.  
External Revelation was never excluded by those whom the Author opposes, Christ is made wisdom to us, 
Answer.  as I have answered before, because all true Wisdom, that is, external Revelation and internal Illumination are derived from him, who is the Mirror of divine Perfections.  
Thus when men have learned, 
Mr. Sherlock.  from an Acquaintance with Christ, to place all their hopes of salvation in a personal Union with Christ, from whom they receive Pardon, Grace, Righteousness and Salvation; what more plain proof can any man, who is resolved to believe this, desire of it, than 1 Joh. 5.12. He that hath the Son, hath life: What can having the Son signify, but having an interest in him, being made one with him: though some will be so perverse as to understand it of believing and obeying his Gospel.  
Personal Union with Christ? 
Answer.  who owns it? that is, of different Natures in the same Person, such as is not between Christ and us; Mystical, the Author should have said; that I own, and from thence are derived all spiritual good things to us: And so much is proved by that of St. John; Having the Son, imports Union with him, or else we may have all at a distance from him. Hear the Learned Bishop Reynolds on that Text: 
Life of Christ, fol. 461.  One thing cannot be the Principle of Life to another, except there be some Union, which may be the ground of that conveyance; and this is that the Text calls, the having of Christ: And what this Union is, he afterwards explains, It is that whereby we and he are spiritually united to the making up of one mystical body, 
Fol. 468.  the formal Reason or Bond of it is the Spirit of Christ; from it doth immediately arise a Communion with him in all good things. Hear the Glory of our Church, Archbishop Usher; 
Serm. before the Commons, An. 1620  No man participates of the benefits arising from Christ to his spiritual relief, except he first have Communion with him; we must have the Son, before we have life; eat him we must, that is, as truly be partakers of him, as we are of our ordinary food: and a little after, This is that great Mystery of our Union with Christ, whereby we are made members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bone. Hear the Learned Hooker; 
Eecles. Pol. Lib. 5.  By virtue of this mystical Conjunction we are of him and in him; even as though our flesh and bones should be continuate with his: No man is actually in him, but they in whom he actually is; for he which hath not the Son, hath not life. And may we say or think, that such Pillars and Luminaries of the Church, should follow the sound and clink of words and phrases, chiming to the tune of their own Conceits? One might rather take the Author to be out, he understands that place of obeying and believing the Gospel: Believing the Gospel is but a dogmatical Faith, which entitles not to Christ; Obedience follows after Union with him, and may be rather called walking in him, than having of him.  
Before we can be united to Christ, we must go to him; 
Mr. Sherlock.  and therefore Faith, which is the Instrument of this Union, is very luckily called, Coming to Christ: But this is not enough, we must receive Christ, Joh. 1.12. that Faith which serves us for Legs to go to Christ, must be an Hand to receive him; when we have received him, we must embrace him in our Arms, as old Simeon did, when he found him in the Temple, which is a little nearer Union, as plainly appears from the example of the Patriarches, who embraced the Promises: And now we have Christ, we must trust and lean upon him, as we are often commanded; and, if leaning be not enough, we may make a little more bold, and roll on him, as appears from the Original: Gal. Psal. 37. We may discharge our load and cast it upon Christ, and having brought our Souls to Christ, we must commit them to his charge, if they perish it will be his fault: Thus St. Paul did, 2 Tim. 1.12. And now we must hid ourselves in Christ, as the Dove in the rock, Cant. 2.14. Christ's Wounds are the clefts of the rock, where the believing Soul hides itself: But this is not enough yet, we must put on Christ, Rom. 13.14. that is, his Righteousness, which is a most beautiful Robe to cover our nakedness; if we would get the blessing, we must go to God, as Jacob did, in the Robes of our elder Brother; though this resemblance doth not very well please me: For though Jacob was a good man, yet this looks like a cunning trick, to rob his elder Brother, and cheat his blind Father; and men must not think, that God is thus to be imposed upon; when we are united to Christ, and made one with him, all is ours, as the Apostle tells us. And now what better proof can you desire for all this, if you will be contented with express words? No man would have dreamed of such Interpretations of Scripture, who had not been prepossessed with the mysterious Notion of a fanciful Union to Christ, and Application of Christ to us; for here is no other proof of this, but words and phrases separated from the body of the Text, and the design of the Discourse, and like stragglers picked up and listed into the service of their Hypothesis. The whole mystery of this and a great deal more stuff of this nature consists, in wresting Metaphorical expressions to a proper sense: When the Scripture describes the Profession of Christianity, a sincere Belief and Obedience to the Gospel, by having of Christ, being in him, coming to him, and receiving of him, these men expound these phrases to a proper natural sense, to signify I know not what unintelligible Union and closure of the Soul with him.  
I never yet took any pleasure in Drollery, 
Answer.  and least of all when it sport's itself with Scripture, which is sacred all over to the lowest Him and Fringe of Metaphors: Methinks no man can play with these, but he will meet with some stops or Remora's in Conscience; the tragical Stories of Theopompus and Theodectes, mentioned by Josephus, might serve for retractives, or the Reverence of Scripture might fly in the face, as the Fringe did in that Jew's, who was addressing himself to his forbidden pleasure. I conceive Faith, which is the Instrument of Union with Christ, is not luckily, but purposely and in wisdom called Coming; It being, as our Church tells us, 
1. Hom. of Faith.  the first coming unto God, whereby we be justified: And in another place, 
2. Hom. of the Passion.  The only mean and instrument of Salvation required of our parts. The divine Spirit did not plant those Metaphors in Scripture, as so many Flowers in a Garden, in vain or to no purpose, but to set and shadow forth in lively colours that excellent Grace of Faith, which doth in so admirable a way unite to Christ, as if it had all Motions, postures and Sensations spiritually in itself, to take in Christ with his incomparable Benefits into the Soul: Christ is the Centre of Rest, rich Treasure, infinite Beauty, sure Foundation, Rock of Salvation, heavenly Covering, and the very Food and Life of Souls; and Faith is coming, receiving, embracing, leaning, hiding, putting on, and feeding on him; denoting thus much to us, That Faith is, as I may say, the common Sensorium, or common Capacity, which takes in Christ and his excellent Benefits in an appropriative way into the Soul. The Author indeed thinks this Union and Application of Christ to be but a Fancy; but it is such an one, as without which his Blood and Merits are like to avail us little or nothing, as I before noted. St. Austin upon that Text of receiving Christ, Joh. 1.12. saith, 
Tract. in Joh.  Et nos illum possideamus, & ipse nos possideat, ille nos possideat sicut Dominus, nos illum possideamus sicut salutem. Gregory Nyssen, as I find him quoted by Gerard, saith, Nos fide Christum recipere, ut intra conclave nostrum, quod cor nostrum est, perveniat. St. chrysostom on that Text, Rom. 13.14. would have us put on, nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be compassed round about with Christ, he would have Christ to dwell in us, and to be a garment about us, that he may be all to us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, within and without; and a little after, he tells us, That he is the Root, Food, Life, the Foundation, Cornerstone, and what not to us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, every way conjoining and conglutinating us to himself. That of going to God in the Robes of our elder Brother, which pleases not the Author, not every way suiting, as indeed no Resemblance doth, was hinted by no less man than St. Ambrose, who saith, Et odoratus est odorem vestimentorum; & fortasse istud est, quia non operibus justificamur, sed fide. And for the necessity of this Application, our Church hath laid it down in terminis; As it profiteth a man nothing to have Salve, 
2. Hom. of the Passion.  unless it be applied to the part infected, so the Death of Christ shall stand us in no force, unless we apply it to ourselves, in such sort as God hath appointed: Almighty God worketh by means, and in this thing he hath ordained a certain mean; what mean is that? forsooth it is Faith: And in another place, 
1. Hom. of the Sacrament.  our Church would have us come to the Lord's Supper, not as specially regarding the terrene and earthly Creatures, but always holding fast, and cleaving by Faith to the Rock, whence we may suck the sweetness of everlasting Salvation. However, the Author, to whom all these are Fancies, understands by such Metaphors, believing and obeying the Gospel: Believing the Gospel is but a dogmatical Faith, not entitling us to Christ or Salvation; if that be all which is meant, the Glory and divine Emphasis of those Metaphors is lost, and the Texts themselves must whither in a very cold and jejune Sense: And for Obedience, that follows after Union, and, as our Church tells us in the 12. Article, is a fruit of Faith.  
Thus when they talk of our spiritual impotency and inability to do any good thing, 
Mr. Sherlock.  they prove it wonderfully from our being dead in trespasses and sins; therefore as a dead man can contribute nothing to his own Resurrection, no more can we towards our Conversion: Which is true of Natural death, but will be hard to prove of a Moral death, which consists in the prevalency of vicious habits contracted by long custom (which was the case of the Heathen, whom the Apostle there speaks of) which do enslave the Will, that it is very difficult, though not impossible for such persons to return to the love and practice of Virtue.  
Every man, 
Answer.  who is acquainted with himself, may learn his own impotency to good, from the inward pressure of corruption which is in him: However the Apostle in that 2. to the Ephesians doth notably decipher it out to us; there he speaks not so much of a spiritual Death in actual customary sins, as of such a Death in Original corruption; for he opposes it to quickening Grace which by divine Principles infused heals the same; and a little after tells us, that we are by nature the children of wrath. Hoc uno verbo, quasi fulmine, totus homo, quantus quantus est, prosternitur, saith Beza on the place: this shows him dead indeed. It's true the Pelagians, 
Contra Julian. l. 6. c. 4.  as St. Austin tells us, would have omitted the word, Nature, and in stead thereof have read, Prorsùs, altogether children of wrath, but the Church would not suffer it. This spiritual Death in Sin is a total one, it runs over all the Soul; there are, saith the Apostle lusts or desires of the Flesh, the sensitive Faculties, and of the Mind, the rational Powers; nothing is left in Man but what is dead in sin, not a drop or a spark of Spiritual Life or true Grace: For then a man should be naturally regenerate and under a Promise of that Evangelical Mercy, which is indulged to the least measure of Grace, though it be but as a smoking flax or bruised reed. Man is wholly void of spiritual Life by Nature, and hence it evidently appears, that he is not able to reach so high as any spiritual Act, such as Conversion is, unless he be elevated above his own Line by supernatural Grace: This is fully the Doctrine of our Church, who tells us, Man of his own nature is fleshly, 
1. Hom. for Whitsunday.  carnal, corrupt, naught, sinful, disobedient, without any spark of goodness in him: And in another place, The condition of Man, 
Article the 10th.  after the Fall of Adam, is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works, to Faith and calling upon God: Wherefore we have no power to do good Works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the Grace of God preventing us, that we may have a good Will, and working with us, when we have that good Will.  
We are said to be created to good works, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and to become new Creatures, and therefore we can contribute no more to it than to our first Creation; and we are born again which signifies that we are wholly passive in it: Which were true indeed, if our being created unto good works did signify the Manner and Method of our Conversion, and not the Nature of the new Creature, which is the true meaning of it; That as in the first Creation we are created after the Image of God, so we are renewed after the Image of God, in the second; which is therefore expressly called in other places the renewing of our minds.  
The new Creature is indeed after God and his Image, 
Answer.  but it is also from him and his glorious Power in a way of Creation: He takes it upon himself; A new heart will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you, Ezek. 36.26. His great Power is put forth in it, Eph. 1.17. and it is brought forth in a way of Creation, even as God commanded the light to shine out of darkness, 2 Cor. 4.6. May there be a new Creature without a Creator Or may poor, dead, impotent Man without any spark of Goodness in himself be such? Or if he cannot do it alone, may he be a Co-creator with his Maker, and put in for a share in so great a work? No surely, all must be ascribed to the Grace of God alone: Non est devotionis dedisse prope totum, sed fraudis retinuisse vel minimum. saith Prosper; We must not rob God of the least Atom in Nature. For my own part, were I, as I am not, under a necessity to do one, I should rather think it tolerable to steal away the old World, as the Manichees did, than with the Pelagians to take away the new from him. But suppose a man could indeed, as some have presumed, new-make his own Heart after God's Image, might it be called a Creation? Is not that Title too high for any Creature, and where doth the Scripture give such an one to Man? 'Tis God's Royal Prerogative to new-make the Heart: Of his own will begat he us, saith the Apostle, Jam. 1.18. To this our Church agrees; It is the holy Ghost, 
1. Hom. for Whitsunday.  and no other thing, that doth quiken the Minds of Men; and a little after, He is the only worker of Sanctification, and maketh us new men in Christ Jesus.  
When this fails, they take another course with Metaphors, to make them serve their purpose, that is, by considering all the properties of those things Christ is compared to, and applying all that will serve their turn to Christ, without regarding the end, to which they are used; thus the Kingdom of Heaven is compared to a Pearl of great price: Mat. 13. This Pearl signifies Christ, who, as Mr. Watson saith, makes us worthy with his worthiness; Though all the Parable means, is, that we should part with all for the Gospel: Thus Christ was prefigured by the Manna, this was circular, and so a figure of Christ's perfection; it was meat dressed in Heaven, and Christ was prepared of his Father, it suited every one's palate, and Christ suits every Christians condition; he is full of quickening, strengthening, comforting virtue, that is, He is what every man fancies him to be, relishes to their gusto; what precious discoveries are here of Christ! What irrefragable proofs for them? Thus Christ is a Rock, 1 Cor. 10. A rock for defence, and for offence, and for comfort, to screen us from God's wrath, and contain the honey of the promises; Christ is resembled by the brazen Serpent, Brass as inferior metal signifies his humanity, and as solid metal the power of his Godhead, it shines but doth not dazzle the eyes, and so signifies the Godhead veiled with Manhood; thus the brazen Serpent was like a Serpent, but no real one; so Christ was in the likeness of sinful flesh, but no sinner; the Serpent was lifted up to be looked on, and so was Christ to be looked fiducially upon: Never man so happy in expounding types, never Serpent so subtle: Thus Christ is a Vine, a Vine is weak, Christ's humane nature was fain to be supported by the Divine, the Vine grows in the Garden, Christ in the Church, not known amon the Heathen: It had been more grand, to have said, that Christ made the Garden, where he grows; The Vine communicates to the Branches, Christ to Believers, the Vine hath rare fruit, and the promises grow upon Christ; the Blood of Christ is the wine, which cheers man's heart, What fine work might a profane wit make at this rate, but further they jumble all together, and prove one thing from another in a wonderful manner, as thus; Christ is lovely, that is, as Mr. Watson hath it, he is lovely in his Titles, being the desire of all nations, the Prince of Peace, the holy one; lovely in his Types, typified by Moses, David, Solomon, who were lovely persons; and typified by lovely things, as the Pillar of Cloud, the Manna, the Mercy-seat, brazen Serpent, and Noah's Ark: Who can forbear being smitten with so lovely a Person? Besides all these, Christ is resembled to the Rose of Sharon, the Queen of Flowers; to a Vine, the noblest of Plants; to a Cornerstone, a Rock, a rich Treasure, a beautiful Robe, and all these are lovely, (and so should any thing have been, that had come in his way at that time;) thus Christ is altogether lovely.  
The Author tells us, 
Answer.  pag. 75. That he had done enough to expose these men to scorn: Yet we have here a very long Harangue, serving to very little use, unless that ill one, which I presume the Author never intended; to gratify that ugly scoffing humour at Religion, which runs about the profane world: God himself by using similitudes, hath sanctified them to us; the Song of Solomon is an entire Allegory full of sacred mysteries, the writings of the ancient Fathers are in a great measure like pieces of Arras or Tapestry, beautified with Allegorical Flowers, and Images of Divine things, to give a little taste: S. Cyril of Alexandria saith, 
Comment. in Aron.  That Christ is inserted into us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, As if he were the Diamond of the heart: S. Hilary tells us, That Christ is Margarita, quia nihil illo pretiosius invenitur, Thesaurus ut in ipso omnes divitiae regnorum coelestium reconditae agnoscantur, 
De Patris & Filiunitate.  all riches and pretionsness being in him: S. Austin touching Manna, saith, Panem Angelorum manducavit homo, 
Tract. 13. in Johan.  quis est panis Angelorum? In principio erat verbum, quomodo manducavit homo? Verbum caro factum est, & habitavit in nobis. And in another place, De Coelo Manna veniebat, that is in Mr. Watson's phrase, 
De ●tilit. Poenitent.  It was meat dressed in Heaven, attend quem figurabat; ego sum, inquit, panis vivus, qui de Coelo descendi: For the Rock, let S. Ambrose come in, Christus petra dicitur, 
De fide centra. Ar. cap. 6.  quia credentibus fortitudinem, incredulis duritiem praestat, that is, in Mr. Watson's language; A Rock for defence, and a Rock for offence; and for the Honey in the Rock, our Church thinks it no disparagement to say, 
1. Hom. of the Sacrament.  That from this Rock we may suck the sweetness of everlasting Salvation: As for the brazen Serpent, let us hear Theophylact, Vide figuram, confer cum veritate, illic Serpentis similitudo, 
Comment. in Joh. 3.  formam habet bestiae, venenum non habet, that is, in Mr. Watson's words, It was like a Serpent, but no real one: Ita ex hoc loco homo Dominus, sed à peccati veneno liber, in similitudine carnis peccati venit; that is, in Mr. Watson's words, Christ was in the likeness of sinful flesh, but no sinner: Tunc videntesevadebant mortem corporis, nunc autem qui vident, mortem animae; that is, in Mr. Watson's words, The Serpent was lifted up to be looked on, and so was Christ to be fiducially looked on. Touching the Vine, I must make bold to vouch in St. Bernard, who, not seeing all things, never dreamed such things should be ridiculous; he brings in Christ speaking thus; 
De Coena Dom. Ser. 10.  Ego sum vitis, dans botrum dulcissimum cunctis palmitibus; that is, in Mr. Watson, I give the sap of Grace to all believers: Generans vinum, quod laetificat cor hominis; that is, in Mr. Watson, My Blood is the Wine which cheers Man's heart: And a little after, Christus est vitis, in quo est totus humour, id est, omnis plenitudo Spiritùs sancti; The divine Spirit fills, or, as Mr. Watson saith, supports his Humane nature. And now I might bring the same Author for the Rose of Sharon, and other things; but this may suffice to show, that Mr. Watson's words may carry a fair Sense before a candid Interpreter: The Author might have made no less pretty sport with those ancient Fathers, those excellent devout Souls, who spiritualise every thing, and reduce every thing to the great Centre of Scripture, Jesus Christ. I shall only add on Mr. Watson's behalf, that he never thought, that Christ, the Manna, should be accommodated to men's Fancy, nor imagined the Church unplanted by Christ; neither did he dream that his Discourses of Christ's Loveliness should be traduced into carnal Expressions, such as that, Who would not be smitten with such an one? To what the Author adds, as his own imitation of these Men, being no other than the playing of his Fancy with itself, I shall return just nothing, as seeing nothing considerable therein.  
When this will not do, 
Mr Sherlock.  they argue from their own preconceived Notions, and pretend to prove their own Scheme from Scripture, but in truth prove the sense of Scripture by its agreement with their Opinions; which is just such a trick as the Papists have got, to prove the Church from Scripture, and the Scripture from the Church. Thus after all their talk of being justified by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, the Scripture tells us, that we are justified by Faith, have remission by Faith, have peace with God by Faith, are sanctified by Faith, are the sons of God by Faith, are saved by Faith: Now how is this reconcilable with being justified by imputed Righteousness? Why, thus; Faith doth not justify absolutely, as Faith, but relatively, as it brings us to Christ, and apprehends his Righteousness: This is their own preconceived opinion, or else no man could have stumbled on this Distinction: But their Reason is plain; Should Faith justify as Faith, as our own Act, it would be as bad as good Works, and irreconcilable with the Grace of God; though modest men dream not of meriting, though Faith had justified as our Act; since the Reward doth so infinitely exceed the Work, that there can be no suspicion of Merit, and where there is no Merit, the Reward is of Grace.  
I shall at present wave, 
Answer.  who symbolizes most with the Papists, and how Justification, Sanctification, Adoption and Salvation are here jumbled together, as if they were one thing: The General Charge (having had so many) I say nothing to, but I come to the Instance; The Scripture saith that we are justified by Faith; very well; but what by Faith exclusively of its Object, Christ's Blood and Righteousness? No surely; then the Scripture, which tells us, That we are justified by Faith in his blood, Rom. 3.25. and made righteous by his obedience, Rom. 5.19. must contradict itself; or what, exclusively to the imputation of these? No neither, without the imputation of these we cannot be entitled to them to our Justification: Now that Faith justifies not absolutely, and as our Act, may appear: In Justification there is a judicial proceeding, and we must answer to something, to the Gospel only, or to the Law also; if to the Gospel only, than Evangelical Justification is in a way frustrative and not perfective of the Law; there needeth only Faith to answer the Gospel, and not perfect Righteousness to answer the Law: But what saith the Apostle to this? Having concluded Justification to be by Faith, Rom. 3.30. he immediately adds, Do we then make void the Law through faith? God forbidden, yea, we establish the Law, ver. 31. And how is this? That Faith, which answers to the Gospel, receives that perfect Righteousness of Christ, which answers the Law in every point, Christ being the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth, as we have it, Rom. 10. Without this, it is not at all imaginable how Faith, or Justification by it, should establish or complete the Law; our sincere Obedience, which flows from Faith, can no more do it than imperfection can reach perfection. Again, if to the Gospel only, than all the Pagans must needs be justified, for they have nothing to answer unto; not to the Gospel, that is not reveiled to them; not to the Law of Nature, that is but the relics and broken pieces of the Moral Law: And if Christians, who have the Moral Law in its entire perfection, are not to answer to it, then surely Pagans, who have only some little Fragments of it, need not answer thereunto, and by consequence they must be recti in Curia before God: But if (as of necessity we must) we must answer to the Law also, then Faith, as it is in itself, and our Act, cannot possibly justify; it being but a piece of the Law, and that imperfect; God, who judgeth according to truth, will not esteem those perfectly righteous, who are not so indeed, nor accept of a partial Righteousness for a total one. If reply be made, This is true, when God judgeth Judicio Justitiae, but not when he judges Judicio Misericordiae; he in his condescending Mercy accepts of Faith in the room of total, perfect Righteousness: I answer, this cannot possibly stand, God's Mercy and Truth are never at variance; his Truth will not esteem us righteous upon account of a partial imperfect righteousness, and his Mercy will not condescend so far, as to interfere with his Truth: But when he esteems us righteous upon account of a perfect Righteousness, which is not our own, but Christ's, than Truth and Mercy both shine forth; Truth, in that there is a perfect Righteousness to answer the Law; and Mercy, in that it is not our own, but our Sureties. But further; If Faith be taken for a perfect Righteousness, than it is lifted up into the room of Christ and his Righteousness: If you say, no, Christ's Righteousness is the foundation of this acceptance of Faith; I answer, Then will it follow, that Christ died not so much for Persons to justify them, as for Graces, to elevate Faith above itself into the estimation of a perfect Righteousness; and withal, that Faith is our proper Righteousness in an immediate formal way, and Christ but a remote Cause only; much after the same rate as the Papists say, Bona opera tincta sanguine Christi justificant: Works are made the immediate Cause of Justification, and Christ the remote. Moreover, it is to be remembered, that nothing can be Instrumentum & instrumentatum; the Artificers Tools are not the House he makes; the Hyssops sprinkling of Blood in the Jewish Sacrifices was not the Blood of Christ; Faith is not our Righteousness, but the Medium to it: Hence, Phil. 3.9. we read of righteousness by faith: it is not itself our Righteousness, but a means to it. Thus it appears, that Faith in itself and as our Act justifies not; therefore it justifies as it is that Evangelical Medium which receives Christ and his perfect Righteousness. Thus the Reverend Hooker, Faith is the only hand, which putteth on Christ to Justification, and Christ the only Garment which being so put on covereth the shame of our defiled Natures, hideth the imperfection of our Works, preserveth us blameless in the sight of God; before whom otherwise the weakness of our Faith were cause sufficient to make us culpable, yea, to shut us from the Kingdom of Heaven, where nothing that is not absolute can enter: Thus our Church; 
2. Hom. of salvation.  The true understanding of this Doctrine, That we are justified by Faith in Christ, is not, that this our own Act, to believe in Christ, which is within us, doth justify us, and deserve our Justification; for that were to count ourselves justified by some Act or Virtue that is in ourselves. And in another place: This Righteousness, 
1. Hom. of salvation.  which we receive of God's Mercy and Christ's Merits, embraced by Faith, is accepted by God for our perfect Justification.  
But this is passed all doubt, 
Mr. Sherlock.  when it is confirmed by a Metaphor or two: A Ring which hath a precious Stone in it, which will staunch blood, may be said to staunch it, but the Virtue lies in the Stone: Faith is the Ring, Christ the precious stone; all that Faith doth, is to bring home Christ's Merits to the Soul and so it justifies, an invention I never met with before: And again; In the Body are Veins, that suck nourishment from the Stomach; Faith is a sucking Vein, that draws Virtue from Christ: Is not this plain, that we are saved by Christ, as the Body is nourished by the Stomach?  
That of the Ring is no new or absurd invention, 
Answer.  it was many years since used by Dr. Pomeran, 
Melch. Ad. in Vita Georg. Anhalt.  in these words;  Annulus magnò estimatur & amatur propter gemmam, non propter aurum; sic dicitur, fide justificari homines propter gemmam Filium Dei: hanc autem gemmam fide amplectimur. With this Similitude George Prince of Anhalt was much delighted. Neither need the Author have found fault with that other Similitude, of a sucking Vein; all spiritual nourishment is drawn from Christ, and that by Faith.  
Now to make all clear, 
Mr. Sherlock.  we may give a Philosophical Account why God chose Faith to be the Instrument of our Justification: Because it is an humble Grace, and gives the Glory of all to Free Grace: If Repentance should fetch Justification from Christ, a man would be ready to say, This was for my Tears: (strange deserving Creatures these, who can dream of meriting Heaven with a few tears!) But Faith is humble, it is an empty Hand, and what merit can there be in that? Doth the poor man's reaching out his hand merit an Alms? (yes, just as much as a few tears merit Heaven.) Faith is only a golden Bucket, that draws water out of the Well of Salvation. But why may not those, who are so apt to be conceited of Merit, grow as proud of a golden Bucket, as if the Well were their own? They are civil to Faith, to make it a golden Bucket; but at other times they tell us, That Faith may be a sore and blear-eyed Leah, a shaking and a palsy hand, weak and bending Legs, and have all the infirmities that may be, and be never the worse neither as to the purpose of Justification; so that Faith had need be a very humble Grace, else it would take such language very ill from them.  
What need all this sport with Faith's Humility or Infirmity? 
Answer.  An humble Grace Faith is, it empties the Soul of itself, gives all Glory to God, hangs upon Christ and free Grace, and hath all in a way of receiving and dependence; and seeing its Nature and aptitude to Evangelical purposes is such, it is no wonder at all, that God set his stamp upon it, and marked it out for an Evangelical Medium, to receive Christ and his Righteousness unto Justification; Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, saith the Apostle, Rom. 4.16. Fides & Gratia commeant, mutuò se ponunt & tollunt; Fides sola Gratiâ nititur, Gratia tantùm credenti promittitur, saith the Learned Paraeus on the place. Let us hear our Church in this matter: 
2. Hom. of salvation.  This saying, that we be justified by Faith only, freely and without Works, is spoken, to take away clearly all merit of our Works, as being unable to deserve Justification at God's hands; and thereby most plainly to express, the weakness of Man and goodness of God, the great infirmity of ourselves, and the might and power of God, the imperfectness of our own works, and the most abundant Grace of our Saviour Christ. But to go on; infirm Faith is, because of the adherent Corruption, which is apt to blear its eyes, and give it a palsy hand and trembling legs; however, if it be true, it entitles to Christ and his Righteousness: Invoco te, Domine, languidâ & imbecillâ fide, sed fide tamen, said Cruciger the Germane Divine. Those men, whom the Author opposes, hold no such thing as meriting by Tears or any thing else of our own, but caution against it: Indeed the Author thinks there is no danger in repentant Tears; but Humane pride, such is its venomous Nature, is ready to swell at any small matter, which hath but any shadow of excellency in it: The heart of good Hezekiah was lifted up, over his Silver, and Gold, and Treasures, and precious things, which yet were of a much lower value than his devotional Tears, which shows the proneness of our Nature to that sin.  
Those Scriptures (Without holiness no man shall see God; 
Mr. Sherlock.  The wrath of God is reveiled against all unrighteousness; In every Nation he that worketh righteousness is accepted of God; Except your righteousness exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into Heaven; He that breaketh the least of these Commandments, and teacheth men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; and he that doth and teacheth them shall be called great there) assert the absolute necessity of an holy life, to entitle us to God's Love and the Rewards of the next Life, and perfectly overthrow their fundamental Notion of Justification by the righteousness of Christ imputed to us.  
Doth the necessity of an holy Life overthrow the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness? 
Answer.  No surely, it's a very gross mistake; a holy Life is so far from overthrowing Imputed Righteousness, that it presupposes it: We are married to Christ, that we might bring forth fruit unto God, Rom. 7.4. And our Church in the 12. Article tells us, That good Works follow after Justification: Those, who are true Believers, and have Christ's Righteousness imputed to them do, above all other men, obey God's Commands, glorify his Name, and walk in holy Obedience towards the Crown of Glory above: Obedience is necessary, but not in that sense, as if the least breach of a Command should finally exclude from Heaven, for than it were, Woe, woe, to us: Nor yet so absolutely, as that a Believer, dying in the first instant of Faith and before actual Obedience, should be shut out of Heaven: Our Church hath taught us better: 
1. Hom. of good works quoting St. Chrysost. sor it.  I can show a man that by Faith without Works lived, and came to heaven, but without Faith never man had life; the Thief, that was hanged when Christ suffered, did believe only, and the merciful God justified him: If any say, that he lacked time; truth it is, and I will not contend therein; but this I will surely affirm, That Faith only saved him.  
But these men defy you, 
Mr. Sherlock.  if you charge them with destroying the necessity of an holy life; for they tell us, Tat this universal Obedience and good Works (a suspicious word) are indispensibly necessary, from the sovereign appointment and Will of God; this is the Will of God, even our Sanctification: It is the Will of the Father, Son, and holy Ghost; it is the end of their Dispensation in the business of Salvation; it is the end of the Father's electing Love, Eph. 1.2. of the Son's redeeming Love, Tit. 2. and of the Spirit's sanctifying Love; it is necessary to the glory of them all: And are not these men mightily injured? Is it not great pity they should be so abused? But the truth is, all this is not one syllable to the purpose; for the Question was about its necessity to salvation; and if we be justified and saved without it, all this cannot prove any necessary obligation on us to the practice of it: God hath commanded Obedience, but where is the Sanction of this Law? Will he damn those who do not obey, for their disobedience, and save those who do, for their obedience? Not a word of this, for this destroys our Justification by Christ's Righteousness only; if after all those commands, God hath left it indifferent, whether we obey or not, Obedience is not necessary. And will the Father elect, and the Son redeem none but those who are holy, and reprobate all others? If we be elected and redeemed without any regard to our being holy, our Election and Redemption is secure, whether we be holy or not; and so this cannot make holiness necessary on our part, though it may be necessary on God's to make us holy; but that is not our care; and how is Obedience for the glory of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit, when the necessity of holiness is destructive to free Grace, which is the only glory God designs by Christ.  
I suppose them injured and abused to some tune, 
Answer.  after they have in terminis asserted the Necessity of Obedience from strong, invincible, Scriptural Arguments, they are yet charged with destroying the Necessity of an holy Life. But, saith the Author, All this is not one syllable to the purpose; for the Question was about its necessity to salvation; if we be justified and saved without it, it is not necessary. I answer, Here we have Justification and Salvation confounded; Obedience follows after Justification, as we heard but now from our Church, but precedes Salvation: But to pass that; Is nothing necessary to Salvation but what justifies? Is not Sanctification necessary to Salvation, and yet distinct from Justification? and how then are we saved without Obedience? But, saith the Author, Where is the Sanction of this Law? Will he damn those that obey not, and save those that do obey? If after all those Commands God hath left it indifferent, Obedience is not necessary: But what a strange Supposition is this! Commanded and yet left indifferent? It is utterly impossible; no man will say so so much as of an Humane Command: No doubt at all, but God will damn the rebellious, and save the obedient; yet our Obedience no way clashes with Christ's Righteousness, neither is Eternal Life given us for Obedience, as if it merited the same. What follows in the Author, Will the Father elect and the Son redeem none but those who are holy? is a very strange Question: Will they? as if the Book of Life were yet unwritten, and the Blood of Atonement yet unshed: The Father hath elected us, that we should be holy, Eph. 1.4. and how can he elect us being such? The Son gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works, Tit. 2.14. and how could we be holy before? However, no disregard is cast upon Holiness, which, though it do not antecede Election and Redemption, yet it sweetly streams and issues from thence; and Believers are obliged to follow after it, as they will answer the End of Election and Redemption; And whilst they are passing on in that pure way, I dare be their Bondsman, that they shall not be met with any such monstrous Conceit, as if Holiness, which is exaltative of free Grace, were destructive of it.  
Yet Holiness is necessary to our honour, 
Mr. Sherlock.  for it makes us like to God: Profane men that they are! as if the perfect Righteousness of Christ were not much more for our honour, and did not make us more like to God, than the rags and patches of our own Righteousness.  
A very hard case, 
Answer.  they must be profane for proving the Necessity of Holiness and likeness to God; but the reason is, this disparages the Righteousness of Christ; A sad story; but it will be proved much about the time, when Christ's justifying Righteousness and sanctifying Spirit shall fall at odds and variance among themselves: So horrid a thing cannot be, neither let any Christian Mind start a thought of it.  
But it is for Peace; what! 
Mr. Sherlock  Peace of Conscience? Must we fetch our peace from Duties and Graces? Is not this to renounce Christ? Miserable men! must we set about correcting our Lives, amending our Ways, performing Duties, following after Righteousness according to the prescript of the Law? Why this is the course, wherein many continue long with much perplexity, hoping, fearing, tiring themselves in their way: Afterwards they come to the Apostle's Conclusion, By the works of the Law no man is justified; and is this the way to Peace? Is this the way to Communion with God by our own Righteousness? Doth not all our wisdom of walking with God consist in our acquaintance with Christ? God is Light, we darkness; he Life, we dead; he Holiness, we defiled; he Love, we hatred; surely this is no foundation of Agreement or Communion: the foundation then of this Peace is laid and hid in Christ, who is our peace, and the Medium of all Communications between God and us: So that if this Gentleman's (that is, Dr. Owen's) memory had not failed him, he would never have told us, that Holiness is necessary to our peace and Communion with God.  
All this is but a mistake, 
Answ  for want of distinguishing between the Foundation of our peace with God, and the Sense of it: The Foundation of our peace is not laid in our Works or Legal Righteousness, but in the atoning and satisfying blood of Jesus Christ, which speaks peace to all believers: 
Melch. Adam. in vit. Jureconsult.  A notable instance whereof we have in that Germane John à Berg Father of Joachim, who in all his life was a zealous Papist, standing on his works and legal righteousness, but upon his deathbed cast away those fig-leaves and poor cover, and reposed himself in the merit and expiation of Christ, as the only foundation of peace: But the sense of this peace is found in a way of holiness, whilst the believer is there; the love of God coming down in the witness of the spirit, and echoing in conscience, makes such a pure serenity in the heart, as outrelishes all things in nature: Now whether there be any inconsistency between the foundation of our peace and the sense of it, I leave to the Reader; these may as well stand together, as Christ's atonement and our Obedience.  
However Holiness serves for the conviction of enemies; 
Mr. Sherlock.  how so, when it is not essentially necessary to his Friends? and it is for the conversion of others; why so, when men may be converted without it? It keeps off the Judgements of God from men; But why cannot Christ's Righteousness do this more effectually than the holiness of men?  
Holiness casts forth a convictive Ray and Glory into the dark world, 
Answ  yet it is not essential to Believers to justify, but to sanctify them; It hath a Divine tendency to convert others, yet the first act of conversion precedes in habitual Grace, and actual Holiness or Obedience follows after; Christ's righteousness, without which there would be nothing but wrath and judgements, is the great fundamental reason of keeping them off; but Holiness ministers under it to the same end.  
But it is necessary in respect of the state and condition of justified persons, 
Mr. Sherlock.  for they are accepted and received into friendship with an holy God; therefore they must cleanse and purify themselves: what need of this? when they are clothed with the Robes of Christ's Righteousness, which is the only foundation of our Commwion with God. And pag. 267. They fulfil the Righteousness of the Law, not by doing any thing themselves, but by having all done for them, by having this perfect righteousness of Christ imputed to them. And pag. 423. The Doctor places Christ's righteousness in the room of ours, to be not only the foundation, but condition of the Covenant; And then makes it an expression of our chaste affections to Christ, quite to thrust out our own righteousness, and to allow it no place in our Religion: And pag. 427. The foundation of their love to Christ, Is a fond imagination that he will save them by his righteousness without any righteousness of their own.  
What! 
Answer.  Doth imputed righteousness make holiness needless? Under pardon, this is neither better nor worse, than an old Popish calumny, such as hath been cast into the face of Protestants over and over: Chemnitius asserting justification by imputed Righteousness, tells us, 
Exam. Conc. Trid. de Justif.  Ind verò Pontificii texunt calumniam, omnia decreta Tridentina ita condita sunt de justificatione, ut obliquè nos insimulent, quasi doceamus credentes non renovari, quasi charitatem & obedientiam ita excludamus, ut nec adsit, nec sequatur in reconciliatis: And what return doth that learned man make thereunto? Sed tantùm Syeophanticae & impudentes calumniae sunt, quibus strepitum excitant. The learned Chamier brings in Sapeins, 
Cham. de Sanctif. cap. 2.  charging the Protestants thus, Non esse nos justos, nist solû imputatione justitiae Christi, non autem ullâ inhaerente qualitate: And Costerus thus, Christus est nostra justitia, nulla est ergo alia justitia in nobis: And Bozius thus,  salutem consequaris & sis sanctus, aiunt omnes Protestants, nihil est necesse boni aliquid velis, moliaris, aut facias, Christo fidas, impunè quidvis audeas, & ad exitum perducas; and then expresses himself thus, Immanem, ita me Deus amet, calumniam: The excellent Davenant, 
De H●tuali cap. ●.  ushering in Bellarmine and Campian, and Becanus, as casting the same dirt into the face of Protestants; saith plainly to the two first, quot verba, tot serè mendacia; and to the third, calumnia est, & apertè falsa. The Papists you see, have cast out these calumnies, but should a Protestant do so? No surely; the Author I confess, hath done a great honour to these few Nonconformists, in casting upon them that reproach of Christ, (for so as a Protestant I must call it) which many a son of the Church of England would willingly bear, hoping to have the spirit of Glory rest upon him; but I suppose, he hath done no great right to the Protestant cause therein: How vain this calumny is, doth assoon appear, as we can open our eyes upon the common distinction between Justification and Sanctification: Justification is an Action of God without us, Sanctification an Action of the Spirit within us; the one is by the perfect Righteousness of Christ imputed, the other by the holy Graces of the Spirit infused and inherent in us: In the one we are freed from the Gild of Sin, in the other from the Corruption and Pollution of it: By the one we have a Title to God's Kingdom, by the other a Meetness for it; it being such as no unclean thing can enter into the same. And what colour of Repugnancy is there between these two? and how doth the one make the other useless? Both are useful to the Believer, and both in Harmony between themselves; Obedience is so far from being needless, that it is a necessary consequent upon Justification by Christ's Righteousness. St. Paul in the Epistle to the Romans first treats of Justification, and then of Sanctification as a consequent thereupon. Good works (as our Church tells us in the 12th Article) are the Fruits of Faith and follow after Justification. To me it is unimaginable, that the holy Spirit, which is procured by Christ's Righteousness, and before whose inspiration (as our Church tells us in the 13th. Article) works done are not pleasant unto God, should inspire unjustified persons to Obedience; nay, had it not been for Christ's Righteousness, the holy Spirit, I verily believe, would no more have touched in the least holy motion upon Men than upon Devils. I shall close this Point with the Authors own words: Christ's Satisfaction was for sins of Omission and Commission, and by it we are reputed by God as having done nothing amiss; and as perfectly righteous, to have done all, to have kept the whole Law, pag. 60. and yet I hope the Author doth not esteem Holiness needless; though I cannot tell, how Christ's imputed Righteousness (whereof his Satisfaction is a part) should make any man more than perfectly righteous.  
However Holiness is necessary with respect to Sanctification. 
Mr. Sherlock.  We have in us a New Creature, which is fed, cherished, nourished, kept alive by the fruits of Holiness: God hath not given us new Hearts to kill them in the womb, or to give them to the Old Man to be devoured, as Dr. Owen hath it: The phrase of this is admirable, and the reasoning unanswerable; if men be new Creatures, they will certainly live new Lives: And this makes Holiness necessary, by the same reason, that every thing necessarily is, what it is, when it is.  
The new Creature is fed with fruits of of Holiness; 
Answer.  so Dr. Owen: Upon which the Author tells us in sport, that the phrase is admirable: I suppose it is so: Hear our Church: As Men that be very Men indeed, 
1. Hom. of good works quoting St. Chrysost. for it.  first have life, and after be nourished; so must our Faith in Christ go before, and after be nourished with good works: But for the reason, I think it cannot be answered: Exercise is necessary for the Body, and is it not necessary for the Body, and is it not necessary for the Soul? It is necessary for the Soul in mere Moral Virtues, and is it not necessary for it in spiriritual Graces too? Reason, though a natural Talon only, necessarily obliges us to walk suitably to it, and how much more do Divine Graces, which are altogether supernatural, bind us to live in a Decorum thereunto? These things to me are very cogent.  
Well! 
Mr. Sherlock.  but holiness is necessary as the means to the end, but how? Though it neither be the Cause, Matter, nor Condition of our Justification, yet it is the Way appointed by God for us to walk in for the obtaining Salvation; he that hopeth, purifieth himself: none shall come to the End who walk not in the Way, without Holiness it is impossible to see God. This is all pertinent and home to the purpose; but it hath two little faults in it, that it contradicts itself, and overthrows their darling Opinions, which I can pardon, if he can: What? the necessary way to eternal Life, and yet neither Cause, Matter nor Condition? At least it might be the Causa sine qua non, and that will make it a Condition: But not to dispute about words; I am content it should be only a way to life, but, what becomes of Christ then, who is the only way? Cannot Christ's Righteousness save us without our own? Doth Christ's Righteousness free us from guilt, and entitle us to Glory, and yet can we not be saved without Holiness? What becomes of free Grace then? Is not this to eek out the Righteousness of Christ with our own? To make Christ our Justifier, and our Works our Saviour?  
This is all pertinent: 
Answer.  It seems the former Arguments drawn from the sovereign Will of God, from the End of the Love of the blessed Trinity, from the Glory of them all, from our Likeness to God, from the Peace of Conscience, from the Conviction and Conversion of others, from the aversion of Judgements, from the State of justified Persons, from the Work of Sanctification, are but poor insignificant things with the Author; which yet with me are of great Moment. This is all pertinent, saith the Author, but it contradicts itself, and overthrows their Darling-opinion: What? the necessary way to eternal Life, and yet neither Cause, Matter nor Condition? At least it might be Causa sine qua non, and so a Condition: But the Author might have observed that the Doctor did not speak ad idem, to one and the same thing; his words are, Holiness is neither the Cause, Matter nor Condition of Justification, yet it is the way to Salvation; both stand well together without any shadow of Contradiction: Obedience is subsequent to Justification, and so neither Cause, Matter nor Condition of it; but it is antecedent to Salvation, and the way thereunto. Well, the Author is content, that it only be a necessary way to eternal Life, but what then becomes of Christ the only way? What of Christ's Righteousness and of free Grace? I hope there is no matter of fear; our Holiness, unless it be lifted up above itself into the room and Throne of Christ, very well comports with Christ and Grace: it is a way, but not, as Christ, an Expiatory Meritorious one; it stands as necessary in Sanctification, but eeks not out Christ's Righteousness in Justification: It flows from free Grace, and doth not overturn, but magnify its Fountain. Afterwards our Author draws up a long Charge against these men, That they prepossess their Fancies with arbitrary Notions, pervert the Scriptures, to justify their Darlingopinions; and that sometimes with so ill success, as to break some stubborn Truths into palpable absurdities and contradictions; their Fancies and Scripture agree no better than the Church of Rome and Scripture do: They add such limitations, distinctions, glosses to Scripture, as are necessary to make them orthodox. Their Acquaintance with Christ's Person is only a work of Fancy, teaches men Hypocrisy, undermines the Design of the Gospel; makes men incurably ignorant, yet conceited of knowledge; impertinent talkers and censurers of Mankind; despisers of their Teachers, as if ignorant and mere Moral Preachers: Their Acquaintance with Christ's Person warms their Fancies, moves their Passions; sometimes they find break of heart, and feel the horrors of damned Spirits; sometimes they are ravished with his love and Beauty, refreshed with the sweet caresses of his love: All which may be no more than the working of a warm Enthusiastic Fancy, the transportation of frantic Raptures and Ecstasies of Love. Unto all which I say two things only; the one is this: In general Charges, which may be drawn up against the most innocent Souls under Heaven, the intelligent Reader must measure the truth of them only by the Instances, which before have been examined: The other is this, that the Author tells us, That their break for sin, and ravishments in Christ, may be but the working of a warm Enthusiastic fancy: In which Censure, I suppose there is no over-measure of Charity. There are yet Two things behind, which, because interwoven with the general Charge, I have hitherto omitted, but shall now recite them; the one is this; Prepossessed Fancies force men (saith the Author) to pervert the Scriptures to make them speak the Orthodox Language; to this we own all those nice and subtle Distinctions, which constitute the Body of Systematical Divinity, which commonly have not other design than to evade the force of Scripture, or to bribe it to speak on their side. I will now wonder no longer, that the Author treats a few Nonconformists with such rough hands; Behold! an universal blast put on those excellent Divines, which have stood in the Protestant World like burning and shining Lights, and have set forth so many learned and worthy Systems of Divinity for the Church's use: But this is A-la-mode with the Remonstrants, who, as Vedelius tells us, 
De Arcan. Armind.  have poured forth convitia atrocissima in Formulas; not being afraid to say, Ista ars est Sathanae, calling them humanam tyrannidem; and proceeding so far as to say, That that Preface in Athanasius his Creed, Qui vult salvus esse ante omnia credat, etc. was a proud one: Systems of Divinity are to them as Bonds and Fetters, which they would willingly break off, that they might have the better Scope to introduce their unsound and novel Opinions. The other is this: It is not, saith the Author, the Person, but the Gospel of Christ, which is the way, the truth and the life. It seems the new and living Way through his Flesh may be stopped up, the great Prophet may want the Title of Truth, the vital Influences of Grace from Christ may be intercepted; and all this after Christ himself hath told us expressly, I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. These things, I suppose, will hardly be passable with Christian Ears or Hearts: If he be not the Way, there is no approach for us to the Father; if not the Truth, we are not bound to believe him or his Gospel; if not the Life, to quicken our dead and unbelieving Hearts, we should never believe in him, though he were both the former.    

CHAP. IU.  

Sect. I.  
NExt to the Knowledge of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  there is not a greater Mystery than our Union to him and Communion with him; on which, as these men represent it, are built all those wild and fanciful Conclusions, which directly oppose the Doctrine and Practice of Christianity: Therefore it is of great concernment to state this matter, and to examine, what is meant in Scripture by Union to Christ and Communion with him; for the Scripture mentioneth such a Relation between Christ and Christians, as may be expressed by an Union; and the phrases of being in Christ, abiding in Christ, can signify no less.  
The Author owns some kind of Union, 
Answer.  but our enquiry is after a spiritual, mystical union between Christ and believers, who are knit together by the Divine Ligatures of the holy Spirit and Faith: The quickening Spirit (as the right Reverend Usher hath it) descending downward from the Head, 
Serm. before the Commons, 1620.  to be in us a Fountain of supernatural Life, and a lively Faith (wrought by the same Spirit) ascending from us upward to lay fast hold upon him. This Union is fully set forth in Scripture: We are called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ, 1 Cor. 1.9. Our fellowship is with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ, 1 Joh. 1.3. And this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Communion cannot but import Union: We are said to have the Son, and to have life by him, 1 Joh. 5.12. To eat his flesh and drink his blood, so as to live by him, Joh. 6.56, 57 And, unless we dream of an oral Manducation, what can this be but a Mystical Union? and what better proof can be of it, than that divine Life, which issues from thence? Our Saviour hath put it out of all doubt, He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him, Joh. 6.56. And in another place he tells them, Abide in me and I in you, Joh. 15.4. What can be more emphatical and expressive of our Mystical Union? If such words do not signify it, what can? We are said to be in him that is true, even in Jesus Christ, 1 Joh. 5.20. And Christ is said to be in us the hope of glory, Col. 1.27. And how full are these Expressions? This our Saviour prayed for in that solemn Prayer, Joh. 17. As thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they may be one in us: This he promised; At that day ye shall know, that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you, Joh. 14.20. Surely that Union, which is set forth by the Union of the Father and the Son in the blessed Trinity, must be a mystical one: The Bonds of this Union are no less pregnantly expressed; touching the holy Spirit, which, as Bishop Davenant tells us, is Primaria Commissura, by which Christ and we touch, the Scripture speaks negatively, If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his, Rom. 8.9. that is, he hath no Union or Communion with him; and positively or affirmatively, He that is joined unto the Lord, is one Spirit, 1 Cor. 6.17. Hereby we know, that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit, 1 Joh. 4.13. Touching Faith, which, as the Learned Usher saith, is the Soul of all other Graces, the Scripture teaches us, that Christ dwells in our hearts by faith, Eph. 3.17. and that Faith comes, receives, leans on, puts on, feeds on, and, in a word, possesses Christ: In one place, Gal. 2.20. we have both these Bonds together, I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me, that is, by his Spirit, and I live by the faith of the Son of God; these two Make up the Mystical Union. The Name of this Union is also expressly in Scripture; Fancy did not baptise it, Mystical, but the holy Ghost; This is a great mystery, to be members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones, Eph. 5.30, 32. Nay, The riches of the glory of the mystery, is Christ in us the hope of Glory, Col. 1.27. The ancient Fathers were no strangers to this Union; that of Ignatius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Epist. ad Eph.  points it out to us. In the times of St, Cyprian and Julius Bishop of Rome, the Church, in the Lord's Supper, which is a divine Seal of this Union, used over and above to note it out by mixing Water with the Wine: Hence St. Cyprian saith, 
Cypr. E. pist. 63. Decret. Julii in Concil.  Quando in chalice vinum aquâ miscetur, Christo populus adunatur, & credentium plebs ei, in quem credidit, copulatur & conjungitur. And Julius saith, Si sit vinum, tantùm, est Christus sine populo; si aqua sola, populus sine Christo. St. Hilary and St. Cyril of Alexandria compare our Union with Christ with that high Union which is between the Father and the Son: St. Cyril upon John tells us, as I have him quoted by the Noble Sadeel, that Christus per fidem ingreditur in nos, & per Spiritum sanctum inhabitat. St. Basil speaks of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an intellectual mouth in the inner Man, by which we feed upon Christ the Bread of Life. St. Chrysostom saith, 
Hom. 11. in Ephes.  that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Spirit flowing from above, which touches all the Members of Christ. Diximus fratres (saith St. Austin) hoc Dominum commendasse in manducatione carnis suae & potione sanguinis sui, 
Tract. 27. in Joh.  ut in illo maneamus & ipse in nobis; maneamus autem in illo, cùm sumus membra ejus, manet ipse in nobis, cùm sumus templum ejus: And in another place, 
De peccator. Mer. cap. 31.  Homines sancti & fideles ejus siunt cum homine Christo unus Christus, unus Christus caput & corpus, magna est & mira dignatio. Theophylact saith, 
In Joh. 15.  that a man is by Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, part of the Root, united to the Lord, and incorporated in him: And to name no more; generally those Say of the Fathers, which the Papists plead, for an oral Manducation of Christ, are so many proofs of the Mystical Union. The Schoolmen concur in the same thing: Aquinas saith, that Christ and his Members are but una Persona mystica: And Barthol. Medina expresses it fully; 
In 3. partem Thom. qu. 8.  Cùm efficimur membra sub Capite Christo, mirabili quâdam Spiritûs sancti operatione unimur, & transimus in Christum, induimúsque illum, & deiformi quâdam insitione atque Vnione illi inserimur. Modern Divines go the same way; to name but a few: Bishop Usher saith, 
Imman. pag. 50.  The Bond of this Mystical Union between Christ and us, is on his part, the quickening Spirit, and on ours, Faith. Est inter Christum & omnia Christi Membra, continuitas quaedam ratione Spiritûs sancti, qui plenissimè residens in Christo Capite, 
In Col cap. 1. ver. 18.  unus & idem numero ad omnia ejus membra diffunditur, vivificans singula & uniens universa; so Bishop Davenant. The Spirit knitteth us, as really, though mystically, 
Life of Christ. 457.  unto Christ, as his Sinews and Joints do fasten the parts of his sacred Body together; thus Bishop Reynolds. But I shall shut up all with the Authority of our Church: In the Lord's Supper there is no vain Ceremony, no bare Sign, nor untrue Figure of a thing absent; but the Table of the Lord, the Bread and Cup of the Lord, the Memory of Christ, the Annunciation of his death, the Communion of the Body and Blood of the Lord in a marvellous Incorporation, 
1. Hom. of the Sacrament.  which by the operation of the holy Ghost (the very Bond of our conjunction with Christ) is through Faith wrought in the Souls of the faithful, the true Understanding of this Fruition and Union between the Body and the Head, between Believers and Christ, the ancient Catholic Fathers perceiving themselves, and commending to their people, were not afraid to call this Supper, the Salve of Immortality, a Deifical Communion, pledge of eternal health and food of immortality. This Mystical Union, we see, is no Fancy, no, very great moments depend upon it: Tota veraejustitiae, salutis, vitae participatio ex hâc pernecessariâ cum Christo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pendet, saith the Learned Zanchy: Without it, how should Christ profit us? which way should his blood wash, or righteousness cover us? What illapses of the holy spirit, or vital influences of Grace could we look for in a state separate from him? He is the Saviour of the body, his merits and righteousness cover only those that are in him; the effectual working of the Divine Spirit is only in those that are parts of him, and united to him as their head; a man can no more continue in the Divine life, and walk in holiness without this union, than the old Dionysius (as the fable runs) could walk a great way with his head off: The opinion against this mystical union, if practical, would in a moment murder all the new creatures in the world, and make a more bloody day with the Church, than that of the Parisian Massacre: This at one blow beheads the Church Catholic, and cuts off that neck of Faith, through which all Graces and Divine influences are derived from Christ unto believers: But now let us hear the Author.  
Those Metaphors which describe the relation and union between Christ and Christians, 
Mr. Sherlock.  do primarily refer to the Christian Church, not to every individual Christian: Christ is the head, but of his body, which no particular Christian is; Christ is an husband, but the whole Church is his Spouse; as St. Paul tells the Church of Corinth, 2 Cor. 11.2. I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste Virgin to Christ. Christ is a Shepherd, and that concerns the whole flock; Christ is a Rock, a corner stone, and the Church an holy Temple: All these Metaphors in their first and most proper use refer to the whole Society of Christians; the union of particular Christians to Christ, is by means of their union to the Church; the Church is the body of Christ, and every Christian by being united to this body, becomes a member of Christ: As the Apostle tells us, Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular: 1 Cor. 12.27. The Church is the Temple of God, and every Christian a lively stone in it; the Church is Christ's Spouse, and every Christian a member of that Society, but every Christian is not Christ's Spouse; he is an enemy to Polygamy, and hath but one Spouse, as he hath but one body, and one Church; which quite spoils the prettiness and fantastical wit, of a late exhortation to young women, to take Christ for their husband; which would have sounded much better in a Popish Nunnery, than among such pretenders to reformation; and to give every one their due, the Papists are the most generous sort of suitors for Christ, for they persuade them to forsake all other husbands for Christ, which is more honourable and meritorious.  
These Metaphors refer to the whole Church or body of Christ very well; 
Answer.  but are not particular Christians united to Christ as their head, espoused to him, under him as Sheep under a Shepherd, built on him as on a Rock? Yes surely, The Church of Corinth (which is the Author's instance) was in proper speech, no more the whole body of Christ, than a particular Christian is, and yet it was espoused as a chaste Virgin to Christ; if a particular Christian, because not the whole body of Christ, cannot be espoused to him, than neither can a particular Church, because not such, be so espoused: And so the grave words of S. Paul about the Corinthian Church, as well as the fantastical wit of the late Exhorter, must spoil together: But if a particular Christian may be espoused to Christ, why should Ministers who are Suitors on that behalf, be checked with a Popish Nunnery, as if those Espousals smelled of a superstitious Vow? The Author himself tells us, pag. 180. Every devout Soul is God's Temple, an enlightened mind is his Debir or Oracle, a pure heart is his Altar, devout Prayers are spiritual Incense, and sweet Perfumes, the body itself is a consecrated place, and called God's Temple: All which is excellently spoken; and I think by the same reason a particular believer may be called Christ's Spouse; but saith the Author, The union of particular Christians to Christ, is by means of their union to the Church; that is, to the whole Catholic Church, the whole body of Christ, which is made up only of Believers and Saints; being as Ignatius calls it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Epist. ad Tral.  This is the Church the Author here means, by the whole Church or body of Christ; that body hath none but Believers and Saints in it: Now if particular believers are united to Christ by their union to this Church, how was the first believer united to Christ? Or afterwards, how was the Church Catholic united to him? Surely not by another Church, but immediately; and then to me it is unimaginable, that the whole Church should be immediately united to him, and never a part so united, or that all believers should be so united to him, and never an one of them so united: Besides, the Church Catholic is part militant on earth, and part triumphant in Heaven; Those in Heaven are no part of the visible Church, afterwards mentioned by the Author; and withal they are at so great a distance from us, that we may as easily imagine an immediate union to Christ, as to them; Those on earth are not all the body of Christ, and so not properly within the Author's discourse; however if we consider the business, those vincula unionis, the holy Spirit and Faith, which unite them all immediately to Christ, are resident in particular Believers; and therefore it is a wonder to me, that those particular Believers, in whom the Divine Bonds reside, should not be immediately united to Christ: It is apparent, that in case those Bonds in particular believers should be dissolved, the whole Catholic Church on earth would be dissolved also; and how then can particular persons be less than immediately united to Christ? Add hereunto, that none are in the Church Catholic but real Believers, and in the very instant of believing they are united to Christ; and therefore it is not at all supposeable, that they should first be united to the Church, and by that means to Christ: That place in the Corinthians quoted by the Author, Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular proves it not: The Church of Corinth was not the whole body of Christ, neither is there any syllable in it to prove, that first we are united to the Church, and then to Christ.  
Christ speaking of himself, 
Mr. Sherlock.  saith, I am the true Vine, John 15. The meaning is, that Church which is founded on the belief of my Gospel, is the true Vine; I signifies Christ together with his Church, which is his body, upon which account the Church is elsewhere called Christ.  
The Author is a little various here; for he saith, 
Answer.  I signifies Christ together with his Church; but a little after, I, and in me, cannot be meant of his own person: So there it is the Church alone, and not together with Christ, neither doth the Author agree upon the Church: First he speaks of the body of Christ, which is the Church Catholic; and a little after, of the visible Church, which the Church Catholic is not; but that, I, doth not here signify the Church is apparent; The same I runs throughout the whole Chapter; I have loved you, vers. 9 I have kept my Father's Commandments: verse. 10. I have spoken to you: verse. 11. I have heard of my Father: verse. 15. I have chosen you: verse. 16. I came: vers. 22. I did the works: verse. 24. I will send the comforter: verse. 26. In none of these I's is the Church meant, no more is it meant in that first I, when he saith, I am the true Vine; however the Author offers some reasons for it: The first is this, The Church in the old Testament is compared to a Vine: Esay 5. Jer. 2. Hosea 10. and so John 15. The Church is the Vine; Christ applies the parable of the Vineyard to the state of the Gospel: Matth. 21.33. And the Christian Church is called an Olive, and the members of it branches. Rom. 11. But I fancy not this arguing: In some places the Vine is the Church, therefore it is so in all; this is the very same with that, which the Author would charge upon his adversaries: pag. 4. Christ sometimes signifies the person of Christ, therefore it must do so always; after the same rate the Author, In some places the Vine is the Church, therefore it is so in all: But in the 15. of John, the context will not bear it; one and the same I, runs through the whole Chapter, and in many passages no way suits to the Church: The Vine in this Chapter differs from those quoted out of the Old Testament; in those the Ghurch is the Vine, no mention at all is made of branches; but in this, the branches are set distinct from the Vine, as appears verse 5. I am the Vine, ye are the branches: The Branches and the Vine are distinguished by I and ye; the Church is included in the branches, as the branches taken asunder, signify particular Christians, so put together they import the Church. The second reason is, God is called the Husbandman, but he dresses not Christ, but the Church, which is God's Husbandry. To which the Answer is easy, God is the Husbandman with reference to both, planting the Vine Christ, and dressing the Branches Christians. The third reason is, Christ speaks of branches in him, which bear no fruit, and there can be no such branches in the person of Christ: But as the Learned Whitaker hath observed against Stapleton, that place, Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh away: Joh. 15.2. May be read thus, Every branch which beareth not fruit in me, he taketh away. The words, in me, being referred not to the Branch, but to the Fruit: But being read as is usual, the answer is obvious; our Saviour in this Verse speaks not of true real Branches, which are always fruitful, but of seeming ones, which are barren; they seem to be in Christ, but are not.  
When Christ speaks in the first Person, 
Mr. Sherlock.  I, and in me, he cannot mean this of his Person, but of his Church and Doctrine, according as the circumstances require: Thus Ver. 5. I am the true vine, ye are the branches, he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit; for without me ye can do nothing: I would willingly learn what sense can be made of this, if we understand it of the Person of Christ; for it is not very intelligible, how we can be in the Person of Christ; and it is more unintelligible how we can be in the Person of Christ, and the Person of Christ in us at the same time, which is a new piece of Philosophy, called Penetration of Dimensions; and that our fruitfulness should depend upon such an Union, is as hard as all the rest.  
How various is the Author on this Vine! First, I, 
Answer.  is Christ together with the Church; then the Church only, and now the Doctrine is ushered in to eek out the Interpretation; and after this rate we may come to the seventy Faces which the Jews talk of in Scripture: But that 5. Verse in the 15. of John cannot be meant of Christ's Person, why not? The Milevitan Council Can. 5. and afterwards the Arausican Council, Can. 24. did so interpret it; the words of the last are remarkable; Vitis sic est in palmitibus, ut vitale subministret eyes, non sumat ab eye, ae per hoc, & manentem in se habere Christum, & manner in Christo, discipulis prodest, & non Christo: 
1. Hom. of good works  Our Church interprets it of no other but Christ; but it is not intelligible, How we can be in the Person of Christ, and the Person of Christ in us. Luther in his Conference at Marpurg with Zuinglius about the Eucharist, told him, 
Mel. Ad. in vita Brentii.  that he must not Mathematica huic negotio admiscere, nec carnem Christi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so will I say to the Author, Physics and Mathematics must here lie by; here is no room for Penetrations or Dimensions, all is spi itual and divine: The Union between Christ and Believers, though a new piece of Philosophy, or rather no part of it at all, is old Divinity, and, though a very great Mystery, not altogether unintelligible: Our Divines express it plainly according to Scripture, to be made by the Spirit and Faith. The most Reverend Usher tells us, 
Scrm. before the Commons, 1620.  That it is altogether spiritual and supernatural, no Physical nor Mathematical Continuity or Contiguity is any way requisite thereunto; it is sufficient for the making of this Union, that Christ and we be knit together by those spiritual Ligatures, the quickening Spirit and a lively Faith.  
If by, he that abideth in me, 
Mr. Sherlock.  we understand the Christian Church, he who makes a profelsion of Faith in me, and continueth in society with those who do so; and by, I in him, the Christian Doctrine, the Sense and Reason of it is very ovident.  
Why, in me, 
Answer.  should signisie one thing, and, I, another, why, in me, should be construed, in the Church, and, I, the Christian Doctrine, there is no reason in the Text; however the Author had some reason to interpret it so: For if in those words, I in him, I should signify the Church, as those words, in me, are made to do, than every particular Believer should have a Church in him; which would be as unintelligible, as that of Christ's being in us. 
Mr. Sherlock   
To abide in Christ is to make a public and visible Profession of Faith in Christ, to be Members of his visible Church; but because many are so, who do not credit their Profession, hence to distinguish true Christians from hypocritical Professors, he adds, And I in you, that is, my words abide in you, Ver. 7. Thus you see, that the Union of particular Christians to Christ consists, in their Union to the Christian Church.  
This Opinion, 
Answer.  which denies that particular Believers are immediately united to Christ, being, as I take it, but novel, hath not yet found its Centre; but rowls about from the Catholic Church, which is made up all of Saints, to visible particular Churches, which are made up of Believers and Unbelievers: First, the Author spoke of our Union to the Body of Christ, now of it to the Church Visible. Before I made it appear, that particular Believers were immediately united to Christ in respect of the Church Catholic; and it is as evident, that they are so united to him in respect of the Church Visible: On the one hand, all that are in the Church Visible are not really united to Christ, the hypocritical Professors do but seem to be so. It is observed by the Learned Whitaker, that Eccesiae particulares visibilibus nexibus colligantur, Ecclesia verò Catholica invisibilibus: A Visible Church as such is connected by visible Bands; and more the Connection cannot be, because Believers and Hypoctites (of both which the Church is made up) cannot otherwise be knit together; and how is it possible, that the Union of Believers to Christ, which is made by invisible Ligatures, should consist in their Union to the Visible Church, which, as such, is only knit together by visible Bands? On the other hand, those, which are not of the Church Visible, may yet be really united to Christ: Thus the Catechumeni were but in vestibulo, and not actually in the Visible Church, and yet, if Believers, were united to Christ. The same may be said of unbaptized Believers: The Emperor Valentinian died before Baptism, but in real Union to Christ; hence St. Ambrose saith, that he had in se imaginem Christi, and that his Soul was in refrigerio. Believers, if unjustly excommunicate, are no longer in the Visible Church, and yet they are in Union to Christ: The Apostles, as Christ foretold them, were to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, cast out of the Synagogues but never to be parted from Christ. Believing Merchants may be at a vast distance from the Visible Church, and yet in near spiritual Conjunction with Christ: And what if a Visible Church turn Apostate from the Gospel? True Believers will come out of her, and, I hope, without any loss of their Union to Christ. Those 7000 which in the time of Elias bowed not the knee to Baal, were, I suppose, joined to no visible Church, and yet they were a choice reserved people unto God. Thus it appears, that Believers are immediately united to Christ, in respect of the Visible Church. As for what the Author, adds Those words, I in him, Joh. 15. 5. are the same with those, My words abide in you, Ver. 7. I answer, The 5. vers. saith, that Christ is in Believers, and the 7. denies it not, but declares, that where Christ is, there are his words also.  
Hence it is, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that the ancient Fathers interpret all those Metaphors, which decipher the Union between Christ and Christians, to signify the cntire Love and Unity of Christians among themselves: Thus St. chrysostom expounds Eph. 2.19, 20, 21. to signify the Unity of the Church in all Ages, the Jewish and Christian Church being both united in Christ: Thus also St. Ambrose to the same purpose: Thus St. Chrysostom, on 1 Cor. 3. observes, That the Apostle dissuades from Schisms and Factions; and tells us, that the Branch draws nourishment and fatness from the Vine by its Union to it, and the Building stands firm by the strong adhesion of its parts: Which plainly signifies, that our Union to Christ consists in our Union to the Christian Church: Thus the same Author argues from Joh. 14.21. He unites us to each other by many Examples and Patterns of the closest Union; he the Head, we the Body; he the Foundation, we the Buildding, etc. According to the sense of this holy Man, Christians are united to Christ, by their Union to the Church; otherwise I cannot understand, how our Union to Christ can be an argument to Unity among ourselves, if we are immediately united to the Person of Christ, without being first united to the Church.  
The Fathers interpret those Metaphors, 
Answer.  which decipher the Union between Christ and Christians, to signify the Love and Unity of Christians among themselves; so the Author: And is there no Union between Christ and Christians according to the Ancients? Or do they deny, that particular Believers are immediately united to Christ? Oh! no, St. chrysostom on that place, Eph. 2.19, 20, 21. saith expressly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Every one of you is a Temple for God: And upon 1 Cor. 3.11. Other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ, he adds (as our Author hath it) Let us be built on Christ, and cleave to him as to a Foundation, and as a Branch to the Vine, that there may be no distance between Christ and us; for if there be, we immediately perish. By the way observe, Christ is the Vine in St. chrysostom; and for the point in hand, if there be no distance between Christ and us, surely we are immediately united to him: And this is very emphatical in the Greek, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let there be no Medium between Christ and us; and if there be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, any Medium, we immediately perish. Nothing could be more emphatically spoken for immediate Union: And in that place, Joh. 14. he expresses (as the Author quotes him) plainly the Union of Christians to Christ. And for St. Ambrose, I shall quote but one place, on 2 Cor. 13.5. he saith, Qui fidei suae sensum in cord habet, hic scit Christum Jesum in se esse. But, saith the Author, If our Union to Christ be immediate, it can be no argument to Unity among ourselves: But the consequence fails; there can be no greater argument to Unity among ourselves than this, That we are all built upon one Foundation, Christ, and have all one and the same Spirit in us; so it is with all that are mystically united to him.  
The Sacraments our Saviour hath instituted, as Symbols of our Union with him, are a plain demonstration of it: 
Mr. Sherlock.  Baptism is the Sacrament of our admission into the Christian Church; For by one Spirit we are all baptised into one body, 1 Cor. 12.13. In which the Apostle seems to allude to Baptism, which confers the holy Spirit on us all, and thereby makes us all members of the Body of Christ: But more expressly in Eph. 4.4. There is one body, and one Spirit; as ye are called in one hope of your calling: One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism: That is, the Christian Baptism is but one, and is a Sacrament of Union, making us all members of that one Body; This is called being baptised into Christ, that is, admitted into the Church by a public Profession of our Faith in Christ. Thus the Lord's Supper is a Sacrament of Union, and signifies the near conjunction between Christ and the Church, and the mutual fellowship of Christians: Hence the Apostle calls the Cup, the Communion of Christ's Blood; and the Bread, the Communion of his Body: For we being many are one bread and one Body, (one Body represented by this one Bread) for we are all partakers of that one Bread, 1 Cor. 10.16.  
Sacraments are Symbols of our Union with Christ, 
Answer.  and why not of an immediate Union? the Elements are immediately applied to individuals, and why may not the signified Union be immediate? else how doth it correspond to the Sign? But to clear this point; first for Baptism: Unbaptized Believers are really united to Christ, even before their Baptism; how else should the Thief on the Cross ever arrive at Paradise? Or which way should the unbaptized Martyrs get thither? Baptism admits men into the Church Visible, but, if Believers, they are in the Church Catholic, that one Body of Christ, before; nay, Baptism supposes them to be so, because it is a Seal of the Covenant: If thou believest with all thine heart, saith Philip to the Eunuch, thou mayest be baptised, Act. 8.37. and after the holy Ghost poured down on the Gentiles, water could not be forbid them, Act. 10 47. And on the other hand, baptised persons may yet not be really united to Christ, they may be admitted into the visible Church, and yet not in that one body of Christ, which is made up of Believers: Simon Magus was baptised Acts 8. but for all that, in the bond of iniquity; many are partakers of baptismal water, in whom appears not a Scintilla Spiritûs Sancti; In like manner for the Lords Supper, men may be, nay, should be in union with Christ before their receiving of it; and yet many outwardly receive it, who are not in union with him, receiving only Panem Domini, and not Panem Dominum (as S. Austin speaks) and eating only forès non intùs, in Sacramento tantùm, non usque ad Spiritûs participationem. To conclude; Sacraments and visible Churches must not be disparaged, yet truth must be owned; a real union to Christ may be before the use of Sacraments, nay, before entrance into the Church visible, and therefore it must be immediate, or else it could in no case be before them.  
The intention of our Lord and Saviour, 
Mr. Sherlock.  in what he did and suffered for us, was not merely to reform and save some single persons, but to erect a Church, and combine all his Disciples into a public Society, to unite them by holy mysteries, and to engage them to a mutual discharge of all Christian Offices, whereby the whole body may edify itself in Love; and therefore our Saviour doth not own any relation to particular men as such, but as they are members of his body, for he is the Saviour of the body, and redeemed his Church with his own Blood: Hence St. John tells, 1 Epist. That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that you may have fellowship with us; and truly our Fellowship is with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ: First, That ye may have fellowship with us, become members of the Church, by which means you have fellowship with God and Christ.  
Christ intended to erect a Church; How so! 
Answer.  Common Philanthropy, which does alike for all men, doth no such singular thing, as to cull and call a Church, a select company out of the rest of mankind: No, it is impossible, because the Love is common, and the work singular; no less than special love must do it, such as God sets upon his chosen one's; Christ intended to set up a Church; very true, and he hath pitched upon the individual persons, which shall make it up, he hath set down their names in the Book of Life; or else his providence, which is so accurate in the little Flies and Gnats, as to set down every wing and little part, which makes up those minute animals, should be very lame and imperfect in that great design of a Church, a Church only being designed, and not the persons of which it should consist: Christ intended to set up a Church; Yes, and he resolved to give such Grace, as should infallibly effect it: Providence, such is its wisdom and accurate perfection, never fails or falls short of its intent; no, not in a design of Justice, and that to come to pass through the hardest medium can be used by it, we need not scale Heaven for this, but have a Scheme let down from thence, to assure us of it. 2 Chron. 18. God intended that Ahab should go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead; and though the manner of it were by a lying spirit, yet it infallibly came to pass, how much more must providence be unfailable in such a design of Grace, as that of a Church: It's true, suasory resistible Grace cannot secure it, because it leaves the issue of all upon the will of man; irresistible Grace must come in, or else we may lay by the design of a Church, and confess with Corvinus, Finis mortis Christi constaret, etiamsi nemo credidisset. As for that place of St. John, That ye may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship is with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ: By us is meant S. John or the Apostles, not the Church or body of Christ: But were that Church meant, it hinders not but that they in the use of the Evangelical Truths and Ordinances might come to an immediate Communion with God and Christ, as the Apostles had; thus the Learned Grotius on the place,  & vos ipsi non minùs quàm nos frucium inde percipiatis, societatem cum Deo & cum Christo.  
Those public censures, 
Mr. Sherlock.  whereby rotten or dead members are cut off from the body of Christ; consist in casting such persons out of the Christian Society, in debarring them from the Communion of Prayers and Sacraments, and all religious Offices, which is a plain demonstration, that our union to Christ, is not an union to his person, but consists in a sincere and spiritual communion with the Christian Church; otherwise this external communion with the Church, could be no visible signification of our union to Christ; nor could our excision from the visible Church signify our separation from him.  
The Author argues thus, 
Answer.  If union to Christ be immediate, than our external communion with the Church cannot signify our union to Christ, nor could our excision from the visible Church, signify our separation from him: To which I answer, just before our Author saith, Our union to Christ, is not an union to his Person, but consists in communion with the Church, that is, the visible Church, as he afterwards calls it; and therefore our communion with the Church doth not signify our union to Christ, but is it; and our excision from the Church doth not signify our separation from Christ, but is it, according to our Author, which cannot possibly stand; Because our union to the visible Church is external, and our union to Christ internal and spititual; our excision from the Church is one thing, and our separation from Christ another; a man may be united to the visible Church, and yet not really united to Christ; for so is the hypocrite; a man may be cut off from the visible Church, and yet not cut off from Christ, for so is the unjustly excommunicate. 
Mr. Sherlock.   
The union between Christ and the Church is not a natural, but a political union; Christ is a King, and all Christians his Subjects; and our union to Christ consists in our belief of his Revelations, Obedience to his Laws, and subjection to his Authority, If you continue in my words, then are ye my Disciples indeed. John 8.31. Which is the same thing with being in Christ: And by keeping his Commandments we abide in his love; John 15.10. and 14.21. And to have his word abide in us, Is a description of the closest and fir most union to him: John 15.7. Thus Christ is a Shepherd, and Christians his Sheep: To signify the Authority he hath over his Church, Shepherd is used as a name of power; thus Christ is a head, and the Church his body, a Husband and the Church his Spouse, which are names of power. Eph. 5.23. Christ is called an Head an Husband, because he hath the Rule and Government of us, Head is a name for Princes and Governors, Deut. 28.13. The Apostles always expound the Metaphor of Christ's being a head, by power: Eph. 1.20.21. Col. 1.18. So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that place signifies one that hath Authority; Christ is the head of all principalities. Col. 10. He is an head and husband, because he is invested with authority to govern; the Church is the body and Spouse, because it must obey; also these Metaphors signify the mildness and gentleness of his Government, as a good Shepherd he lays down his life for his Sheep, John 10. He loves his Church with the natural kindness of an head and husband, his Government is only for the good of his Church; and therefore his yoke is easy, he gave himself for his Church, that he might sanctify it: Eph. 5.25, 26. Upon which account we may be called members of his body, of his flesh and bone, verse 30. The Church being taken out of his crucified body, as woman out of man; Christ hath reconciled the Gentiles, (that is, taken them into his Church) in the body of his flesh through death; because the Covenant which was the foundation of the Church was sealed with his blood, Christ owns himself our friend: John 15. Ye are my friends, if ye do what I command you; which shows the tenderness of his Government. He exercises his authority in methods of Love; hence he is called a Father.  
Our union to Christ, 
Answer.  consists in a belief of his Revelations, Obedience to his Laws, and Subjection to his Authority: Thus the Author; To whom I answer, A belief of Revelations is only a dogmatical faith, which is found in many not united to Christ; Obedience is not our mystical union to Christ, but a fruit of it; Christ and the Soul being once espoused, outcomes a blessed progeny of good works, as so many real proofs of that Divine conjunction, which is made by the Spirit and Faith; and shows forth itself in such effects, as the dead womb of nature could never have produced: Subjection to Christ's Authority, is either a formal actual one, standing in doing his commands, and that is the same with Obedience, a fruit of our union to Christ, or a virtual one, consisting in accepting Christ as our Lord, and this is part of that Faith, which is a bond of that Union. Those words, If ye continue in my words, then are ye my Disciples indeed: John 8.31. Were spoken to Believers, to men in union with Christ, to exhort them to perseverance, as a real proof of their Discipleship and Union to Christ: If ye keep my Commandments, ye shall abide in my Love: John. 15.10. They were in his love before; Verse 9 But Obedience will show it forth: Thus St. Austin on the place, Ostendit, non unde dilectio generetur, sed unde monstretur, hinc apparebit, quod in dilectione meâ manebitis, si precepta mea servaveritis; Christ's promise to the Obedieut is, That he will love him, and manifest himself to him. Joh. 14.21. Christ loved him before, but now he will manifest it: Thus St. Austin on the place, Quid est diligam, tanquam dilecturus sit, & nunc non diligat? Absit, diligam & manifestabo, id est, ad hoc diligam, ut manifestem. Our abiding in Christ, and Christ's words abiding in us; are very well joined together: Joh. 15.7. To show us, that where the Soul and Christ are in union, there the holy words will have a mansion in the heart. Christ is a King, a Shepherd, an Head, an Husband; and all in a superlative transcendency above all others in those relations: He is a King who hath his Laws without us, and an inward Sceptre in our hearts, making the unwilling will to become a willing one, in the day of his power: A Shepherd who speaks to his Sheep, nay, and brings them into the Fold, John 10.16. who before were not in it: A Head, who stands above all in eminency, and influences spiritual life and motion into the lowest, meanest Believer on the earth: An Husband who espouses us unto himself, and invests us with a rich Dowry out of his incomparable Graces and Perfections. The Church was taken out of the crucified body of Christ: But that place, We are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones, Eph. 5.30. plainly declares the mystical union, as man and wife are one flesh, so Christ and Christians are one spirit. One thing more may be observed; Christ, saith the Author, hath reconciled the Gentiles (that is, taken them into his Church) in the body of his flesh through death Col. 1.21.22. This is a little strange, reconciled, that is, taken them into his Church; Socinus on this place, 
De Servat. pars 1. cap. 8.  saith, That the reconciliation here is, Omnium rerum non cum Deo, sed secum ipsis per Christum parta concordia: And a little after, Vniversi tàm Gentes quàm Judaei unus Dei populus sunt facti: But I hope our Author doth not exclude reconciliation to God.  
Christ doth not govern us immediately by himself, 
Mr. Sherlock.  for he is ascended up into Heaven, where he powerfully intercedes for his Church, and by a vigilant providence superintends all the affairs of it; but hath left the visible and external conduct, and Government of his Church to Bishops and Pastors, who preside in his name, and by his authority: He governs his Church, by men who are invested with his authority, which is a plain demonstration, that the union of particular Christians to Christ, is by their union with the Christian Church, which consists in their regular subjection to their spiritual Guides and Rulers, and in concord and unity among themselves: For if our union to Christ, consist in our subjection to him, as our Lord, and this authority is not immediately exercised by Christ, but by Bishops and Pastors; it follows that we cannot be united to Christ, till we unite ourselves to the public societies of Christians. and submit to the public instructions, Authority and Discipline of the Church.  
Christ hath left the visible and external conduct of his Church to Bishops and Pastors: Very well, 
Answer.  But the internal Sceptre and Rule over hearts, is in his own hand only; and therefore the Papists, who make the Bishop of Rome Head of the Church, secundum exteriorem gubernationem, are yet so modest as to leave Christ to be the only Head, secundum interiorem insluxum. Our union to Christ is an internal, spiritual one, made by the Spirit and Faith, such as cannot consist in any thing external; such as subjection to Ecclesiastical Governors, who have the visible conduct, is. Hence the Reverend Usher tells us, Without that quickening Spirit, 
Serm. before the Commons, 1620.  no external communion with Christ or his Church, can make a man a true member of his mystical body; this being a most sure principle, that he which hath not the Spirit of Christ, is none of his. Rom. 8.9. A wicked man may be subject to Ecclesiastical Government; yet while such, is not, cannot be a member of Christ, or his mystical body; Bellarmine himself was so struck with the evidence of this truth, that he confessed, That wicked men, are but membra mortua & arida, quae solum adhaerent reliquis externâ conjunctione, non de Eeclesiâ nisi secundum apparentiam exteriorem, & putatiuè, non verè; that is, they are no members at all, which makes it clear, that our union to Christ stands not in subjection to Ecclesiastical Governors, and what (for such a thing is possible) if the Ecclesiastical Governor be a wicked man himself? Is it imaginable, that the union of one wicked man to another, should produce an union to Christ? Or what if such a case should fall out, as once did, when under the Emperor Basiliscus, 
Evag. Hist. L. 3.  no less than five hundred Bishops condemned the Council of Chalcedon? It would be very hard in such a dismal lapse, to say, that all the Christians under them, had without any default in themselves, lost their union with Christ; and yet we must say so, unless we allow that union to be made and supported by the internal bonds of the Spirit and Faith.  
Schismatics are in the Church, 
Mr. Sherlock.  just as Rebels are in a Kingdom, not as parts of it, but enemies: The Apostle tells us, wherein the unity of the Church consists: In Eph. 4.16. Christ is the Head; from whom the whole body fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, making increase of the body to the edifying itself in love: That is, The supreme power is invested in Christ, as Head, to whom the Church is obedient and subject; but to make this union firm and lasting, there must be a regular subordination of the several members, and a mutual discharge of Christian offices, which advances their growth in Grace, and especially in love; this supposes a visible society of Christians, professing the Faith, and living in communion with each other, if there be no such visible Society, as in persecution, or degeneracy of the Church: Our union to Christ consists in an acknowledgement of his Authority and Subjection to his Laws, which makes us members of the universal Church, but when there is a visible Church, we are under an obligation of communion; because herein our Subjection to the Authority of Christ, and our Union to him consists.  
Schism is the concern of visible Churches; 
Answer.  but that place Eph. 4. speaks not of visible Churches, which are made up of believers and unbelievers, but of the Church Catholic made up of Believers and Saints only; This is plain, the Church Catholic is that whole body, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fitly joined together, all being Saints in it; but in the visible Church, there are believers and unbelievers, who can no more stand in harmony than light and darkness, Christ and Belial, the Temple of God and Idols: In the Church Catholic there is an effectual working in every part; but in the Church visible, there is no such energy in the wicked: And so in that parallel place, Eph. 2.20. The Church. Catholic is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That whole Building fitly framed together, which groweth unto an holy Temple in the Lord: But in the Church visible the wicked grow not into a Temple; nay, there is not a stone of the spiritual Building laid in them: And Eph. 1.23. The Church Catholic is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not only the body, but fullness of Christ: Every member of it helps, as it were to fill up the mystical body; but in the Church visible the wicked do not complete the body, but corrupt it; they do not adorn, but deform it. I have before shown, that our union to Christ, stands not in communion with a visible Church, or its Rulers: It is made by internal and spiritual ligatures, and is invariably one and the same, whether there be a Church visible or not: But saith the Author, We are under an obligation of Communion with a Church visible, when there is one: But it is one thing what our Duty is, and another what constitutes our union with Christ; it is our duty to be subject to civil Magistrates, but I suppose our union to Christ consists not in it; it is our duty to hear the Ministers of Christ; Luke 10.16. But our union to Christ doth not consist in it; indeed it is a sacred Ordinance which God is pleased to use, to bring us to Christ; but the only proper immediate bands of that union are the Spirit and Faith.  
If any particular Church apostatise from the Faith of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  we are then under the same necessity of deserting their communion, as we are of obeying the Laws, and submitting to the Authority of our Lord and Master.  
We must indeed desert an apostate Church; 
Answer.  but if, as our Author holds, our union to Christ consists in communion with a visible Church, then upon our departure from it, though never so just, our union to Christ must fail; Which yet I think can never be the lot of a true believer; he is part of that Church built on the Rock, against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail: Matth. 16.18. Part of that building, which is an holy Temple, an habitation of God through the Spirit; Eph. 2.21.22. and that Spirit makes and maintains that union.  
This Political Union betwixt Christ and his Church, 
Mr. Sherlock.  may be either only external and visible, and so hypocritical Professors may be said to be united to Christ, or true and real, which imports the truth and sincerity of our Obedience and Subjection to our Lord and Master.  
Hypocrites may seem, 
Answer.  but are not members of Christ, or united to him: non potest Christus habere damnata membra, omnia ista membra, absit omninò, 
Contr. Cresc. l. 2. cap. 21.  ut in membris illius columbae unicae computentur, saith St. Austin; and in another place, Si amas & amplecteris peccata tua, contrarius es Christo, 
Expos. in Epist. Jo, hannis.  intus sis, foris sis, Antichristus es, intus sis, foris sis; palea es, sed quare foris non es? Quia occasionem venti non invenisti: Our Obedience to Christ our Lord, is not the very mystical union itself, but a Divine fruit of it.  
The Spiritual Kingdom of Christ requires the homage of the Soul, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the Government of our thoughts and passions, the renovation of our minds and Spirits; we must be born again of water and of the Spirit, if we would enter into God's Kingdom; that is, before we can be the Disciples and Subjects of Christ, we must be born of water, make a public profession of our faith in Christ, and obedience to him in our Baptism, we must be born of the Spirit too, that is, our minds and Spirits must become subject to Christ, our faith in Christ, and subjection to him must be sincere and hearty, governing all the motions of our Souls, and making usually such as we pretend to be, which is called, being born of the Spirit; because all Christians Graces are in Scripture attributed to the Spirit, as the Author of them.  
Here are two things, 
Answer.  Baptism and Regeneration; both are not of a like necessity to make us Disciples of Christ, Regeneration is simply necessary, but so is not Baptism; unbaptised persons may be real believers, and if they die before Baptism, as Valentinian did, they enter into Bliss: 
Contr. Don. l. 1.4. cap. 22.  Impletur invisibiliter, cum mysterium Baptismi non contemptus religionis, sed articulus necessitatis excludit; saith St. Austin: Baptism may be administered by man, but Regeneration is the sole work of the holy Spirit, which breathes where it lists, and forms all those Graces, which make up the new creature; hence we are said to be born of the Spirit, and all the Graces in the new man are called the fruits of the spirit: Hence Fulgentius saith, ex eodem Spiritu renati sumus, ex quo natus est Christus: 
De Jucava. cap. 20.  The very same Spirit which form Christ in the womb, forms him in the heart. And S. Ambrose speaking of the Gracious Image of God in us, saith, Pictus es ô homo, 
Hexaem. l. 6. cap. 8.  à Domino Deo tuo, bonum habes artificem atque pictorem: No other hand, but that of the holy spirit only, is able to draw such a picture of God, as is in the new creature; we who naturally lie in a Mass and Chaos of corruption, are not capable of doing any thing in it.  
As a visible profession is the foundation of an external Political union between Christ and his Church, 
Mr. Sherlock.  so this new nature is the foundation of a real and spiritual union: And this the Scripture represents under several notions. First by the Subjection of our minds and Spirits to Christ, as our spiritual King, when we put our Souls as well as our Bodies under his Government: Hence Christ is said to dwell in our hearts by Faith; Eph. 3.17. That is to have the sole command and Empire of our wills and affections, to govern our hearts, as a man does the house in which he dwells: Secondly by a participation of the same nature, which is the necessary effect of the Subjection of our minds to him; for the Gospel of our Saviour is the truest image of his mind, he transcribed his own nature into his Laws; and therefore a sincere Obedience to his Laws is a conformity to his nature: Hence is that exhortation, That the same mind may be in us as was in Christ: Phil. 2.5. And to be his Disciples, is to learn of him: Matth. 11.29. Hence our union to Christ is described by having the Spirit of Christ: Rom. 8.9. If any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his, that is, unless he have that same temper of mind which Christ had, which is called having the Spirit, by an ordinary figure of the cause for the effect; for all those Virtues and Graces, wherein our conformity to Christ consists, are called the fruits of the Spirit; and therefore what the Apostle calls, having the Spirit, in the next verse he expresses by, If Christ be in you,, that is if you be possessed with the same love of virtue and goodness, which appeared so eminently in him, which is much to the same sense with that expression of Christ being form in you: Gal. 4.19. Hence in 1 Cor. 6.17. He that is joined to the Lord, is one Spirit: Herein consists our union to Christ, that we have the same temper; Souls are united by an harmony of wills, this makes two one Spirit.  
After a long discourse touching external communion with the Church; 
Answer.  the Author is now come to own a spiritual union with Christ; and this (saith the Author) the Scripture represents to us; first by the subjection of our minds to Christ, as our King; Christ dwells in our hearts by Faith, Eph. 3. that is, he commands there; But I take that place of the Apostle, to be an eminent proof of the mystical union; it is not said Christ commands, (though that be very true) but he dwells in our hearts, not by a piece of faith, such as accepts Christ as our Lord, but by an entire one, such as receives him in all his offices: We have in those words faith expressed, which is a bond of that mystical union, and where faith is, there is that other bond, the holy Spirit, which flows as rivers of living water in the believers heart; and just before those words of Christ's dwelling in our hearts by faith; the Apostle speaks of the holy Spirit in the inner man, Verse 16. which is the principal bond of that mystical Union: And St. Chrysostom on the words saith, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, By the holy spirit in the inner man Christ doth dwell in our hearts by faith: But (saith the Author) Secondly this is represented in Scripture, by a participation of the same nature, which is the necessary effect of the subjection of our minds to Christ. To which I answer, If by that subjection be meant a receiving Christ as our Lord, it is but a part of that faith, which with its Sister Graces make up the new creature; all Graces are found in the new creature, and among others Faith, which receives Christ in all his offices, and among other in his Kingly; but if by that subjection be meant Obedience to his Laws, (which the Author after mentions, calling it a conformity to his nature) the new creature is not the effect of Subjection or Obedience, but the cause of it; true Obedience is too pure a thing, to issue out of an unregenerate heart; before it can come forth; 
Enchir. cap. 106.  Ipsum liberum arbitrium liberandum est: As St. Austin speaks: Lapsed nature must be new-natured, and its deadly wound healed by regenerating Grace. First, according to Scripture there must be a good tree, and then good fruit: 
De Eccles. Hierar. cap. 2.  First a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Divine state or being (as Dionysius calls it) and then Divine operations issuing forth in a sweet connaturalness to the Heavenly principles within. To this purpose let us hear our Church, 
2. Hom. of Alms.  As the good fruit is not the cause that the tree is good, but the tree must first be good, before it can bring forth good fruit; so the good Deeds of men are not the Cause, that maketh men good; but he is first made good by the Spirit and Grace of God that effectually worketh in him, and afterwards he bringeth forth good fruit. As for such as are regenerate and new Creatures, I acknowledge them to have the same temper of Mind with Christ, and that every Grace in the new Man, answers to that in Christ, and morally unites to him; but the Mystical Union is made by the holy Spirit and Faith, which hath this above other Graces, to receive Christ and incorporate us into him. That place, Phil. 2. of having the same mind with Christ, holds out the same temper in both; that in Matt. 4.11. calls us to an imitation of him; that Gal. 4.19. expresses the State of the new Creature which is moulded after the Image of Christ: But the other two places, quoted by the Author, prove the Mystical Union; the one is that, Rom. 8.9. If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his: By Spirit, is not meant an holy temper of Mind, but the Spirit itself; the very same which just before the words is called, The Spirit of God, and ver. 11. The spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, and by which our mortal bodies shall be quickened: This is that Spirit, which unites us to Christ, in such an admirable manner, that Christ is said to be in us, ver. 10. St. chrysostom on the words saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He that hath the holy Spirit, hath Christ himself; the Spirit being present, Christ, nay, the whole Trinity must be so: The other is that, 1 Cor. 6.17. He that is joined unto the Lord is one Spirit, that is, one and the same holy Spirit is in Christ and Believers, mystically uniting them together: This appears, as well by the opposition of one spirit in this 17. Verse, to one flesh in the 16. Verse: For, as the Learned Beza notes on the place,  constet expositio exterioris corporum copulae, & nostrae cum Christo interoris, spiritûs nomen usurpavit Apostolus; as also by the afterwords, What, know ye not that your body is the Temple of the holy Ghost, which is in you? ver. 19 The holy Ghost is that one Spirit, which unites Christ and Believers: Hence the Reverend Usher, quoting this place among others, concludes, That the Mystery of our Union with Christ consists mainly in this, that the self same Spirit, which is in him, as in the Head, is derived from him into every one of his true Members.  
There is yet a closer Union, 
Mr. Sherlock.  which consists in a mutual reciprocal Love, when we are transformed into the image of Christ; he loves us, as being like to him, and we love him, as partaking of his Nature; he loves us as the price of his Blood, as his own workmanship created to good Works, and we love him as our Redeemer and Saviour.  
I acknowledge there is a Moral Union between Christ and Christians by holy Love; 
Answer.  but this Moral Union supposes a Mystical one, made by the Spirit and Faith: Where these are not, there can be no such thing as Love to Christ: Hence the Apostle, Eph. 3.16, 17. first lays down the Mystical Union with its two Bands, the Spirit in the inner man, and Faith, whereby Christ dwells in the heart; and immediately after adds the Moral one, That ye may be rooted and grounded in Love:  the Mystical Union is, there is holy Love to Christ. What the Author afterwards adds, touching God's dwelling in the Church as his Temple, is so far from opposing, that it points out the Mystical Union; especially seeing, as the Author confesses, Particular Christians are in Scripture styled the Temple of the living God: That place quoted by the Author, Know ye not, that ye are the Temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 1 Cor. 3.16. is very emphatical; Christians are the Temple of God, and made so by the indwelling Spirit, which is the bond of the Mystical Union. Indeed the Author saith, That the indwelling of the Spirit primarily refers to the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, which God in that Age bestowed on the Church; this was the true Shechinah or divine Glory resting on them: But I conceive the holy Spirit hath been in Believers in all Ages: God dwelled in the Jewish Temple in Types and Symbols of his Presence, but, which was far more excellent than those outward shadows and appearances of Glory, he dwelled even then by his Spirit in all true Believers. The sweet strains of Devotion in David did plainly evidence, that the holy Spirit was in him; the spiritual Embroidery or Needlework in every Psalm, tells us, that the Finger of God was there: The believing Israelites, in Mannâ Christum intellexerunt, saw Christ in their Manna and fed on the same spiritual Meat, as believing Christians do; which is a clear proof that the holy Spirit was in them. The Son of God coming in the Flesh, the holy Spirit was poured down in extraordinary Gifts; and, though those Epiphanies of divine Glory went off, yet the same Spirit hath been and ever will be in Believers. This our Church acknowledges; 
1. Hom. for Whitsunday.  Neither doth the holy Spirit think it sufficient inwardly to work the spiritual and new Birth of Man, unless he do also dwell and abide in him: And a little after, our Church breaks out in an holy admiration; O what comfort is this to the heart of a true Christian, to think that the holy Ghost dwelleth in him! The Apostle tells the Ephesians, that they are builded for an habitation of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, through the Spirit, Eph. 2.22. Indeed the Author interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a spiritual Temple, in opposition to the material one, which St. Peter calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a spiritual house; but I take it the Spirit itself is meant: Thus Grotius, as I have him quoted in the Critics, saith, Non tantùm tota fidelium collectio, sed & fideles singuli rectè appellantur Templum, quia in ipsorum mentibus Spiritus Dei habitat. 
Mr. Sherlock.   
Eaptism and the Lords Supper represent and signify both our external and real union to Christ.  
Baptism doth signify to all baptised an admission into the Church Visible, 
Answer.  and to Believers it seals the Mystical Union with Christ: Thus the Apostle, speaking of Believers, such as are the children of God by faith in Christ, Gal. 3.26. saith, As many of you as have been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ; you are mystically united to Christ, and Baptism seals up that Union to you: The Lord's Supper doth import to all receivers a Communion with the Visible Church, and to Believers it seals the Mystical Union; hence the cup is the Communion of Christ's blood, and the bread is the Communion of Christ's body, 1 Cor. 10.16. The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and why was it not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; St. chrysostom upon the words answers, Because the Apostle would show something more, even 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a great Conjunction with Christ.  
Baptism signifies our profession of becoming new men, 
Mr. Sherlock.  of Conformity to Christ in his Death and Resurrection: We are buried with Christ by Baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life, Rom. 6.4. Baptism signifies our dying to sin and walking in newness of life; He that is baptised into Christ, hath put on Christ, Gal. 3.27. that is, hath engaged himself to be conformed to Christ's image and likeness.  
Baptism signifies our profession of Conformity to Christ; very well: 
Answer.  But first of all it signifies our Union to him, without which there can be no participation of his Death and Resurrection, nor conformity thereunto. In that place, Gal. 3. putting on of Christ imports an Union with him; and in that Rom, 6. after that discourse of Conformity to Christ's Death and Resurrection, the Apostle immediately raises up himself to the Fountain of that Conformity, and tells us, that we are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, implanted in the likeness of his death and resurrection, ver. 5. Aptissimâ translatione arctissimam illam nostri cum ipsa Christi substantiâ conjunctionem, & vivificam illam virtutem inde in nos manantem expressit, saith Beza on the place. The Apostle by that Metaphor of a Plant, expresses our intimate Conjunction with the very Substance of Christ, and the quickening virtue flowing from thence unto us, to assimilate us to his Death and Resurrection.  
Thus the Lord's Supper is a spiritual feeding on Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  eating his flesh and drinking his blood, which signifies the most intimate Union with him, that we are flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone, Eph. 5.30. That as we are redeemed by his death, and so taken out of his crucified Body; so by this spiritual feeding on Christ, we are transformed into the same Nature with him, as much as if we were of his flesh and bones: This is eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ, when the visible figures of his death and sufferings, affect our minds with such a strong and passionate sense of his love to us, and excite in us such a firm hope in God, as transforms us into a divine Nature: And this is our real Union to Christ.  
In the Lord's Supper all true Believers feed upon Christ: 
Answer.  Those words of our Saviour, He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him, 
Immanuel 52.  Joh. 6.56. declare, as the most Reverend Usher hath it, That by a mystical and supernatural Union we are as truly conjoined with him, as the meat and drink we take is with us: And what this Mystical Union is, the same Author tells us, That it is made by the Spirit and Faith. But, saith our Author, This spiritual feeding on Christ is, when we are transformed into the divine Nature: But, I take it, that transformation cannot possibly exist, without a Mystical Union to Christ, who is the great Treasury of Grace; nor without the Spirit and Faith, which are the bonds of that Union: Therefore our Saviour tells us, He that eateth me shall live by me, Joh. 6.57. Spiritual Life follows after eating or Union to Christ: No man (saith the Reverend Usher) can participate in the benefits of Christ, 
Serm. before the Commons 1620.  except he first have comunion with Christ himself: We must have the Son, before we have Life; and eat him we must, that is, as truly be made partakers of him, as of our food, if we will live by him. The Apostle tells us how the divine Transformation comes; Beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, we are changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord, 2 Cor. 3.18. The heavenly Change is from the two bands of the Mystical Union, that is, from the Spirit, which is called the Spirit of the Lord; and from Faith, which is set forth by a transformative View of Christ. Excellent is that of Calvin, and by him quoted out of St. chrysostom, 
Inst. l. 4. c. 17.  Vinculum istius conjunctionis est Spiritus Christi, cujus nexu copulamur: Et quidem veluti canalis, per quem quicquid Christus ipse & est, & habet, ad nos derivatur: The Spirit of Christ is the Bond of Union between Christ and us, and the Channel of derivation, whereby Christ and all that he hath is conveyed to us.  
1 Joh. 1.3. 
Mr. Sherlock.  That which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you, that you may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ. Observe, that our fellowship with the Father and Son is first founded on our fellowship with the Christian Church, 1 Cor. 1.9. God is faithful, by whom ye are called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord; where the fellowship of Christ can signify no more, than the fellowship of the Christian Church, whereof Christ is Lord and Head; and therefore the Apostle adds in the next Verse, Now I beseech you Brethren by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, that there be no divisions or schisms among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgement: Where he argues from the nature of their Faith in Christ, to the Obligations of Peace and Unity; which plainly evinces, that this fellowiship with Christ is that relation we stand in to him, as Members of the Christian Church, whereof he is Head: The true Notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is plain, 2 Cor. 6.14. where the Apostle dissuades from fellowship with heathen Idolaters, where we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all which Expressions decipher to us the Nature and Foundation of Fellowship; The Nature of it consists in the Union of things, which in Rational Being's consists in mutual Relations and common Interests; and the Foundation of it is a likeness of Nature and Harmony of Wills: And therefore the Apostle explains our fellowship with God by our being the Temple of God, and that God dwells in us, and walks in us, ver. 17.18.  
As for that place, 1 Joh. 1.3. 
Answer.  I have answered before: As for the other, 1 Cor. 1.9. Ye were called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ, it is to be considered, that in the Epistles written to Visible Churches, some things are common to all, some proper only to Believers: Those Churches are made up of Believers and Unbelievers, and all things do not quadrate to all: Thus in the quoted Chapter, that touching schisms and divisions is an Item to all, ver. 10. but that fellowship of Christ, ver. 9 is proper to Believers; such as shall be confirmed unto the end, ver. 8. This place evinces not, that our Fellowship with Christ is founded on our Fellowship with the Visible Church; all that are in it have not Communion with Christ; those therefore, who walk in darkness, have it not, and if they say that they have it, the Apostle gives them the lie in plain terms, 1 Joh. 1.6. Where by the way, it appears, that the fellowship with Christ mentioned, ver. 3. consists not in Fellowship with a Visible Church; on the other hand all that are out of it want not Communion with Christ: The unbaptized and unjustly excommunicate, if Believers, have it, and yet are not in a Visible Church. But, saith the Author, the Apostle, 1 Cor. 1.10. argues from the nature of their Faith in Christ to the obligations of Peace and Unity. To which I answer, that the Apostle argues from the precedent Commendations, that the Grace of God was given to them, ver. 4. that in every thing they were enriched,, ver. 5. that they came behind in no gift, ver. 7. that they had fellowship with Christ, ver. 9 which were only proper to the Believers among them; and from thence exhorts all to Unity, ver. 10. Because the Believers among them were really such, and the rest would seem to be such. Afterwards the Author tells us, That the Foundation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Communion, is a likeness of Nature and harmony of Wills. Now if we speak of Communion with a Visible Church made up of Believers and Unbelievers, these have not a likeness of Nature; the one having a divine Nature in them, the other only an humane and that corrupt; nor an harmony of wills, the Will of the one being sanctified, of the other carnal and vicious; which shows that a Visible Church in the whole Complex of it hath only external Ligaments to tie the Members of it together: If we speak of Communion with Christ, which is proper to believers, they are mystically united to Christ by the Spirit and Faith, and withal have an heavenly Nature and Will suiting to his.  
Now because the Lord's Supper is the only Act, which the Scripture mentions, 
Mr. Sherlock.  whereby our Fellowship with God and Christ is expressed; hence it is called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Communion. 1 Cor. 10.16. The cup is the Communion of Christ's blood, the bread of his body: And he calls it the Communion; 1. Because it signifies the Communion of Christians with each other, that they are all Members of Christ's body, ver. 17.2. Because it signifies our fellowship with God, ver. 18. Behold Israel after the flesh, are not they that eat of the sacrifice partakers of the Altar? The sacrifice on the Altar was reckoned as God's meat, as the Temple was his House; therefore those, who eat of the Sacrifice, were entertained at God's Table, which was a signification of their Fellowship with him: Thus the Lords Supper is a Feast upon a Sacrifice, even that great stupendious one of the Body of Christ, which was offered on the Cross; Therefore to eat the Bread and drink the Wine, which are Figures of his Body and Blood, is to eat of that Sacrifice, that spiritual food God hath provided for us: Thus God entertains us at his Table as his own Children, who are of his Family, as Members of Christ, who have a right to all the Blessings of the New Covenant, which was sealed with his Blood: This is the only Act of Religion which in Scripture signifies Communion with God: But Prayer, Meditation, and such like Acts of Devotion, are not where called Communion with God; though a prevailing custom hath in our days almost wholly appropriated that name to them: Fellowship with God doth not consist in transient acts, but is a state of life, that relation we stand in to God and Christ; and no act of religion properly signifies this fellowship with God, but only eating at his table: You will not say, that a poor man enjoys communion with his Prince, when he puts up his petition; to pray to God is an act of homage, which we own him, a Duty which results from our fellowship with God, but it is not in its own nature an act of communion.  
The Lord's Supper is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Answer.  or Communion, but Prayer, Meditation, and such like acts of Devotion, are not where called so; thus the Author: But the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, mentioned 2 Cor. 13.12. cannot be spared out of Divine Ordinances, unless we would strip them of their Divine excellency, and write upon them that Ichabod, which is proper to their departure: And what if there were no such word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Scripture? No more was the Nicene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nor the Ephesine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the thing itself being there will suffice all men but Chimers, who only follow the sound of words: True Believers, as they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Partakers of the divine Nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. moulded and form into the Resemblance and beautiful Image of God, so they have Communion with God in all holy Ordinances; there God meets them, and dispenses out spiritual Blessings to them; there is a divine Converse and Intercourse between God and believing Souls; the drawings of God are answered with the Soul's running, Cant. 1.4. God saith, Seek ye my face, and the Antiphon in the Soul is, Thy face, Lord, will I seek, Psal. 27.8. In Prayer the holy Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rom. 8.26. lifts over against us to help up our devotions, and the Great God above makes such sweet returns of Grace and Mercy, as if he were present and vocally said, Here I am, Isai. 58.9. While we are devoutly musing, the holy Fire will perhaps drop down from Heaven, and set the Heart as a spiritual Altar, burning and aspiring upwards towards the great Origen of all Goodness and Perfections: In the Dispensations of the Word, oh, what divine Influences and Spirations are there on God's part! What Compliances and Responses on the Believer's! Justice, it may be, appears in a Threatening, and the Heart trembles at the Word; Heaven opens in a Promise, and the Heart leaps up in the triumphs of Faith; the Rays of the divine Purity break forth in a Command, and the holy Principles in the heart sparkle in a beautiful Correspondence thereunto; and is not this Communion with God? Who would not say, God is here of a truth? When God in Ordinances impresseth something of himself upon the Soul, and draws answerable Affections of the Soul to himself, there is Converse with God indeed. Further, a true Believer hath Communion with God in Providences; If Providence pipe in Prosperity, he dances before the Goodness of the Great Donor, in whom are all the Springs of Happiness; If it mourn in Adversity, he complies in an holy Silence under the Will of that infinite Mind that order all: He looks upon himself (as the excellent Mr. Shaw hath it) not as in himself, but in God, 
Welcome to she Plague.  and labours to become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, wholly God's, and to live in the world only an Instrument in the hand of him that worketh all things according to the counsel of his own Will: Nay, I may add, a Believer, as far as he acts like himself and expresses the Purity of the divine Life, hath Communion with God in every thing; how low soever his Calling be, therein he abides with God, and the works that he doth are wrought in him; he would not live a moment without God in the world, but be ever receiving Impressions from him & giving up himself to him: After the similitude of a Plant that is influenced by the benign Beams of the Sun, and in the Virtue of those Beams spreading itself towards Heaven, as Mr. Shaw speaks. As for the Author's Simile, That a Poor man, who begs of a Prince, hath not Communion with him, it is enough to say, That Alms is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rom. 15.26. God, such is his condescending Grace, takes us into Communion with himself, notwithstanding that infinite distance, which is between him and us, incomparably greater than that which is between the greatest Monarch on earth and the poorest Almsman.   

SECT. II.  
NOthing more easy to be understood than our Union with Christ; 
Mr. Sherlock.  and it had certainly continued so, had not some men undertook to explain it, who have made it more than mystical, that is, an unintelligible Union: When we inquire what this Union is, they answer in general, that it is a mystical Union through the Spirit and Faith: This, Mystical, is a hard word, and therefore to explain it, they tell us, that it is an Union of Persons, but no Personal Union: 
Dr. Jacomb, pag. 45.  The Person of Christ is united to the Person of the Believer, and the Person of the Believer is united to the Person of Christ (as it must needs be, where the Person of Christ is united to the Person of the Believer:) Which Union is made by Faith, which receives the Person of Christ, and therefore must unite to the Person of Christ: (I doubt that consequence is not good, for men are not united to every thing they receive; but yet what follows may help it out:) As it is in the Marriage-union which joins person to person: This is not very clear yet, and therefore the same Author describes it thus: This Mystical Union is that supernatural, spiritual, intimous Oneness and Conjunction, which is between the Person of Christ and the Person of Believers, through the Bonds of the Spirit and Faith; upon which follows mutual and reciprocal Communion with each other: This Oneness and Conjunction are hard words still; and therefore to explain them, you must observe, that Christ and Saints are united; how? Why, in respect of that Oneness and Conjunction which is between them: This is as plain, as one could wish; they are one by their Oneness: Union is Union, and Christ is Christ, and Believers are Believers, and Oneness is Oneness; and thus Christ and Believers are united by their Oneness: But what are the Bonds of this Union? (though it had been convenient first to have understood the Union better:) Why, they are the Spirit and Faith; the Spirit unites Christ to us, and Faith unites us to Christ: And who can deny this to be a very Mystical Union. But besides this mystical Union, there is a Legal or Law-union between Christ and Believers, as he is their Surety; a Moral Union, the foundation of which is Love: And thus Christ and Believers are united mystically, legally, morally. The design of these distinctions is to prove the Union of persons between Christ and Believers: And, because I find this Author hath bewildered himself, I will help him out; for it is a very plain case, if Christ and Believers are united, their persons must be so: For the Person of Christ is Christ himself, and the persons of Believers are Believers themselves. I cannot understand, how they can be united without their persons, that is, without themselves: But then they are united by mutual Relations, or mutual Affections, or Common Interest; not by a natural Adhesion of Persons.  
Never did I like Scoptical Divinity; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Almost every where in this Passage there is a flirt and a sting at worthy Dr. Jacomb, who yet may comfort himself, that Sadeel, Zanchy, Davenant, Usher, Reynolds, with many more are Co. sufferers with him; all of them (however the Author be so civil as not to name them) hold the very same Mystical Union as Dr. Jacomb doth: But what saith the Author? Nothing is more easy to be understood than our Union to Christ: Nothing! how so? St. Paul calls it a great Mystery, our Church, a marvellous Incorporation, Bishop Reynolds, one of the deep things of God, not discernible without the Spirit; and yet nothing more easy to the Author: Only some men have made it, as he tells us, more than mystical, that is, an unintelligible Union. More than mystical they have not made it; yet the Learned Whitaker saith, 
De Fe●les. Visib. quest. 2.  it is Maximè mystica & planè mirifica: Neither do they make it unintelligible, though they would have it received in Faith; according to the measures of Scripture, and not of mere Reason: This latter in the Socinians cashiered the Hypostatical Union in Christ, because it could not pierce into the Vinculum Vnionis, 
Racou. Cat. deperson. Christi  which tacks mortal and immortal, eternal and temporal together in one Person; and, unless it be subjected to Scripture, it may do as much in us touching the mystical one. But the Dr. saith, Faith receives Christ and so unites to him; which consequence is not good; for men are not united to every thing they receive: But Faith receives Christ as spiritual Food, and eating Christ's flesh and drinking his blood, as the Author tells us, pag. 184. signifies the most intimate Union with him, besides the Marriage union, which might have prevented the Exception. But Christ and Saints are united in respect of the Oneness between them: This is plain, saith the Author, they are one by their Oneness. I fear the Reader may think we are at Tittle-tattle; How should they be one without Oneness? or who would deny or cavil at it? But the Doctor should have understood the Union first, before he had come to the Bonds: And hath not the Dr. in his Book set down the Properties of this Union? Or what can better show the Nature of it than the Bonds thereof? But the Dr. in his design to prove an Union of Persons is bewildered, and the Author will help him out: Bewildred? Not by any Arguments as yet; however it is kindly meant for one, who hath interlaced his Discourse with so many exceptions to very little purpose. But Christ and Believers are not united by a natural Adhesion: No, who ever said so? Doth not the Dr. make the Union and the Bonds of it both spiritual? But the Author apprehends some strange Mystery in the business, which now must be heard.  
Dr. Owen tells us, 
Mr. Sherlock.  That by the Graces of Christ's Person, he doth not mean the glorious Excellencies of his Deity, considered in itself, abstracting from the Office, which for us as God and Man he undertook; nor the outward appearance of his Humane Nature neither, when he conversed here on earth, nor yet now as exalted in Glory; but the Graces of Christ's Person, as he is vested with the Office of Mediation; his spiritual Eminency, Comeliness, Beauty, as anointed and appointed by the Father, unto that great work of bringing home all his Elect into his bosom: Now, unless the Person of Christ as Mediator be distinct from his Person as God-man, all this is idle talk; for what personal Graces are there in Christ as Mediator, which do not belong to him either as God or Man? The peculiar Duties of that Office of Mediator are not personal Graces; his Personal Graces fitted him for his Office, but he hath no Personal Graces, as Mediator, which he hath not either as God or Man. The Dr. tells us, That Christ is white in his Deity, and ruddy in his Humanity; but these belong to his Divine and Humane Nature, and that without regard to his Mediatory Office. Again the Dr. tells us, That Christ is excellent in his Deity, and desirable in his Humanity: This looks like a contradiction to what he said before, but he hath a Salvo, which delivers him both from contradiction and from sense, that he doth not consider these Excellencies of his Deity or Humanity as abstracted from his Office of Mediator, though he might if he pleased; for these Excellencies would have belonged to him as God and Man, whether he had been Mediator or not: But what becomes of his distinction of the Graces of Christ's Person as Mediator, from the Graces of his Person as God and Man? When there are no personal Graces in Christ, but what belong to his Deity or Humanity, an than you can find no other Person to be the Subject of these personal Excellencies, unless his Office of Mediation must go for a distinct Person, which is a new kind of Heresy.  
It was the saying of Nazianzen, 
Answer.  That there is one Consideration of the Deity, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Dr. Owen being to speak of the Grace of Christ the Mediator, did not consider the Excellencies of his Deity in itself or apart, nor the Excellencies of his Humanity singly and by itself; but the Excellencies of both Natures met in conjunction in the Person of the Glorious Mediator Jesus Christ: This must be a distinct Consideration from the other, or else what is the Hypostatical Union? What the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Immanuel, or Word incarnate? What is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Communication of Properties, celebrated by Divines? How did God purchase his Church with his own blood? Act. 20.28. Or lay down his life for us? 1 Joh. 3.16. which way was the blessed Virgin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the ancient Council hath it? What is the Grace of Unction, or all those full Treasures of habitual Grace in the Humane Nature of Christ? And what are the opera 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or operations of God-man the Great Mediator, who hath the Excellencies of both Natures in himself? This Consideration being therefore a distinct one, the Dr. shows, that Christ was white in his Deity and ruddy in his Humanity, which needed no more have been slighted, than such allusions common in the ancient Fathers; but the humour of exposing to scorn provokes to such things. The Doctor doth not, and, I am sure, will not own any such thing, as that the Person of Christ, as Mediator, is distinct from his Person as God-man; or that the Graces of Christ's Person, as Mediator, are dististinct from his Person, as God-man. But, saith the Author, What personal Graces are there in Christ, as Mediator, which do not belong to him either as God or Man? To which I answer, The Grace of Union was not peculiar to either Nature in Christ, but common to both; the Humane Nature in him was only assumed, but the Divine and Humane were both united; but saith the Author, Those excellencies would have belonged to him as God and man, whether he had been Mediator or not: To which I shall only say: That Christ should be God and man, and yet not Mediator is such an extrascriptural conceit, as I suppose never entered into the Doctor's mind.  
But what ever becomes of the distinction, 
Mr. Sherlock.  there is a very deep fetch in it; the observing of which will discover the whole mystery of the Person of Christ, and our Union to him: For these men consider that Christ saves as Mediator, and not merely considered as God or man, they imagine that we receive Grace and Salvation from Christ's Person, just as we do water from a Conduit, or a Largess from a Prince; that it flows to us from our Union to his Person, and therefore they dress up the Person of the Mediator with all those personal Graces and Excellencies, which may make him a fit Saviour, that those who are united to his Person, need not fear missing of Salvation; hence they ransack all the boundless perfections of the Deity, and what ever they can fancy as comfort to Sinners; this is a personal Grace of the Mediator, they consider the effects of his Mediation, and what ever great things are spoken of his Gospel or Religion or Intercession, these serve as personal Graces too, that all our hopes may be built not on the Gospel-Covenant, but on the Person of Christ; so that the dispute now lies between the Person of Christ and his Gospel, which must be the foundation of our hope, which is the way to life and happiness.  
To what purpose all this is, I see not; 
Answer.  Is not Christ God-man, our Mediator? Do we not receive Grace and Salvation from Christ's person? And if we do, is he a conduit only, and not rather a Sea or Ocean of Grace? S. chrysostom, as I have him quoted by the Learned jean's, calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an infinite Sea, adding, Though all the Saints that are, were, or shall be, did, do, or shall receive of his fullness, yet will he never be emptied, never the less full for all that; and why should the Author utter such a word, as dressing up of Christ? The investiture of him with his sacred Office of Mediator, is so far above a slight, that it is no less than the work of infinite Love, Wisdom and Power; those whom the Author opposes, ascribe nothing to Christ, but what is founded on Scripture: And for such as are united to Christ in truth, I verily believe that they shall never fall short of Heaven, and to keep them in the true way thither, God puts his fear into their hearts, that they shall not departed away from him, but these men ransack all the boundless perfections of the Deity? What is this for? Must we not own that Christ is God, and hath all the fullness of the Godhead dwelling in him? Or may we be Christians without it? but they would have us build all our hopes, not on the Gospel, but on the person of Christ: And where do they utter any such word or syllable? Or how could they do so? To rest upon Christ, and cast away the Evangelical warrant, to stand for the great purchaser, and despise or neglect the Charter is utterly impossible.  
To make this appear, consider, 
Mr. Sherlock.  Dr. Owen tells us, That Christ is fit to be a Saviour from the Grace of Union; and if we would understand what this strange Grace of Union is, It is the uniting the nature of God and man in one Person, which makes him fit to be a Saviour to the uttermost, he lays his hands upon God by partaking of his nature: Zach. 13.7. And he lays his hands on us by partaking of our nature: Hebr. 2.14. And becomes a Daysman or Umpire between both. Now though this be a great truth, that the Union of the Divine and Humane nature in Christ did excellently qualify him for the Office of a Mediator; yet this is the unhappiest man in expressing and proving it, that I have met with: For what an untoward representation is this of Christ's Mediation, that he came to make peace by laying his hands on God and men; as if he meant to part a fray, or scuffle, and he might as well have named, Gen. 1.1 or Matth. 1.1. or any other Scripture for the proof of it.  
Strange Grace of Union! 
Answer.  No Divine is a stranger to the Gratia Vnionis: Nay, the Author himself confesses it to be a great truth, but the strangeness is in the Doctor's untoward expressing of it, he being the unhappiest man therein, that ever the Author met with, 
Imman. fol. 21.  that is, except Bishop Usher, whose words are these, Christ the only fit Umpire to take up this controversy, was to lay his hand as well upon God the party so highly offended, as upon man the party so basely offending: But the Doctor might as well have named Matth. 1. or Gen. 1. for the proof: The expression was taken from Job 9.33. And if that expression, the man God's Fellow, Zach. 13.7. do not prove Christ's Divinity; and that other, he took part of our flesh and blood, Heb. 2.13. do not prove his Humanity, what can do it?  
From the Deity of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the Doctor observes, The endless, bottomless, boundless Grace that is in Christ; it is not the Grace of a creature, no, not of the humane nature itself, that can serve our turn; if it could be conceived as separate from the Deity: Surely so many thirsty, guilty souls, as every day drink deep and large draughts of Grace and Mercy from him, would, if I may so speak, sink him to the very bottom; nay, it could afford no supply at all, but only in a moral way; and that is a very pitiful way indeed.  
The condemned Pelagius would allow mere moral Grace; 
Answer.  but if there be no more, what means the drawing, quickening, renewing, regenerating, creating, conquering Grace so signally set forth in Scripture? Or how should poor, lost, lapsed, corrupted man, dead in Sins and Trespasses, ever be raised up into the Divine life? Mere suasion operates only, as proposing an object, and not as ingenerating a power or faculty; and were there no other Grace, how should the power of repenting and believing, which are things far above the Sphere of Nature, ever be produced? Or which way should the acts of repenting and believing ever come forth without a power? S. Austin is not content with mere suasory Grace, but would have such an one, Quâ Gloriae magnitudo non solùm promittitur, 
De Grat. contr. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 10.  verum etiàm creditur, nec solùm revelatur Sapientia, verum etiam & amatur, nec suadetur solùm omne bonum, verùm & persuadetur: And a little after, he tells Pelagius, That he must confess such a Grace, if he would be a Christian.  
The Dr. tells us, 
Mr. Sherlock.  That if all the world should set themselves to drink free Grace, and Mercy, and Pardon from the Wells of Salvation; if they should set themselves to draw from one single Promise, they would not be able to sink the Grace of the Promise, (of the Person of Christ he means, saith the Author) one hairs breadth; The Infiniteness of Grace with respect to its Spring or Fountain will answer all objections, what is our finite guilt before it? Show me the sinner that can spread his Iniquity to the dimensions of this Grace: Here is Mercy enough for the greatest, the oldest, the stubbornest Transgressor, etc. Enough in all reason this; what a comfort is it to sinners to have such a God for their Saviour, whose Grace is bottomless, and boundless, and exceeds the largest dimensions of sin, though there be a world of sin in them!  
The Grace of the Promise, saith the Dr. of the Person of Christ he means, 
Answer.  saith the Author: This is just to as much purpose, as if the Author should tell us, That the Grace of the Evangelical Charter, and the Grace of Christ the great Purchaser cannot consist together, which as yet I never found admitted among Divines: The Infiniteness of Christ's Grace is a thing no more to be scrupled or played withal, than the Verity of his Deity. When the Emperor Constantine had unjustly and unnaturally dipped his hands in the blood of his Son Crispus, 
Spondan. Annal.  and Nephew Licinius Junior, the Pagan Flamens were nonplussed, and could tell of no way of Expiation for so horrible a Crime; but the Christian Doctrine furnished him with one. No sooner doth a man become Christian, but he must own, that the Grace of Christ is infinite, and in a transcendent Excess above all the dimensions of sin, that the oldest and greatest Transgressor may find mercy enough in him; and in very deed, this is a comfort for sinners too high and sacred to be entertained with any other laugh than that of the joy of Faith.  
But what now if the Divine Nature itself have not such an endless, 
Mr. Sherlock.  boundless, bottomless Grace? At other times the Dr. tells us of the Naturalness of Vindictive Justice. Though God be rich in Mercy, he never told us yet, that his Mercy was so boundless and bottomless: He hath given a great many demonstrations of the severity of his Anger against sinners, who could not be much worse than the greatest, oldest, stubbornest Transgressor's. But supposing the Divine Nature were such a bottomless Fountain of Grace, how comes this to be a personal Grace of the Mediator? For a Mediator, as Mediator, ought not to be considered as the Fountain, but as the Minister of Grace: God the Father ought to come in for a share at least in being the Fountain of Grace, though the Dr. is pleased to take no notice of him. But how excellent is the Grace of Christ's Person above the Grace of the Gospel! for that is a bounded limited thing; it is a straight gate, and narrow way that leadeth unto life; there is no such boundless Mercy, as all the sins in the world cannot equal its dimensions, as will save the greatest, oldest, stubbornest Transgressor's.  
Smalcius denies God's Mercy to be infinite and immense, 
Answer.  and the Author seems to hint some such thing; But Christ is God, and in his Divine Nature there can be no finite Attribute; and what if Divine Justice be natural and infinite too? Infinite Justice and Infinite Mercy may stand very well together; or what if Divine Justice break out against sinners? yet is Divine Mercy infinite for all that; nay, what if Divine Mercy had showed itself in gracious Effects to no one man in the World? yet still would it have been infinite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the divine Essence: And what if the Author will not call this a personal Grace in the Mediator? It is doubtless a Grace in the Person of the Mediator; and what if Christ as Mediator be God's Servant? yet is he really God, and a Fountain of Grace, and that without the least exclusion of his Father being such: The Son made and upholds all things, and yet, I hope, the Father did and doth the same; and what if in the Gospel the Gate be straight, and Way narrow? yet the Grace is never the less infinite, because it is dispensed in a way decorous to the Holiness of God: infinite Grace stands open to the greatest Sinners; and yet none shall partake of it but upon the holy Terms of the Gospel.  
Thus the Love of Christ is an Eternal Love, 
Mr. Sherlock.  because his Divine Nature is Eternal; an unchangeable Love, because his Nature is so; a fruitful Love producing all things which he willeth to his beloved; he loves Life, Grace, Holiness into us; he loves us into Covenant, loves us into Heaven: This is an excellent Love indeed, which doth all for us, and leaves nothing for us to do; we own this discovery to an Acquvintance with Christ's Person, or rather with his Divine Nature, for the Gospel is very silent in this matter; all that the Gospel tells us is, that Christ loved Sinners so as to die for them, and that he loves good men who believe and obey his Gospel, so as to save them; and that he continues to love them, while they continue to be good, but hates them when they return to their old Vices: And therefore sinners have reason to fetch their comforts, not from the Gospel, but from the Person of Christ, which as far excels the Gospel, as the Gospel excels the Law.  
The Dr. discourses of the Love of Christ as he is God: 
Answer.  There is in God Amor Complacentiae, a Love of Complacence, whereby he delights in good men; but is there not Amor Benevolentiae too, a gracious purpose of bestowing good things on us? All the good things Temporal in the World, and Spiritual in the Church, know no other Spring or Origen than this; our Repentance, Faith, Grace, Holiness (unless we will blaspheme the great Donor, and deny them to be Gifts) are so many pregnant proofs of it: Hence the Apostle tells us, That God worketh in us to will and to do, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.13. And is not this Love or gracious Purpose an Eternal one? It can be no other; all the divine Decrees are so: His Works are in Time, but his Decrees in the same Eternity with himself, as being no other than Deus Volens. Should his Decrees be made in time, the Divine Will, though it ever had an infinite Reason and Wisdom standing by it, must yet hang in suspense, and float in uncertainties touching things to come, till its own Creature, Time, came forth into Being; and then upon passing those Decrees, a new Generation of Future's must start up which were never before, and withal a new Prescience in God to look upon those novel Objects; both which are impossible. But this is a Love, which doth all for us, and leaves nothing for us to do: Thus the Author. 
Vsser. de Cottesch.  The Semipelagians, to blast the Doctrine of St. Austin touching God's Free Grace, form out of their own Brain a Story of the Praedestinatiani, an odious Sect which, as was pretended, held such a Notion, as rendered an holy Life altogether unnecessary: But why the Author should charge the Dr. with any such thing, I know not, he never said or thought any such thing; nay, he hath again and again urged the Necessity of Obedience: Neither do I see how there can be a more unnatural Consequence framed than this; Christ loved us, and therefore we need do nothing ourselves: Our Love to Christ is an excellent Principle of Obedience to him, and, to set it a working, his Love to us is a divine Inflammative to ours. But, saith the Author, All that the Gospel tells us, is, That Christ loved Sinners, so as to die for them, and that he loves good men, who believe and obey the Gospel: But sure this is not all; Christ in his Love doth something to the Quickening and Conversion of men, and something to the sanctifying and establishing of them: This Last I suppose the Author allows not, for he tells us, That he loves them while they continue good, and hates them when they return to their old vices; But this is much after the rate of the Remonstrants, who tell us, That as soon as men believe, there is a kind of incomplete Election, such as rises and falls with their Faith; and when they arrive at the full point of Perseverance, it becomes complete and peremptory: The Divine Will, according to them, must be successive and make its progress from an incomplete Election to a complete one, and in its passage to that Completure, it must all the way vary and turn about to every point as the fickle Will of Man doth; that standing, there is an Election, that falling, there is none; and so toties quoties, as often as it pleases man to show himself variable, Election will be something or nothing as it happens. This Opinion doth not ascribe Eyes and Hands to God, as the gross Anthropomorphites did, but it assimilates him to the  turn and wind of the Creature. But to speak more directly to the Author; God's electing Love antecedes all Goodness in in Men; and if his elect Vessels fall into great sins, as holy David did, and this after their Conversion, however the Light of God's Countenance be for a time suspended, however their habitual Graces be weakened, and their Consciences wounded, yet the Foundation of God stands sure; electing Love remains unvariable, and will revive them again by Repentance. When God elected a People to himself, he did not, as Mr. Shaw speaks in allusion to the words of the Apostle, use lightness, or purpose according to the flesh, after the manner of men, unsteady and wavering in their determinations; no, the foundation of God standeth sure, the Lord knoweth those that are his.  
But if the Love of Christ be infinite, 
Mr. Sherlock.  eternal, unchangeable, fruitful, I would willingly understand, how sin, and death, and Misery came into World; for if this Love be so, because the Divine Nature is so, than it was always so; for God always was what he is, and that which is eternal, could never be other than it is now: And why could not this Love as well preserve us from falling into Sin, Misery, and Death, as love Life and Holiness into us; for it is a little odd, first to love us into Sin and Death, that then he might love us into Life and Holiness, which indeed could not be, if this Love were always so unchangeable, and fruitful, as the Dr. persuades us: For if this Love had always loved Life and Holiness into us, how should it happen, that we should sin and die.  
The gracious Decree of Election is, 
Answer.  as becomes the Divine Nature, eternal, unchangeable, fruitful; yet was it a free Act, terminating upon what Object it pleased: Hence God saith, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated; he infallibly brings his Elect to Glory: But no man may be so vain or presumptive, as to limit the holy One, or chalk a Way or Method for him to walk in, who works all things according to the counsel of his own will. But how then came sin and death into the World? Why, surely it came in by Man's Transgression, and under God's-Permission: But why could not this eternal, unchangeable, fruitful Love, preserve us from falling? I doubt not at all, but God, who is Almighty, could have kept up Man and all his Posterity in their primitive station, as well as he did the standing Angels; but if you ask on, Why did he not do it? I have nothing to answer, but that it was not his pleasure: God loves no man into sin; the Expression is too odd for a Christians Mouth or Ear; but he suffers his very Elect to fall into sin, yet is his Love eternal, unchangeable, fruitful towards them; if I may allude to that of Hezekiah, Isai. 38.17. He loves them from the pit of corruption, he fetches them out of the corrupt Mass of Mankind by his effectual Grace; and though afterwards they have many falls and lapses, yet electing Love sets to its hand again, and revives them by a fresh Repentance, showing itself fruitful in their recovery and safe conduct to Heaven; and all this is managed in a way of unaccountable Sovereignty.  
Not that I deny, that the Love of God is eternal, 
Mr. Sherlock.  unchangeable, fruitful, that is, that God was always good, and always continues good, and manifests his love and goodness in such ways as are suitable to his nature, which is the fruitfulness of it; but then the unchangeableness of God's love doth not consist in being always determined to the same object, but in that he always loves for the same reason; that is, that he always loves true virtue and goodness, wherever he sees it, and never ceases to love any person, till he ceases to be good; and then the immutability of his love is the reason why he loves no longer; for should he love a wicked man, the reason and nature of his love would change, and the fruitfulness of God's love with respect to the Methods of his Grace and Providence doth not consist in producing what he loves by an omnipotent and irresistible power, for then sin and death could never have entered into the world; but he governs and doth good to his Creatures, in such ways as are most suitable to their Natures; he governs reasonable Creatures by Principles of Reason, as he doth the material World by the necessary Laws of Matter, and bruit Creatures by the instincts and propensities of Nature.  
After all the rest, 
Answer.  the Author himself confesses, that there is in God an eternal, unchangeable, fruitful Love; how so? There is a Love of Virtue and Goodness; and is there not a Love of Persons too? The Scripture is express in it: St. Paul is a chosen vessel, Act. 9 Jacob was loved, and that before he was born, or had done any good at all, Rom. 9 The Lord knoweth those that are his, 2 Tim. 2. He calleth his sheep by Name, Joh. 10.3. Some are drawn of the Father, Joh. 6.44. Some are called according to purpose, Rom. 8.28. On some God will have mercy, when he hardens others, Rom. 9.18. All which places places prove that electing Love is of particular persons, who, as St. Austin hath it, certissimè liberantur, are certainly saved, when others are left in massa perditionis. Unless this be owned, that great Design of a Church, which is the Masterpiece of Providence, must be carried on in such a lame and imperfect manner, as if God (which is unworthy of him) should say, I would have a Church, but I intent not who shall make it up: Such a Jeofail is hardly to be found in a prudent Man. But saith the Author, The unchangeableness of God's Love doth not consist in being determined to the same Object, but in that he always loves for the same Reason, that is, he always loves true Virtue and Goodness, wherever he sees it, and never ceases to love any person, till he ceases to be good: he always loves for the same Reason; where Goodness is, there he loves, where Goodness is not, there he loves not: This is the Author's meaning, this is loving for the same Reason: But if this had been so, what could have become of Man, corrupt, lapsed Man, in whom, as our Church tells us, there is not a spark of Goodness? How desperate must his case have been? Divine Love could not possibly have let out a drop of Mercy to such an one, much less have showed forth itself in such an unparalleed Act, as the Mission of his own Son for our Redemption, there being not in any Son of Adam naturally, so much Goodness (the only reason according to the Author of divine Love) as might attract the least crumb of Comfort on Earth, or the least moments Reprieve from Hell. But saith the Author, Should he love a wicked man, the Reason and Nature of his Love would change: He cannot love a wicked man with a Love of Complacence, but cannot he love him in Design, or with a Love of Benevolence? Then, (though, as the Author tells us, pag. 88 he did passionately desire and design the Happiness of Man) yet he could not design to him (being in a lapsed corrupt Estate) a Christ, or a Gospel, or any the least Means of Salvation; Goodness, the only reason of Love, being gone by the Fall, nothing that is good could be intended to him. The Author acknowledges that God loves Goodness in Men, but whence came that Goodness? Was it a Donative of Divine Love or not? If so, than he loved them before they were such; if not, then may we say with the Pelagians, A Deo habemus, quòd homines sumus, à nobis ipsis, quòd justi sumus; though God be necessary to our Being, yet he is not to our Goodness, 
Tract. 81. in Joh.  as St. Austin observes. I shall add no more to this, having spoken before touching irresistible Grace.  
Christ being God and Man, 
Mr. Sherlock.  made him an endless bottomless Fountain of Grace to all that believe: Thus the Dr. upon which the Author glosses, This he was as God, as we were told before, and his Grace was never the more bottomless for becoming Man: The design of all this is, to make the Person of Christ the Fountain of all Grace, from whence we must drink Pardon and Mercy as long as we need any.  
His Grace was never the more bottomless for becoming Man; 
Answer.  yet as God and Man he is the Fountain of all Grace to us; and unless he had been Man, there would have been no Communication of Grace to us. The most Reverend Usher, upon that Text, He that eateth my flesh, 
Imman. pag. 52.  and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in him, saith Three things: 1. That by the mystical and supernatural Union we are as truly conjoined with him, as meat and drink is with us: 2. That this Conjunction is immediately made with his Humane Nature: 3. That the Lamb slain, that is, Christ crucified, hath by that death of his, made his flesh broken, and his blood poured out for us, to be fit food for the spiritual nourishment of Souls, and the very Wellspring, from whence by the power of his Godhead, all Life and Grace is derived to us. To the same purpose speaks the Learned Zanchy.  
To begin with the Fullness of Christ; 
Mr. Sherlock.  and the first place wherein we meet with it, is Joh. 1.16. And of his fullness we all received, and grace for grace: Now what is meant by this Fullness, we may learn from ver. 14. The Word was made flesh and dwelled among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth: This Fullness which was in Christ, is a Fullness of Grace and Truth; and if we consult ver. 17. we shall find, that this Grace and Truth is opposed to the Law of Moses, The Law was given by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ: So that Grace and Truth signify the Gospel, which is a Covenant of Grace, and is expressly called the Grace of God, Tit. 2.11. and contains the most clear and perspicuous Revelation of the Divine Will, in opposition to the Types and Shadows under the Law; is Truth, in opposition to Types and Figures; this is the Fullness we receive from Christ, a perfect Revelation of the Divine Will, concerning the Salvation of Mankind, which contains so many excellent Promises, that it may be well be called Grace, and prescribes such a plain and simple Religion, so agreeable to the natural Nations of Good and Evil, that it may well be called Truth: This Fullness dwelled only in Christ, and from him alone we receive it; for none of the Prophets, who were before him, did so perfectly understand the Will of God as he did: No man hath seen God at any time, but the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him, v. 18. No man ever before had so perfect a knowledge of the Will of God (which is here called seeing God, because sight gives the most perfect knowledge) but the Son, who understood all his most secret counsels, hath perfectly declared the Will of the Father to us: and hence that Fullness we receive from Christ is explained by Grace for Grace, which signifies the abundance of Grace manifested in the Gospel. St. Austin expounds it, Pro Legis gratiâ quae praeteriit, gratiam Evangelii accepimus permanentem; but this seems to be a forced sense, for the Law is not where called Grace, but Grace is opposed to to the Law in the next verse: But however, this they agree in, that by the fullness of Grace and Truth they understand the Gospel, that perfect declaration which Christ hath made to the World. This Fullness was first in the Person of Christ, before he could communicate it to us; yet it is not this Personal Fullness we are to attend to, but the Fullness and Perfection of his Gospel, from whence we must fetch the knowledge of the Divine Will.  
Joh. 1.16. And of his fullness we all received, and Grace for Grace: 
Arswer.  Upon this Text the only Quaere is, Whether by Fullness is meant, the Fullness of Christ's Person, or the Fullness of his Gospel? I conceive here is clearly meant the Fullness of Christ's Person; it is in the Text his fullness, his, who is God the Word, ver. 1. his, who was in the beginning with God, ver. 2. his, by whom all things were made, ver. 3. his, who is the true light, that lighteth every man that cometh into the world, ver. 9, his, who was made flesh and dwelled among us, ver. 14. None of these [his'] can be attributed to the Gospel, but they are all proper to the Person of Christ; [his fullness] therefore must signify the Fullness of Christ's Person, from whence all Grace is derived, as Light is from the Sun, and Sense from the Head: All true Believers receive from him grace for grace, that is, say some, Gratiam cumulatissimam, abundant Grace; or, as others, Grace answering to the Grace in Christ; as the Child receives from his Parent's Limb for Limb, or the Glass from the Face Image for Image. It is further to be noted, that the words are, we received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, out of his fullness: Had the Fullness meant here been the Fullness of the Gospel, the words would have been, We re-received of his Fullness, even the whole Gospel; but because here was intended the Fullness of Christ's Person, the words are, We received of his fullness, that is, a part or share of it, and, as the Apostle speaks, Eph. 4.7. Grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. We may then conclude, that the Fullness is in Christ's Person, and say of him, 
Hom. of Man's Misery.  as our Church doth, He is the alone Mediator between God and Man, which paid our Ransom; he is the Physician, which healeth all our diseases; he is the Saviour, which saveth us from our sins; he is that flowing and most plenteous Fountain, out of whose Fullness all we have received. But saith the Author, We may learn what this Fullness is, by ver. 14. We beheld his glory, the glory, as of the only begotten Son of God, full of grace and truth; so that this Fullness is a Fullness of Grace and Truth; and if we consult ver. 17. we shall find, that this Grace and Truth is opposed to the Law of Moses, so that Grace and Truth signifies the Gospel. To which I answer, In the 14. ver. we have only a description of the Person of Christ, whose Glory is there set forth by being full of Grace and Truth, not a tittle in it of the Gospel: In the 17. vers. we have not the word, fullness, but we have Grace and Truth opposed to the Law of Moses, but how? not as if under the Law, taken in the whole Complex and Administration of it, there were no Evangelical Truths or Graces: this is evident; for in the Second Commandment we have mercy for thousands: Upon the renewing of the Tables we have God proclaiming himself in those stately Titles of Love, The Lord gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin: In Deut. 30.6 we have the circumcision of the heart; in the 37. Psal. 31. we have the Law of God in the heart, as the Character of a righteous man: We have the holy Spirit in the Saints; hence David siducially prays, Take not thy holy Spirit from me, Psal. 51.11. We have Job looking to his living Redeemer, Job 19.25. Abraham rejoicing to see Christ's day, Joh. 8.56. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob embracing the Promises, and looking to an heavenly country, Heb. 11. and, and to say no more, all the Types and Shadows in the Ceremonial Law, were a kind of veiled Gospel, and pointed at Christ, the great Centre of both Testaments: And hence it appears, that, in case the Law be never called Grace, yet Evangelical Truths and Graces were not wanting under it. But in that 17. vers. two things are pointed out to us; the one is this, That the Evangelical Truths and Graces, after the coming of Christ in the flesh, though in Substance but the same, were gradually far more excellent than before; those Truths, which under the Law were in Shadows and dark Resemblances, after the coming of Christ appeared in Splendour and evidential Glory; those Graces, which under the Law were but as Drops and in lesser measures, after his coming were as Showers and in greater plenty: The other is this, That Christ is in a transcendent manner supereminent above Moses; though there were Grace under the Law, yet Moses could not communicate it; he could declare the Law or Doctrine, but being but a Man, a Minister, he could go no further: Just as John could baptise with water, but then he was at his utmost: Moses could no more communicate Grace then John could baptise with the holy Ghost and Fire; but Christ dispenses more than mere Doctrine, he communicates Grace itself: Hence it appears, that in that 17. vers. there is more than bare Doctrine opposed to the Law, and attributed to Christ. I confess the Gospel to be the Charter and Medium of Grace, but it is in the Royal hand of Christ to communicate it, and that from his own Person: He is a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance and remission of sins, Act. 5.31. Moreover, if all Grace, and the fullness of it be only in the Gospel, in the outward Doctrine and Declaration of God's Will, as the Author seems to hint, what becomes of the influences of Grace? What are the supplies of the Spirit of Christ? Phil. 1.19. What the inward drawings and teachings? John 6.44.45. What the measure of the gift of Christ? Eph. 4.7. What the effectual working in every part, which is from the Head Christ? Eph. 4.16. All internal operations of Grace, all vital influences from Christ must utterly cease; the condemned Pelagius may come in, and set up the very first and rudest draught of his Heresy, which placed all Grace in Free Will and external Doctrine; and the Orthodox Fathers, which with might and main opposed him therein, may be justly censured for doing so.  
To the same purpose the Apostle discourses in Coloss. 9.10. 
Mr. Sherlock.  For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and ye are complete (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, filled) in him, who is the head of all Principalities and Powers: The expression is allusive and Metaphorical: For God who is a Spirit, cannot in a proper sense dwell bodily in any thing: The Apostle's design in this Chapter is to persuade the Colossians to adhere to the Gospel, not to be seduced by Jews or Gnostics, (who talked very much in their canting phrase of the Pleromata) to corrupt the Religion of Christ with Jewish Ceremonies, or Pagan Superstitions; and the principal argument he urges to this purpose is the perfection of the Gospel-revelation, that in Christ (that is the Gospel) are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; Verse 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, not in whom are hid, but in whom are all the hidden treasures of wisdom and knowledge, that is, who hath now revealed to us all those treasures, which in former ages were hidden from the world; upon this he exhorts them to be firm to the Gospel, Vers. 6.7. To beware lest any man spoil them through Philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditious, of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ; and then adds, For in him (that is, in Christ) dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily: So this must refer to the complete and perfect revelation of the Gospel, which needs not be supplied by the Philosophy or Traditions of men. To understand the reason of this phrase, and the force of Argument, we must consider, that this is an allusion to Gods dwelling in the Temple at Jerusalem by Types and Figures, which were the Symbols of his presence: The Temple was God's house, the Mercy-Seat and Cherubims, etc. were the emblems of God's presence; he dwelled among them by Types and Figures, and therefore instituted a typical and figurative Religion, and this was an imperfect declaration of himself to the world: But now God hath sent his son to tabernacle among us. Joh. 1.14. The Deity itself dwells in the Temple of Christ's Body, not by Types and Figures, but by a real and immediate Presence and Union; and therefore those revelations, which are made by Christ, are answerable to the inhabitation of the Godhead in him, contain a true and perfect declaration of God's will, in opposition to the impersect rudiments and types of the Law, so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or bodily, is opposed to figurative and typical; and this is a plain demonsiration of the persection of the Gospel-revelation, that the fullness of the Deity dwelled substantially in Christ; his Religion answers the greatness of his Person, the Godhead dwelled in him bodily, and his Religion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too, all truth and substance, The Law was but a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ, Verse 17. His Religion is body, truth, and substance, this place is exactly parallel with Joh. 1.14. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, tabernacled among us: Herein the Figure of the Tabernacle was fulfilled, that God dwelled in our flesh, and the Revelations he made of God's Will did agree with the manner of his appearance, were full of Grace and Truth; not typical, but a plain and perfect declaration of God's Will, and as the Evangelist tells us, That of his fullness we have all received, that we are perfectly instructed by him: So our Apostle adds here, And yè are complete in him, filled in him; you need no Instructor but Christ; so that this fullness of the Godhead dwelling bodily in Christ, does ultimately resolve itself into the perfection of the Gospel-revelation: For since the fullness of the Deity did inhabit in Christ's Person, he was able to acquaint us with the whole Will of God; the force of this reason our Saviour takes notice of: John 3.34, 35. He whom God hath sent, speaketh the words of God, that is, declareth his whole will to us; for God giveth not the Spirit by measure to him; it is not with him, as it was with the meaner Prophets, who bade only particular Revelations: The fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily; the Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.  
That place Col. 2.9. 
Answer.  In him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, speaks not of the Gospel, but of the Person of Christ, it being a most pregnant, invincible proof of his Deity: The Socinians would fain wrest away this Scripture: Here Bishop Wren against the Racovian Catechism, first setting down their odd interpretation, and then passing his worthy censure on it, In Christo, id est, in Evangelic, habitat, id est, patefacta est, omnis plenitudo, idest, tota voluntas, Deitatis, id est, Dei, corporalitèr, id est, integrè & reipsâ:  placet verò! Quid malum! Naso suspenditis has glossas; satisque ridiculè coactas esse clamatis! Erratis profectò Juvenes, neque satis rem adsecuti estis; praetèr enim quod gratis dictae sunt, sunt etiàm insanùm violentae, & seriò execrandae: Thus he. The interpretation was execrable in his eyes, and well it might be so, contrary to all just rules of interpreting Scripture without any necessity at all urging thereunto, they decline from the native proper sense of the words, and run into Tropes and Figures; Christ is taken for Doctrine, Dwelling for Manifestation, the fullness of the Godhead for the Will of God, and Bodily for Clearly and Perfectly; all is a mere force and violence upon the Text: Was it ever heard or read that the All-fulness of the Godhead should signify the Will of God, or the knowledge thereof; This is such a Catachresis, (saith Mr. jean's) for which they can bring no Precedent or Parallel; it sounded so harsh in the ears of their own Eujedinus, as that it drove him to affirm, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was by the carelessness of transcribers crept into the Original, instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; but the thing is clear by the afterwords, In him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, saith the ninth Verse: What is this, In him? In him, who is the Head of all Principality and Power: Verse 10. In him, in whom we are circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands: Verse 11. In him, with whom we are buried in Baptism: In him with whom we are risen through Faith: In him, who was raised from the dead, Verse 12. In him, who nailed the hand-writing of Ordinances to his Cross, Verse 14. In him, who spoiled and triumphed over Principalities and Powers: Verse 15. All which are proper, not to the Gospel, but to the person of Christ; In him therefore dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily, not in the Gospel, but in the Person of Christ: But saith the Author, The expression is allusive and metaphorieal; for God who is a Spirit, cannot in a proper sense dwell bodily in any thing: I answer, God is a Spirit, but I take it, that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, bodily is the same with personally: For as Bishop Davenant observes, among the Hebrews, Souls are put for Persons: Gen. 14.21. And among the Greeks, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Person, and so it is used in the vulgar Epigramm, — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; that is, by the hypostatical Union, the eternal Word assuming, and the humane Nature assumed, becoming one Person: The Apostle's design in this Chapter (saith the Author) is to persuade the Colossians to adhere to the Gospel, and that, because of the perfection of the Gospel; in Christ, that is, in the Gospel, are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, or there are the hidden treasures: But I answer, the Apostle exhorts them to adhere to Christ; the Person of Christ, (In whom are hid all the treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge, Verse 3. In whom dwelleth all the Fullness of the Godhead bodily, Verse 9) is opposed to the persons of the Seducers, with all their Philosophy and vain deceit: Thus Bishop Wren saith, Christum ipsum iis opponi, quia ipsa Deitas in Christo inhabitat: Neither Verse 3. nor Verse 9 speak of the Gospel, but of the Person of Christ: The Godhead (saith the Author) dwelled in Christ bodily, not by Types and Figures, and his Religion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too, all truth and substance; but we must remember, that this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the substance of the Christian Religion was under the Law, though the face of it did not shine with such a Lustre and Glory as after the incarnation; but the Author goes on, Ye are complete in him: Verse 10. You need no Instructor but Christ, who hath revealed God's will to us; so that this Fullness of the Godhead dwelling bodily in Christ, does ultimately resolve itself into the perfection of the Gospel-revelation: To which I answer, We are complete in him; but is instruction a Christians completure? Oh! no, besides knowledge, there must be justifying and sanctifying Grace, Christ's Righteousness, and the Holy Spirit with all its Divine Furniture, to make a Christian complete, and in whom, or in what is he complete? Not in the Gospel, (of which the Apostle speaks not) but in the Person of Christ: To which purpose Bishop Wren hath an excellent passage, Quid non sunt praestituri fideles, atque summâ fide elaboraturi, ut divelli se nunquam patiantur ab illius (in quo & seipsos quoque Divinitatis repletos esse intelligunt, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Vers. 10.) spirituali & mysticâ Vnione? Observe, he owns that Believers are united to Christ by a mystical Union, and in him complete, and according to the Creature-model, filled with the Divinity: As for that in the Author, That the Fullness of the Godhead ultimately resolves itself into the Gospel; If the meaning be only this, the Fullness of the Godhead is in Christ, therefore the Gospel is Divine, I own it; but if the meaning be, the Fullness of the Godhead is in Christ, and by him transfused into the Gospel, I utterly deny that transfusion. 
Mr. Sherlock.   
In other places the Fullness of Christ signifies the Church, Eph. 1.22, 23. the Church is called his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all; the Church makes him (as it were) complete and perfect; for he cannot be a perfect Head without a Body: Hence the Church is called Christ, 1 Cor. 12.12. Beza tells us, That this is the reason of that Phrase, which so frequently occurrs in the New Testament, of being in Christ, that is, being Members of the Christian Church. Now the Church is called Christ's fullness, with respect to its extent and universality, that it is not confined to any particular Nation, as the Jewish Church was, but takes in Jews and Gentiles, bond and free: This I take to be the meaning of Col. 1.19. For it pleased the Father, that in him should all fullness dwell. Beza observes, that some Expositors by his fullness, understand the Church; for ver. 18. the Apostle tells us, That he is the head of the body, the Church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he might have the preeminence: For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell: Where fullness must be expeunded of the Church, that it pleased God to unite his Church unto Christ; for the Apostle assigns this as the Reason of Christ's being the Head of the Church. And if you would know, why the Church is called fullness, and all fullness said to dwell in Christ, the Reason follows in 20, 21. And having made peace through the blood of his Cross, to reconcile all things by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in Heaven; and you, who were sometimes alienated, and enemies in your minds by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled: This is that fullness that dwells in Christ, that he is made the Head of the Universal Church, both in heaven and earth, that Jews and Gentiles are now united in one Body, that Christ is the universal Shepherd and Bishop of Souls, by him to reconcile all things to himself: And this is the meaning of that phrase, The fullness of him who filleth all in all; the Church is his fullness, because he filleth all in all, that is, doth not confine his care and providence, and the influences of his Grace to any one Nation, but extends it to the whole World: Thus the fullness of Christ signifies in Eph. 4.13. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, which is the explication, of, to a perfect man, that is, to that perfection of Faith and Knowledge, which becomes the Christian Church; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying the age, and growth and stature of a Man, the fullness of Christ cannot so properly be understood of any thing, as of the Christian Church: This is all I can find in Scripture concerning the Fullness of Christ, which either signifies the Perfection of his Gospel, or the Universality of his Church; which is a plain Demonstration of those men's skill in expounding Scripture, who make this Fullness a Personal Grace in Christ.  
Eph. 1.22, 23. 
Answer.  The Church is called Christ's body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all: But this is not the Church Visible, which is made up of Believers and Unbelievers (these latter being dead and putrid Members, do not as, Bishop Davenant hath observed, complere Corpus Christi, sed corrumpere & deformare;) but it is the Church Catholic which is made up only of Saints; these make up the Mystical Body of Christ, and without them Christ as Head accounts not himself complete: The Church is Christ's Fullness, but is there not a personal fontal Fullness in Christ? No doubt there is; the Text tells us, That he filleth all in all, and that he is head to the Church, and so must dispense vital Influences of Grace to all his Members: Hence the whole Body is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, supplied with all the Furniture of Grace from him as Head, Col. 2.19. and all the Members of that Body are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, filled with all graces in him, Col. 2.10. Without this fontal Fullness in Christ, what would become of the Church? In a moment the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Body would turn into Corruption, and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Fullness would vanish into Confusion; but, because it is mystically united to him as a living Head, hence it is called Christ, 1 Cor. 12.12. The phrase, being in Christ, signifies the Mystical Union with him: Hence Beza on that place, There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ, Rom. 8.1. saith, Quia sumus per fidem facti unum cum Christo. That place Col. 1.19. For it pleased the Father, that in him should all fullness dwell, speaks not of the Church as Christ's Fullness, but of the fontal personal Fullness in Christ; the Church is called Christ's Fullness, but never the All-fulness of him; the All-fulness is not the Church's Fullness, but Christ's, such as made him fit to be Head of the Church, and the Origen of all Graces in the Church: The All-fulness is an antecedent Reason, why Christ was Head of the Church, the Church's being Christ's Fullness is a consequent and result from thence. But saith the Author, The Church is called fullness, because ver. 20, 21. Christ reconciled all things in heaven, and earth, he is Head of the Church Universal in heaven and earth, Jews and Gentiles are now united in one body: To which I answer, Christ is indeed the Head of the Church Universal, but the All-fulness made him meet to be such an Head, else he could not have reconciled all things. Christ (saith the Author) filleth all in all, that is, he extends the influences of his Grace to the whole world: This I suppose, is somewhat hard to be maintained; in the Pagan World it is difficult to believe, that there are Influences: There they are without God in the world; the only Name, Jesus, is not named; the holy Spirit, the Fountain of all Grace, is not heard of; the holy Ordinances, the Chariot of the Spirit, are wanting; and how can we think of the Influences of Grace there? The Fathers in the fourth Council of Carthage would have every Bishop believe, 
Crab. Concil. Tom 1.  that Extra Ecclesiam Catholicam nullus salvetur. I therefore conclude with Camero, Vult Apostolus omnem plenitudinem esse à Christo, non vult omnes participes esse hujus plenitudinis: Thus saith the Author) the fullness of Christ, Eph. 4.13. signifies the fullness of the Church; the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, is the explication of the perfect man; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the age and stature of a man, the fullness is to be understood of the Christian Church. I confess this Text may well be construed, as Eph. 1.23. aught to be, of the Church; only whereas there the Apostle speaks of the Churches being the Body of Christ, here he speaks of its growing to ripeness and full perfection, which is chief accomplished above in Glory: But we must still remember, that the Churches being Christ's Fullness doth not deny, but suppose a personal fontal Fullness in Christ, who filleth all in all.  
Let us now consider in what sense Christ is called our Life; 
Mr Sherlock.  he is called Life with respect to his Doctrine; he preached the Word of Life, and brought life and immortality to light by the Gospel: In him was life, and the life was the light of men, Joh. 14.6. that is, he preached the Word of Life, which enlighteneth the dark Minds of men, it is not imaginable how Life should be Light in any other sense. Christ tells his Disciples, I am the way, the truth, and the Life, Joh. 14.6. that is, I declare the true way to Life: Thus he calls himself the bread of life, Joh. 6. with respect to the Doctrine he preached, ver. 33. and with respect to that Sacrifice he offered for the Life of the World; The bread I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world, ver. 51. Christ is also our Life, because he hath power to bestow immortal Life upon all his sincere followers: Joh. 11.25. I am the Resurrection and the Life; Joh. 5.25. The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live: He first raises those who are dead in sin, to a new spiritual Life by the power of his Doctrine, and then hath Authority to raise them to an immortal life: Thus Col. 3.3, 4. Ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God: When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory: That is, you profess yourselves dead to the world in conformity to Christ's Death; and though that immortal Life, which you expect to enjoy with Christ, who is now risen again from the dead, be at present concealed from your view; yet when Christ, who is the Author of Eternal Life, and hath power to raise us up from the dead, shall appear the second time to judge the world, then shall ye appear with him in glory. We must not dream of fetching Life from the Person of Christ, as we draw water out of a Fountain; but we must steadfastly believe and obey his Gospel, which is a Principle of divine Life in us, and then we may expect a Resurrection and immortal Life.  
Christ preached the Word of Life, 
Answer.  he brought Life and Immortality to light, that is, in a more illustrious manifestation of it; Immortality, which did but dawn and glimmer under the Law, breaks forth in Lustre and Glory under the Gospel. That, Joh. 1.4. The life was the light of men, speaks not of Christ's Doctrinal Word, but of his Creative, which lighted up an excellent Reason in Man: This is clear from the Series of the Evangelist's speech, which in this place makes its progress from a state of Creation, unto Darkness or the amission of Light, and from thence to the instauration of it. Christ is the life, Joh. 14.6. not only declaring the Way to Life, but inspiring that Spiritual Life, which is a Seed of Eternal: He is our Life with respect to his Sacrifice, Joh. 6. but then that Sacrifice must be applied to us, by the quickening Spirit, which unites to Christ, and by Faith, which feeds on him. He raises up those that are dead in sins to a new spiritual Life, Joh. 5.25. Not by his Doctrine only, but by his Regenerating Spirit; and when he hath raised them up, he is their Life still by the supplies of the Spirit, and influences of Grace: Hence St. Austin upon the 26. Verse, As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself, observes, That Christ hath Life in himself, but the Believer hath not Life in himself, but in Christ, living but as a part or piece of Christ, and ever in dependence on him. Christ is called our life, Col. 3.4. that is, he is the Fountain of the glorious Life in Heaven, and withal of those Graces which are the first-fruits and buddings of it. After all this, the Author concludes thus: We must not dream of fetching Life from the Person of Christ, as we draw water out of a fountain: This is durus sermo indeed, we must not fetch Life from Christ; he calls us to come to him, nay, charges the unbelieving Jews for not coming to him for Life, Joh. 5.40. yet we must not fetch life from him. St. Paul did all things through Christ strengthening him, Phil. 4. 13. and did not live himself, but Christ lived in him, Gal. 2.20. yet we must not: Christ is in Scripture an Head, who gives all vital Influences to his Members; 
2. Hom. of Man's misery.  and in our Church-Homily a flowing and most plenteous Fountain, of whose fullness we all receive; yet we must not: And what then must we do? We must believe and obey the Gospel, which is a Principle of divine Life in us; so the Author: But is Christ and his Gospel at odds indeed? If we fetch Life from Christ, may we not believe and obey the Gospel? Or if we believe and obey the Gospel, may we not fetch Life from Christ? What strange inconsistencies are these? The Ephesians tusted in Christ, and yet heard the Gospel of Salvation, Eph. 1.13. they were for the great Purchaser and Fountain of Life, and yet cast not away the Charter; The Jews searched the Scriptures, and yet should have gone to Christ for Life; they thought they had Eternal Life in the Scriptures, and, which was their folly, they thought they had it there in a way separate from Christ; but he told them, that the Scriptures, if they had digged deep enough in them, would have testified of him unto them, and so have pointed out unto them the Fountain of Life in Christ, Joh. 5.39, 40. Nay, believing and obeying the Gospel are so far from being inconsistent with fetching Life from Christ, that they cannot be without it; Without Life from Christ, how or which way should a man believe or obey the Gospel? May Nature, lapsed Nature do it? No surely, that, which of itself is not sufficient so much as to raise up an holy thought, or to say, Jesus is the Lord, cannot of itself believe or obey the Gospel: Or may Nature and Doctrine do it? To place all Grace in outward Doctrine is mere Pelagianism: It is a saying of St. Austin, Solet dicere humana superbia, 
De Grat. & Liber. Arb. c. 2.  si seissem, fecissem; ideò non feci, quia nescivi: Humane pride is wont to say, had I known, I had done it; ask only a Rule, and presuming upon its own power for performance: But the Scripture tells us of an internal Work, of inward Teachings, Drawings, Quickening, and New-creatings in the Heart; where these things are, there the Gospel is a Principle of Divine Life in us: There the Gospel comes not in word only, but in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as the Apostle hath it: 1 Thess. 1.5. Believing and obeying the Gospel, suppose internal operations of Grace; and these must come from Christ the fountain of life: In him we are created unto good works, and without him we can do nothing.  
Thus to proceed, 
Mr Sherlock.  Christ is the Power of God, and the wisdom of God, and the Gospel is the wisdom and power of God: 1 Cor. 1.24. Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God, that is the Doctrine of a crucified Christ, as appears by the verses before; The Jews require a Sign, and the Greeks seek after Wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness, but to them who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God: The Jews were all for Signs and Miracles, the Greeks for curious Philosophical Speculations; neither of them could relish the plain simple Doctrine of a crucified Christ: But the Apostle tells us, that this Doctrine is the power and wisdom of God; the most powerful method which was ever used by God for the reforming of the world, and the contrivance of excellent wisdom; thus the Gospel is called, the power of God to them that believe: Rom. 1.16. And by this foolishness of preaching, that is, by preaching this foolish Doctrine (as it was accounted by the world) of a crucified Christ; it pleased God to save them that believe: Christ being exalted to the right hand of Majesty, may in a proper sense be called the power of God, because all power is given to him in Heaven and earth, and he hath the supreme Government of all the affairs of this spiritual Kingdom, and this is a personal power inherent in him; but the exercise of it is confined to the Rules of the Gospel; he hath power to save those that believe and obey, and to destrey his enemies; this power cannot save any man whom the Gospel condemns; we have no reason to trust to his personal power, unless we first obey his Gospel; however omnipotent he be, his Gospel is the measure of his actings, if that condemn us, his omnipotent power will not save us.  
Christ is the power and wisdom of God, and so is the Gospel, 
Answer.  but are they both in equal degree such? No surely, the Gospel is such organically, and in a way of subordination to Christ, and he is such principally, and in a way of excellency above the Gospel: The Gospel is the wisdom of God, a Glass of it, and a Divine Medium to illuminate, and make us wise; but all this under Christ the brightness of his Father's Glory, and great illuminator; from whom the unction or teaching anointing of the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation descends down upon us, to open our eyes & hearts upon the glorious things in the Gospel: The Gospel is the power of God, a Divine Sceptre, to subdue and overcome the wills and hearts of men; but this is under Christ, the eternal word and power of God, who by that Sceptre produces that great and supernatural effect. The Apostles, though earthen Vessels carried about the Evangelical treasure with them; but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the excellency of the power was of God, and not of them: 2 Cor. 4.7. The believing Corinthians were the Apostles Epistle, and Christ's too, 2 Cor. 3.2. & 3. but not in equal degree: They were (saith the Text) Christ's Epistle ministered by the Apostles; the Apostles were but as the pen, which the Almighty Fingers of the Spirit used to make the Impression or Divine Inscription upon their hearts: Hence the Text saith, That the same was written, not with Ink, but with the Spirit of the living God: The Text quoted by the Author, (The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks foolishness, but unto them, which are called both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God; 1 Cor. 1.22, 23 and 24. is a very remarkable one; they all had the Gospel, the external call; yet, to show that all was in the Royal hand of Christ, the dispensation is very different: Those to whom Christ preached, was a Stumbling block or Foolishness, had not so much as any internal illumination; For it is not at all imaginable, that Christ the power of God, if truly understood, could be a stumbling-block to the Jews, who looked after signs; or that Christ the wisdom of God, if truly understood, could be Foolishness to the Greeks, who sought after wisdom; but those called one's among them, to whom Christ was the power of God, and wisdom of God, had internal illuminations and operations of Grace: The Gospel than is the power and wisdom of God, but organically and in subserviency to Christ, who hath all the power in Heaven and earth, and illuminates and subdues hearts by the Gospel, as he pleases; he hath power to save such as believe and obey; but that is not all; he hath power to make them believing and obedient, and to save them, not contrary to the Gospel-rules, but according to them.  
But the chief personal Grace is still bebind; 
Mr. Sherlock.  viz. the Righteousness of Christ: Now no Christian will deny, that Christ was very righteous, a great example of universal holiness and purity; and it must be confessed, that his Righteousness was not an imaginary, imputed Righteousness, but inherent and personal; but what comfort is this to us, if we continue wilful, incorrigible sinners: Yes, saith the Doctor, Hast thou the sense of guilt upon thee? Christ is complete Righteousness, the Lord our Righteousness; this makes Christ suitable to the wants of a sinner indeed, that he hath a Righteousness for him, which God infinitely prefers before any homespun Righteousness of his own. This is a very comfortable Notion for bad men, and such as I would not part with for all the world, did I resolve to live wickedly, and yet intent to go to heaven; but it is good to be sure in a matter of importance.  
Christ's Righteousness was not an imaginary imputed Righteousness, 
Answer.  but inherent and personal; thus the Author: It was not imaginary, but inherent; very true; but was it not imputed to him? Then Christ would never have appealed to God, as he doth, Surely my judgement is with the Lord, and my work with my God, Isai. 49.4. God would never have accounted him as righteous, or promised him a Seed, Isa, 53.10. he would never have said, This is my wellbeloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, Matth. 3.17. neither would he ever have exalted him, and given him a name above every name, Phil. 2.9. In a word; if his Active and Passive Righteousness were not reckoned or accounted of by God, than he could not be our Saviour, or pay a Ransom or Satisfaction to divine Justice for us. What follows in the Author, That this Righteousness may be a comfort to wilful incorrigible sinners, is, as I have before manifested, a mere Popish Calumny.  
But before I proceed any further with the Author, I shall crave lief of the Reader a little to state and prove this point, That we are justified before God by the Imputed Righteousness of Christ, and then I shall proceed with the Author.  
Justification may be considered in a double Notion; there is Constitutive Justification, whereby we are made righteous before God; and Sentential, whereby we are pronounced such at Judgement: I chief aim at the first, upon which the second follows as a consequent. Christ's Righteousness is either Active, such as fulfilled the Command of the Law, or Passive, such as bore the Curse of it; I take in both. The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is, either that Fundamental Imputation, whereby it is so far reckoned or accounted unto men in general, as to make them capable of Justification upon Gospel-terms; or that after particular Imputation, whereby it is so far reckoned or accounted to Believers in particular, as to constitute them righteous before God: The first Imputation severs men from lapsed Angels; the second severs Men from Men, Believers from Unbelievers. The first we have in such Scripture-expressions as tell us, that Christ died for us; for unless his Death were in some sense accounted to us, it was no more for us than for Devils: The second we have in such Scripture-expressions as tell us, that we are justified by his blood; for his Blood justifies us not, unless it be actually particularly made ours, and made ours it cannot be without an Imputation: We have both together, Col. 1.20, 21. He hath reconciled all things, and a little after, yet now hath he reconciled you; all things in the first sense, and you, O believing Colossians, in the second; Reconciliation was actually particularly imputed unto them, which was before applicable to all. I intent the second particular Imputation in this discourse. That which I assert is this, That Believers are justified or constituted righteous before God, by the Active and Passive Righteousness of Christ actually particularly applied unto them.  
And first, as is meet, let us open our eyes upon Scripture, which is the only infallible Rule; there often occurrs that memorable phrase, the righteousness of God, which cannot but be of considerable moment in this matter: And what doth it import? our own inherent Graces, or Christ's Righteousness? Not our inherent Graces, for these, though they come down from Heaven, are never called the Righteousness of God; nay, on the contrary, they are called our own: Hence the Father of the Romans is called, your Faith, Rom. 1.8. the Love of the Corinthians, your Love. 2 Cor. 8.8. the Patience of Christ's Disciples. your Patience, Luk. 21.19. the Hope of the scattered Christians, your Hope, 1 pet. 1.21. That which is called in Scripture the Righteousness of God is not the same with that which is called our own there, but it imports the Righteousness of Christ, which by Imputation is made ours: This is called the Righteousness of God, because it is the Righteousness of Christ who is God, (for so his Blood is called, the blood of God, and his Life laid down, the life of God) and not a Righteousness inherent in us: And withal it is a perfect Righteousness (which can consist before the Tribunal of God himself, and in which the pure Eyes of the holy One can find no spot or blemish at all) and not an imperfect one, such as our inherent Graces are. But that the Righteousness of God imports Christ's Righteousness will further appear by the places wherein that phrase is used: Thus Rom. 1.17. For therein is the Righteousness of God reveiled from faith to saith: In the precedent Verse he saith, That the Gospel is the power of God to salvation to every one that believeth; and how so? Why, because it reveils the Righteousness of God, which saves the Believer, and delivers him from the wrath, which in the subsequent Verse is declared to be reveiled from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men: And can our inherent Graces expiate sin and avert wrath? Oh, no; these, such are their spots and imperfections, must pass with God cum Venia, with a pardon of their defects, and under the Wings of Christ's Righteousness; that, that alone expiates sin and averts wrath; no other but that can be the Righteousness of God within that Text. Thus Rom. 3.22. The Righteousness of God is by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe: Inherent Graces are not upon us, but in us; but Christ's Righteousness, as that in the Text, is not in us, but upon us: Inhererent Graces are not the matter of our Justification, of which the Apostle there treats, but of Sanctification; Christ's Righteousness is not the matter of our Sanctification, but of our Justification, which is the very thing there treated of: Hence it appears, that the Righteousness of God in this place is that of Christ. Thus Rom. 10.3. They submitted not themselves to the Righteousness of God; and what was that? The next Verse tells us, For Christ is the and of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth; and which way was Christ the End of the Law, by imparting inherent Graces to the believer, or by his own perfect Righteousness imputed to him? Not by the inherent Graces, alas! these are so far from reaching the perfection of the Law, that they are full of defects, and every defect is no less than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a falling short of the Law: Profectò illud quod minus est quàm debet, ex vitio est, saith St. Austin, That which is less than it ought to be, is so far sinful, as it is less than it ought to be: Nothing less than the pure Righteousness of Christ, which answers the Law in every point, can be the Righteousness of God in this place. Thus 2 Cor. 5.21. He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; The Apostle doth not speak of a Righteousness in ourselves, but in him; not of a Righteousness inherent, but imputed: Christ's Righteousness is made ours, as our sins were made his, and that is only by Imputation. St. Austin pithily expresses it, Ipse ergo peccatum, 
Enchirid, cap. 41.  ut nos justitia, nec nostra, sed Dei simus, nec in nobis, sed in ipso; sicut ipse peccatum, non suum, sed nostrum, nec in se, sed in nobis constitutum; similitudine carnis peccati, in qua crucifixus est, demonstravit. Thus Phil. 3.9. That I may be found in him, not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: By the Righteousness which is of God cannot here be meant inherent Graces; those words (that I may be found in him) have a tacit relation to the Judgement of God, and before that Tribunal no Saint on earth can can stand in his own Righteousness: Job could not; If I justify myself, my own mouth shall condemn me, Job 9.20. David could not; Enter not into judgement with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified, Psal. 143.2. Danicl could not; O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces. The Righteousness which is of God is not the same with inherent Graces; which, because inherent, are our own, and so styled in Scripture; neither is it the same with Faith itself: The Apostle saith not, that it is Faith, but that it is a Righteousness through the Faith of Christ, a righteousness of God by faith: It is therefore no other than Christ's Righteousness, which Faith receives, and God imputes. But there is one place behind, which in terminis calls the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Christ, 2 Pet. 1.1. To them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: Observe, it is not through the Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of God and of our Saviour Christ, as noting two Persons, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of God and our Saviour, as betokening one, as Reverend Bishop Downham hath observed; like that, Tit. 2.13. The glorious appearance of the great God and our Saviour, where one Person is intended: Hence it appears, that the Righteousness of God is the Righteousness of Christ, who is God. Neither can inherent Graces be here meant; for Faith, the first Radical Grace of all, is said to to be obtained through this Righteousness. Thus far it appears, that the Righteousness of God is the Righteousness of Christ. Now it is evident that this Righteousness is imputed to us, or else it could never arrive at those glorious Effects which are ascribed to it; how should it profit us, unless it were applied and become ours? Or how should it become ours but by Imputation? Being the Righteousness of another, it cannot be ours subjectively and inherently; and if it at all become ours, it must be so by Imputation. Without the first fundamental Imputation it could not render us justisiable or savable, any more than it doth render Devils so, without the after particular Imputation it cannot justify or save us: Unless this Righteousness be imputed, it cannot save, or avert God's wrath, Rom. 1. It cannot be upon the Believer to justify him, Rom. 3. It cannot be the end of the Law for Righteousness to him, Rom. 10. We cannot be made the Righteousness of God in Christ, 2 Cor. 5. We cannot have the Righteousness of God to make us stand before God's Tribunal, Phil. 3. The virtue of all depends upon Imputation. Thus much touching that excellent Phrase, The Righteousness of God, so often mentioned in Scripture. I now proceed to other Scriptures: To him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness, Rom. 4.5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it is reckoned or imputed for Righteousness: Now is Faith taken here properly absolutely in itself? or is it taken relatively with respect to its Object, the Righteousness of Christ? Properly absolutely in itself it is a Work; the Apostle opposes believing to working, ver. 5. and speaks of a Righteousness without Works, ver. 6. Faith therefore is not here taken absolutely; for so Faith is a Work, and believing working: Faith absolutely taken is our own; hence we meet with those Phrases, Thy faith, and My faith, Jam. 2.18. But that which justifies us is not our own, but the Righteousness of God; the Righteousness which justifies is through Faith, Phil. 3.9. and not Faith itself: Faith is the hypostasis of things hoped for, Heb. 11.1. but the justifying Righteousness is not the hypostasis, but the very thing hoped for. We by faith wait for the hope of righteousness, Gal. 5.5. That Righteousness, which justifies us, is the Righteousness, which is imputed to us; but we are justified by Christ's blood, Rom. 5.9. we are made righteous by his obedience, Rom. 5.19. these therefore are imputed to us for Righteousness: It is not Faith in itself is our Righteousness, but its Object, the Blood and Obedience of Christ. Another famous place we have, Rom. 5. there Adam and Christ are set forth as two Roots; Adam conveying to the Branches, naturally in him, Sin and Death; and Christ conveying to the Branches, spiritually in him, Righteousness and Life: As by the offence of one judgement came upon all to condemnation, so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life: As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, ver. 18, 19 Here the Apostle speaks of Justification; Justification of Life is opposed to condemnation; Christ's Righteousness is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because it hath a virtue in it to justify others, and is opposed to Adam's Transgression, which had a power to involve others in condemnation: By the obedience of Christ we are made, or (as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies) constituted righteous: And how can Christ's Obedience being not inherent in us, make us righteous? This, I confess, is above Philosophy, but the Apostle clears it: Adam's Transgression was not inherently ours, yet was it imputed to us to Condemnation; in the same manner Christ's Obedience is not inherently ours, yet was it imputed to us to Justification of Life: Hence St. Bernard expostulates thus; Curio non aliunde justitia, 
Epist. 190.  cùm aliunde reatus? Alius qui peccatorem constituit, alius qui justificat à peccato: An peccatum in semine peccatoris, & non justitia in Christi sanguine? And indeed it would be very strange, that Adam's Sin should be imputed to us, as the Church hath ever acknowledged against Pelagians, and yet Christ's Righteousness should not be imputed to us. Another place I shall instance in, is that, Rom. 8.3, 4. What the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us: Unto which I shall also add that other, Rom. 10.4. Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Righteousness of the Law, is a pure and spotless Perfection, the least defect makes a breach upon it, and ushers in a Curse: The chief and primary End of the Law was absolute Obedience, and how is the Righteousness of the Law fulfilled or its great End attained? Our inherent Graces can no more reach it, than defect can reach perfection, or a spotted Face, absolute Beauty: Neither doth the Apostle say, that the Righteousness of the Law is fulfilled, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by us, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in us, it is not our own work; but in the Righteousness of Christ the Law hath its end and completion, and when that Righteousness is made over to us by Imputation, than the Law may be said to be fulfilled in us. The Apostle, Rom. 5.18. saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, By the Righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men to justification of life: Here we have a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christ answering to that in the Law, and, that being ours by imputation, the Law is fulfilled in us. St. chrysostom putting the question on that place, Rom. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; What is the Righteousness? What would the Law have? And answering himself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That we should be without sin, adds, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, This therefore is performed for us by Christ. The last place I shall quote is that, Eph. 1.6. He hath made us accepted in the Beloved: Where we may observe, that we are not accepted in ourselves, in our inherent Righteousness, but in Christ the beloved; in his perfect Righteousness, which becomes ours by Imputation. Thus far I have asserted Imputed Righteousness by Scripture. I shall now add some Reasons to prove it. And  
1. God the righteous Judge proceeds judicially in Justification, his judgement is according to truth, Rom. 2. 2. he esteems no man righteous which is not such, nor doth he account an imperfect Righteousness to be a perfect one, such as justifies before him: Hence it appears, that our inherent Graces, because imperfect, cannot be our Righteousness or the matter of our Justification; and what then shall we do? How may we be justified before him? Must not the perfect Righteousness of Christ come in, and, to make it ours, a divine Imputation! No other expedient can be thought of, because there must be a Righteousness, and a perfect one to justify us, If any reply, That in and through Christ, our inherent Graces, though imperfect, are accepted of God in the room of a perfect Righteousness, I answer, God is merciful, but his Mercy never clashes with his Truth, which calls for a perfect Righteousness; He accepts of our Graces, but they must pass (as St. Austin saith of our Life) sub veniâ, under pardon, and under the Wings of Christ; he accepts them, but not as the Matter of our Justification, nor in the room of Christ's perfect Righteousness: Justification of Life comes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by one righteousness, as that place may be read, Rom. 5.18. and that one only Righteousness is the perfect Obedience of Christ, no other Righteousness may take away its Crown. But further, should God accept of an imperfect Righteousness in Justification, some I fear might ask, why he could not abate a little more, and accept of a No-righteousness? why he could not pardon & justify wilful and impenitent sinners? which the impure Socinus himself will not allow of? yet, if the true & holy one might decline from a perfect Righteousness in Justification, what may not men imagine or presume upon?  
2. God hath set down in the Gospel his own Way and Method of Justification. The Apostle, Rom. 3.28, 30. having drawn his Conclusion up, That a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law, that Circumcision and Uncircumcision are justified in one and the same way of Faith, adds ver. 31. Do we then make void the Law through faith? God forbidden! yea, we establish the Law, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we make the Law to stand in its firmness and perfection: That God might justify poor sinners returning and believing, he doth not abrogate the Law, and so accept of their imperfect Grace in the room of that perfect Righteousness, which the Law calls for; but he introduces the perfect Righteousness of a Mediator and imputes it to Believers, and so stablishes the Law, and justifies in a way completive and perfective of it: Hence Christ is said to be the End of the Law, and the Law is said to be fulfilled in us: The Obedience of Christ answers the Law in every point, and makes the old Promise (Do this and live) dead through our Impotency, spring and bud again with life. Here the infinite Wisdom of God shows forth itself, that as all the Types and Shadows of the Law, which were but Temporaries, were perfected in Christ the true Substance; so all Moral Commands, which are of an immortal Goodness, were completed in his Righteousness; it pleased God through the perfect Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, to justify; that being a way perfective of the Law: neither may any man presume to contradict his Method.  
3. A man in Justification is presumed to stand at God's Bar, and to answer to somewhat; and what must he answer to, to the Gospel only, or to the Law also? If to the Gospel only, I confess Faith answers to the Terms of it; but mean while all the Pagans in the World must be in a justified State: They as well as others are only to answer to the Gospel, and to that, because unreveiled, they need make no answer at all; and having nothing to make answer unto, they must needs be in a justified condition: And mean while also, all true Believers must be in a state of Perfection, the defects of their Graces must be no sins; for the truth of Grace in them answers to the Terms of the Gospel, and to more than these they are not to answer: But if in Justification a man be to answer to the Law also, nothing less than the perfect Righteousness of Christ (and that made his by Imputation) can possibly serve his turn; nothing else is an answer to the pure perfect Law, nothing else can stand before the divine Tribunal of Heaven: Hence the Reverend Bishop Andrews saith, with respect to that Name (Jehovah our righteousness) we may say, Esto justitia, 
Sermon of Justif. in Christ's Name.  & fac justitiam; esto justitia, & intra in judicium cum servo tuo: With this Righteousness, with this Name, we may without fear appear before the King executing Justice. If any here reply, we are Christians, the Moral Law delivered by Moses obliges not us, I answer, I conceive it obliges all Christians, the Scripture urges it upon them: St. Paul presses the Romans, though no Jews, to love, as the fulfilling of the Law, Rom. 13.8, 9 and the Ephesians, though no Jews, to honour their parents, because it is a commandment with promise, Eph. 6.2. St. James in his Epistle, which is general to Gentiles as well as Jews, would have them fulfil the Royal Law, according to the Scriptures, Jam. 2.8. The Matter of the Moral Law is perpetual, and why should God put a temporary obligation upon it? If the Moral Law bind us not, than all the excellent Morals in the Prophets, (which are but as so many Commentaries on the Moral Law) do not belong unto us; and what a door will this open to overthrow the Old Testament? I conceive therefore the Moral Law delivered by Moses obliges us christian's, and I take it that our Church is of the same mind; for I am sure she is too wise to command us to Echo to an abrogated Law in such a devotional Prayer as that, Lord, have mercy upon us, incline our hearts to keep this Law: But, however this opinion be touching the Moral Law as Mosaical, without doubt, whatsoever is Moral. Natural in it, whatsoever is the pure Primitive Law of Nature must reach unto all, and bind all, all must answer to it; and, because it calls for finless Perfection, nothing can answer it but the perfect righteousness of Christ, and that made ours by Imputation.  
4. It is evident that the Passive Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us; In Scripture the blood of Christ justifies us. Rom. 5.9. purges the corjcience. Heb. 9.14. cleanses us from all sin. 1, Joh. 1.7. washes us from our sins. Revel. 1.5. And how can it do these great things for us, unless it be applied and made ours in particular● or how can it be made ours but by a particular Imputation? sanguis Christi non haeret in nobis; it is not subjectively in us, but what ever it doth for us in Justification, it doth as imputed to us; Hence Christ is called a propitiation through faith in his blood. Rom. 2.25. Faith receives the atoning Blood, and God imputes it: If there had been no first fundamental Imputation of that Blood to us, it could not have been said that Christ died for us more than for Devils: That Blood shed could not have rendered us pardonable or justifiable upon Gospell-terms: And if there be not an after particular Imputation of that Blood to us upon believing, it cannot be said actually to justify and wash us from our sins: As shed for us it makes us pardonable and justifiable but no more, till there be a particular imputation: Without this it doth not actually justify and wash us, because it is not particularly applied and made ours. Should we be justified or pardoned without this Imputation, we should be justified or pardoned without that Blood made ours, and by consequence without a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Satisfaction made ours in particular; that Satisfaction without this Imputation being only in common to all pardoned or unpardoned, and particularly applied to none. Bellarmine himself confesses the Imputation of Christ's Passive Obedience: Solus Christus (saith he) pro peccatis nostris satisfecit, 
D. Justifi●● 〈…〉  & illa satisfactio nobis donatur, & applicatur, & nostra reputatur, cum Deo reconciliamur & justificamur: And why he might not as well have allowed the Imputation of the Active Obedience, I see not; save only because he would leave for our inherent Graces a room in Justification: But because he allows not the Imputation of the Active Obedience, Bishop Andrews is bold to tell him, 
Sermon of J●stisie  That he spoils Christ of one half of his Name, that is, of that Name, Jehovah our Righteousness: And withal the Bishop urges thus against the Papists; By what proportion do they proceed? They cannot counterpoise an infinite sin but with an infinite Satisfaction, and think they can weigh down a reward every way as infinite, with a Merit (to say the least) surely not infinite: Why should there be a recessary use of Christ's death for the one, and not an use f●●● as necessary for the Oblation of his Life for the other? And again he saith, This nipping at the Name of Christ is for no other reason, but that we may have some honour ourselves out of our Righteousness: Hence Bellarmine saith, Magìs honorificum est habere aliquid ex merito: Rather than they will lose their honour, Christ must part with a piece of his Name. Thus that Reverend Man. Let us therefore confess that all Christ's Righteousness Active as well as Passive is made ours by Imputation: His Obedience, like his seamless Coat, all woven together of Love and Philanthropy, from his first breath of Holiness on Earth to the last gasp upon the Cross, should not be rend or divided, but preserved entire for our Justification and Salvation.  
5. When we are justified before God, it must be by a Righteousness, either that of inherent Grace, or that of Christ imputed to us; We are not justified by the first, our inherent Graces have all their spots and wrinkles of imperfection; how faltering is our Faith! How fluctuating our Hope! How cold our Charity! How much is there wanting of what ought to be in every one of them! All of them are but in part, and as it were in their first Lineaments, none of them in plenitude or full measure answering to the Law; they dwell not alone; but alas! there is a sad Inmate of Corruption, a body of Sin dwelling under the same roof, so that the purest actions of the Saints on earth come forth ex laeso Principio, out of an Heart sanctified but in part, and in their egress from thence gather a taint and tincture from the indwelling sin: Quotidie stillamus super telam justitiae nostrae saniem concupiscentiae nostrae, saith one, Our concupscence like putrid matter is ever dropping upon the web of our weak little holiness; If we walk not post concupiscentias, it is very well; Non concupisces, which is a greater thing, we cannot reach in this Vale of sins and sorrows; still the Flesh will be lusting, and Corruption bubbling up in the heart; and can we think that such imperfect Graces should be the Matter of our Justification? Again, we have contracted many Guilts, and every even the Least of them, have a kind of Infinity in them, because against an infinite Majesty; and can our inherent Graces; which are but finite things, ever expiate or blot out those guilts? No surely, they cannot cover their own spots and blemishes, but must pray in aid from the Grace and Righteousness of Christ to have them done away; and is it imaginable that those Graces, which want a pardon and covering for their own Defects, should ever be able to stand before God and justify us at his Bar? Who? were is the Saint in Scripture that ever durst stand before God in his own inherent Righteousness? Job. though perfect, would not know his own soul, Job. 9, 21. David though a man after Gods own heart, would not have him mark iniquities, Psal. 130.3. Daniel, though a man of desires, prays, not for his own Righteousness, but for God's great Mercies, Dan. 9.28. Look over the posture of all Saints in Scripture, you find them not standing upon their own bottom, but in a sense of their wants, breathing after Holiness, pressing on towards perfection, flying to a Mercy-seat, and (as it is expressed, Hebr. 12.2.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, looking off from themselves unto Jesus the author and finisher of their faith, in whom alone perfect Righteousness is to be found. Now if, as appears, Justification be not by inherent Righteousness, than it must be by imputed, according to that of St. Bernard touching fallen Man, Assignata est ei justitia aliena, qui caruit suâ.  
Unto what hath been said, I shall add a few Testimonies out of the Fathers: 
Ad Diagoras  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉! What other thing could cover our sins, but Christ's Righteousness? In whom could we lawless and ungodly be justified, but in the only Son of God Oh sweet exchange! Thus Justin Martyr. The fulfilling of the Law by Christ the First-fruits, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was to be imputed to the whole lump; so Athanasius. Christ having translated the filthiness of my sins to himself, hath made me partaker of his purity, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, communicating unto me his own beauty; so Greg. Nyssen. Non habeo unde me jactem, 
De Jacob. & ●it. Beat. lib. 1. cap. 6.  gloriabor in Christo; non gloriabor quia justus sum, sed quia redemptus sum; non quia vacuus peccati, sed quia remissa peccata; thus St. Ambrose. God sent his Son, that, assuming our flesh and obeying his Father in all things, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he might justify the Nature of Man in himself; so St. Cyril of Alexandria. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, If thou believest on Christ, thou hast fulfilled the Law, and more than it commanded; thou hast now received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a greater Righteousness, 
Hom. in ●om. 10  that is, in Christ the end of the Law; So St. chrysostom. Domine, memorabor justitiae tuae solius, ipsa enim et mea; nempe factus es mihi tu justitia à Deo: 
Sup Cant Ser. 61.  numquid mihi verendum, nè non una ambobus sufficiat! Non est pallium breve, quod non possit operire duos; Justitia tua in eternum me & te pariter operiet, quia largiter larga & eterna Justitia; thus St. Bernard. Many other Passages might be quoted out of the Fathers, but this Taste may suffice: This divine Truth touching imputed Righteousness, such is its Heavenly Oriency, hath extorted a confession even from its enemies; The very Schoolmen themselves, as Bishop Andrew's hath observed, whatever they are in their Quodlibets and Comments on the Sentences, yet in their Soliloquies and devotional Meditations acknowledge Jehovah justitiae nostra, Cardinal Contarenus saith, Ego prorsùs existimo, piè & Christianè dici, quòd debeamus niti tanquam re stabili justitia Christi nobis donatà; non autem sanctitate & gratià nobis inherente. And Bellarmine himself confesses, Propter incer●itudinem propriae justitiae, & periculum inanis gloriae, 
st just, 〈◊〉 cap. 7.  tutissimum est fiduciam totam in sola Dei misericardia & benignitate reponere. And now having in short asserted this great Truth, I shall attend the Author.  
To begin with that famous place, 
Mr. Sherlock  Jer. 23.6. where Christ is called expressly, the Lord our righteousness: In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: And this is the name whereby he shall be called, the Lord our righteousness; a very express place to prove, that Christ is our righteousness, as these men expound it; that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us: But is there no other possible sense to be made of this phrase? Righteousness in Scripture is a word of a very large use; sometimes it signifies no more than mercy, kindness and beneficence, and so the Lord our righteousness is the Lord, who doth good to us, who is our Saviour and Deliverer; which is very agreeable to the reason of this name; that in his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel dwell safely; and righteousness signifies that part of justice, which consists in relieving the injured and oppressed: Thus David speaks: Hear me, O Lord, of my righteousness, Psal. 4. Thus Isai. 54, 17. Their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord, which is a parallel expression, to the Lord our righteousness, and signifies no more than that God will avenge their cause, and deliver them from their enemies, the like we have, Isai. 45.24. In the Lord have I righteousness and strength; that is, the Lord the righteous judge will deliver them from their enemies, which agrees with that promise, vers. 14. Thou shalt be far from oppression; and Isai. 61.10. He hath clothed me with the garments of Salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness. This sounds like imputed righteousness; but it signifies the great deliverances God promised to Israel in the former verses, which should make them as glorious as a splendid garment would.  
The Lord our righteousness is a very illustrious Name of Christ: 
Answer.  Bishop Andrews observes the word, Jehovah; Fl (saith he) is communicated to Angels; their names end in it, as Michael, Gabriel, Jah is communicated to Saints, their name's end in it, Isaiah, Jeremiah: But here is Jehovah to certify us, that it is not the righteousness of Saints, nor of Angels that will serve the turn, but the righteousness of God, very God: And in his after discourse upon that name, he fairly builds on it the imputation of Christ's active and passive righteousness; but our Author hath no mind to it. The Socinians, who play in Homonymies, familiarly enervate the force of a word in one Text, by the different signification of it in another: Tell them that Christ is called God; they will say, so are creatures too; tell them of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they will reply, Moses was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acts 7.35. I will not say that our Author imitates them, but he turns himself about, and is much concerned for another interpretation of Christ's name: Is there no other possible sense to be made of this phrase? Righteousness sometimes signifies mercy; and so the Lord our righteousness, is the Lord that doth good to us: Thus the Author, righteousness in some places signifies mercy: Very well, but where do we meet with Jehovah our mercy? Or, because it signifies so in some Texts, must it do so in all? The question is, what it signifies in this place; Christ borrows not his Name from temporal blessings: no, that is too low: The Salvation their spoken of is a spiritual and eternal one, that Salvation is procured by the active and passive righteousness of Christ, that righteousness is made ours by imputation. Hence Christ is called the Lord our righteousness: The Name of Christ must import somewhat peculiar to himself, to do good to us is common to the whole Trinity: but the active and passive righteousness of Christ is peculiar to himself, that therefore is imported in this Name: This Name seems to be attributed to the Church, Jer. 33.16. because the Church is mystically united to Christ, in whom this perfect righteousness is; and this righteousness, which is in Christ, becomes the Churches by imputation; Observe, this name is not given to all men, but to believers, as pointing out not common favours, but that righteousness of God, which is upon those that believe: The Kingdom of Christ is a spiritual Kingdom, and the Salvation must be suitable to it: And this great Name, the Lord our righteousness, is the foundation of both: As to the places quoted out of Isaiah by the Author, that Isai. 54. may possibly speak of a vindication, or justification against their enemies, that Isai. 45.24, 25. In the Lord have I righteousness and strength; in the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory; speaks of a justification by Faith in Christ, that robe of righteousness, Isai. 61. may be taken for Christ's Rrighteousness, which is the foundation of Salvation; but however these be taken, that first quoted place, Jer. 23.6. plainly imports imputed righteousness.  
It is very observable, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that in all the histories of the Gospel, which gives us an account of our Saviour's Sermons, and parables; whereby he instructed the people in all necessary truths, he makes no mention at all of imputed righteousness: but exacts from them a righteousness of their own, if they would find mercy with God: Now it is very strange, (if imputed righteousness be the great Gospel-mystery) that our Saviour should not once mention it, nor warn his hearers to beware of tructing in their own righteousness: but that instead of this he should severely enjoin them the practice of an universal righteousness, as the only thing that pleases God, and severely threaten those, who continue in any sin, who break the least of his commandments, that they shall not enter heaven: This to me is a very great prejudice against such notions, as are set up for the fundamentals of Christianity, when there is not the least footsteps of them to be seen in the Gospel of our Saviour: Did not our Saviour instruct his hearers in all things necessary to Salvation? Or have the Evangelists given us an imperfect account of our Saviour's doctrine, and omitted so essential a part of it, as imputation of his Righteousness? Choose which side you please, and the consequence is bad; if the first, than Christ was not faithful in his prophetical Office; If the latter, you overthrow the credit of the Gospel and by both destroy the foundation of our Faith: Our Saviour's Sermons were to be the rule of the Apostles, had the Apostles taught any thing, as necessary to Salvation, which our Saviour had not taught, especially any thing that did so plainly contradict the Doctrine of our Saviour, as this imputed righteousness doth, it would very much have weakened their credit with me; for this had been to preach another Gospel than our Saviour did, and we have St. Paul 's command to reject all such Preachers; though they were Apostles, or an Angel from heaven, Gal. 1.8, 9  
And is there no mention at all in the Gospel of imputed Righteousness? 
Answer.  Are there no footsteps of it? Yes surely, our Saviour tells us, Seek ye first the kingdom of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, his righteousness, that is, Gods, Matth. 6.33. Inherent Graces are in Scripture called our own; but here we have God's Righteousness, which answers to Jehovah our righteousness in the Prophet, and the righteousness of God in the Epistles. Now the Righteousness of God, that is of Christ, as before hath been noted, is made ours only by Imputation; but where doth Christ speak of his own Righteousness? See Math. 3.15. Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness, saith he; he fulfilled all righteousness, but was it for himself or for us? Not for himself, his humane Nature was no sooner assumed into his divine Person, but it had a Title to Heaven, and might have asended up thither; it was for us therefore: Hence the Apostle saith expressly, That he was made under the Law to redeem us, Gal. 4.4. What he did as under the Law was for us; and such was all his righteousness, and therefore that was for us; and what was for us must be applicable to us, and this cannot be without an imputation. It is said that, Christ gave his life. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a price or ransom for, or instead of many, Math. 20.28. Now a Ransom or Satisfaction implies imputation, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly imports a Subrogation or Substitution of one in the room of another: Christ died in our room and satisfied for us; this Satisfaction is made ours particularly by imputation, Hear the French Divines; Hanc satisfactionem loco nostro praestitam à Christo nobis imputari, negari non potest, quis neget solutam à Fidejussore pecuniam imputari Debitori? exhibitam à Vade satifactionem imputari ei cujus nomine facta est? Ea igitur Christi satisfactio, nobis ex gratiâ Dei Patris imputata atque donata, illa demum justitia est, quâ justificamur in Dei judicio. We see therefore in the Gospel Satisfaction owned, and that necessarily infers Imputation: Christ's blood was shed for many for the remssion of Sins, as himself tells us, Matth. 26.28. Now it could not be shed for us without the first fundamental Imputation; neither can it be made ours to justify us without an after particular Imputation; For his Blood, when it cleanses away our sins, is not ours by Inhesion, therefore if it be at all ours to do that great Work, it must be so by Imputation. Remission of sins was to be preached in his name, Luk. 24.47. and In his name shall the Gentiles trust. Math. 12.21. This Name includes his Blood and Righteousness and these are made ours by Imputation. If any reply, plainer proof is desired, I answer; Several things are to be considered by us; There is no one place in the Gospels to maintain Justification by our own Righteousness, or if there were, I shall be bold to say, that all the Protestant Churches in the World are bound to yield the Cause in this point to their Adversaries the Papists. Obedience to God's Commandments is indeed the way to heaven, but it is not where made an ingredient into our Justification. That place, Math. 5.19. quoted by the Author, that Whosoever shall break one of the Least Commandments shall be the Least in the Kingdom of Heaven, if taken in rigore juris; were enough to shut all men out of heaven; it imports therefore, that sincere Obedience is necessary to those who will go thither: Again, the Evangelicall Light broke out as it pleased the Father of Lights, gradually and successively. In Math. 16. Peter makes that famous Confession, Thou art Christ, and was by Christ called, Blessed, for it; and a little after Peter, as ignorant of Christ's Passion, would have diverted him from it, and for that was called, Satan: Christ's Passion was sure a most necessary thing, yet he knew it not. Further, our Saviour tells the Apostles, that It was expedient for them, that he should go away; why so? Then the spirit should come, which should guide them into all truth, which should glorify Christ, which should take of Christ's, and should show it unto them, Joh. 16.7, 13, 14, 15. Observe, the Spirit was to open and display the things of Christ; amongst others, his blood and righteousness in their glory, and true use to be made ours; and now it is no wonder at all, if imputed Righteousness be more fully laid down in the Epistles, than in the Sermons of our Saviour Christ himself; the wisdom of heaven reserved that fuller light, till the descent of the holy Ghost. Moreover, we must distinguish between the necessity of Christ's imputed righteousness in itself, and the necessity of the knowledge of it: Imputed Righteousness since the fall hath ever been necessary in itself; no man was ever justified without Christ's blood applied to him, and that application is made upon believing by way of imputation; but the knowledge of it hath been more or less necessary, as the Evangelical light hath more or less reveiled it. St. Peter at that time of his confession was no doubt justified by Christ's blood; and yet he then had not the knowledge of his passion. Lastly, it appears plainly, that our Saviour warned his hearers not to trust in their own Righteousness: Thus the Pharisee and the Publican are in the Parable set forth to those that trusted in themselves, that they were righteous, Luk. 18.19. The Pharisee boasts of his Justice, Purity, Sanctity: The Publican cries out of his sins, and begs for mercy; and as our Saviour tells us, went away jestified rather than the other: So true is that of Prosper, Melior est in malis factis humilis confessio, quàm in bonis superbagloriatio: To conclude, I hope by these things it appears, that neither our Saviour was unfaithful in his prophetical Office; nor the Evangelists in giving us an account of our Saviour's Doctrine.  
It is worth the observing, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that in all the New Testament there is no such expression as the Righteousness of Christ, or the imputation of Christ's Righteousness; we there only find 〈◊〉 righteousness of God, and the righteousness of Faith, and the righteousness of God, which is by the faith of Jesus Christ; which is 〈◊〉 strange: Did the whole Mystery of the Gospel consist in the imputation of Christ's Righteousness, that neither Christ nor his Apostles should once tell us so in express terms.  
This is Bellarmine's own Argument, 
Answer.  Hactenùs nullum omninò locum invenire potuerunt, 
De just. l. 2. cap. 7.  ubi legeretur Christi justitiam nobis imputari ad justitiam: But I hope our Author will not follow the sound and tinkling of words; what if it be not in Scripture syllabically and literally? May it not suffice to be there in Sense & just Consequence? Ratio divina non in superficie est, sed in medullà. The Author saith, That there is no such Expression, as the Righteousness of Christ; but St. Peter tells us of the righteousness of God & our Saviour Jesus Christ, 2. Pet. 11, 1- Again he saith That there is no such Expression, as the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness: But St. Paul tells us, That we are made righteous by Christ's obedience, Rom. 5.19. But I will say no more to this Objection. because I have before proved Imputed Righteousness by Scripture.  
That phrase, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the Righteousness of God, sometimes signifies his Justice Veracity or Goodness, Rom. 3.5. but most commonly in the new Testament it signifies that Righteousness which God approves, & commands and which he will accept for the Justification of a sinner, which is contained in the Terms of the Gospel, Rom, 1.17. For therein is the Righteousness of God reveiled: Thus it is called the Righteousness of God, Math. 6.33. Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness; which is the same with the righteousness of his Kingdom. Now the Kingdom of God signifies the State of the Gospel, and the Righteousness of God or of his Kingdom, that Righteousness which the Gospel prescribes, which is contained in the Sermons and Parables of Christ, and consists in a sincere and universal Obedience to the Commands of God. 
Answer.   
The Righteousness of God is indeed that which he approves and accepts of in Justification, but not that which he commands us to do; no than we should not be justified by Christ's blood, Rom. 5.9. nor made righteous by his obedience, Rom. 5.19. than the Apostle would not tell us of a righteousness imputed without works, Rom. 4.6. Neither would he as he doth in that place, exclude the Works of converted Abraham from Justification; I say, of converted Abraham; for those words (Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness, Rom. 4.3.) were spoken of Abraham divers years after his Conversion. as Dr. Ward hath observed: Our Obedience is an Evidence of our Justification, 
〈◊〉 22.  but till it can expiate sin, and reach the top and apex of the pure Law, it cannot be the Matter of our Righteousness before God. Our Church places good Works after Justification, and most exellently states Justification in three things; Upon God's part his great mercy and grace; 
〈◊〉 of Salvation.  upon Christ's part Justice that is, the satisfaction of God's Justice, or the price of our Redemption by the offering of his Body & shedding of his Blood, with fulfilling of the Law perfectly & thoroughly; and upon our part true and lively Faith in the Merits of Jesus Christ, which is not ours but by God's working in us: Thus our Church, leaving no room at all for Obedience In the point of Justification.  
The Righteousness of God (that which he commands and rewards) is the Righteousness of Faith, 
Mr. Sherlock.  or Righteousness by the Faith of Christ: Now Faith in Christ, is often ujed objectively for the Gospel of Christ, which is the Object of our Faith; and so the Righteousness of Faith, or by the Faith of Christ, is that Righteousness which the Gospel commands: Thus Acts. 24. Felix sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the Faith of Christ, that is, concerning righteousness, temperance and the judgement to come, vers. 25. which are the principal Matters of the Gospel; Thus obedience to the Faith, is obedience to the Gospel, Rom. 1.5. In this sense Faith and Works are opposed in St. Paul's Epistles: the Dispute in the Epistle to the Romans is, Whether we must be justified by the Law of Moses, or by the faith of Christ, that is, whether the observation of all the external Rites and Ceremonies, and an external Conformity of our Actions to the moral Precepts of it will justify a man before God, or that sincere universal Obedience, which the Gospel of Christ requires, which transforms our Minds into the likeness of God. and makes us new creatures? And that this Righteousness of Faith, and this alone can recommend us to God, the Apostle proves from the Example of Abraham, in the 4. Chapter. who was accounted righteous for the sake of his sincere and steadfast belief of God's Promises; vers. 3. Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness: And this, while he was uncircumcised, which is a convincing argument against the Jews, that Circumciston, and the observation of the Law of Moses, is not necessary to justification, because Abraham, the Father of the faithful, and pattern for our justification, was justified without it.  
The Righteousness of God, 
Answer.  is the Righteousness of Christ: And this is called the Righteousness of God, because he accepts it, and imputes it to us: And a Righteousness through the Faith of Christ, because Faith receives it: The Righteousness of God is not Faith itself, but a righteousness through the faith of Christ, Phil. 3.9. Faith, I confess, is sometimes put for the Gospel; but the question is not what it is in other places, but what in those which speak of the Righteousness of God: Mark that place, Rom. 1.17. therein, that is, in the Gospel, is the righteousness of God reveiled from faith to faith. Here Faith is not put for the Gospel; for then the Righteousness of God should be reveiled from Gospel to Gospel: Nay, here we have the Gospel, the Righteousness of God and Faith, all set down as distinct things: And in other Scriptures, we have the Grace of Faith mentioned with the Righteousness of God, because Faith receives that Righteousness: The Moral Law of Moses required not only external conformity; but internal Sanctity, and that in all perfection; the Apostle in the fourth Chapter to the Romans, excludes not only external observations; but the works of converted Abraham from justification; Faith is accounted for Righteousness, not properly absolutely in itself, but relatively with respect to its object Jesus Christ, as I have before proved.  
Abraham's faith was not a faith in Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock  but Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for Righeousness: Christ indeed was the material Object of Abraham's Faith; that is, he believed that promise, which God made of sending Christ into the world; upon which account our Saviour tells the Jews: Your father Abraham rejoyed to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad, Joh. 8.56. But no man could believe in Christ till he came; that is, could not believe any thing upon his Authority, which is the true Notion of believing in him. Some men make work with Abraham 's Faith, as if it were a fiducial reliance or recumbency on Christ for Salvation; upon which the Righteousness of Christ, apprehended by Faith, was imputed to him: But how should Abraham learn this great Mystery from that general and obscure promise; In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; which is all that was ever reveiled to Abraham concerning Christ; this is such a train of thoughts from: In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, as Mr. Hobbs himself could never have hit on: Is there no possible way for God to bless the world, but by imputation of Christ's Righteousness? Or is there a natural connexion between this blessing and imputed Righteousness, that we cannot understand the one without the other? before Abraham could come to the knowledge of imputed Righteousness, he must distinctly know, first, that the blessings here meant are spiritual, pardon and eternal life: The whole Jewish Nation for many ages, who had more promises concerning Christ, than this was, expected only a temporal Prince; and therefore they were prejudiced at the mean appearance of Christ. Secondly, That Christ was to die for the sins of the World: And this the Apostles themselves did not understand till after Christ's Resurrection. Thirdly, That he fulfilled all Righteousness for us. Fourthly, That great mystery of the Incarnation of the Son of God, without which it is impossible to understand the virtue of his Sacrifice and Righteousness. Fifthly, That intimate oneness and conjunction between Christ and his Church, which is a riddle not understood to this day. Sixthly, The Nature of Faith, rolling the soul on Christ for Salvation; and then possibly he might understand this great mystery of imputed Righteousness; and all this must be learned from that general promise: In thy seed shall all Nations be blessed.  
Abraham believed the promise of the Messiah; 
Answer.  but his Faith was not a Faith in Christ: Why so? no man could believe in Christ till he came; that is, he could not believe upon his Authority: But surely Christ was a Prophet under the Old Testament, his Spirit, and surely then his Authority too was in the Prophets, 1 Pet. 1.11. And so it was in the Promise to Abraham: Besides, true Faith in Scripture imports a reliance or fiducial recumbency; so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the Old Testament signifies; and to these, (as Dr. Ward proves by many parailels) answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the new, where also we often find that phrase, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a phrase totally the holy Spirits, found in no humane Author; I mean not for the Object, but the form of speaking, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is not any where but in Scripture (as Dr. Ward observes) which surely must import a reliance, or fiducial recumbency. According to this notion of Faith, I conceive Abraham rested on, or trusted in the Messiah for Salvation; he being the Messiah, he could not but expect some great thing from him; and what was it, Temporals or Spirituals? Surely not Temporals, his Faith was gone beyond the Line of this World, even as far as the City which hath foundations in another, Heb. 11.10. And how did he think to come thither, but by the Messiah? He did not speak to God, Gen. 18. trusting in his own righteousness; But in the lowest posture of humility: much less did he think to enter Heaven upon the account of his own worthiness; he was a man of great Faith, and the Father of the faithful: The Promises of the Messiah were Spiritual Ones, The seed of the woman shall break the serpent's head, Gen. 3.15. that is, Christ should dissolve the works of the Devil, and erect his own Kingdom of Grace and Glory; In thy seed shall all nations be blessed, Gen. 22.18. That is, with all spiritual and eternal blessings in Christ. It is not imaginable; that God should suffer the Faith of so great a Believer as Abraham, to hang in the thickets of carnal things, when he had such spiritual Promises before his eyes; our Saviour saith, Abraham saw his day and rejoiced, Joh. 8.56. He saw the day of his Incarnation; and as some, the day of his Passion: How far God carried the eyes of his Faith, I know not; however he saw so much, as put him into those joys and triumphs of Faith, which pointed beyond this World to that Salvation, which is the end and centre of Faith: To me it suffices to say, that Abraham rested upon Christ for Salvation, and then Christ's Righteousness, though unknown to Abraham, was imputed to him: The Author saith, That, from in thy seed shall all nations be blessed, to imputed righteousness, is a train of thoughts beyond Mr. Hobbs, and yet (Abraham discerning the Messiah in that Promise) it may be absolved in two short words, that the Messiah shall merit Spiritual Blessings for us, and that that merit shall be applied to us; there being no other way of applying of what is another's, but by Faith on our part, and Imputation on Gods: The Author asks the question, Is there no possible way for God to bless the world, but by imputed Righteousness? I answer, had not Christ died for us, which involves an imputation, nothing of blessing could have been expected, the wrath of God would no more have spared us, than it did lapsed Angels: The Jews about Christ's coming thought only of a temporal Messiah; the very Apostles for a time thought not of Christ's death; but this was because they then lived in the dregs and darkness of the Jewish Church. I suppose in former ages the Jews had another manner of Prospect of Christ, and above others Abraham, whose Faith stands in Scripture, with a more than ordinary crown on it, probably had so.  
Now if you would know what the Faith of Abraham, and if all good men in ancient times was; 
Mr. Sherlock.  the Apostle to the Hebrews gives us a full account of it, Heb. 11. that he discourses there of a justifying Faith; that is, such a Faith as renders men approved of God, and which he will count for Highteousness, appears from the tenor of this Chapter, in the second verse he tells us, That by this the elders obtained a good report; that is, the Fathers were approved and rewarded by God for the sake of this Faith, as he shows particularly, That Abel obtained witness, that he was righteous, ver. 4. That Enoch had the testimony, that he pleased God, ver. 5. That Noah became heir of righteousness, which is by Faith, ver. 7. Now this justifying Faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A firm and confident expectation of those things hoped for, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an argument of the being of those things, which we do not see; Faith is such a firm and steadfast persuasion of the truth of those things, which are not evident to sense, as makes us confidently hope for them: the object of Faith must be unseen things, and the nature of it consists in such a firm assent to those unseen things, as produces some answerable effects in our lives: This is the general notion of Faith, by which the elders obtained a good report.  
Faith is the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not seen, 
Answer.  Heb. 11. This, saith Erasmus, is encomium fidei, rather than definitio Dialectica: However be it, that justifying Faith is here meant; Christ (the marrow and centre of the Covenant) must be included in it; Faith is the substance of things hoped for; that is, hoped for by virtue of the Promises, and in a special signal way, by virtue of the prime fundamental promise touching the Messiah, which (as we see, Gen. 3.15.) was delivered to Adam as an heavenly treasure, more worth than a world; and by him was no doubt handed down to his posterity, not merely in the bare words and letters of it (for that protevangelium, or first Promise of the Gospel was ministerium spiritûs) but with such Divine Commentaries upon it, as the illuminating spirit was pleased to give in to the heart of believing Adam; Faith, such is its excellent nature, presentiates and makes to subsist the good things hoped for, in such a lively manner, as if they were actually at hand, and before our eyes: Nay, as learned Pareus observes on the place, it makes them subsist, not only speculatively and assentively in the mind, but fiducially in the heart. Now by Faith in the Messiah the Elders had their divine Testimony. Abel was righteous before God; Enoch pleased God; Noah was an heir of Righteousness, all of them were Justified and accepted in their persons and holy walking: The Author makes Faith to consist in a firm assent only, without any thing more in the nature of it: Thus the Romanists: Thus Bellarmine proves it to be only assensum firmum, 〈◊〉 certum ad ea omnia quae Deus credendae proponit: And to that purpose, among others, quotes this Text, Heb. 11. But I cannot find that this will down with Protestants: Faith is set forth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, confidence; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a firm persuasion; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fiducial liberty; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a persuasion with full sails; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fiducial subsistence of things hoped for; which expressions speak more than a naked assent: Faith receives Christ, puts on Christ, feeds upon Christ, such an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it was to the Fathers in the days of Moses, that they did eat the flesh, and drink the blood of the Son of God, even before his Incarnation, 1 Cor. 10.3, 4. Mere assent cannot do this; Through faith we are justified, and have peace with God, Rom. 5.1. We have our hearts purified, Act. 15.9. We have the Spirit of all grace, Joh. 7.38. We quench the fiery darts of the Devil, Eph. 6.16. We have a victory over the world, 1 Joh. 5.4. We rejoice in the hope of the glory of God, Rom. 5.2. Nay, not only in the hope of it: but with joy, unspeakable and full of glory, 1 Pet. 1.8. as if we had a piece of heaven here below; mere assent cannot reach such admirable effects: Nay, it may be in wicked men, who have not the least mite of those Graces or Comforts: Our Saviour hath excellently expressed the nature of true Faith: Every one which seethe the Son and believeth on him, hath eternal life, Joh. 6.40. Here are two acts, the one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to see the Son, to assent that he is the Redeemer of the World; the other is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to believe on him, by fiducial recumbency; by which, saith Bishop Davenant, 
Dau. Det. 165.  Vitam à vitae fonte haurimus, & in ipsum quasi totos nos immergimus, We draw life from the fountain of life, and wholly drown ourselves in him; It was well said of the School-man; Nullus potest justificari, nisi per unionem ad Christum, prima autem unio ad Christum fit per fidem; None can be justified but by an union with Christ, and the first union is by faith: Faith doth not only look upon Christ; but it unites to him, and rests on him; It is not a mere intellectual thing, but as Philip said, Act. 8.37. It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, out of the whole heart, the whole, not a Plece only of the heart is resigned up to Christ in believing, mere assent therefore is not the all of Faith, but there is fiducial recumbency in it: Thus our Church, 
3. Hom. of Salvation.  The articles of our faith the devils believe, they believe all things written in the New and Old Testament to be true; and, for all this faith, they be but devils, remaining still in their damnable estate, lacking the very true Christian faith; For the right and true Christian faith, is not only to believe that holy Scripture, and all the Articles of our faith are true; but also to have a sure trust and confidence in Gods merciful promises to be saved from everlasting damnation by Christ; whereof doth follow a loving heart to obey his commandments. And again, 
1. Hom. of Faith.  our Church sets forth faith to be, a true trust and confidence of the mercy of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, a trusting in God, committing ourselves wholly unto him, hanging only upon him, and calling upon him: But it may be said, that the Author places Faith in such a firm assent, as produces some effects in our lives, and so not in mere assent: To which I answer, according to our Author: The nature of Faith stands only in assent: Obedience indeed is an effect of Faith, but it is not Faith itself; it is not an essential ingredient in the nature of Faith; neither is it indeed the effect of any Faith, but such an one as is total and genuine; that is, which is assentive and fiducial also.  
The different sorts of Faith result from the different Objects and Motives of it; 
Mr. Sherlock  the Apostle takes notice of two kinds of Faith in this Chapter; and Faith in Christ makes a third, which are all the kinds of Faith the Scripture is acquainted with: The first we may call a natural Faith; that is, a belief of the principles of natural Religion, which is founded upon natural Demonstrations or Moral Arguments, as that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him; Which was the Faith of Abel and Enoch, whereby they pleased God; for there being no mention made of the Faith of Abel and Enoch in the Old Testament: The Apostle proves, that they were true believers; because they had this Testimony, that they pleased God: Now it is impossible to be sincerely religious, or do any acceptable service to God without the belief of his being and providence, and care of good men: These are the first principles of all Religion: And God required no more of those good men, who had no other particular Revelation of his Will. Secondly, There is a Faith in God, or a belief of those particular Revelations, which God made to the Fathers of the Old Testament: Thus Noah believed God, being warned of the deluge; and in obedience to him, provided an Ark; and this was imputed to him for Righteousness. Thus Abraham, in obedience to the divine Revelation left his Country and Father's house, and went into a strange Land: Thus Sarah by believing the promise of God, received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child, when she was past age, because she judged him faithful, who had promised: Thus Abraham, in obedience to God, offered up Isaac, which was as heroical an act of Faith, as was ever done by man: The like examples we have of the Faith of Isaac, and Jacob, and Joseph, and Moses, etc. Who firmly believed all the particular Revelations God made to them, and confidently expected the performance of all his promises; how unlikely soever they appeared to be: This is that Faith whereby Abraham, and all the good men in these days were justified, viz. Such a firm belief of the being and providence of God, and all those particular Revelations God made to them, as made them careful in all things to please God, and to obey him.  
It is the observation of the Learned Dr. Prideaux, 
Answer.  That in the dark age of the Schoolmen, Paulus cessit Aristoteli, & gratia naturae: St. Paul was fain to yield to Aristotle, and grace to nature: And I fear it will be so again, we have here set before our eyes natural Faith: Faith natural in its believing principle, and natural in its Object; Reason of itself, and without any elevation of Grace, may, nay, I suppose, must admit the things of natural Theology, as being within its own Sphere; and shall we call this faith, justifying faith, which is nature, & nothing but nature? Justifying Faith, if we believe Scripture, is every way supernatural; supernatural in its Principle, & supernatural in its Object: Supernatural in its Principle, it is called, faith of the operation of God, Gal. 2.12. It is not of ourselves, but it is the gift of God, Eph. 2.8. Not a natural gift, but a gift of mere Grace: unto you it is given to believe, saith the Apostle, Phil. 1.29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it is freely graciously given to you to believe, it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a good grace divinely given. Hence the second Arausican Council, expressly tells us, that our believing is per infusionem & inspirationem spiritûs Sancti, Can. 6. Nay, the very Council of Trent pronounces an Anathema on those that say, that a man may believe without the inspiration of the holy Spirit: And Faith is also supernatural in its Object, it is a thing above the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, above mere natural Theology: It is fixed in a God in Covenant, and in his free Grace, it hangs upon Christ, and his sweet-smelling Sacrifice; it embraces the promises of Grace and Remission, and all these are supernatural only: As in the Author's Natural Faith, there is nothing but Nature; So in the true justifying Faith, there is nothing but supernatural Grace: But the Author gives us an instance of natural Faith in Abel and Enoch, who believed the principles of natural Religion, who believed that God is, and that he is the rewarder of them that seek him: And had Abel and Enoch only a natural Faith? Did they not believe in a Messiah? Was that first precious promise, Gen. 3. Given to be hid and buried in oblivion? Or was it not handed down to Abel and Enoch? Surely it was, and they believed in the Messiah: How could they come to God without a Mediator? No man cometh to the Father but by me, saith our Saviour, Joh. 14.6. Or how could they be reckoned among those, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, seek out God, Heb. 11.6. Nature may grope after God, but it cannot indeed seek him out, as he is in his gracious Covenant without a Divine Call and Spirit: Or how could they be justified without Faith in a Messiah? By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, Isai. 53.11. To him give all the Prophet's witness, that through his name, whosoever believeth in him, shall receive remission of sins, Act. 10.43. We see, without believing in him, there is no remission, no pleasing of God. And were Abel and Enoch without a promise; then they were in a mere Pagan state; and what that is, the Apostle tells us, Eph. 2.12. Having no hope, and without God in the world; and this because they were without Christ, and without the covenant of promise; as that place tells us. Now if Abel and Enoch were without God; then how could they be sincerely Religious, or do him any true service? And if they were without hope, how could they look upon God as a rewarder of them that seek him? Indeed, there are some rudera imaginis Dei in us: A natural man hath some obscure notions of God, and his remunerating goodness, but in the Apostle, when God is said to be a rewarder, it is not to be taken Philosophicè, but Evangelicè; that is, that he is a rewarder of Believers in and through the Messiah; and the Promises of Grace, and eternal life made in him: Take away the word, and you take away justifying Faith: How shall they believe in him, of whom they have not heard? Rom. 10.14. If Abel and Enoch had only natural Faith, and that justifying, mere Pagans may have the same, who yet have not the name Jesus, the only name of Salvation, who never heard of the holy Ghost, the Fountain of all Holiness; who have not the Gospel, the Chariot of the holy Spirit; who know not what Grace is, in its supernatural nature, or in its centre; the glory of heaven; notwithstanding all this, they may have justifying Faith: Before the Author told us, That the Gospel is the fullness of Christ, the principle of a Divine Life, the Wisdom and Power of God; and yet without this Gospel a man by mere Nature may arrive at justifying Faith: By these things I hope it appears, that the Faith of Abel and Enoch, was more than natural, even Faith in the Messiah: Remarkable is that of the second Arausican Council, Can. 25. 
Crabbe, 1. tome, 628.  Abel justum, & No, & Abraham, & Isaac, & Jacob, & omnem antiquorum Sanctorum multitudinem, illam praeclaram fidem, quam in ipsorum laudem praedicat Apostolus Paulus, non per bonum naturae, sed per gratiam Dei credimus fuisse collatam: You see, they allow no natural Faith: Our Church, reckoning up Abel, and the rest of the Worthies, Heb. 11. saith, They did not only know God to be the Maker and Governor of the World; 
2. Hom. of Faith.  but they had a special confidence and trust, that he would be their God, although they were not named Christian men; yet was it a Christian Faith that they had; for they looked for all benefits of God the Father, through the merits of his Son Jesus Christ, as we now do: And in the eighteenth Article, our Church saith, They are to be had accursed, that presume to say, that every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth; so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature: For holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ, by which men must be saved. And what can be more full or zealous than these passages? I shall only more add the judgement of Bishop Wren; Abelem, qui per propterque fidem Messiae defunctus est, etiamnum celebrari à nobis Christianis, atque in Ecclesiae Christi Martyrologiis (quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ritè appellantur, Heb. 12.1.) locum habere: Thus much touching natural Faith. The second sort of Faith mentioned by the Author, is of particular Revelations made to Noah, Abraham, and others, whereby they were justified: Observe, the Author saith, That in the Eleventh Chapter to the Hebrews, there are mentioned two kinds of Faith; that is, natural Faith, and Faith of particular Revelations: So that it seems in this Chapter (which reaches down from Abel to the Maccabees, Nay, I suppose after them, to the Incarnation of Christ) there is no Faith in Christ at all to be thought of: But Noah and the rest had not only a Faith of particular promises, but a Faith in the Messiah too, which was that which made it justifying, Abraham rejoiced to see Christ's day: And that was the joy of Faith, Joh. 8.56. Jacob tells us of a Shiloh, to whom the gathering of the people should be, Gen. 49.10. And surely he himself was gathered to him by Faith. Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasure in Egypt, Heb. 11.29. And surely he was no stranger to Christ in his Faith: Job saith, I know that my Redeemer liveth, Job 19.25. And O how piercing and appropriative of Christ was his Faith! The Fathers in Moses' time did all eat the same spiritual meat, and all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ, 1 Cor. 10.3, 4. And how this feeding on Christ should be without Faith, I know not: Unto us was the Gospel preached as well as unto them, saith the Apostle, Heb. 4.2. They were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Evangelized; they had Christ set before them: And we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved even as they, saith St. Peter, Act. 16.11. We shall be saved, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the very same manner as they were saved; that is, we and they are both saved by Faith in Jesus Christ and his Grace. Again, it is to be considered, that the Sacrifices under the Law were ordained to be as Types, and shadows of Christ, to make an Atonement for sin (as appears in Leviticus) not that the Sacrifices themselves were an absolute real Atonement in themselves; but a typical one, pointing out the only true atoning expiatory Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Now either God did reveil to the Jews, at least wise to the Believers among them; the typicalness, the true use and end of those Sacrifices, or not: if he did reveil it to them, than all true Believers among them did not hang upon the Shadow, and outward Sacrifice only; but by their Faith did fix upon Christ and his precious Blood: but if he did not reveil it to them, the Sacrifices, even of those Believers, must be all miscarriages, nothing but mere blots and Erratas; they must be offered up not in Faith, but in mistake, in the belief of an utter falsity; that is, in the belief of that impossible thing, That the blood of bulls and of goats could take away sin: There must be such a gross error in modo, a misprision so horrible; that it is not imaginable, that any one among all the millions of Sacrifices under the Law, could be rightly offered up, or accepted by God: Such hard intolerable consequences follow this opinion, that the Ancients had no knowledge of, or Faith in the Messiah: On the other hand, that they had such a Knowledge and Faith, may be gathered, as from other things; so from this consideration, that they offered up their Sacrifices in Faith, as Abel did; that they were graciously accepted of by God in their offering up those Sacrifices: Hence it is said, that God had respect to Abel and his offering, consuming it, as is thought, by fire from Heaven; and so giving a divine Testimony to it. Hence also we find, that when Noah offered burnt offerings, the Lord did smell a sweet savour, Gen. 8.21. because those Sacrifices had an aspect upon the sweet Sacrifice of Christ, in which God is ever well-pleased. Moreover, if the justification of the ancients were, as it must be, built upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the death and satisfaction of Christ; then, unless it were by a Faith in Christ, the death of Christ, one in itself, must found three ways of justification; one by natural Faith, another by a Faith of particular promises; and a third by Faith in Christ, which seems very strange and incongruous: Thus much touching the Ancients Faith in Christ; unto which I shall only add the Testimony of our Church. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob believed, and it was imputed to them for righteousness: 
2. Hom. of the Passion.  was it imputed to them only? And shall it not be imputed to us also? Yes, if we have the same Faith as they had, it shall be as truly imputed to us, as it was to them; for it is one Faith that must save both us and them, even a sure and steadfast Faith in Christ Jesus.  
From hence we learn: Thirdly, 
Mr. Sherlock.  what Faith in Christ is, which is now imputed to us for righteousness, as Abraham 's Faith was to him; for to make our Faith in Christ answer to the Faith of Abraham, and all good men in former ages (without which the Apostles argument from Abraham's being justified by Faith is of no force) our Faith in Christ must signify such a steadfast belief of all those Revelations, which Christ hath made to the world, as governs our lives and actions: Abraham was justified by believing the Revelations, which God made to him, and we are justified by believing those Revelations which Christ hath made of God's Will to us; for if by the righteousness of Faith, you understand the righteousness of Christ apprehended by Faith, and imputed to us; you utterly destroy the Apostles argument for our justification by Faith; for Abraham and all the good men of old were not justified by such a Faith as this; they never heard of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us: Noah was made heir of Righteousness, because he believed the deluge, and prepared an Ark at God's command. Abraham 's Faith was imputed to him for righteousness, because he left his own Country, followed God into a strange Land, believed that God would give him a son, and offered this son at God's command. Now what hath all this to do with an imputation of Christ's Righteousness? How does it follow, that because Abraham was justified by such noble and generous acts of Faith; therefore we should be justified by imputed Righteousness, by rolling our souls on Christ? These two Faiths are of as different kinds, as can be imagined; we cannot reason from the one to the other: The difference between the Faith of Abraham, and the Faith of Christians is this; Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness; we believe in Christ, and this is counted to us for righteousness: Abraham believed the Revelations God made to him; we believe the Revelations God hath made to to us by his Son, Heb. 1.1. So that the first notion of Faith in Christ, is a firm belief of his divine Authority; which necessarily draws after it a belief of the whole doctrine of the Gospel: Thus Joh. 20.31. The Christian Faith is described by believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: And 1 Joh. 5.5. Who is he that overcometh the world; but he that believeth, that Jesus is the Son of God; That is, that he came from God with full Power and Authority to declare his Will, and confirm the Covenant: Abraham 's faith was founded on the immediate Inspirations of God, or the Revelations of Angels; But a Faith in Christ is founded on the Authority of Christ, which is the first Object of the Christian Faith; and the reason and foundation of all other acts of Faith: Abraham had only some particular Revelations, as the Object of his Faith; but Christ hath made a perfect Revelation of the whole Will of God, which is the Object of our Faith: Thus the Christian Faith excels all other kinds of Faith, as much as the Gospel excels all other revelations made to Abraham and other good men: but still the end of all Faith is the same to govern our lives, and make us obedient in all things to God, as Abraham 's was, without which no Faith can justify.  
The stress of this discourse lies upon two or three supposals: 
Answer.  One is this, that the very act of Faith is properly, and in itself, our Righteousness, or the matter of our Justification: Another is this, that the whole nature of Faith consists in an assent to Divine Revelation: A third is this, that Abraham had only a Faith of particular Revelations; but no Faith in Christ: Now, not to repeat things over and over, I have before proved, that Faith, as it is an Act, and absolutely in itself considered, is not our Righteousness, or the matter of our Justification; that there is in the nature of Faith, over and above a mere assent, a fiducial recumbency also; and that the Faith of Abraham was not only a Faith of particular promises, but a Faith in the Messiah: These things being before asserted; the answer is very easy; Our Faith in Christ very well answers to the Faith of Abraham: Abraham trusted in Christ, and so do we: These Faiths answer one another, and that much more harmoniously, than if we say, Abraham believed particular Promises, and we believe in Christ; for there the Objects are variant: Indeed our Faith, as having more of Evangelical Light in it, is more explicit than Abraham's was; but (this being but a gradual difference) still they are one Faith in substance and, centre in the same Object, in the Messiah. But saith the Author, Abraham and the rest never heard of imputed Righteousness; no, he and Noah believed particular Revelations, and what hath this to do with imputed Righteousness? Doth it follow, because Abraham was justified by such generous acts, that we should be justified by imputed Righteousness? But I must assert, that Abraham and Noah trusted in the Messiah, and so Christ's Righteousness (though, suppose, unknown to them in such a clear manner as it is to us) was imputed to them; And indeed without it, I see not how they should have (which, no doubt, they wanted) remission in Christ's Blood. But (saith the Author) The first notion of Faith in Christ is a firm belief of his Authority; the Christian Faith is described by believing, that Jesus is the Son of God, the very Christ, Joh. 20.31. and 1 Joh. 5.5. that is, that he came from God with full authority to declare his Will, and confirm the Covenant: To which I answer, That Jesus is the Son of God, in its proper signification imports, that he is his Son by Eternal Generation, and from thence we may infer, that his Authority is Divine: But we must remember, that Christ was a Prophet under the Old Testament; his Spirit, and surely then his Authority, was in the Prophets. The Author seems to hint by those places, Joh. 20.31. and 1 Joh. 5.5. that justifying Faith consists only in assent to divine Principles, such as that (That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God) is; but though those places in the Letter sound only an assent to that divine Axiom, That Jesus is the Son of God, yet more must be taken into the construction; as well because the Scripture, which ever consists with itself, doth in other places assert, that in justifying Faith, there is, over and above a mere assent, a fiducial Recumbency on Christ; as also because wicked men, who have no justifying Faith, may have an assent to all Evangelical Axioms: Nay, the very Devils cried out, and confessed, That Jesus was the Son of God, Matth. 8.29. and yet (as our Church observes) for all this they were but Devils.  
Phil. 3.8, 9 Yea, doubtless, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and I account all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: By my own Righteousness these men understand inherent Righteousness, whatever good St. Paul had done, either while he was a Jew, or after his Conversion to Christianity, this he rejects; and therefore the Righteousness, which is through the Faith of Christ, must needs be an imputed Righteousness, the personal Righteousness of Christ apprehended by Faith and imputed to us: This is fairly offered, but what proof have they of it? That, I confess, I cannot learn; only it is taken for granted, that my Righteousness, signifies inherent Righteousness, and the Righteousness of Faith, imputed. But they need not signify so; my own Righteousness, can signify no more than that in which he placed his Righteousness, whatever it was, and what necessity is there to understand this of inherent Holiness? An External Righteousness serves most men's turn very well, and this is the Righteousness by which the Pharisees (and amongst the rest St. Paul while he was a Pharisee) expected to be justified: For what his Righteousness was he tells us, in ver. 6, 7. Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews, as touching the Law a Pharisee (who were mighty strict and punctual in observing all external Ceremonies) and he expressed his zeal for the Law of Moses by persecuting the Christian Church; and touching the righteousness which is in Law he was blameless: which last phrase, touching the righteousness of the Law blameless, signifies only an external blamelesness of conversation, as Mr. Calvin acknowledges: For this was the Pharisees Notion of the Moral Law, that the obligation of it did reach no further than the outward man; and Trypho the Jew in Justin Martyr quarrels with the Gospel of our Saviour for this very reason, That it requires the government of our thoughts and passions, which, he says, is impossible for a man to do: Thus we must understand this blamelesness here; unless we will say, that St. Paul, while he was a Pharisee, did perfectly observe the Moral Law, which those, who talk so much of the impossibility of keeping Gods laws, will be loath to own: So that my own righteousness which is of the Law, is so far from signifying an inherent Righteousness, that it signified only an external one, which consisted only in some external Rites, or external Privileges, or an external Civility: This Righteousness he had reason to reject, because God will reject it: This was all the Righteousness he had, while he was a Pharisee, and this he accounts dung and dross for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord; that is, for the sake of the Gospel, which is the knowledge of Christ, which contains a more excellent and perfect Righteousness than the Law did: and that he might win Christ, that he might attain to Evangelical Righteousness, such as Christ was the Preacher and Example of: And that he might be found in him, not having his own righteousness which is of the Law; that at the last day he might appear to be a sound and sincere Christian, whose righteousness does not consist only in external observances or external conformity to God's Law; but, that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith; that is, that inward vital Principle of Holiness, that new Nature which the Gospel of Christ requires of us, and which this Christian Faith will work in us; which is a Righteousness of Gods own choosing, which he commands, and which he will reward.  
We are now come to that famous place, 
Answer.  Phil. 3.8, 9 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. Learned Beza observes, That those words (and be found in Christ) have a tacit relation to the Judgement of God: The Apostle here treats of Justification, and from that removes all things but Christ and his Righteousness: The Author indeed would have him only to reject his external Righteousness, external Observance, and Conformity to the Law of God, that which he had as a Pharisee, that which God will reject. But let us consider the place: First the Apostle sets down a Catalogue of his Privileges; He was circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews, as touching the Law a Pharisee, concerning zeal persecuting the Church, touching the righteousness which is in the Law blameless, ver. 5, 6. But then after all, he casts away all this Jewish and Pharisaical glory, What things were gain to me, those I have counted loss for Christ, ver. 7. he would not be justified by any of those things; but doth he go no further? Doth he only exclude his external Pharisaical Righteousness? No surely, his discourse goes on, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ, vers. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Particles of amplification, as if the Apostle had said, Nay, more than that, even now do I count all things loss: In the 7. Verse he casts off his Jewish and Pharisaical gains, but in the 8. he puts by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all things, his inherent Graces not being admitted to be the Matter of our Justification: In the 7. Vers. we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in tempore praeterito, I have counted, but in the 8. we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in praesenti, now I do count all things loss: Hence the excellent Beza saith, Notandum praesens tempus; sic enim crescit oratio, ut jam Apostolus, quod ad justificationem coram Deo attinet, omnia opera excludat, tum praecedentia, tum etiam consequentia fidem. 
Exam. ' de Justif. pag. 135.  And Learned Chemnicius saith, Paulum non tantùm uti praeterito tempore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, de operibus praecedentibus conversionem, sed praesenti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ut ostendai quòd operibus suis, etiam post renovationem fact is, non tribuat Justificationem coram Deo. Even our inherent Graces (how precious soever they be in Sanctification) must not assume the Royal seat of Christ and his Righteousness, they must not be our very Righteousness in Justification. Bellarmine indeed here cries out, Quanta, quaeso, blasphemia est! How great is this blasphemy, to call good works done out of the Faith and Grace of Christ no better than dung! But Paraeus answers him very well, That they are not so called absolutely in themselves, but comparatively to the Righteousness of Christ; nefas enim ducit in ullis operibus fiduciam Justificationis ponere coram Deo: In the Matter of Justification, the whole Church calls her Righteousness a filthy Rag; St. Paul will not there own his own inherent Graces, no more than holy Job would know his own Soul. But this is yet more clear, ver. 9 The Apostle would be found in Christ, not having his own Righteousness, which is of the Law; he excludes his own Righteousness, that is, his inherent Graces in the point of Justification; I say, his inherent Graces, for he had before shut out his external Pharisaical Righteousness, ver. 7. and (his after-speech being not a Battology or vain repetition, but progressive or expressive of more than went before) he doth in the 9 Verse put by his inherent Graces, under the name of, his own Righteousness; and (which further confirms this Sense) inherent Graces are in Scripture said to be our own: Hence we find, my faith, and thy faith, Jam. 2.18. and our Saviour saith, Except your righteousness shall exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of heaven, Matth. 5.20. See here, a Righteousness, and that exceeding a Pharisaical one, called theirs. The Apostle excludes the righteousness which is of the Law: In the 7. Verse he had shut out the Righteousness of the Law taken in the Pharisaical sense; but in the 9 Verse he goes on, and puts by the Righteousness of the Law taken in its own spiritual Nature, the Righteousness which the Law in its holy Commands prescribes; and surely the Law calls for internal Holiness, as well as external Conformity. In another place the Apostle tells us, That by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified, Gal. 2.16. No flesh, not the holiest Saint on earth (whose Righteousness is as much above the Pharisees as Life is above pictures and shadows) shall be justified by his own Righteousness or conformity to the Law. But if the Apostle would not have his own Righteousness, which is of the Law, in Justification, what would he have? He would have the righteousness which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: He doth not say, a Righteousness which is Faith or other Graces, but a righteousness which is through the faith of Christ, a righteousness which is of God by faith: Now inherent Graces are never in Scripture called the Righteousness of God; The righteousness of God is upon those that believe, Rom. 3.22. not in them, as inherent Graces are: The righteousness of God is in Christ, 2 Cor. 5.21. not in ourselves, as our Graces are: The righteousness of God is one and the same with the righteousness of Christ, 2 Pet. 1.1. not the same with our Graces: The Apostle therefore would have, the righteousness which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith; that is, the perfect Righteousness of Christ, which Faith receives, and God accepts on our behalf. By these things it appears, that the Apostle in this place doth not only exclude external Pharisaical Righteousness, but even inherent Graces in the matter of Justification.  
There is a double Antithesis in the words; 
Mr. Sherlock.  the righteousness of the Law is opposed to the righteousness which is by the faith of Christ, and my own righteousness to the righteousness of God: Now the surest way to understand the meaning of this, is to consider how these phrases are used in Scripture. The righteousness of the Law (as you have already heard) is an external Righteousness, which consists in washings, and purifications, and sacrifices, or an external conformity, to the Moral Law: The righteousness which is by the faith of Christ is an internal Righteousness, which consists in the renovation of our Minds and Spirits, in the government of our thoughts and passions, which is therefore called being born again, becoming new creatures, rising with Christ, putting off the old man, and putting on the new, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness: That Righteousness, which God requires of us under the Gospel, must be an inward Principle of Love and Obedience, which transforms us into the image of God, as if we were born again or made new creatures. The reason why Godsent Christ into the world, to die as a Sacrifice for our sins, and to confirm and seal the new Covenant with his Blood, was, that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit, Rom, 8.3, 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as St. chrysostom expounds it; that which the Law was designed to work in them, but was found too weak to effect it, by reason of the greater power of sin; that is, the inward holiness and purity of mind which was represented and signified by those external Ceremonies of Circumcision, Washing, Purifications and Sacrifices: This was the design of the Gospel, to work in us that inward Holiness and Purity, which is the perfection and accomplishment of the typical and figurative Righteousness of the Law. I know very well that this place is expounded of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; but is there any mention here of the Righteousness of Christ? That he fulfilled all Righteousness for us, that his Righteousness is imputed to us, and so we fulfil the Righteousness of the Law in him? The Apostle's design is to show the great Virtue of the Gospel in delivering from the power of sin, which the Law could not effect: The Law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus, (that divine and spiritual Law, which Christ hath given us, which governs our Minds, and is a Principle of Spiritual Life) makes us free from the Law of sin and death; (from the power and dominion of sin, which is called a Law, and the Law in our Members warring against the Law of our Minds: For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh (what the Law could not do, to deliver us from the power and dominion of sin) this God effected by sending Christ into the world to publish the Gospel to us, and confirm the Promises and Threaten contained in it with his Blood, that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit: How can Imputation come in here? What pretty sense would this make of the Apostle's Argument? The Law was too weak to make men throughly good, to conquer their sin, reform their hearts and lives, therefore God sent his Son into the world; What for? to give them better Laws, more excellent Promises, and more powerful assistances to do good? No, by no means; but to fulfil all Righteousness for them, that they may fulfil the Righteousness of the Law, not by doing any thing themselves, but by having all done for them, by having Christ's Righteousness imputed to them: There was no reason to abrogate the Law of Moses for this end, it might have continued in force still, and have been as available to Salvation as the Gospel is, with the supplemental Righteousness of Christ; but the weakness of the Law, the Apostle complains of, was not the want of an imputed Righteousness (which might have been had as well under the Law as under the Gospel, if God had pleased;) but a want of strength and power to subdue the sinful appetites of men: It was weak through the flesh; by the prevalency of lusts, which the Law could not conquer; therefore the Gospel must supply this defect, not by imputed Righteousness, but by an addition of power to enable men to do that which is good, to fulfil the Righteousness of the Law by a sincere and Spiritual Obedience.  
The Righteousness of the Law (as you have already heard) is an external Righteousness: 
Answer.  Thus the Author: We have heard so from the false Glosses of the Pharisees, we have had such a rumour from the Socinians, as if the Law were but a lame imperfect thing. Socinus (as I have him quoted by Calovius) was not afraid to say, That Praecepta Veteris Testamenti were levia, vana, parùm Deo digna; but surely this will not down with Christians: The Law is Sanctio sancta, the Image of the divine Sanctity, the Summary of all Duties. The Psalmist in the 19 Psalms, having set forth how the Glory of God breaks forth from the Sun and Heavens, elevates his discourse to the pure Law; which, as it enlightens the inner Man, is a brighter Luminary than the Sun, which shines to Sense; and, as it comprizes all Duties within itself, is a nobler Circle in Morality, than the Heavens, which environ all other Bodies, are in Nature: The Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord is pure, making wise the simple, saith the Psalmist in that place: So perfect it is, that nothing is to be added to it, or diminished from it, Deut. 4.3. so spiritual, that even the Saints under the Gospel are but carnal in respect of it, Rom. 7.14. It calls upon us to love the Lord with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our might, Deut. 6.5. to love him in such a divine degree, as to love nothing else suprà, aequè or contrà, and is this external Righteousness? Or what is inner purity, if this be not so? It tells us, Non concupisces, and so meets with the very first rise of corrupt Nature, with the very motions and titillations of the flesh; it would have an heart all of purity and holiness, without any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or relics of corruption in it, and what can be more divine? St. Paul therefore saith, that in his Pharisaism he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without the Law, because without a sense of its spiritual Nature, Rom. 7.9. Unless we own its divine Spiritualty, we are as it were without it. In a word, whatsoever it be that makes up the just posture of Man towards God or his Fellow-creatures, is there delineated in such accuracy and full perfection, as no man in this life, but Jehovah our righteousness only, ever arrived at: But to go on with the Author, The Righteousness, which is by the Faith of Christ, is internal: This God requires of us under the Gospel. Thus the Author; To which I answer, The Author, pag. 259. makes the Righteousness of Faith in those under the Old Testament, distinct from the Righteousness which is by the Faith of Christ; and here he makes the Righteousness which is by the Faith of Christ, to consist in internal holiness and renovation: But surely there were New Creatures under the Old Testament, as well as there are under the New; Job was a perfect, an upright man; and therefore a New Creature: David a man after Gods own heart, and therefore a New Creature: without this internal renovation there could not have been that circumcision of the heart, Deut. 30.6. nor the law in the heart, which is made the Character of a righteous man, Psal. 37.31. That Covenant of writing the Law in the heart, Jer. 31.33. was in substance one and the same in both Testaments: Those under the Old Testament, unless regenerate, could never have entered so holy a place as Heaven, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or general Assembly (which takes in all the Saints of the Old Testament) is the Church of the first born, Heb. 12.23. There are none else but New Creatures in it: However the Racovian Catechist appropriates the New Creation to the New Testament; yet I must assert, that it was under both Testaments; but under neither was it the justifying Righteousness: But the Author goes on, God sent his son into the world, that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, Rom. 8.3, 4. that we might have inward holiness and purity, that we might be delivered from the power of sin, and that by the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ: Thus the Author, to which I answer, God sent his Son indeed into the world, that we might be sanctified by his Spirit; but that was not all, he sent him, that we might be justified by his Blood and Righteousness; to which purpose it will be worth while to consider that place, Rom. 8. The Apostle in the first verse, sets forth believers, men in Christ, by two excellent things; first, by Justification, There is no condemnation to them; no, though there be relics of corruption in them, as is imported in the seventh Chapter, there is none; and then by Sanctification, which is in conjunction with the other; they walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit: And in the other verses he confirms both, but inverso ordine, first, he confirms their Sanctification, from the great Origen of it; the holy Spirit, The Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the Law of sin and death, vers. 2. The power of the holy Spirit hath subdued the power of sin; and then he confirms their Justification from the sufferings of Christ (with which his active obedience is to be taken in conjunction) What the Law could not do in that, it was weak through the flesh; God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh, vers. 3. Their sins were condemned in the flesh of Christ; there was an atonement made for them, which certainly must relate to Justification: from these sufferings of Christ (with which his active obedience must be taken in conjunction) the Apostle infers, That the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, vers. 4. The Law was not able to justify us, for want of a perfect obedience in us; but God translated the impletion of the Law upon Christ; Christ fulfilled all Righteousness for us: Christ bore the wrath of God for us, and (these things being imputed unto us) the Righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us: But then the Apostle returns again to Sanctification, and subjoins, Who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit; assuring us, that those who are justified by the imputed Righteousness of Christ, are also Sanctified and led by his holy Spirit: This I take to be the meaning of the place: But let us hear our Church treating upon this place in conjunction with other Scriptures: 
r. Hom. of Salvation.  St. Paul saith, Rom. 3. We are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption which is in Christ: And Rom. 10. Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth: And Rom. 8. That which was impossible by the Law; in as much, as it was weak by the flesh; God sending his own Son, in the similitude of sinful flesh, by sin, damned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, which walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit: In these places the Apostle toucheth three things, which must go together in our Justification; upon God's part his great mercy and grace; upon Christ's parts justice; that is, the satisfaction of God's justice, or the price of our redemption, by the offering of his body, and shedding of his Blood with fulfilling of the Law perfectly and throughly; and upon our part true and lively Faith in the merits of Jesus Christ, which yet is not ours, but by Gods working in us: So that in our Justification is not only God's Mercy and Grace, but also his Justice, which the Apostle calleth the Justice of God, and it consisteth in paying our ransom, and fulfilling of the Law: And so the Grace of God doth not shut out the Justice of God in our Justification, but only shutteth out the justice of man; that is to say, the justice of our works, as to be merits of deserving our justification. And therefore St. Paul declareth here nothing upon the behalf of man, concerning his justification, but only a true lively Faith, which nevertheless is the gift of God, and not man's only work without God; and yet that Faith doth not shut out Repentance, Hope, Love, Dread, and the fear of God to be joined with Faith in every man that is justified, but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying; so that although they be all present in him that is justified; yet they justify not all together. These are the excellent words of our Church, worthy (without flattery be it spoken) to be written in Letters of Gold, but much more in the hearts of all true Christians: We see here, that there is in justification nothing on the behalf of man but Faith only; no, internal Holiness, Repentance, Hope, Love, Fear of God, are in the justified, but shut out from the office of justifying: God's Grace, and Christ's Righteousness are the great causes of justification: But saith the Author, Is there here any mention of Christ's Righteousness, or the imputation thereof? I answer, Our Church surely thought so, and we have his passive Righteousness expressed, vers. 3. and where that is expressed, the active is implied: This is clear, when the Scripture saith, That we are made righteous by Christ's obedience, Rom. 5.19. It doth include his blood also, and when he saith, That we are justified by his blood, Rom. 5.9. It doth include his active obedience also, so that the Scripture (because it expresses justification by both, and because it must be consistent with itself) in expressing the one, includes the other: When therefore, Rom. 8.3. his sufferings are expressed, his active obedience is also included, both therefore are intended, and withal an imputation, without which they cannot be profitable to us: But saith the Author, The Law could not do it; that is, the Law could not deliver from the power of sin. I answer, The Law could not do it of itself, and without the Spirit of Christ; but if that divine Spirit take the Law into its hand, and write it in the heart, I suppose there will be a New Creature: But the Author saith, That the righteousness of the Law may be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit, vers. 4. How can imputation come in here? What pretty sense will this make of the Apostles argument? I answer, The sense is very clear, the Righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us, by Christ's Righteousness imputed to us; and withal, we to whom that is imputed, walk after the Spirit; the one is our Justification, the other our Sanctification: Both the Apostle proves to be in Believers, and both consist very well together, as appears from the first verse: There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit. The, No condemnation, appertains to Justification, and the walking after the Spirit to Sanctification, and both stand very well together: As to what the Author saith afterwards, That there was no reason to abrogate Moses ' s Law, it might have availed to Salvation; as well as the Gospel, with the supplemental righteousness of Christ, there might have been an imputed righteousness as well under the Law, as under the Gospel. I answer, That I conceive, that the Moral Law delivered by Moses, obliges us christian's, as I have before proved; and I suppose our Church is of that mind too; for I cannot imagine, that she should in her Catechism instruct Children in an abrogated Law: How there should be an imputed Righteousness without a Gospel, I know not; it pleased God to found the Gospel upon a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a satisfaction, and that cannot be, or be profitable to us without an imputation: The impotency of the Law was, as I noted before, that it could not justify us for want of perfect obedience: But God translated the impletion of the Law upon Christ; and his Righteousness being made ours by imputation, the Law is said to be fulfilled in us.  
To the same purpose the Apostle discourses, 
Mr. Sherlock.  Rom. 7.4, 5, 6. Wherefore, my Brethren, you also are become dead to the Law, by the body of Christ, (who put an end to that imperfect dispensation by his death) that you should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God; for when we were in the flesh, (under that carnal and fleshly dispensation of the Law of Moses) the motions of sins, which were by the Law (which grew more boisterous and unruly by the prohibitions of the Law, vers. 8.) did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death; That is, did betray us to those wicked actions, which end in death: But now we are delivered from the Law; that being dead, in which we were held, that we should serve in newness of the Spirit, and not in the oldness of the Letter: So that the reason why the Law of Moses was abrogated, was, because it could not make men good, it nursed them up in a ritual external Religion, taught them to serve God in the Letter by Circumcision, Sacrifices, or external conformity to the Letter of the Law; but the Gospel of Christ alone teacheth us, to worship God in the Spirit; to offer a reasonable Sacrifice to him; to fulfil the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all the internal Righteousness, of which those legal Ceremonies were the Signs and Sacraments: This is the plain meaning of the Apostles, which can never be reconciled with imputed Righteousness, which would make his argument foolish and absurd: Therefore he tells us in other places, what little reason we have to be so zealous for the Law of Moses, since we have the perfection of it in the Gospel: what need is there of the circumcision of the flesh, which the Law required? When in the Gospel we have the circumcision made without hands, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of that fleshly circumcision: What need of legal washing and purgations? When they are all fulfilled in the washing of regeneration, in the Gospel baptism: Thus we are complete in Christ, who bath perfectly instructed us in the will of God, and instiluted such a Religion as is the perfection of all Ceremonies, Col. 2. We must now offer another Sacrifice, than the Law of Moses commanded, not the Sacrifices of dead beasts, but of a living and active soul, Rom. 12.  
The Apostle, 
Answer.  Rom. 7. vers. 4. Shows that we are dead to the Law by the body of Christ; that is, by Christ crucified, we have remission, and the holy Spirit, and so are dead to the cursing and irritating power of the Law, that we might bring forth fruits of holy works to God: Before, when we were in the flesh, in our corrupt unregenerate estate, the motions of sin, which were accidentally irritated by the Law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death; that is, to bring forth sinful actions, which tend to death, vers. 5. But now saith the Apostle, we are delivered from the Law, from the curse and irritating power of it, That being dead wherein we were held, that we should serve in newness of Spirit, and not in the oldness of the Letter, vers. 6. That is, in those new Divine Prinples, which our spirits have from Gods, not in the old nature, which by the outward Letter of the Law is irritated unto sin: This I think is the scope of the Apostle, he discourses of the regenerate and unregenerate; the one dead to the Law, the other irritated by it; he discourses not of the difference between those under the Old Testament, and those under the New; for the regenerate under the Old Testament, were dead to the cursing and irritating Law; they had internal Righteousness, which the Author calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; they had the circumcision of the heart, Deut. 30.6. which in the Author is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the fleshly circumcision, they had the law in the heart, Psal. 37.31. And by consequence they had true regeneration, in which (saith our Author) all the legal washings and purifications are fulfilled; they were not irritated by the Law, but delighted in it, as in their joy, choice, treasure, hony-comb of sweetness, and what not, as appears in the Psalms: They served in the newness of the Spirit, in new Divine Principles, which they had from the holy Spirit, in the easiness of the New Creature; to which the Will of God is natural: Even in their Rituals and Sacrifices, they knew all must be done in newness of Spirit, in the exercises of internal Graces. The very Heathens themselves, thought that they were to Sacrifice, Mente candidâ, & expurgatâ conscientiâ: How much more did the servants of God under the Old Testament do so; they knew, that there were better Sacrifices than the outward ones: Sacrifices of righteousness, Psal. 4.5. And sacrifices of a broken spirit, Psal. 50.17. They understood, that the heart, the truth in the inward parts, was more than all the rest: On the other hand, the unregenerate under the New Testament, they are in the flesh; the motions of sin carry all before them; they have nothing of internal Righteousness, they are uncircumcised in heart, as well as in flesh; they are baptised, yet want the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of regeneration; they are irritated by the Law, their inward malignity swells and rises against the holy commands which stand in Scripture as so many dams and bars to their impetuous lusts: Whatever they do in Evangelical Ordinances, they do all in the oldness of the Letter, the Letter, the outward Rule presses them to Duty; but there is no inward acting of Faith, no suavity of Love or holy Affections; all is done in a dead, dull, flat manner, nothing is minded but the opus operatum, the mere external work. By this we see clearly where the difference lies: It's true, the Ceremonials of Moses were abrogated by Christ, but, I suppose, the Moral Law was not, it's own  Rectitude and Righteousness immortalizes it so, that it stands faster than the Pillars of Heaven and Earth, and must be so as long as God is God, and Man Man: The Reason of Man must be bound in duty to point to God as the Primum Verum, and the Will of Man to resign to him as the Primum Amabile: these are Foundations never to be shaken: The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the Law amounts to so much more than the inherent Righteousness of all Saints put together, that it is no were to be found, but in the perfect spotless obedience of Christ; neither can that be made ours but by imputation.  
Hence Christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Mr. Sher-Jock.  the end of the Law, the perfection and accomplishment of it, for Righteousness to them that believe, Rom. 10.4. That is, the Gospel of Christ requires that Rightcousness of us, which the Law did only typify and represent, that holiness and purity of mind; which is the perfection of all legal Righteousness: For that Christ should be the end of the Law, by imputation of his Righteousness to us, hath no foundation in the Text. The Apostle explains what he means by this in the following verses, where he gives us a description of the righteousness of the Law, and the righteousness of Faith: The righteousness of the Law is an external conformity, to the letter of the Law; the man that doth them shall live in them; that is, shall enjoy all the Temporal Blessings of Canaan, which were promised to the observance of the Law: But the Righteousness of Faith, is a firm and steadfast belief of the Divine Authority of Christ, that he is the Lord, and more particularly a belief of his Resurrection from the dead, as the last and great confirmation which God gave to the divinity of Christ's Person and Doctrine: This is that Faith that overcometh the world, and purifies the heart, and transforms us into the likeness of God; which is the perfection of all the ritual righteousness of the Law. Upon this account Christ is said to be made to us Righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.20. He of God is made to us Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification, and Redemption: He is our Wisdom, as he is our great Prophet who instructs us in true Wisdom; our Righteousness, as we are justified by Faith in him, by a sincere belief of his Gospel, which is the only Righteousness acceptable to God; our Sanctification, because the law of the spirit of life in him makes us free from the law of sin and death; our Redemption, as by these means he bathe delivered us from the bondage of the Jewish Law, from the idolatrous Customs of the Heathens, and the tyranny of wicked Spirits, and the wrath of God, which is the merit of sin.  
Christ is the end of the Law, 
Answer.  even of the Moral Law, and what did that call for? Not external Conformisty only, but all Holiness and Righteousness, and that in pure sinless perfection; this our Faith or inherent Graces, because imperfect, can never amount to: The Law therefore hath its end only in the perfect spotless Righteousness of Christ, and, that being made over to Believers by Imputation, Christ is truly said to be the end of the Law for righteousness to the believer. The man that doth them shall live in them. Rom. 10.5. that is, saith the Author, shall enjoy the temporal blessings of Canaan. Indeed the Racovian Catechist will go no further; Nusquam in Lege Mosis reperies vitam aeternam promissam, saith he: But we find the Saints in the Old Testament fixing their Faith upon eternal Life; My Redeemer liveth, and I shall see him, saith Job, Job. 19.25, and 27. Abraham desireth a better country, that is, an heavenly, Heb. 11.16. The just shall live by his faith, Hab. 2.4. which is interpreted of eternal Life, Rom. 1.17. Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved, Joel 2.32. that is, with eternal Life, as it is applied, Rom. 10.13. Paul said no other things, than the Prophets and Moses did, Act. 26.22. and yet surely he spoke of eternal Life: Moses and the Prophets are frequent in promising the Messiah, and in him all the Promises are contained. Do this and live, is meant of eternal Life; a Curse, that is eternal Death, is threatened to the violaters of the Law, Gal. 3.10. therefore Life and that eternal is promised to the keepers of it. When the Lawyer asked, What shall I do to inherit eternal life? our Saviour answered him, that he must keep the Law, Luk. 10.25, 28. If the Law did not promise eternal Life, than it did not threaten eternal Death, and by consequence Christ, who redeemed us from the Curse of the Law, redeemed us only from a temporal one: But to pass on. Christ of God is made unto us righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. that is, saith the Author, we are justified by Faith in him, by a sincere belief of his Gospel: That we are justified by Faith in Christ, I acknowledge, but not in the Author's sense; he makes Faith properly and as an Act to justify; he makes the nature of Faith to consist only in a firm assent: But I have before proved, that Faith justifies as it receives Christ and his Righteousness; and that justifying Faith,, over and above assent, includes in it a fiducial Recumbency. Christ is made to us righteousness one of these two ways, either by the Graces of his holy Spirit imparted to us, or else by his perfect Obedience imputed to us; He is not made Righteousness to us by the Graces of his Spirit imparted to us, for with respect to these he is made Sanctification to us; and Sanctification and Justification must not be confounded: As we have holy Graces from him to sanctify us, so we have Righteousness from him to justify us: He is therefore our Righteousness, because his perfect Righteousness by Imputation becomes ours. Bellarmine. speaking of this place, at s●●●interprets it of the inherent Righteousness in us, which comes from Christ; but afterwards, as convicted of the truth, 
De Jusi●●. 11.2. cip. 10.  he saith, Nobis imputari Christi justitiam & merita, cùm nobis donentur & applicentur, ac si nosipsi Deo satisfecissemus; That the Righteousness and Morits of Christ are imputed to us, when they are given and applied to us, as if we ourselves had satisfied God. Further, our Author upon this Text saith, That Christ is our wisdom, as he is cur Prophet; our Righteousness, as we are justified by believing the Gospel; our Sanctification, as we have the Law of the Spirit of life; and our Redemption, as by these means he hath delivered us. I see not what room is left here for the redeeming Blood of Christ; nevertheless I suppose the Author meant to include the same.  
This is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the foundation of all other mistakes, that by the Righteousness of the Law, and the Righteousness of Works, most men understand an internal Holiness, and then conclude, That if this Righteousness will not please God, nothing but an imputed Righteousness can; though I should rather have concluded that nothing can: But the truth is, the Righteousness of the Law and of Works in the New Testament signifies only an external Righteousness, which cannot please God; and that internal Holiness, which they call the Righteousness of the Law, is that very Righteousness of Faith, which the Gospel commands, and which God approves and rewards, and this imputed Righteousness is not where to be found, that I know of, but in their own Fancies.  
The Righteousness of the Law and of Works in the New Testament signifies only an external Righteousness: 
Answer.  Thus the Author: And yet before the Author quoting that Text, Rom. 8. That the righteousness of the Law might he fulfilled in us, interprets it of internal holiness in us: I confess it is not meant of our internal Holiness; but neither doth it signify external Righteousness only: The righteousness of the Law, Phil. 3.6. doth by the circumstances of the Text intent only an external Righteousness; but the righteousness of the Law, ver. 9 reaches to an internal one; for, as I before noted, the Apostles speech there is progressive, and expresses more than it did before. The Works of converted Abraham are excluded from Justification, Rom. 4.2. and yet surely they were more than external shadows; By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified, Gal. 2.16. not only the Pharisee with his external Righteousness, but no flesh, not the holiest man on earth shall be justified by the works of the Law. The Law in the New Testament plainly calls for internal Holiness; it is a holy, just, good, spiritual Law, forbidding Concupiscence, the very first rise and imperfect births of Corruption, Rom. 7. commanding the love of God with all the Heart, Soul and Mind, Matth. 22.37. And therefore it would be very strange, if the Righteousness or the Works of this Law (which is represented in the New Testament as a divine spiritual Law) should in the same New Testament signify no more than external Righteousness, no more than the mere shell or outward superficies of true Sanctity, and that too in Epistles written not to Jews or Pharisees, who hung about the Letter of the Law, but to the Romans, Galatians, Philippians, who, I suppose, understood it better: They could not but see some hints of inward Purity in the Books of Pagan Philosophers; and it is inimaginable, that they should look for less in the Law of God: Though the Pharisees, who had only an external Righteousness themselves, construed that Law, according to their Model; yet why the believing Romans, Galatians, Philippians, who had internal Graces in themselves, should do so, I see no reason: Neither is it to me credible, that the Romans, who in the Epistle to them had the pure Spirituality of the Law set before them, should ever construe the Righteousness or Works of the Law mentioned in that Epistle to be only external. As for internal Holiness, God indeed approves of it, but not as that which is the matter of our Righteousness in Justification.  
Let us now consider in what sense the Apostle opposes his own Righteousness to the Righteousness of God; 
Mr. Sherlock  and there is no great difficulty in this; for the Apostle tells us, that by his own Righteousness he means the Righteousness of the Law, and by the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of Faith; and what that is you have already heard: Thus in Rom. 10.3. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God: Where, their own Righteousness, which the Jews so obstinately adhered to, was the Righteousness of the Law; and the Righteousness of God, which they were ignorant of, and would not submit to, was the Righteousness of Faith: For this was the great Controversy between the Jews and Apostles (which is the Subject of this Epistle) Whether men were to be justified by the Law of Moses, or by the Gospel of Christ, by a Legal or Evangelical Righteousness, as appears from Rom. 9.3. Israel, who followed after righteousness, hath not attained to the Law of righteousness; wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the Law; that is, The Israelites, who pursued so earnestly after Righteousness, are excluded from Righteousness or forgiveness of sins, and are under a Curse, because they did not look for Righteousness and Justification in the way, which God prescribed, which is by Faith in Christ or by Christianity, but by the observance of the Law of Moses. Now the most obvious reason, why the Righteousness of the Law is called their own Righteousness, and the Righteousness of Faith God's Righteousness, is, because this Legal Righteousness was a way of Justification, not of God's appointment, but their own choosing; God never designed that any man should be justified to eternal Life by observing the Law of Moses, but yet they confidently expected Justification by that Law, and for that reason rejected the Gospel of Christ: But the Righteousness of Faith is a Righteousness of God's choosing, this he approves and accepts of for the Justification of a sinner: By this the Elders obtained a good report; by this Enoch and Noah and Abraham were justified before God: And therefore this may well be called the Righteousness of God, because this he appointed, and this he will own and reward.  
Our own Righteousness is, I confess, 
Answer.  the Righteousness of the Law, and the Righteousness of God is a Righteousness by Faith, or through Faith, because Faith receives it, but it is not Faith itself; The righteousness of God is reveiled from faith to faith, Rom. 1.17. Were Faith itself the Righteousness of God, the words must amount to no more than this; Faith is reveiled from Faith to Faith. We are made the righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. 5.21. and who ever construed those words thus, We are made Faith in him? Faith is inherent in ourselves, but the Righteousness of God is in Christ, who is Jehovah our Righteousness. The Jews went about to establish their own righteousness, Rom. 10.3. but it doth not appear, that that was a mere external one; we find, that they had a zeal of God, Ver. 2. which surely was internal. Zeal is a mixture of Love and Anger: They had, at least in pretence, a love to God and his Glory; and an anger at the Christian Faith, as supposing it an enemy to God and his Law. All the Jews were not Pharisees, nor did they stick merely in the Letter or husk of external Righteousness; the Scribe could say, That the love of God with all the heart, was more than all burnt-offerings and sacrifices, Mark 12.33. and some Jewish Rabbins say, That the heart of man answers to the holy place; there a place must be made for the Shecinah, the divine Majesty to dwell in, and it must be the holy of Holies. No question the Jews, at least some of them, did know, that there must be some inward Sanctity; but still they stuck in their own Righteousness, they would not submit to be justified by the Righteousness of another. Our inherent Graces, as before I noted, are called our own in Scripture, but never the Righteousness of God; that is not our own but another's, that is, Christ's, and made ours only by Imputation. Israel followed after righteousness, but attained not to the Law of righteousness; wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but, as it were, by the works of the Law, Rom. 9.31. they attained not to the Law of Righteousness: Had the Righteousness of the Law been only an external one, they might have reached it; but the Law called for all Righteousness and that in pure sinless perfection, and that they attained not, because they sought it not in Christ, in whom perfect Righteousness is, but in themselves, where it could not be found: But to go on, God never designed that any man should be justified to eternal life, by observing the Law of Moses: So the Author: It's true, God never intended to justify us fallen Creatures by our own Righteousness, or by the Righteousness of the Law performed by us: But if (as the Author told us before) Abel and Enoch were justified by a belief of the Principles of natural Religion: If Noah was justified by believing the Deluge; if Abraham was justified by believing the particular Revelations made to him, why might not the Jews be justified by believing the Law of Moses? Abraham and all the good men in those days were justified by such a firm belief of the Being and Providence of God, and the particular Revelations made to them, as made them careful in all things to please God: Thus the Author, pag. 255. Why might not Jews before the Incarnation of Christ be justified by such a firm belief of the Law of Moses, as made them careful to please God? The Law of Moses was a Revelation too, in its Morals pointing out a perfect Sanctity and Righteousness; and in its Typicals aiming at Christ, the body and substance of them all.  
There is one Metaphorical expression still behind, 
Mr. Sherlock.  The unsearchable riches of Christ, Eph. 3.8. Where by the unsearchable riches of Christ is meant the Gospel: The Apostle calls it unsearchable riches, because the grace of the Gospel is not a narrow stinted thing, not confined to a particular Nation, as the Law was, but is offered to all mankind: The Gospel contains those glorious discoveries of God's goodness to all mankind, as may well be called the riches of his Grace: And is it not a great violation of the Majesty of Scripture, to sport and toy with words and metaphors, as some men with this riches of Grace? That he is rich, because he hath a rich dowry, 
Brooks riches of Christ.  having all the world given him, that he keeps open house, and maintains all the Creation, that he doth enrich all the Saints, and all of the Saints, their Understandings with glorious light, their Consciences with quickness, etc. that he after all this vast expense is never the poorer, that he is rich in Houses, Lands (though he had not a place whereon to lay his head) Gold, Silver, Temporals, Spirituals, that he is the great Lord and owner of all: These are fine things to persuade young women to accept of Christ for their Husband.  
By the unsearchable riches of Christ, 
Answer.  I suppose, are meant the infinite merits of Christ; the Gospel is the Charter of them, but no more his riches, than the Deeds and Evidences are the Lands and Manors, which they convey: The merits of Christ are an infinite inexhaustible Treasure, and that because the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him: But, I hope, no man will say, that the fullness of the Godhead dwells in the Gospel: I see nothing of sport or toying in the words of Mr. Brook, but very sober and excellent truth: Though our Saviour had not Houses or Lands here, yet he promises an hundred-fold to those which forsake them for his name's sake: That of the young women, I pass by as a toy, which possibly may gratify some fancies, more than they do mine.   

SECT. III.  
THe union of persons between Christ and Believers, 
Mr. Sherlock.  which gives them a propriety in all the personal graces of Christ is commonly explained by a conjugal relation, and legal union, that mutual relation which is betwixt Husband and Wife; and that union, which is betwixt the surety and debtor: Now these men say, That the Wife hath an interest in her Husband's Estate, and is secured from all arrests of the Law; And therefore, Christ being our Husband, all his personal Excellencies, Righteousness, etc. are ours, and the Law cannot take hold of us, but our Husband must be responsable for our faults: A very hard Law truly; and I think a Husband is in a very ill case, when he has a bad Wife. Now suppose this were the case in some earthly Marriages, it were worth while to consider, whether this be essential to Marriage: Or whether it depends upon private contracts or public Laws, which are arbitrary and mutable; for if this be essential to Marriage, how can we be secure, that this is the Law of our Spiritual Marriage, unless our Spiritual Husband had told us so; especially considering that this Spiritual Marriage betwixt Christ and his Church, is of a different nature from earthly Marriages; and if they differ in any thing, we cannot be sure, but that they differ in this, unless we have some better proof of it, than this Analogy between earthly and Spiritual Marriages: Nay, and better proof too, than Dr. Owen giver us of it, Cant. 1. Behold! thou art fair, thou hast Doves eyes: Cant. 3.14. O my Dove! thou art in the clefts of the rock: Or Cant. 4.8. Come with me from Lebanon; look from the top of Amana, from the top of Shenir and Hermon; from the lion's dens, and the mountains of the leopards: Or Isai. 4.2. The branch of the Lord is beautiful and glorious: and the fruit of the earth is excellent and comely to them that are escaped of Israel: Which are all the proofs he can sinned for Christ's giving himself to the soul with all his excellencies: Now how any such consequence as this can be drawn from Doves eyes, or the clefts of the rock, or from Lebanon, Amana, Shenir, Hermon, or from the lion's dens, or mountains of leopards, is past my understanding to make out: But let the Laws of Kingdoms and Nations be as they will, there can be no Law made to alter the nature of things; there never was any Law, that the personal virtues, and qualities, and perfections of the Husband should be settled on his Wife for a jointure; though the Husband be never so fair, wise, virtuous, his Wife may be ugly, a fool, or an harlot; for personal excellencies pass not out of the person, nor can be made ever to any other, as Money and Lands are: By our Marriage to Christ; his personal excellencies cannot be ours, though his person were. In Marriages there are private contracts; and the truth is, Christ hath not made such an absolute settlement of himself upon us, as these men dream he hath: for the Gospel contains the Articles of this Marriage; and there we must learn to what purposes, and upon what conditions Christ gives himself to us, and must challenge no more from Christ by virtue of our Marriage to him, than what the Gospel, the Marriage Covenant promises; and we find nothing there of his personal Righteousness to be made ours: And for what they tell us, That a woman under covert is not liable to an arrest at Law; but all must fall upon her Husband: It is true as to matters of debt, but does not extend to crimes; if a woman kill or rob, her being under covert secures her not from the Gallows: How secure soever any man may fancy himself of his Marriage to Christ: I would n●t advise him to venture too much upon it; for if he be guilty of any gross wilful sin, there is some danger, that the Law or Gospel may condemn him, unless he timely repent, and reform: When the Scriptures calls Christ our Husband, and the Church his Spouse; it means no more but that Christ is our Head and Governor, who rules his Church with as great kindness, tenderness, and compassion, as an Husband exerciseth towards his Wife; and that we are to pay the same Love, Duty, and Obedience to Christ, that Wives own to their Husbands: And here we must have done with the Metaphor, unless we will turn Religion into a Romance.  
Christ being our Husband, his Righteousness is ours; 
Answer.  the Law cannot take hold of us, our Husband must be responsable for our faults: But this is a very hard Law (saith the Author) and the Husband in a very ill case: In truth our Husband, though the eternal Son of God, was made under the Law, wounded, bruised, cast into a bloody sweat, made a curse; and (as the Septuagint hath it, Isai. 55.3.) he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a man set in the stroke of God's wrath: But all this he was, not by chance or fortune, but out of choice and unparallelled Love to his Spouse: The essentials of Marriage lie in a narrow room, a consent per verba de praesenti does it; but the just necessary consequents of it, are, as the Civilians tells us, Consortium omnis vitae, divini & humani juris communicatio; the Wife participates of his sacred and civil good things; neither can it be otherwise, where there is, as there is in Marriage, such an intimate union of minds and bodies; there must needs be a communio bonorum, nature and reason tells us; that the Wife in so near an union must have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, alimentum & indumentum, food and raiment, out of the Husband's estate; Nay, and all things in a decorum thereunto; and can we think that Christ should do less for his Spouse, when her necessities exceed all those in nature? Will he, who infinitely transcends all humane Relations, leave his Spouse to the rags of her own Righteousness, or suffer her to perish in an eternal prison for debt; and that, when he hath fulfilled the Righteousness, and bore the curse of the Law on purpose to clothe her, and satisfy for her? The whole Book of Canticles is a divine Ditty; which, under the parable of Marriage, streams all along, as a full torrent of Spiritual Love interchangeably passing between Christ and his Church: Well might the Doctor bring his proof from thence: Christ calls his Spouse all fair, and without spot, Cant. 4.7. She was not so naturally, but by Marriage; neither is she so in this life by inherent Graces; but by the Righteousness of Christ put upon her by a gracious imputation: Christ calls her from Lebanon, from the top of Amana, Shenir, and Hermon, from the lion's dens, from the mountains of the Leopards, vers. 8. That is, from the brutish lusts and idolatries of the World; and he calls her thus: Come with me, with me, my Spouse, as if he had said, that he would provide for her as a Spouse; and therefore she should come away with him: But, saith the Author, Personal virtues in the Husband were never settled on the Wife for a Jointure, by our Marriage to Christ; his personal excellencies cannot be made over to us. To which, I answer, the Righteousness of Christ cannot be made ours, so as to inhere in us: But it may be made ours by imputation; or if not, neither can his blood be imputed to us; and by consequence there can be no such thing as satisfaction or redemption through his Blood: But for the truth of imputed Righteousness, these men desire to appeal no further than the Articles or Marriage Covenant contained in the Gospel, beyond this they desire to claim nothing from Christ their Husband and Saviour? But, saith the Author, A woman under covert is not liable to debts, but she is to crimes. I answer, Our debts are crimes, and that above Felonies; they are High-treasons against the God of Heaven; and if these fall not on our Husband Christ, they must fall upon us; and than who, where is the man that can stand before the Divine Tribunal? What room can there be for the least drop of mercy or forgiveness? Remarkable is the form, that in Anselms time was used in the Visitation of the sick, the weak man is there directed thus: Si Dominus Deus te voluerit judicare, dic Domine, mortem Domini nostri Jesu Christi objicio inter me & tuum judicium, alitèr tecum non condendo; & si tibi dixerit, quia peccator es, dic Domine, mortem Domini nostri Jesu Christi pono inter me & mea peccata: He was not to contend with God; but to put the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between himself and God's Tribunal, and to put it between himself and his sins; unless our Husband had undertaken to discharge our debts, we could never have had any possibility of Salvation.  
Christ and Believers are legally united, 
Mr. Sherlock.  Dr. Jacomb tells us, That Christ is the Saints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Surety, he struck hands with God (as the words imports) put himself into their stead, took their debt upon himself, and bound himself upon this account to make satisfaction to God. Now in the Law the debtor and surety are but one person; the Law looks on them as one, and makes no difference between them; and therefore both are equally liable to the debt; and if the one pay, it is as much in the eye of the Law, as if the other had paid it: Thus it is with Christ and us; he is our Surety, he took our debt upon himself, engaged to pay what we owed; upon this Christ and we are but one person before God; and accordingly he deals with us; for he makes over our sins to Christ, and Christ's Righteousness and Satisfaction to us, he now, in a legal notion, looks upon both but as one person: Now I have two things to say to this: First, I wonder why this should be called the union of Saints to Christ? Or why Christ should be called only the Saint's Surety? The Apostle tells us, that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heb. 7.22. The Surety of a Testament or Covenant: Now there is a vast difference between Christ's being the Saints surety, and the surety of the Covenant; for the Covenant respects both Saints and Sinners; therefore is antecedent to our union to Christ as Saints; and to be surety of the Covenant, signifies no more but to confirm this Covenant, and to undertake for the performance of it, that all the promises of it shall be made good upon such terms as are annexed to them: But to be a Surety for Saints (as the Doctor explains it) is to strike hands with God, to put himself in their stead to do and suffer for them. Now this notion is different from the notion of a Surety of a Covenant, and so it wants some better proof. But secondly, suppose Christ had been called the Saint's surety: I doubt they are as much out in the Law of suretyship, as they were before in the Laws of Marriage: For, first, the prime end of suretyship among men, is not that the Surety, shall without more ado pay the debt: but to give security to the Creditor, that the debt shall be paid; that is, the Surety doth not make himself immediate Debtor; but the Debtor is Debtor still, and bound to pay the Debt; and the Surety is liable only in case of his default: It is a strange definition of suretyship, That it is an absolute taking the debt upon ourselves, and an actual discharging the Debtor. No man in his wits ever became surety for another, when he knew before hand; that, if he did, he must pay the debt: but men become sureties upon reasonable assurance, that they shall suffer no injury by it: Therefore when Christ died for us, he did not die as our Surety, but as our Sacrifice substituted in our room, which is the Scripture notion of it, and differs as much from the notion of a surety; as paying the debt doth from being bound with another, that it shall be paid: Suppose, secondly, That Christ died for us as our Surety; yet did Christ fulfil all Righteousness for us as our surety too? Doth this also exactly answer the case of suretyship among men, so as that there needs no illustration of it? The Doctor was so wise, that he would not assert this in the premises, but very craftily thrusts it into the conclusion; That therefore God makes over our sins to Christ, and Christ's Righteousness and satisfaction to us: But was there ever such a surety heard of among men, that one man should discharge all offices of piety, virtue, justice, temperance instead of another? If such a thing had ever been, such a man ought not to have been called a surety, but a proxy: But humane Laws, as many defects as there are in them, never admitted of such proxies; for these are personal duties, which none can perform for us; you may as well say, that a man may live and be a man by proxy, as discharge those duties, which are necessarily entailed on his person by a proxy. Proxies are allowable only in such cases, where the material enquiry is, whether the thing be done, not who doth it; but where the consideration of the person that doth it, is essential to the action; there is no place for a surety or proxy: because it doth not satisfy the Law, that the thing is done, unless it be done by such a person. Thus it is in all the duties of Piety and Religion; every individual person is bound to do them: Though there were never so many righteous men in the World, there righteousness can avail none but themselves; Nay, the righteousness of God, which is more than all the righteousness of men cannot make an unrighteous man righteous; no external Relation can make the righteousness of another ours; because it is personal righteousness, that is required of us, and the righteousness of another can never be our personal righteousness, unless we become one person with him: There is no other way to make the personal righteousness, (which is the Righteousness required of us) but by a personal union to Christ, by being christed with Christ, as some speak, how boldly soever, yet very agreeable to these principles.  
Christ is the Surety of the Covenant, Heb. 7.22. 
Answer.  And he is our Surety also, he undertook the satisfaction of our debts; and therefore must be such, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God, saith he, Heb. 10.7. Burnt-offerings and Sacrifices could not pay our debts: The blood of Bulls and Goats could not take away sin, as the Apostle there tells us: Christ therefore undertook the doing of it, he was substituted in our stead or room, he gave his life, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 20.28. A price in the room or stead of many; he gave himself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Tim. 2.6. A counterprice, or vicarious price for all; he was our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, his Soul was in our Soul's stead, which could never have been, unless as our Surety he had undertaken to satisfy for us: The sins of us all met upon that holy immaculate one, Isai. 53.6. He was made sin for us, 2 Cor. 5.21. Sin by imputation, who had not the least spot by inhesion; and this could by no means have been, unless he had undertaken satisfaction as our Surety: St. Paul could never have been charged with the debt of Onesimus, unless as his Surety; neither could Christ have been charged with our sins, unless he had been ours: he was nor only charged with our sins, but made actual satisfaction for them; he paid that he never took, he was wounded for our transgressions, Isai. 53.5. He gave himself for our sins, Gal. 1.4. He made such satisfaction, that he blotted the bond or hand-writing that was against us, Col. 2.14. And these things he would never have done, unless he had taken them upon himself as our Surety; he saith of himself, that he came to give his life a ransom for many, Matth. 20.28. He came for that end, as being bound by his suretyship so to do: He was therefore our Surety, as well as the Surety of the Covenant: Nay, it being plainly the divine pleasure, that there should be no remission without shedding of blood, that all pardoning mercy should issue out to us through a satisfaction; unless he had been our Surety, unless he had undertaken to satisfy for us, he could not have been Surety of the Covenant; he could not have secured the least Grace or Mercy to us, more than to Devils; for whom he would not be surety, or make any satisfaction: Now being our Surety, he is one with us Conjunctione legali, and so he is with all those for whom he is Surety, so far forth as he is Surety for them. But possibly Dr. Jacomb may speak of the Saints, because the Payment or Satisfaction of Christ hath a special aspect upon the Elect or chosen people of God, and is particularly applied to Believers and Saints; whilst in the mean time to others, who receive not the Atonement, it is totally ineffectual, and in the event, as it were, none at all: But, saith the Author, I doubt these men are as much out in the Law of Suretyship, as before in the Laws of Marriage: To which I only say, I hope they are out in neither. But before I come to the Author's Objections, I shall crave lief to offer one thing to the Readers consideration, viz. That the Titles given to Christ in Scripture, are all to be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in a way of transcendent Excellency and Eminency, not according to the narrow Scantling of humane Laws or Reason: Christ is a Sacrifice, but when did you ever hear of a Sacrifice that offered up itself, or of a Sacrifice and Priest both in one? Or when was there a Sacrifice that was offered up through the eternal Spirit, or that had such an Altar as the Deity? Christ is a Redeemer, but when was there a Redeemer who paid down himself as a Price, and, which is more, paid down himself to himself? For so Christ as God-man paid down his humane Nature to himself as God. Christ is a Mediator, and where is there a Mediator, who hath two Natures in one Person, or who gave himself a Ransom for all? And to name but one instance more, Christ is a Surety for us; but where was there a Surety ever procured by the Creditor only? Or a Surety, who took another Nature to be such in? Christ is a Surety of the Covenant, where there is something on God's part, and something on Man's; and who ever heard, that in Articles of agreement, or reciprocal Covenants between Man and Man, any one became Surety for a performance of both parts or sides of the Covenants? These things plainly show, that Christ is all these in a way of Eminency or Transcendency: So that, unless we will be so bold as to spoil him of the glory and excellency of his Titles, we must by no means crowd them into the Span of humane Laws or Reason. This, if considered, will prepare a way to answer the Author's Objections, which are now to be heard: The Surety doth not make himself immediate Debtor, he doth not absolutely take the debt upon himself; he is liable only in case of the Debtors default: No man in his wits would be Surety for another, when he knew beforehand, that, if he did, he must pay the debt: Men become Sureties upon assurance not to suffer injury by it: Thus the Author: To which I answer, Sureties are usually bound to pay in case of the Debtors default, but it is not at all material or essential to Suretyship, whether the Debtor be solvent or not; it is not the Debtors sufficiency, but the Sureties own Act, which makes him a Surety; neither can a Surety, if prosecuted, plead this in Law, that the Debtor was a Non solvent at the time when he became Surety: But however it be with Sureties among men, Jesus Christ was a Surety after another rate than they are: Sureties among men undertake to pay the debt upon a mere contingency, that is, if the Debtor make default; but Christ undertook to satisfy for us, not upon contingency, but certainty: he was delivered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by a determinate Counsel; it was down in the eternal Rolls, that he must make satisfaction for us, there was not the least Salvo, or Condition, or Contingency in it. No man in his wits will be a Surety for a known Non-solvent: But Christ was by his love to us so excordiated and ravished out of himself, that he would be Surety for us, though known utter Bankrupts, though under the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, under a perfect impossibility to fulfil the Law or expiate the least breach of it: Nay, he would be a Surety for us, for this very reason, because he knew, that we were in a lost irrecoverable condition in ourselves. The Surety doth not absolutely undertake the debt: But Christ our Surety did absolutely undertake to make Satisfaction, he was a Surety and a Redeemer both in one: As a Surety he paid down his Blood for satisfaction, and as a Redeemer he paid the same Blood for a price of Redemption. A Redeemer, we know, doth not depend on the Captive for paying the Ransom, but absolutely undertakes it himself; and so did Christ our Redeemer for us: And if as Redeemer he absolutely undertook to pay down his Blood for a price of Redemption, then as a Surety too, he absolutely undertook to pay down the same Blood for satisfaction; otherwise his Redeemership and Suretyship could not possibly consist together. Sureties use to have assurance to save them harmless: But had Christ any? Or was any such thing possible? It pleased the Lord to bruise him, Isa. 53.10. There was an absolute 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon his Death and Sufferings, Matth. 16.21. and how could he be saved harmless against the Decree of Heaven? Nay, if if he could, he would not; when Peter would have had him spare himself, he calls Peter, Satan, one who in that particular savoured not the things of God. Thus we see, Christ is a Surety in a way of Excellency above humane Sureties. But saith the Author, Christ died for us, not as our Surety, but as our Sacrifice: To which I answer, Christ died for us as a Sacrifice, but he died for us as a Surety too; no one Notion can take in all the Excellencies of his Death: Though the Essentials of his Suretyship lay in his undertaking to satisfy for us, yet the Satisfaction itself was a just necessary consequent of it: As he offered up himself for us, so he died for us as a Sacrifice; and as he undertook to satisfy for us, so he died for us as a Surety. But to pass on with the Author: If Christ died for us as a Surety, yet did he fulfil all Righteousness for us as a Surety too? Was there ever such a Surety heard of among men, that one man should discharge all Offices of Piety, Virtue, Justice, Temperance in stead of another? Such a man must have been called not a Surety, but a Proxy; but humane Laws admit no such Proxies; these are personal Duties, which none can perform for us; no external Relation can make the Righteousness of another ours; the Righteousness of another can never be our personal Righteousness, unless we become one person with him: Thus the Author: To which I answer; Here the Author makes a great wonder at Imputed Righteousness; Was there ever such a Surety heard of among men? saith he: To which I answer, Socinus makes as great a wonder at the imputation of sin to Christ: Ego sanè non video quid absurdius aut iniquius dici potuerit, quàmjure alicui posse aliena peccata imputari; I see nothing (saith he) more absurd or unequal than that the sins of one man should be imputed to another: Yet for all this our Divines do maintain, that our sins were imputed to Christ; and indeed there can be no Satisfaction without it. The Author here complains, that Christ should be a Surety to fulfil all Righteousness for us, and so that Righteousness should be imputed to us; but if the sin of one man may be imputed to another, why not his Righteousness? The Apostle argues from the Imputation of Adam's Sin, to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness; As by the offence of one judgement came upon all men to condemnation; so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men to justification of life: As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, Rom. 5.18, 19 What can be more express, if our Reason would submit to it? Bishop Davenant tells us, that, 
De justit. habit. cap. 28.  Christus Sponsor pro nobis factus nostro nomine non modò subivit perpessionem Crucis, sed impletionem Legis: Christ, not as our Proxy, but as our Surety, did in our name not only undergo the sufferings of the Cross, but took on him the impletion of the Law. But saith the Author, Righteousness is a personal thing, to be performed by ourselves: I answer, What Christ performed for us, was not performable by ourselves in our lapsed estate; he fulfilled all Righteousness for us to the very highest pitch of the Law, in order to our Justification, and that we could not reach in our own persons; and that sincere Obedience which we pay in our own persons doth not fully answer the Law, and so appertains not to our Justification, but Sanctification: And this I take to be the Method of Salvation which God hath chalked out to us. It's true, the Author urges, That the Righteousness of another can never be our personal Righteousness: But though it cannot be ours by Inhesion, yet it may by Imputation; it was only in Christ's Person, yet may be reckoned or accounted to us in Justification, or else I cannot tell, how the Blood of Christ, which cleanses away all sin, should ever be ours; that was not inherent in us, and, if it become ours, it must be by Imputation: If we own not the Imputation of Christ's Passive Obedience, we cannot own, that Christ gave himself for us as a Ransom or a Sacrifice; and if we own the Imputation of his Passive Obedience, we must also own the Imputation of his Active; for there was, not to say a tincture, but a great, and high measure of Active Obedience in his Passion, and if his Passion in its entirety and complete perfection be imputed to us, his Active Obedience must be imputed to us also.  
But now let us consider, 
Mr. Sherlock.  whether in Law the Debtor and Surety are one person; no considering man can think it indifferent, who pays the debt, the Surety or the Debtor, or that they are both equally obliged to it; the Debtor is the immediate Debtor still, and the Surety only obliged in case of default, the Law doth not account it indifferent which of them pay it: For though it permit the payment to be exacted from the Surety, in case the Debtor refuse, yet it will look back again, and allow the surety an action against the debtor for such a refusal, which is an Argument that the Law doth not judge them one person: Thus it is in bail, the Law doth not judge them one person, for if the prisoner escape, the bail or surety shall be punished according to the nature of the fact; and yet the prisoner is not quitted by this means, but liable either to the arrest of the Surety; or in Criminal Causes to the Sentence of the Law, if ever he be retaken. Thus in Sureties for good behaviour (which sounds as if it were nearest a kin to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as our Surety) though the Surety be never so innocent and virtuous, this will not serve him for whom he is Surety; but if he prove a Villain they shall be both punished: So that humane Laws are strangers to this Mystery of imputing the Righteousness of a Surety to a bad man; Suretyship doth not so unite their Persons, that whatever one doth, is always and to all purposes imputed to the other: And if this will not hold good among men, it is a very sorry foundation for this bargain and exchange betwixt Christ and Believers, that he should take their sins upon himself, and impute his Righteousness to them.  
All this runs upon a mistake, 
Answer.  that Christ cannot be a Surety, unless he be such after the manner of men; the Suretyship of Christ is not to be measured by humane Laws, unto which (because variant among themselves no less, I suppose, in points of Suretyship than in other things) it cannot possibly correspond; but it is to be measured by the holy Scriptures, which set forth his undertaking and satisfying our debts in a way of superlative Excellency above all the Sureties in the world. Among men, notwithstanding the Surety, the Debtor is Debtor still: But Christ hath as our Surety made such a plenary Satisfaction on our behalf, that if we receive him by Faith, we are Debtors no longer, all our debts are crossed and blotted out of God's Book. Among men the Surety, having made payment, may have his Action against the Debtor, and ordinarily he seeks to reimburse himself; But our heavenly Surety seeks no such matter; he knows, that all the Creatures in Heaven and Earth are not able to repay him what he hath laid down for us, neither if they could, doth he desire it; but on the contrary he woes and beseeches men to come in to him, that their Debts may not be charged on them by the Law for want of embracing the Gospel. If upon the escape of the Prisoner, the Bail be punished, yet is not the Prisoner quitted: But our Surety Christ, did not suffer as a Bail doth upon escape, upon accident or contingency, but upon absolute and irrevocable certainty, such as could not be avoided, and he suffered so in our room and stead; and his Satisfaction is so far reckoned or imputed to us, that upon our believing there is not, there cannot be any condemnation to us, or satisfaction required of us for ever. In Suretyship for the Behaviour, the Virtues of the Surety are not accounted to him for whom he is Surety: But the Payment and Satisfaction of Christ our Surety is upon Gospel-terms so imputed and made over to us, that the Law or Justice of God cannot demand a second Payment and Satisfaction from us: Hence it appears, that Christ and we are one person in Law, that his Payment and Satisfaction is reckoned as ours. And what matters it, if humane Laws are strangers to imputed Righteousness, it suffices us, that this Mystery is founded on the holy Scripture. When the Romans would have no other Gods, but what were approved of by the Senate, Tertullian tells them, Apud vos de humano arbitratu Divinitas pensitatur; 
Apost. cap. 5.  nifi homini Deus placuerit, Deus non erit: But as long as we find Imputed Righteousness in Scripture, we need not seek a Probatum est from humane laws or reason.  
Let us now try, 
Mr. Sherlock.  whether the Notion of a Mediator can do any better service than the Notion of a Surety. Dr. Owen saith, That Christ fulfilled all Righteousness as he was Mediator, and that whatever he did as Mediator, he did it for them whose Mediator he was, and in whose stead, and for whose good he executed the Office of a Mediator before God; and hence is it that his complete and perfect Obedience to the Law is reckoned to us: But that Christ fulfilled all Righteousness as he was Mediator must have good proof, the Notion of a Mediator includes no such thing. A Mediator is one who interposes between two differing parties; but was it ever heard of yet, that it was the Office of a Mediator to perform the Terms and Conditions himself: Moses was the Mediator of the first Covenant, Gal. 3.9. and his Office was to receive the Law from God, and to deliver it to the people, and to command them to observe the Rites and Sacrifices and Expiations, which God had ordained; but he was not to fulfil the Righteousness of the Law for the whole Congregation: Thus Christ is now the Mediator of a better Covenant, and his Office required, that he should preach the Gospel, which contains the Terms of peace between God and men; and since God would not enter into Covenant with sinners without the intervention of a Sacrifice; he dies too as a Sacrifice and Propitiation for the sins of the World, and confirms and seals this new Covenant with his own Blood; and being risen from the dead, he executes this Office of Mediator with power and glory, that is, he intercedes for us according to the Terms and Conditions of the new Covenant, to obtain the pardon of our sins, and the assistance of the divine Grace to do the Will of God, and all those other blessings that are promised: But the Office of Mediator doth not oblige him to fulfil the Righteousness of the Covenant for us.  
Christ is a Mediator but in a supereminent way; a Mediator, 
Answer.  but above all Peers or Parallels: Hence the Apostle tells us, that there is one Mediator between God and men the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim. 2.5. One Mediator; Moses was a Mediator too, but, because Christ was a Mediator in a peculiar and superexcellent manner, there is but one Mediator. Moses was an internuncial Mediator; but Christ was a satisfying and atoning one: Hence it appears, that the Mediatorship of Christ must not be measured by the Mediatorship of Moses or any other person in the world, but must be construed according to those singular Excellencies and Preeminencies which the Scripture attributes to it: The Apostle tells us what a Mediator he was; He gave his life a ransom for all; and, as I noted before, where his Passive Obedience is expressed, there the active is employed: Christ was a Mediator in that, which he did for us; and on our behalf, and for us, and on our behalf he fulfilled all Righteousness: This is evident; that of Christ's which is imputed, and applied to us to justify and make us Righteous before God, was done for us, and and on our behalf; and such was his fulfilling all Righteousness. Hence the Apostle tells us; That by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men to justification of life, and by the obedience of one, shall many be made righteous, Rom. 5.18, 19 Moses was not to fulfil the righteousness of the Law for the people, nor was he to die as a propitiatory Sacrifice for them, but Christ, a more excellent Mediator, did both for us.  
Dr. Owen first tells of an habitual Righteousness of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock.  as Mediator in his humane Nature, that this was the necessary effect of the Grace of Union, that thereby he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fit to do all that he did for us; So that this is not imputed to us, but was his own proper Righteousness: But Secondly, There is the actual obedience of Christ, which was his willing performance of every thing that God by any Law did require, besides the particular Law of the Mediator: Let us then first consider the peculiar Law of the Mediator, which he tells us, respected himself merely, (so that we have nothing to do with this neither) and it contains all those acts and duties of his, which were not for our imitation; he instances in his obedience, which he shown in dying, (though St. John tells us, that we must imitate him in this also, must lay down our lives for the brethren, as Christ died for us, Joh. 1.3.16. And St. Paul tells us, that we must be conformed to the Death and Resurrection of Christ, Rom. 6. which sounds very like an imitation) though in the next page he excepts the case of dying of his passive obedience; and tells us, that all the rest of his obedience to the Law of meditation is not imputed to us, as though we had done it; So that by the Law of meditation, he understands whatever Christ was bound to do as our Mediator, whatever was proper to his Mediatory office; all this (though sometimes, when he better thinks of it, he excepts dying) is not imputed to us, as though we had done it: I hope we shall find something at last to be imputed to us; and yet there is nothing left now. But thirdly, That which concerns him in a private capacity, as a man subject to the Law: And now whatever was required of us by virtue of any Law, that he did and fulfilled: And this is that actual obedience of Christ, which he performed for us: This is very strange, that what he did as Mediator, is not imputed to us: But what he did not as our Mediator, but as a man subject to Law, that is imputed to us, and reckoned as if we had done it, by reason of his being our Mediator; and it is as strange to the full, that Christ should do whatever was required of us by virtue of any Law, when he was neither Husband, Wife, Father, Merchant, Soldier, Captain; much less a Temporal Prince; and how he should discharge the duties of those Relations for us, when he was never in any of those Relations, I leave to the subtlety of the Schoolmen.  
I know not of what moment this discourse is, 
Answer.  only the Author would seem to wrap the Doctor up in obscurity; but the Doctor hath expressed his mind in plain terms, pag. 182. his words are these: God sent Christ as a Mediator to do and suffer whatever the Law required at our hand; for that end & purpose, that we might not be condemned, but accepted of God. This satisfies me, Christ our Mediator was made under the Law, under the command, and under the curse of it; he fulfilled the command of it by his active obedience, he bore the curse of it by his passive: This entire obedience of his, which fully answers the Law, is by God imputed to us; not as if we were Mediators, or had done it as Mediators; no, by no means, Christ is the great Actor of it, the Mediatorship is his own: But it is imputed to us so far as to justify us, and make us righteous before God; we were no efficients in it, but are mere recipients; and it is applied to us in order to our justification: It is not for us to reach the works of our Saviour; these are far above our Line, we must indeed lay down our lives for the Brethren, as St. John tells us: But what in a way of atonement and expiation of sin! No, it is too high for us so to do: Paul was not crucified for us, nor can any other Saint be, only we must, as we can, Procul ejus vestigia sequi, as Calvin expresses it, imitate him as far as our model goes: We must be conformed to the Death and Resurrection of Christ, Rom. 6. We must die unto sin, and be alive unto God: But, after we have in our little resembled him, we must confess, that the merit is only in him, not in us, we are but receivers, he is the great purchasor: But, saith the Author, it is strange that Christ should do whatever was required of us by virtue of any Law, when he was neither Husband, Wife, Father, Merchant, Soldier, Captain or Prince; and how could he discharge the duties of those relations which he was never in? To which, I answer, After this rate would the Socinians rob us of the satisfactory passion of Christ: For, say they, If Christ had satisfied for us, than he must have suffered all that we should have suffered; that is, eternal torments, which he did not: But one answer serves for both: Christ suffered the same which we should have suffered in the substantials and essentials of it, though not in the accidentals or circumstantials of it; and what was wanting in the duration of his sufferings was compensated by the dignity of his person, and Christ fufilled the command of the Law in the substantials and essentials of it, though not in every relation; this latter not being poslible for him to do, because he could not possibly be in all relations; he had that Love in perfection, which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the fulfilling of the Law, and what of accidentals of obedience was not in him, was compensated by the dignity of his person.  
The Doctor tell us, 
Mr. Sherlock.  That of this exexpression, as Mediator, there is a double sense, it may be taken strictly, as relating solely to the Mediator, and so Christ may be said to do as Mediator, only what he did in obedience to the Law, (that is only what he did as Mediator, which is a pretty Observation:) But in the sense now insisted on (that is, not strictly as Mediator, but as not Mediator, whatever Christ did, as a man subject to the Law, he did as Mediator, because he did it as part of the duty incumbent on him, who undertook so to be: The meaning is, that he, who was Mediator, being bound to do such things, though not as Mediator, but as a man subject to the Law; yet he did them as Mediator, because he was a Mediator who did them, which is such an exposition of Quâ, as subtlest Schoolmen never yet thought of.  
I suppose there is no need of the subtle Schoolmen, 
Answer.  who yet sometimes take Quâ specificatiuè, sometimes repliducatiuè: I suppose the Doctor wants only a fair Interpreter, he tells us expressly, pag. 182. God sent Christ as a Mediator to do and suffer whatever the Law required at our hands; for that end and purpose, that we might not be condemned, but accepted of God. It was all to this end, that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us; that is, which the Law required of us, consisting in duties of obedience; this Christ performed for us: The Doctor doth not merely intent that the Mediator did fulfil the Law, or that he who did fulfil it was a Mediator; but that he did it as a Mediator, and was by God sent to do so, and that for us. This, I suppose, will appear to any Reader, who seriously peruses the places in the Doctor's Book; a little piece of a face, and that wrested, will hardly reprsent the whole as it ought.  
The difficulty of Christ's doing those things as Mediator, 
Mr. Sherlock.  which did not belong to the Laws of his Mediation, is a very material one, and requires great skill in Logic to get rid of it: but however, it is wisely done to make a show of saying something, to that which cannot be answered; for he was sensible, that what Christ did purely as Mediator could not be imputed to us, as though we had done it, though the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or fruits of it are, because we were never designed to be Mediators and the Righteousness of a Mediator is as improper to be imputed to those, who are not Mediators, as it is to impute the Righteousness of a Prince to a Beggar; therefore he was forced to consider him not as Mediator, but as a private man, though this too was impossible; for he could not at the same time act so wany different and opposite parts as there are relations and conditions of men in the world; and yet when he thought on't again, he found, that it was not the Righteonsness of a private person, that would avail us (becausè we have no way to come at it, to make it ours) but only the Righteousness of the Mediator, who did, what he did for us, and in our stead; and so wheels about again, and is caught in the net and labyrinth of his making.  
The Doctor asserts positively, 
Answer.  that Christ, as Mediator did do whatever the Law required at our hands; and I can never persuade myself, that he should exclude the fulfilling of the Law from the Laws of his Mediation: But then, as the Author would have it, we run upon another rock; that is, If what Christ did as Mediator be imputed to us, than we must become Mediators, and much such an Argument against imputed Righteousness, we have in Bellarmine, whose words are these, 
De justif. l. 2. cap. 7.  Si vere imputaretur nobis Christi justitia, profectò non minus justi haberi censerique deberemus quàm ipse Christus, proinde deberemus dici atque haberi Redemptores & salvatores mundi. Upon which Bishop Davenant gives this censure, that it is ridicula illatio; The Righteousness of Christ was in himself by inhesion, or from him by personal action; but it is ours only by imputation; and who ever heard of a Mediator, made such by imputation, or by that Righteousness, which another performed for him? The Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us; but what, Secundum totam latitudinem, to all intents and purposes whatsoever? Oh no, it is not imputed to us, to do that which is impossible, to make us Mediators, or the Efficients of it, but so far only as to make us Righteous before God; by the imputation of it, we are justified and saved, but we are not Mediators and Saviour's: The Righteousness is formally Christ's the one Mediators; but materially it becomes ours by imputation, so far forth as to justify us: The Righteousness itself is one thing, and the manner of application another: Bellarmine himself, who made the objection, can say in another place, passiones Christi, & quae sunt infiniti pretii, 
De Indulgent. l. ●. cap. 4.  applicari per indulgentias finiso modo: So say I, the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not to all intents and purposes; not to translate a Mediatorship upon us, but in a limited manner, to justify and save us, who are the receivers of it: It is imputed to every Believer, but it makes never an one of them, God-man; and no man that is a mere man, or less than God-man can be an expiating and saving Mediator; or, if he could, he could not be such without a Divine Call or Ordination, which no Believer can pretend to: The Mediatorship is totally, solely Christ's; but the Righteousness which he performed, is so far imputed to us, as to justify and save us: The satisfaction of Christ's death is made ours, and that by imputation; or else we must be pardoned without a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and yet that imputation doth not make us satisfying Mediators: Our Church tells us, 
1. Hoim. of Salvation.  Christ is the Righteousness of them that believe, 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 may be called a fulfiller of the Law: And yet our Church never dreamt of any such thing, as that such an imputation would turn a Believer into a Mediator; there is therefore no ill consequence, but an infinite comfort in this assertion; that the Righteousness of Christ, our Mediator is imputed to us.  
The Doctor tells us, 
Mr. Sherlock.  That Christ was under no obligation to obey these Laws himself; And to make this appear, he discourses particularly of the Law of our Creation, and the Ceremonial Law given to the Jews: And for the first, the Law of Creation, that comprehends those eternal Laws, which result from the essential difference of good and evil, which all mankind are bound to observe by the very frame of their natures: Now he dares not deny, that Christ was bound to obey this Law for himself; but then his obedience was voluntary: And what of that? For so the obedience of every good man is; for by voluntary he tells us, he doth not mean, That it was merely arbitrary, and at his choice, whether he would obey or not; but on supposition of his undertaking to be Mediator, it was necessary it should be so; but he voluntarily and willingly submitted to it: and so became really subject to the commands of it. And is it not very plain now, that Christ was not obliged to obey those Laws, because he willingly submitted to them; but he means somewhat more by this, voluntary, than he could tell how to express; and all that I can guests is, that whereas we are bound to obey these Laws antecedently to our choice; it was not so with him, for his obligation was consequential, upon his being born, and becoming man, which was his own choice; and yet, even then, as he tells us: As he was Mediator God-man, he was not by the institution of that Law obliged to it, being, as it were, lifted up above that Law by the hypostatical Union: Now this is very profound reasoning; for the meaning of it is this: That Christ had not been bound to live like a man, unless he had become man; and yet I can grant something more, that it was impossible that he should have lived like a man, without being man: But when he chose to be man, he was bound to discharge all the duties of a man for himself: But how could he be exempted from this Law, by being Mediator God and Man: When the Doctor acknowledges, that upon supposition of his being Mediator, it was necessary it should be so; that is, that he should obey, now, not to be obliged by the Institution of the Law as Mediator; and that it should be necessary for him to obey as Mediator, are at so great a distance, that it may serve for another trial of skill to reconcile them.  
Christ, 
Answer.  when he assumed the humane Nature, was as man subject to the Law of Creation; for his humane Nature was but a Creature, and its will, not being Supreme in itself, was under the Divine Will; but Christ freely and voluntarily became man; and so put himself of his own accord into the state of subjection; and as he was not made man for himself, but for us: So neither was he made under the Law for himself, but for us. Hence the Apostle joining both these together; He was made of a woman, made under the Law, Gal. 4. 4, 5. Superadds as the end common to both, that he might redeem us; he assumed humanity, and with it duty, neither for himself, but both for us, that he might 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fulfil the Law, Matth. 5.17. for us; not only doctrinally, by opening the pure Spirituality of it; but practically too, by fulfilling all the Righteousness thereof. Christ as man was bound by the Law; but this hinders not, but that his obedience may be for us, and may be imputed to us in justification: No sooner was that Divine Decree (which put a must upon Christ's sufferings) made known to him as man; but he was bound to die, and yet his death was a sweet Sacrifice for us, and a propitiation for our sins; And as the Blood of Christ was the Blood of God, so the obedience of Christ was the obedience of God; being stamped with his Deity, it amounted to an infinite sum; enough for himself, and a world besides. Christ was in some sense, as it were, exempted, and lifted up above the Law by the hypostatical Union; he might have carried up the Humane Nature into heaven, in the very first instant of its assumption; he need not have performed the Law, in such a debased manner, for such a space of time, and in such a place as earth; he was not simply and absolutely bound to it in himself; but upon supposition, that he took upon him the Mediatory Office, he was bound to fulfil the Law for us as he did.  
Though we suppose, 
Mr. Sherlock.  that Christ as man was bound to yield obedience to the Law of Creation, yet the Dr. observes, that this is the only Law he could be liable to as a man; for an innocent man in a Covenant of works, as he was, needed no other Law, nor did God give any other Law to such persons; the Law of Creation is the only Law, that an innocent Creature is liable to, with what Symbols of the Law God is pleased to add: But now Jesus Christ yielded perfect obedience to all the Laws which came upon us by the occasion of sin, as the Ceremonial Law; yea, those very Institutions that signified the washing away of sin and repentance from sin, as the Baptism of John, which he had no need of himself; this therefore must needs be for us: This looks something like, but I fear it will prove like all the rest, that is, to no purpose: I would willingly have had some proof of it, that an innocent man can be bound by no other Law than that of Creation: God, as he acknowledges, might add what Symbols he pleased to that Law; (for he remembered the Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil) and I know not what these Symbols are, but positive Laws, and such the Ceremonial Laws were; and if God may require the obedience of an innocent man to one positive Law, he may, if he please, enjoin twenty. And though they were at first commanded upon occasion of sin, an innocent man may observe them to good and wise purposes, as solemn acts of Worship, external expressions of Devotion, a public profession of a virtuous Life; to which purposes among others, the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the Law and Baptism of John served: And if there were no other reason, this were enough, that an innocent man should set an example of reverence to all divine Institutions: But this is not worth contending about; for the Righteousness of the Ceremonial Law could never justify any man; neither can I understand, why the Doctor should suppose, that Christ fulfilled the Ceremonial Law for all Believers, when the greatest part of them, the Gentiles, were never under the obligation of it.  
God gave unto innocent Adam symbolical Precepts, 
Answer  over and above the Law of Creation; but what were those Precepts? Not Washings, Purifications, Circumcisions, Expiations, Sacrifices, nothing that was significative of sin, but such only as were congruous to that State: The true One would not have the least shadow of a lie in his Service; neither is it to me imaginable that Christ should for his own sake be put under such Laws as are unsuitable to his Innocency; what need had he of Circumcision, who had no corrupt flesh in him, or of Baptism, who was without spot? But, saith the Author, an innocent man may observe such Laws, for profession or examples sake: But surely what he doth must be done in truth. We find in Scripture, that at the Jewish Sacrifices there was a confession of sin, the form of which, as their Doctors say, was thus; O Lord, thy people, the house of Israel, they have sinned, they have done wickedly, etc. and might an innocent Israelite (had there been such an one) have joined in this confession, and that without the forfeiture of his innocency? I doubt he could not: Besides, when the Scripture assigns no such reason for Christ's subjection to any Law, who may be so bold as to do it? But, saith the Author, Christ's Obedience to the Ceremonial Law justifieth no man; Neither according to the Author doth his Obedience to the Moral Law; and therefore he might have left his Obedience, which is the compleature of all divine Laws, undivided and in its entirety.  
The Dr. saith, 
Mr. Sherlock.  There can be no other reason assigned of Christ's Obedience to the Law of God, but only this, that he did it in our stead: Now this Argument would be good, were it true and were there not a great many things done, which we cannot assign the reason of, and yet done for great and weighty reasons; but this reason is sufficient, because he was as much bound to it as any other man. The Dr takes it for granted, That if Christ were not bound to obey these Laws upon his own account, it must be either for us, or to fit him for his Death and Oblation; but it was not to fit him for his Death, therefore it was for us: He tells us, that he answered all Types, and was every way fit to be made an offering for sin by his Union and habitual Grace: If his Obedience were not for us, and upon our account, there is no just cause to be assigned, why he should live here in the world so long as he did in perfect obedience to all the Laws of God. Had he died before, there had been perfect Innocence and perfect Holiness by his habitual Grace, and infinite Virtue and Worth from the dignity of his Person; and surely he yielded not that long course of Obedience but for some great and special purposes, in reference to our Salvation: Yes truly; but must this needs be his actual fulfilling all Righteousness for us? What do you think of his preaching the Gospel throughout all Judea which would take up some time? What of the many Miracles which confirmed his Doctrine? What of training up his Apostles to succeed him in his Ministry as Eye-witnesses and Ear-witnesses of his Miracles and Doctrine? What of the holy Example of his Life, which was no less necessary than his Laws? These are all great and special purposes in reference to our Salvation, though we should suppose him fit to have been a Sacrifice (as Herod designed he should have been) as soon as he were born; though by the way, I think he could not have answered the Types and Predictions of him, had he died so soon, notwithstanding his perfect innocence and holiness.  
I take it the Doctor's Scope was this, 
Answer.  That the end of Christ's Active Obedience could not be assigned to be, that he might be fitted for his death and oblation, and that because be was every way fit to be made an offering for sin, by his Union and habitual Grace; the Dr. intended not, that Christ lived here so long, only that he might obey and for no other ends: It's true that Christ lived here so long, that he might preach, and do Miracles, and instruct his Apostles, and it's true, that he lived here so long, that he might fulfil all Righteousness, all these were ends of his living here; but the Quaere is, What was the end of his Active Obedience? I never yet read, that the end of that was his preaching, doing of Miracles, or instructing his Apostles; these were simultaneous and concurrent in time with his Obedience. But Christ obeyed the Law, that he might give us an holy Example by his Life: I grant it, but that was not all; Christ died also for to leave an Example to us, but there was much more in his Death; in truth both were for our Justification: As we are justified by his blood, Rom. 5.9. so we are made righteous by his obedience, ver. 9  
His Third Reason to prove, 
Answer.  that Christ fulfilled all Righteousness for us, is from the absolute necessity of it: For this is the Term of the Covenant, Do this and live; Life is not to be obtained, unless all be done that the Law requires; we being unable to do this, it is necessary that Christ our Mediator and Surety should fulfil the Law for us: This Argument is to prove that it ought to be so, not that it is so; but we must not prescribe methods to God. The sum of the Argument is, that there never was, nor never can be a Covenant of Grace; that God still exacts the rigorous perfection of the Law from us; that we must not appear before him without a complete and perfect Righteousness of our own or of another: Now this is the thing in question, Whether we must be made righteous with the perfect Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, or whether God will for the sake of Christ dispense with the rigour of the Law, and accept of a sincere and Evangelical Obedience in stead of a perfect and unsinning Righteousness; so that he only confidently affirms what was in dispute, and this goes for an Argument.  
We must not prescribe methods to God: 
Answer.  Nor may we deny those he hath set down and reveiled to us. The Scripture tells us, that Justification under the Gospel is in a way completive and perfective of the Law, so that the Law is established, Rom. 3.31. and hath its end or compliment, Rom. 10.4. and this cannot be without a perfect Righteousness: And withal the Scripture tells us where that Righteousness is, Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to us, Rom. 10.4. and, We are made the Righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. 5.21. The Righteousness of Christ is made ours by Imputation, & that answers the Law in every point. But then (saith the Author) there can be no covenant of Grace: If the perfect Righteousness were to be done by us in our own persons, there could be none indeed; but may there be none, if that Righteousness be fulfilled by Christ and imputed to us? The Papists use to blast imputed Righteousness with many ugly names, as if it were putative, an imaginary Fiction, a Spectrum of Luther's Brain, and the like; but I never before heard, that the Righteousness of Christ, made ours by Imputation, did overthrow the Covenant of Grace: Sure the Passive Righteousness of Christ doth not overthrow it, and, if the Active be joined with that as it ought, no evil can ensue; but we may in the conjunction of both as in a Glass see the admirable Wisdom of God, which hath framed the Covenant of Grace in such a manner, that we, who have no perfect Righteousness of our own, are yet justified by the complete Righteousness of Christ our Surety; so that the Law, though not fulfilled by us, hath its perfect completion. It's true, that God accepts of our sincere Obedience, but not in Justification; not in the room of Christ's perfect Righteousness, but in its own proper place, having its defects covered with Christ's Righteousness.  
The Doctor makes a great flourish with some Scripture-phrases, 
Mr. Sherlock  that there is almost nothing that Christ hath done, but we are said to do it with him; We are crucified with him, dead with him, buried with him, quickened with him; etc. But he is quite out in the reason of these expressions, which is not, that we are accounted to do the same things, which Christ did, but because we do some things like them: Our dying to sin is a conformity to the death of Christ, and our walking in newness of life, a conformity to his Resurrection.  
I know no Divine who interprets those Phrases (of being crucified, 
Answer.  dead, buried, quickened with Christ) of imputed Righteousness, neither do I suppose that the Doctor ever intended any such thing; those Phrases belong to Sanctification: Then we are crucified with Christ, when we feel the power of his Cross in our Mortification than we are risen with Christ, when we feel the power of his Resurrection raising of us up to the divine Life and Likeness.  
The Doctor citys that Text, 
Mr. Sherlock.  Gal. 4. 4, 5. God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law, and here he stops; but I shall take confidence to add, That we might receive the adoption of Sons: Now by being made under the Law, he tells us is meant, being disposed of in such a condition, that he must yield subjection and obedience to the Law; well, suppose this, and this was all to redeem us, and therefore our redemption is by the obedience of Christ imputed to us: Fairly argued, but can his obedience to the Law contribute no otherways to our redemption, but by being reckoned as done by us? But the truth is, this, us, is not in the text, it is not to redeem us, but to redeem them that were under the Law, that is, the Jews, who were in bondage under the Mosaical Law; from which Christ redeemed them by abrogating that Law, and introducing a better covenant, the adoption of sons: For in this Epistle, nay in this chapter, the Law is called a state of servants, and of an heir under age, but the Gospel is the adoption of sons, puts us into such a free and manly state, as that of an heir at age, and therefore is called the Spirit of Adoption, Rom. 8.15. So that the meaning of this Text is this, that God hath put an end to the dispensation of the Law, which is called redeeming them that are under the Law, in a state of servitude and bondage, and hath established a better Covenant in the room of it, which as much exceeds the Law as the adoption of Sons doth the state of Servants; and this God brought to pass by sending his Son made of a woman, made under the Law: For the understanding of which words we must consider, what influence Christ's appearing in the world had on the abrogation of the Law, and that was, that he accomplished all the Types and Figures of the Law in his own Person; and when all those Types were fulfilled, they grew out of date: So that his being made under the Law most probably signifies his being made such a Person, as should exactly answer all the Types and Figures of the Law, and so to put an end to it, as of no further use: Thus the Temple was God's House, but now the Shechinah or divine Glory rested on Christ: When Christ the great Highpriest came, and offered himself, all legal Priests and Sacrifices were of no use: Thus by his being under the Law, and accomplishing all the Types of it; he put an end to all those beggarly rudiments, and delivered the Jews from the bondage of the Law; for though the Gentiles too are redeemed by Christ, yet they were not redeemed from the Law of Moses, under which they never were.  
God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, 
Answer.  made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons: Thus the Apostle, Gal. 4. 4, 5. The Son of God was made of a woman, in his Incarnation, made under the Law; under the rule of it in his active obedience; under the curse of it, in his passive; and the end of all was, that he might redeem us; that we, who were captives under the wrath of God, might be redeemed one's. And further, that we might receive the adoption of sons, that we, who were children of wrath, might be sons of God, and so heirs of eternal life; and that it may be thus indeed, that Christ's being under the Law, his active and passive obedience may procure such a redemption and adoption; such an exemption from wrath, and title to heaven for us: His obedience must be applied to us, and become ours, which cannot be but by imputation: But, saith the Author: This, us, is not in the Text, it is not, to redeem us, but to redeem them that were under the Law; that is, the Jews: But was not Christ a Redeemer of the Gentiles also? Or is he not their Redeemer within this Text? Yes, surely, observe the words of the Apostle; To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. The Apostle altars his phrase, and turns them into, we, which takes in the Galatians into the adoption; and by consequence into the redemption too; and to make it more clear, he altars his phrase again, and turns we into ye; in the next verse which hangs upon the former: And because ye are sons, vers. 6. ye Galatians, ye Gentiles are sons; and ye Galatians, ye Gentiles, are redeemed one's within the Text: Otherwise, which is very strange, the Apostle should argue from the Redemption of the Jews only, to the Adoption of the Gentiles: But to go on, Christ, saith the Author, redeemed the Jews from the bondage of the Mosaical Law (that is, I suppose, the Ceremonial Law) and introduced a better Covenant, the adoption of sons. To which I answer, Christ did indeed redeem from the bondage of Mosaical Rites and Ceremonies: But is this all the Redemption within the Text? If we stop here, we fall in with the gloss of Socinus; who understands only a freedom, A jugo legis, 
De servat. part. 2. cap. 24.  ut Spiritûs servilis loeo filialem spiritum adipiscerentur. The Redemption here is not to be restrained to a freedom from Mosaical Ceremonies only: Christ was made under the whole Law, and the Redemption, which must be parallel to his being under the Law, must not only be a Redemption from the Bondage of the Ceremonial Law, but a Redemption from the curse of the Moral; of which the Apostle had discoursed but a little before, Gal. 3.13. Our Saviour was never made under the whole Law to redeem from a part of it only. Again, Redemption from the Ceremonial Law was peculiar to the Jews: But the Redemption here spoken of reaches as far as the Gentiles also; who, as I before noted, have a share in the Adoption of Sons, as well as the Jews: The Redemption here spoken of, is not a part or piece of Redemption, but Redemption in its fullness and excellency. Christ by coming into the flesh, introduceth a better Covenant; that is, the beams of Evangelical Light were purer, and the effusions of the holy Spirit larger than before: But still we must remember, that the Covenant of Grace was for substance, one and the same under both Testaments: Under the Old Testament, true Believers had the Law in their heart, the Adoption of Sons, the free Spirit, and a true title to eternal Life: And on the other hand, under the New Testament, unbelievers have the Law and Gospel too, but in the Letter; their bondage is far greater than that of beggarly Elements: The unclean spirit dwells and works in them; and the dreadful wrath of God abideth on them. Christ's being under the Law, saith the Author, is his being such a person, as should exactly answer all the Types and Figures of the Law: Unto which I add: His being under the Law, is his being such a person, as should exactly answer all the demands of the Moral Law, in its mandatory and minatory parts.  
I shall now examine what influence the Sacrifice of Christ's Death, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and the Righteousness of his life have upon our acceptance with God: And all that I can find in Scripture about this, is, that to this we own the Covenant of Grace, that God being well pleased with the obedience of Christ's Life, and the sacrifice of his Death; for his sake entered into a new Covenant with mankind; wherein he promses pardon of sin and eternal life to those who believe and obey the Gospel: This is very plain with reference to Christ's death. Hence the Blood of Christ is called the blood of the covenant, Heb. 10.29. And Christ is called, the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, Heb. 13.20. And the Blood of Christ is called, the blood of sprinkling, which speaks better things than the blood of Abel, Heb. 12.24. which is an allusion to Moses, his sprinkling the blood of the Sacrifice, whereby he confirmed the Covenant between God and the children of Israel, Heb. 9.19, 20, 21. For when Moses had spoken every Precept to all the people according to the Law (when he had declared the terms of this Covenant to them) he took the Blood of Calves and Goats, with Water and scarlet Wool, and Hyssop, and sprinkled both the Book, and all the People, saying, This is the blood of the testament, which God hath ordained to you: Thus the Blood of Christ is called, the blood of sprinkling; Because by his Blood God did seal and confirm the Covenant of Grace, as the sprinkling of the blood of beasts did confirm the Mosaical Covenant, Hence we are said, to be justified by the blood of Christ, Rom. 5.9. that is, by the Gospel-Covenant, which was confirmed with his Blood: Christ is called a propitiation through faith in his blood, Rom. 3.25. that is, by a belief of his Gospel. Hence the Scripture uses these phrases promiscuously; To be justified by Faith, and to be justified by the faith of Christ; and to be justified by Christ, and to be justified through Faith in his blood, & to be justified and saved by grace; Nay, by believing, that Christ is the Son of God, Joh. 20.31. And that God raised him from the dead, Rom. 10.9. All which signify the same thing, that we are justified by believing and obeying the Gospel; for faith, or faith in Christ signifies such a firm belief of the Gospel, as brings forth all fruits of obedience, and the Grace of God is the Gospel of Christ, expressly so called, Tit. 2.11. As being the effect of God's Grace, and Faith in the Blood of Christ is a belief of the Gospel; which was confirmed by his death, and believing, that Christ is the Son of God, the Messiah, and Prophet, whom God sent to reveil his will, includes a general belief of the Gospel, which he preached; and believing that God raised him from the dead doth the same, because his Resurrection was the last and great confirmation of the truth of the Gospel. Hence the Apostles attribute such things to the Blood of Christ, as are the proper immediate office of the Gospel-Covenant, because the Blood of Christ is the Blood of the Covenant; and therefore all the blessings of the Gospel are owing to it, because the Gospel-Covenant was procured and confirmed by it: Thus the Gentiles, who were a far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ; and the Gentiles and Jews were reconciled unto God in one body by the cross, Eph. 2.14, 15, 16. That is, the Gentiles were received into the fellowship of God's Church, and the Jews and Gentiles united in one body: Now this union of Jews and Gentiles is owing to the Gospel, which takes away all marks of distinction and separation, and gives them both an equal right to the blessing of the New Covenant: This New Covenant belongs to all mankind; there is now no distinction of persons: Neither Jew, nor Greek, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free; but Christ is all, and in all: No man is acceptable to God, because he is a Jew or Greek; but the only thing of any value is Faith in Christ, or a belief of the Gospel, which is indifferently offered to all. Now this is attributed to the Blood of Christ, and to his death, because thereby Christ put an end to the Mosaical Covenant; and sealed this New Covenant of Grace with Mankind, as the Apostle explains himself, in the following verses 17.18. etc. That Christ having abolished the Law of Commandments by his death, he came and preached peace, (that is, the Gospel of peace) to them who were a far off, to the Gentiles, and to them who were nigh to the Jews, he abrogated the Mosaical Law; That Law of Commandments contained in ordinances, which was peculiar to the Jews, and separated them from the rest of the World; And he broke down the middle wall of partition, which kept the uncircumcised Gentiles, though Proselytes, at a distance from God, as confining their worship to the outward court of the Temple, which the Apostle seems to refer to in that phrase; Them that were a far off. And now, by the Gospel he admits the Gentiles to as near an approach to God, as the Jews: As he adds; For through him we have an access by one Spirit to the Father, vers. 18.  
The Author enquiring, 
Answer.  what influence the obedience and death of Christ have upon our acceptance with God, resolves it thus: All that I can find in Scripture is, that to this we own the Covenant of Grace. Christ's Blood is called the Blood of the Covenant, because it did seal and confirm the Covenant. I answer, Christ's Blood did indeed seal and confirm the Covenant: But is this the all of it? Socinus will own as much as this comes to; Sicuti alicujus animantis sanguine fuso foedera antiquitùs sanciebantur, 
De servat. l. 1. cap. 3.  & confirmabantur, ita Christi silii sui sanguine foedus suum novum atque aeternum, quod nobiscum per ipsum Christum pepigerat, sancivit & confirmavit Deus: Thus he, telling us too, that it is therefore called, Sanguis aeterni foederis: To the same purpose speaks the Racovian Catechist, with others of the same Tribe: But the Scripture tells us more of the Blood of Christ, That we are justified by his blood, Rom. 5.9. But, saith the Author, we are said to be justified by his Blood; that is, by the Gospel-Covenant, which was confirmed with his Blood: This is a strange way of interpreting Scripture: We are justified by his blood; that is, by the Gospel: We may as well go on to verse 18. and say, justification of life is by the righteousness of one; that is, by the Gospel: And to verse 19 and say, We are made righteous by the obedience of one; that is, by the Gospel: And from thence we may go on at the same rate with other Scriptures, as, He hath washed us from our sins in his own blood, Revel. 1.5. that is, in his own Gospel: The blood of Jesus Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered up himself without spot to God, shall purge your consciences from dead works, Heb. 9.14. that is, the Gospel shall do it: This is my blood of the new Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins, Matth. 26.28. that is, this is my New Testament of the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of fins: Rather than make such work with Scripture; we were as good let the Blood of our dear Lord stand there, as it ought, in its justifying Glory: We are justified by Christ's blood; that is, by the Gospel: And is Christ's Blood the Gospel? Or where in all the Scripture is the Blood of Christ so taken? The Scripture rarely, if ever, speaks of being justified by the Gospel, but it speaks much and often of being justified by Christ's Blood: It cleanses us from all sin, 1 Joh. 1.7. It purges the conscience, Heb. 9.19. It was shed for the remission of sins, Eph. 1.7. It washes us from our sins, Rev. 1.5. And yet all this contrary to the express words and genius of Scripture, must be understood not of the Blood of Christ, but of the Gospel; and why of the Gospel? Because his Blood confirmed the Gospel: And is justifying and confirming the Gospel all one? Christ's Blood, according to the Author, confirmed the Covenant with all Mankind; but all men are not justified: When the Scripture speaks of Christ's Blood and Death as confirmative of the Covenant or Gospel, it speaks sometimes in general of all men: Thus he died for all men, 2 Cor. 5.15. He gave himself a ransom for all, 1 Tim. 2.6. with many other places to the same purpose: But when the Scripture speaks of Christ's Blood as justifying, it speaks not in general of all, but in particular of Believers only; and yet if justify- and confirming the Gospel were all one, it might be as truly said, that Christ justifies all as that he died for all The Gospel is the Charter of Justification; but besides the Charter their must be a Righteousness to be the Matter of our Justification: God never justifies any man without a Righteousness, and what is it? Is it the very Act of Faith? Thus Socinus would have it, 
De servat. part. 4. cap. 4.  that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere is loco justitiae, in the room of all Righteousness: But I have before proved that Faith as an Act and absolutely in itself considered cannot justify us; Or is it our inherent Graces? This is the express Tenet of the Papists: Thus Bellarmine would have justifying Grace to be donum in Animainhaerens', Renovation and Regeneration: Against this our Protestant Divines have sufficiently testified. Indeed no man, who understands, either himself and his own Erratas, or the necessary distinction which is to be made between Justification and Sanctification, can assert it: And now nothing remains to be our Righteousness in Justification but the Obedience and atoning Blood of Christ, and these cannot be applied to us, and become ours but by Imputation: By this it appears, that the Blood of Christ doth not only confirm the Covenant, but that it justifies us also. And this further appears by the place quoted by the Author, Moses sprinkled the blood on the book and on all the people, Heb. 9.19. He did not only confirm the Covenant, but sprinkled the People too; this was the Type or Figure; but Christ, who is the Substance, not only confirms the Covenant, but sprinkles the hearts of Believers by his Blood: Hence their hearts are sprinkled from an evil conscience, Heb. 10.22. and they have the sprinkling of the blood of Christ, 1 Pet. 1.2. But to go on; The Scripture, saith the Author, uses these phrases promiscuously, to be justified by Faith, by Christ, by Grace; nay, by believing that Christ is the Son of God, or risen from the dead: To which I answer, All these concur to the same Justification, but not in the same manner: Grace, which is the inward impulsive Cause of Justification, is not Christ or his Blood; the Blood of Christ, which is the Matter of our Righteousness, is not Faith; Faith, which is the Hand to receive Christ and Grace, is not the Gospel, the Charter of Justification, which contains the Evangelical Axioms, such as those, touching Christ's being the Son of God or touching his Resurrection from the dead, are: These are distinct things and not to be confounded. As for that place, Eph. 2.14, 15, 16. the Apostle speaks indeed of reconciling Jews and Gentiles, but that is not all, he speaks too of reconciling both to God, ver. 16. and of making them one new man in himself, ver. 15. which notes a further reconciliation than that among themselves, even a conjunction with God and Christ, according to our Saviour's Prayer, That they maybe one in us, Joh. 17.21. Christ, saith the Author, abrogated the Mosaical Law: I answer, He did so as to Types and Ceremonials; but the Moral Law, which is immortalised by its  Sanctity, stands to this day, and the Grace, which was under the Old Testament, was not abrogated, but made more illustrious than it was before. The Gentiles, saith the Author, were at a distance from God; But if they had natural Faith, and could by it please God, the distance was less and more tolerable; though they were but in the outward Court of the Temple, nay, though they were a thousand miles off from it, they would do well enough in the other world.  

Mr. Sherlock.  Thus the Jews are said to be redeemed from the curse of the Law, by the accursed death of Christ upon the Cross, Gal. 3.13. Because the death of Christ put an end to that Legal dispensation, and sealed a new and better Covenant between God and Man; and the Gentiles were redeemed from their vain conversation, received from their fathers, that is, from those idolatrous and impure practices they were guilty of; not with silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Jesus Christ, 1. Pet. 1.18, 19 Now the Gentiles were delivered from their Idolatry by the preaching of the Gospel, which is called their being redeemed by the blood of Christ, because we own this unspeakable blessing to his death.  
Thus the Jews are redeemed from the curse of the Law by the accursed death of Christ, 
Answer.  Gal. 3.13. so the Author; and thus Socinus, 
De Servat. part. 2. cap. 1.  Ad Judaeos tantùm pertinet, This belongs only to the Jews: But the Curse which fell upon Christ, was not a ceremonial one, but a real, such as put him into Agonies and a bloody Sweat; neither were the Jews only redeemed from it, but the Gentiles also; what else was this to the Galatians who were Gentiles? Were not the Gentiles also under the Curse, and by nature children of wrath? No doubt they were, the Apostle saith, That Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, ver. 14. And surely he would not argue from the Redemption of the Jews only to the Benediction of the Gentiles, but from what was common to both of them. The Gentiles were redeemed from their vain conversation, that is, from their idolatrous practices, with the blood of Christ; 1 Pet. 1.18, 19 that is, they were delivered by the preaching of the Gospel; So the Author: But when they were redeemed from their vain Conversation, they were redeemed from the guilt of it; and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this was not the Gospel, but the precious Blood of Christ, who was a Lamb without blemish and without spot.  
Those men are injurious to the Blood of Christ, 
Mr. Sherlock  who attribute no more to it than a non-imputation of sin; That by his death Christ, 
Dr. Owen Com. 193.  bearing and undergoing the punishment due to us, paying the ransom due for us, delivered us from the wrath and curse of God: And thus by Christ's death all cause of quarrel is taken away: But then this will not complete our acceptation, the old quarrel may be laid aside, and yet no new friendship begun; we may be not sinners, and yet not so far righteous, as to have a right to the Kingdom of heaven: So that the Blood of Christ only makes us innocent, delivers us from guilt and punishment; but (if we will take the Doctor's word for it) it can give us no title to Glory; this is owing to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, to the Obedience of his Life: But you see the Scripture gives us a quite different account of it; we are said to be justified and redeemed by the Blood of Christ; nay, We have boldness to enter into the holiest by the Blood of Jesus, Heb. 10.19. which is an allusion to the high Priest's entering into the Holy of Holies (which was a Type of Heaven) with the blood of the Sacrifice: Thus by the Blood of Christ we have admission into heaven itself, though the Dr. says, That the Blood of Christ makes us innocent, but cannot give us a Title to Heaven. The Scripture takes no notice of their artificial Methods, That the guilt of sin is taken away by the death of Christ, and that we are made righteous by his Righteousness: But the Blood of Christ is said to justify us, and to give us admission into the holiest of all; into heaven itself; nay, we are made righteous by the death of Christ too, 2 Cor. 5.21. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him: That is, Christ died as a Sacrifice for our sins, that we might be reconciled to God: So that our Righteousness as well as Innocence is owing to the death of Christ, to that Sacrifice he offered for our sins; his Blood had a great virtue in it, to make us righteous, to purge our consciences from dead works, that we might serve the living God; and our righteousness and accceptance with God is wholly owing to that Covenant, which he purchased and sealed with his Blood.  
I suppose the Author to be a very unfit man to put in this accusation: 
Answer.  Who attributes most to that Blood, the Author or these men, is a very short issue, and will soon he tried: Christ's Blood sealed and confirmed the Covenant; this is the all of it saith the Author: These men (though they do not stint it with an All) yet they freely own, That Christ's death did seal and confirm the Covenant; evidently therefore they attribute as much to Christ's blood, as the Author doth: But do they stay here? No, they say with the Apostle; That we are justified by Christ's blood, Rom. 5.9. And doth the Author do so? No surely, We are justified by his blood; that is, by the Gospel-Covenant, which was confirmed with his blood: Thus the Author: Now if justifying and confirming the Covenant be one thing, than the Author allows justification by Christ's blood; But justifying and confirming the Covenant are not one thing: Christ's blood, according to the Author, confirmed the Covenant for all; but it doth not justify all. Hence it appears, that the Author allows not justification by Christ's Blood; and yet he charges these men with being injurious to it; to which they attribute remission, or non-imputation of sin: But for the matter itself, I conceive that the Obedience and Blood of Christ are to be taken in conjunction; both together are the completure of the Law, both are imputed to us, both justify us unto life eternal. Hence I conceive where one is expressed in Scripture, the other is employed; when the Scripture saith, That we are justified by Christ's blood, Rom. 5.9. It doth include his Obedience; and when it saith, That we are made righteous by his obedience, Rom. 5.19. it doth include his Blood also. Hence our Church takes in both into justification: 
1. Hom. of Salvation.  He paid the ransom for them by his death; he fulfilled the Law for them in his life: so that in and by him every true Christian man may be called a fulfiller of the Law.  
But though our pardon and justifieation be attributed to the Blood of Christ; 
Mr Sherlock.  yet I could never persuade myself, that this wholly excludes the perfect Obedience and Righteousness of his life: For the Apostle tells us, That we are accepted in the beloved, Eph. 1.6. Whatever rendered Christ beloved of God, did contribute something to our acceptance: For because he was beloved, we are accepted for his sake: No man will deny, that God was highly pleased with his perfect Obedience: We know how many blessings God bestowed upon the children of Israel, for the sake of their Fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who were great examples of Faith and obedience, which made them very dear to God; and no doubt God was more pleased with the Obedience of Christ, than with the Faith of Abraham; and therefore we ought not to think that we receive no benefit by the Righteousness of Christ, when Abraham 's posterity was so blessed for his sake: But then Christ's Righteousness and Death serve not two such different ends, as these men fancy; but they both serve the same end to establish the Covenant: God was so well pleased with what Christ did and suffered; that for his sake he entered into a Covenant of Grace with man: As Abraham 's Faith was not imputed to his Posterity, as their act; but for Abraham 's sake, God entered into Covenant with them, and chose them for his peculiar people.  
Here we have the Author acknowledging, 
Answer.  that the obedience of Christ did contributé something to our acceptance with God: The children of Israel were blessed for Abraham 's obedience; and why may not we for Christ's? The confequence is undeniable; but there is a vast disproportion between Abraham's obedience and Christ's. Abraham's was but the obedience of a man, and of an imperct man; but Christ's was the obedience of God: His Blood is called, the blood of God; and for the very same reason his obedience may be styled the obedience of God: Abraham's had not a jot or tittle of merit in it, he had nothing to glory in before God: But Christ's was so richly meritorious as to purchase the Blessings of both Worlds: Abraham's was not imputed to his Posterity; it was little enough, and (without Christ's Righteousness to cover its defects) too little for himself: But Christ's is imputed to us, and is long enough, and broad enough to cover a multitude of Believers, and to justify them before God. The Covenant made with Abraham was the very Covenant of Grace; The Gospel was preached to Abraham, Gal. 3.8. And Abraham saw Christ's day and rejoiced, Joh. 8.56. And hence it appears, that the Covenant with Abraham was not founded in Abraham's Righteousness, but in Christ's; and therefore the Apostle tells us expressly, That it was confirmed before of God in Christ, Gal. 3.17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, before confirmed; The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tells us, that the Gospel was in Abraham's time.  
The obedience of Christ's life was one thing, 
Mr Sherlock.  which made his Sacrifice so meritorious, which was the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and spot; And this is the most that can be made of, Rom. 5.18, 19 As by the offence of one judgement came upon all to condemnation: So by the Righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all to justification of life: For as by one man's disobedience, many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous: There is no necessity of expounding this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, obedience, of the Righteousness of Christ's life; for it may well signify no more than the obedience of his death, notwithstanding the Doctor's distinction, that doing is one thing, and suffering another: For the Apostle tells us, That he became obedient unto death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Phil. 2.8. And his offering himself in Sacrifice, is called doing God's will, Heb. 10.9, 10. And whether this be properly said or not, I will leave the Doctor to dispute with the Apostle: It is plain, that in this Chapter there is no express mention made of any act of obedience and righteousness, whereby we are reconciled to God: But only his dying for us, in vers. 8. the Apostle tells us, That Christ died for us: In vers. 9 That we are justified by his blood: In the 10. That we are reconciled by his death; which makes it more than probable, that by his Righteousness and Obedience here, the Apostle understands his death and sufferings; because this was the subject of his discourse; but yet these expressions, His righteousness and obedience, seem to take in the whole compass of his obedience in doing and suffering the Will of God; and the meaning of the words is this: That as God was so highly displeased with Adam's sin, that he entailed a great many evils and miseries, and death itself upon his posterity for his sake: So God was so well pleased with the obedience of Christ's life and death, that he bestows the rewards of Righteousness on those who according to the rigour of the Law are not righteous; that for Christ's sake he hath made a new Covenant of Grace, which pardons our past sins, and rewards a sincere though imperfect obedience: For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, shall be made righteous, is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, shall be justified; That is, treated like righteous persons: So that Christ's Righteousness is not the formal cause of our justification; that very Righteousness, whereby we are righteous: But it is the meritorious cause of that Covenant, whereby we are declared Righteous, and rewarded as Righteous; for the Apostle tells us, in vers. 17. who those are, who are thus justified by Christ, and shall reign with him in life; not those who are Righteous by the imputation of Christ's Righteousness: But those who have received abundance of Grace, and the gift of Righteousness; that is, who by the Gospel, which is the abundant grace of God, are made holy and righteous, as God is; which Righteousness is called a gift, because it is not owing solely to humane endeavours, but is wrought in us by supernatural means: We are made righteous by the Righteousness of Christ, not that his actual obedience is reckoned as done by us (which is impossible) But because we are made righteous, both in a proper and forensick sense, by the Gospel-Covenant, which is wholly owing to God's Grace and Christ's Merits and Righteousness: So that the Righteousness of Christ is our Righteousness, when we speak of the foundation of the Covenant, by which we are accepted; but if we speak of the terms of the Covenant, than we must have a righteousness of our own; for the Righteousness of Christ will not serve the turn: Christ's Righteousness and our own, are both necessary to our Salvation; the first as the foundation of the Covenant, the other as the condition of it.  
We are now arrived at that famous place, 
Answer.  as by the offence of one judgement came upon all to condemnation; so by the Righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all to justification of life; as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, Rom. 5.18, 19 The Apostle here uses two words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Righteousness; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Obedience; both these signify the doing of God's Will, which doing for its rectitude is called Righteousness; and for its subjection, Obedience, neither of them do properly signify suffering: Mere suffering, which is not spirited with a right and subjective mind, is not Righteousness or Obedience: The Apostle here speaks of Righteousness in general, and Obedience in general, and who may pair off aught, and say, it is not all Christ's Righteousness or Obedience, but some; especially, when that some, the passive, I mean, is less properly such than the active? and what necessity or cogent reason is there for doing so? The Antithesis in the Text evinces the contrary; Act is here set in opposition against Act, Christ's Obedience against Adam's Disobedience. Now, for what the Author alleges, I say, it is true, that of Christ's being obedient, Phil. 2.8. reaches down to his death, but it takes in all the Obedience of his life; and that of Christ's doing Gods will, Hebr. 10.7. extends to the Sacrifice of himself, but it comprises all the righteousness of his life too. It is true, that the Apostle in this 5. Chapter to the Romans, doth first speak of Christ's Death and Sufferings; but his active and passive Obedience are so near in conjunction, that the Apostle may in his discourse easily pass from the one to the other: Nay, as I before noted, when the one is expressed in Scripture, the other is implied; so that the Apostle doth not indeed pass from one thing to another, but only vary his Phrase. The Author himself confesses, That those expressions, his righteousness and Obedience, seem to take in the whole compass of his Obedience, in doing and suffering the will of God. And how doth the active and passive righteousness of Christ justify us, or make us righteous? Why, these procured that Gospel Covenant, whereby we are declared righteous, and rewarded as righteous. Now, this Interpretation may stand good, when justifying and procuring the Covenant shall be, what they can never be, one and the same thing: Christ's active and passive Obedience, according to the Author, procured the Covenant for all Men; But surely they do not justify all Men. The whole Obedience of Christ may be considered two ways: either as it is procurative of the Covenant, and so it renders us justifiable; or as is it received by Faith, and so it actually justifies us: But neither of these can be without a Divine imputation; without that first fundamental imputation (which is implied in such Scripture expressions, as tell us, that Christ died for us) the Obedience of Christ could not have rendered us justifiable any more than it doth Devils; and without that second particular imputation (which is implied in such Scripture expressions, as tell us, That we are justified by Christ's Blood, that we are made righteous by Christ's Obedience.) the Obedience of Christ could not justify us; for it justifies us not as it procures the Covenant (that is done, according to the Author, for all Men; and all Men are not justified) but it justifies us, as it is particularly made ours; and made ours it cannot be without an Imputation. According to the Author, the Apostle must be interpreted thus: By the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all unto Justification of life; that is, by the righteousness of one the Covenant was procured: and so, by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous; that is, by the obedience of one the Covenant was procured. But this Interpretation is so harsh and strange, that, I suppose, few will be able to receive and own it: But the Author tells us, That the Apostle, in ver. 17. acquaints us, who the justified are, not those who are righteous by imputed righteousness, but those who by the Gospel, which is the grace of God, are made righteous as God is; But by the grace of God, vers. 17. is not meant the Gospel, but the rich mercy of God; and by the gift of righteousness there, is not meant inherent graces, but the righteousness of Christ, which is made over to us by a gracious imputation; the very same righteousness, which is called the righteousness of one, vers. 18. and the obedience of one, verse 19 The Apostle is so far from speaking of our own inherent righteousness, that the great scope of the Chapter is not of Sanctification, but Justification; and that not by a righteousness of our own, but of another, that is, of Christ. But now, let us hear the Author's conclusion: Christ's righteousness and our own, are both necessary to our salvation; the first, as the foundation of the Covenant; the other, as the condition of it. Very well, Faith in Christ is indeed the condition of the Covenant, and in us inherent; but I had thought, the Author had been treating of that righteousness, which is the matter of our justification, and not only of the condition of the Covenant: To understand what that righteousness is, which is the matter of our justification, we must consider, what it is which we are to answer unto in the point of justification; if we are only to answer unto the terms of the Gospel Covenant, than indeed Faith answers thereunto; but what will be the consequences of this? If we are only to answer unto the terms of the Gospel Covenant, than our Saviour, contrary to his words, came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to dissolve the Law, to untie all the Bonds of it, to loosen the very Foundation of it; then Justification is not in such a way, as establishes the Law, as the Apostle tells us, Rom. 3.31. But in such a way as voids and abrogates it, than all true Believers must be in a state of perfection, the defect of their Graces must be no sins, for they have that true Faith, which answers the terms of the Gospel; and to more than these they are not to answer; then the Gospel, the great Charter of Grace, hath no pardon in it, for no more is required of us, but the truth of Faith and other Graces; and the want of true Faith and other Graces the Gospel doth not pardon: Then Christ died not to obtain the pardon of those sins, which are consistent with Gospel-sincerity, but died to prevent them from being sins, which otherwise would have been sins, and to prevent them from being pardoned by his Blood; and to name but one thing more: Then all the Pagans must be in a justified state; for the Gospel Covenant being founded for them also, they are only to answer to the terms of the Gospel; and to these they have a very easy full answer, that they knew them not: By these things it appears, that in the point of Justification, we must answer not to the terms of the Gospel only, but to the pure perfect Law also; and to that, nothing of our own imperfect Graces can respond; nothing less can answer, but the perfect Righteousness and Obedience of Christ, which is made ours by imputation: Hence the Apostle tells us, That by the righteousness of one we have justification of life; and by the obedience of one, we are made or constituted righteous.   

SECT. iv  
According to the notion of these Men, 
Mr. Sherlock.  men may, nay, must be united to Christ while they continue in their sins; Mr. Shephard tells us expressly: That Obedience doth not make us God's People, or God our God; but he is first our God (which is only by the Covenant of Grace) and hence it is, that he being ours, and we his, we of all others are most bound to obey him: We are God's People, and that by virtue of the Covenant, before we obey him. The same Author tells us: That we are united to Christ our life, not by Obedience as Adam was to God by it, but by Faith (that is, by such a Faith of which Obedience is no part) and therefore as all actions in living things come from union, so all our acts of Obedience are to come by Faith, from the Spirit on Christ's part, and Faith on ours, which make the union; The meaning is this, We must first be united to Christ by Faith, before we can do any thing that is good; before this union the best actions we can do are sins, which is a plain demonstration of the truth of this charge; because according to this principle, we can do nothing but sin, before we be united to Christ; hence these Men constantly place our Justification before our Sanctification, that we are first accounted holy by God before we are made so; now our Justification follows our union to Christ, and our Sanctification follows our Justification; and therefore we must first be united to Christ, before we are sanctified, that is, before we are made holy: Hence we are told, that holiness is a remote end of vocation, but the next end is to come to Christ. And the same Author makes a speech for Christ to a Sinner (more gracious than all the Gospel invitations) though thou hast resisted my Spirit, refused my grace, wearied me with thy iniquities; yet come to me, this will make me amends, I require nothing of thee else but to come.  
We cannot indeed be united to Christ, whilst we continue in our sins, 
Answer.  in the wilful Indulgence of them; neither can we be holy, whilst we are separated from Christ, and the influence of his Holy Spirit. Mr. Shephard sets Faith in the first place, and then Obedience after it as a fruit thereof; and well he may do so, Ye are all the Children of God, by Faith in Christ Jesus, Gal. 3.26. Faith makes us God's People; Obedience, which comes after, proves us such: Without Faith it is impossible to please to God, Heb. 11.6. and therefore without Faith it must be impossible to obey him: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Faith is the beginning of life, saith Ignatius: Fides principium Christiani est, Faith is the first principle, 
Epist. ad Eph.  or mover in the new Creature, saith St. Ambrose: Laudo fructum boni operis, 
In Psal. 118. Ser. 20.  sed in Fide agnosco radicem, I praise the fruit of a good work, but I acknowledge the root of it to be in Faith: So St. Austin: And a little after he saith, 
In Psal. 31  That works before Faith are but, inania & cursus ceberrimus praeter viam, Vain things and a swift running beside the way. Hence our Church in the 1. Homily of good works assures us, That Faith giveth life to the Soul, and that they be as much dead to God that lack Faith, as they be to the World, whose Bodies lack Souls; that without Faith all that is done of us is but dead before God, all good works are but shadows and shows of good things; that out of Faith come good works, that be good works indeed, and without Faith no work is good before God. I suppose Mr. Shephard cannot speak more fully; it may seem harsh to some, that before Faith in Christ, there should be nothing good in us, that our best actions should be sins: but if we look on a wicked Man, that is, a Man without Faith in the Scripture-glass, nothing can be plainer; take him at an honest calling, The ploughing of the wicked is sin, Prov. 21.4. Take him in sacred or Devotional affairs, His Sacrifice is an abomination, Prov. 15.8. And so is his Prayer too, Prov. 28.9. Whatever his outward work or posture be, To the unbelieving there is nothing pure, Tit. 1.15. The very mind and conscience is defiled, and will be so till it be purified by Faith. Mr. Shephard places Justification before Sanctification; and what doth the Church of England do? It tells us in the 12. Article, That good works are the fruits of Faith, and follow after Justification, that they spring necessarily of a true and lively Faith. And in the 13. Article, That works done before the Grace of Christ, and the inspiration of his Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of Faith in Jesus Christ: Nay, in the close of that Article, our Church saith of such works, We doubt not but they have the nature of sin. As for Mr. Shepherd's speech for Christ, come in a sense, that they have in some measure resisted his Spirit, refused his Grace, and wearied him with their iniquities; the inviting of such is no more than that of our Saviour, which calls the weary, and heavy laden, to come to him for rest; in which all are concerned, except such as can without Christ earn a sanctity, or holiness at the finger's ends of Nature, and take a nap at home, in a presumption of their own worthiness and self made righteousness.  
But let us consider, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the whole progress of the Soul to a closure with Christ; the several steps to this are Conviction, Compunction, Humiliation, and Faith, which is the uniting Grace. Now if there be nothing of forjaking of sin included in all this, than Men must be united to Christ before they forsake their sins: Now, Conviction is a great sense of the evil of sin, and the evil after it, of its abominable & accursed Nature, and the Judgements which follow it; and this is as it ought to be, Men must be awakened to see these evils, before they will reform their lives; Reform? nay, you are out, this is not the end of Conviction to reform sin (that is a legal way) but Compunction is the end of it; well then, what is this Compunction? Why, Compunction is first a great fear of being damned, he sees death, wrath, eternity near to him; next to this succeeds a great sorrow and mourning for sin, and that which perfects this Compunction, is a separation from sin; this is something like, but by a separation from sin, you must not understand a leaving sin, but such a separation as consists with living in it; For it is nothing but a being willing, or rather not unwilling, that the Lord should take it away; the Lord doth not wound the heart, that the Soul should first heal itself, but that it may desire the Physician, the Lord Jesus, to come and heal it: So that all he means by separation from sin, is to be content that Christ by an irresistible power should take away our sins: By this Separation the Soul is cut off from the will to sin, not from all (no, nor from any) sin in the will, for that must be mortified by a Spirit of holiness, after the Soul is implanted into Christ. Now this is down right nonsense, for he must be a subtle Man, who can distinguish between a will to sin, and sin in the will; and all that can be made of it is this, that this separation is a willingness, or rather not unwillingness, that Christ should take away our sins against our wills; and therefore he tells us, That this Separation is no part of our Sanctification: The whole design of this Compunction, is to work humiliation in us, which is the work of the Spirit, whereby the Soul, broken off from self-conceit and confidence, submitteth and lieth under God, to be disposed as he pleaseth; this self-confidence is any hope of pleasing God, by Reformation, or Repentance, or any thing he can do. When Men feel this Compunction, the great danger is, lest they should sack ease, by Repentance and Reformation; if they can repent and reform, they have some hopes (as well they may if they do so) that this will heal their wounds, and pacify the Lord towards them, when they see no peace in a sinful course, they will try a good one: But this is a dangerous mistake; for while it is thus with the Soul, he is uncapable of Christ: For he that trusts to other things to save him, or makes himself his own Saviour, or rests in his duties without a Saviour (that is according to this Author, all those who repent and reform) he can never have Christ to save him: So that true Humiliation is this; when the Soul feels its own inability and unworthiness, that it may lie under God to be disposed of; that is, contented to be saved or damned, as shall please God; and when the Soul is at this pass, it is vas capax, a vessel capable of Grace: And now they are made thus hollow and empty by Humiliation, they are capable of receiving Christ, as an hollow vessel is of receiving any thing. This is a new notion of our union to Christ, that it is a receiving Christ into us, as an hollow vessel receives any liquor poured into it: This is a Philosophical account of the nature of Humiliation, that a man must have such a sense of his inability to please God, that he shall never dare to be so profane as to attempt it, but must leave repentance and reformation to carnal christless men; and that he may be so sensible of his unworthiness, that he shall contentedly submit to God to be damned or saved, as he pleases: And now the Soul being thus hollow, is fit to receive Christ; and being grown careless of its Salvation, and indifferent whether it be saved or damned, (for it is impossible thus to submit without being indifferent in some measure which God shall choose) it is a fit object for mercy; certainly it is a very hard thing to bring any man in his wits to this; and I find by this Author, that God is very hard put to it to humhle the Soul thus: For he is forced to irritate and stir up original corruption, to stir the dunghill (a very unfit office for an Holy Being) that so men finding themselves sensibly, grow worse and worse, may despair of growing better, and leave off such vain attempts, and sit down humble under God: Nay, the Lord loads, and tires, and wearies the Soul, by its own endeavours, till it can stir no more; That is, when the Soul labours to repent and reform; the Spirit of God, which should assist such pious endeavours withdraws itself; because it knows the Soul would rest therein without Christ: Now I know not, who suffers most by this: The sinner who is thus humbled, or God who thus humbles him; for it must needs be as contrary to the holy merciful nature of God, to use such methods of Humiliation, as it is to the proud heart of man, to be thus humbled: Thus you see that Humiliation hath nothing to do with repentance, and reformation of our lives.  
The steps of the Soul towards Christ, 
Answer.  are conviction, compunction, Humiliation, Faith: Now if there be nothing of forsaking of sin in all this, than men must be united to Christ before they forsake their sins: So the Author: But doth Mr. Shepherd allow of no kind of forsaking of sin before union to Christ? Yes surely, There is, saith he, a separation from sin; so much separation, as makes the Soul willing, that sin should be taken away: So much separation, as is necessary to the Souls closing with Christ: He never thought that a man indulging his lusts, should immediately come, and be united to Christ: No, every step or degree, which he sets in the Souls progress to a closure with Christ, proves the contrary, what need conviction, compunction, humiliation; If the Soul, wallowing in its lusts, might be united to Christ. But Mr. Shephard makes the end of conviction to be, not reformation of sin, but compunction: But how doth he so? What, that there is no tendency at all in conviction towards reformation? No, he saith expressly, that the next end of it is compunction. Sorrow for sin is so called for in Scripture; that no man may deny it to be one of God's methods, by which he uses to bring men home to himself: Neither is it imaginable, that sin our old joy, unless in some measure it become our sorrow, should ever be reform, as it ought, without compunction (saith Mr. Shephard) a sinner will never part with his sin: A bare conviction doth but light the Candle to see sin; but compunction burns his fingers, and that makes him dread the fire: But Mr. Shephard (who places this compunction in a fear of wrath, sorrow for sin, and separation from sin) means by separation, not a leaving of sin, but a being willing, or rather not unwilling, that the Lord should take it away, and that by an  power, and that against our wills. To which, I answer, touching  Grace, and that objection, as if we were made willing against our will, I have before discoursed: In compunction there is a leaving of sin in some measure; the fear of wrath will make a man start from it; sorrow for sin will make it cease to be joy; separation from sin, so as to be willing to have it taken away, is a kind of withdrawing and departure of heart from it: But indeed in this compunction, there is not such a leaving of sin, as if we could be our own Physicians, and heal our corrupt natures, as if we could ourselves reach that victory over the world and its lusts, which is the triumph of Faith, as if we could mortify the deeds of the body, without that holy Spirit, which is given to Believers for that end: This were to render Christ, Faith, the holy Spirit unnecessary to our Sanctification, and to render ourselves like those Pagans (of whom St. Austin speaks) who would not be made Christians, Quia quasi sibi sufficiunt de bonâ vitâ suâ. Mr. Shephard saith, 
Enarr. in Psal. 31.  That this separation from sin cuts off the Soul from the will to sin, not from all sin in the will, which is mortified by the Spirit of Holiness: Now this (saith the Author) is down right nonsense; for he must be a subtle man, who can distinguish between a will to sin, and sin in the will: But, I suppose, no great subtlety is required to solve this; by a will to sin is meant that act of the will, whereby it is carried out to sin as its beloved Object; and by sin in the will is meant that habitual corruption, which is there: In compunction there is such a separation from sin, that the will is not in its acts carried out, as before, to sin as its pleasure, joy, and pursuit; but not such a separation from sin, as if the habitual corruption in the will were mortified, as after Faith it is by the holy Spirit: But, saith Mr. Shephard, Huniiliation breaks off the Soul from self-considence: after compunction men are apt to seek ease by repentance and reformation, to try a good course: but if they trust in themselves, or rest in their duties without a Saviour; they are uncapable of Christ; that is, saith the Author, all those who repent and reform, are uncapable of Christ: And must the world believe, that Mr. Shephard is against repentance and reformation? Surely, there is no reason at all for it, the thing is very plain, if a man will stand like the proud Pharisee upon his bottom; if with the Jews he will go about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to make to stand his own weak cadaverous righteousness, if he will repent and reform in his own strength, and without coming to Christ the Fountain of Grace: Surely he is not, whilst in this proud posture, capable of Christ: Repentance and Reformation are good things, but they must be done in a good manner, they must not be made our Christ's or Saviour's, they must not keep us off from Jesus Christ, or make us say, as the Pagan mentioned by St. Austin did, Jam benè vivo, quid mihi necessarius est Christus? I can live well already, what need have I of Christ? All that reformation, which is without Faith in Christ, is, as our Church saith of works without Faith, But dead before God: Nemo computet bona opera sua ante fidem, saith St. Austin, If we would reform indeed, we must go to Christ by Faith: But, saith the Author, in this Humiliation of Mr. Shepherd's, a man must have such a sense of his inability to please God, that he must not dare be so profane as to attempt it; and such a sense of his unworthiness, as to submit to God, whether he will save or damn him, he must in some measure be indifferent, whether he be saved or damned; but it is an hard thing to bring a man in his wits to this. To which, I answer, for the first, a sense of our inability to please God, is a thing so necessary, that our Saviour tells Laodicea, that she was wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked, and must have her gold, and raiment, and eyesalve, and all from him: If we think we can please God in ourselves, & not in the beloved Jesus Christ; or that we can please God, by walking in our own strength, and not in the power of Grace, we do but deceive ourselves, and our labour will be but in vain; it will far with us, as it did with the man storied of in one of the Jewish Rabbins, who in the night lighted his Candle, and it went out again, and lighted it again, and again, and still it went out: Our Lamps of a self-made Sanctity and Righteousness, though trimmed over and over, with our endeavours, will certainly go out, and at last we must resolve, as he did, to wait for the Sun, to have all Grace come down to us in the healing Beams of the true Sun of Righteousness, Jesus Christ. And as for the second thing, a sense of our unworthiness, so as to submit to God, whether he will save or damn us; it is no such strange thing to me, that poor finners should lie prostrate at God's feet, acknowledging their worthiness to be for ever condemned, and God's Sovereignty in dispenfing Grace as he pleases; it is no more but only to subscribe to that of the Apostle, He will have mercy, on whom he will have mercy; and whom he will he hardeneth, Rom. 9.8. Theodorus Cornhertus, though in his life he had writ against Calvin and Beza, in the point of Predestination, yet at his death professed to God, Se animam suam à Deo possidere, quam Deo integrum sit, pro suo beneplacito, servare vellet an reprobare, sibi nil esse quod conqueratur: Either we have power in our hands to work true Faith in ourselves, to regenerate our own hearts, or not 5 if we say, we have such a power in ourselves, how shall those Scriptures be salved, which tell us, That God begets us of his own will, James 1.18. That he worketh the will of his own good pleasure, Phil. 2.13. That the regenerating spirit bloweth where it listeth, Joh. 3.8. That faith is not of ourselves, but the gift of God, Eph. 2.8. How shall God's Royal Prerogative, which is to make a new heart, to take away the stone of it, to sprinkle the clean water, to put his Spirit into men, as we have it, Ezeck. 36. ever be preserved inviolate? It cannot be, but if, as becomes us, we faith, that God is the great Worker of regenerating Graces in us; how can we do less than lie prostrate at his feet and pleasure for it? The case is very short, either Gods will must depend on Man's, or Man's will must depend on Gods; and one would think it very reasonable, that Man, a Creature, a mere Receiver should depend on him who is a God and great Donor of all. The Fathers in the second Arausican Council, Can. 4. determine thus: Si quis, ut à peccato purgemur, voluntatem nostram Deum expectare contendit, non autem, ut etiam purgari velimus, per Sancti Spiritus infusionem & operationem, in nos fieri confitetur, resistit ipsi Spiritûi Sancto: You see they make Man's will hang upon Gods, and not è contrà: This submission to Gods will is not, as if we might be indifferent whether we were saved or damned; but that we must lie at God's feet, humbly confessing our desert of eternal damnation on the one hand, and the Sovereignty of God's free Grace on the other: And that such a man is in his wits, hear the judgement of learned Bishop Reynolds, 
Sinful. of sin 262.  That man, who can in secret and truth of heart willingly, and uncompulsorily stand on God's side against sin, and against himself for it, giving God the glory of his Righteousness, if he should condemn him; and of his unsearchable and rich mercy, that he doth offer to forgive him; I dare pronounce that man to have the Spirit of Christ; for no man by nature can willingly and uprightly own damnation, and charge himself with it, as his due portion: Thus he: But, saith the Author, I find God is very hard put to it, to humble the Soul thus: For he is forced to stir up original corruption, which is a very unfit office for an holy Being. To which, I answer; God is too high to be put into an office, and too wise to do that which is unfit; yet in Scripture we find him withdrawing from, and hardening of men: The Church cries out, O Lord, why hast thou made us to err from thy way! and hardened our hearts from thy fear? Isai. 63.17. Nevertheless God doth what he doth in a just decorum, in a way congruous to himself; so that his Holiness, or any other Attribute suffers not thereby; and withal in a way profitable to men: When God left good Hezekiah to fall, I doubt not but it was so far profitable to him, as it did humble him for the pride of his heart: when he withdraws and leaves the humbled sinner to the stir of inward corruption, it hath a very merciful issue; if it carry him out of himself to Christ: The very withdrawings of the Spirit, are by itself made use of, to make the sinner hasten out of himself to Christ.  
Mr. Shephard saith, 
Mr. Sherlock  That true Faith is the coming of the Soul, not unto duties of Holiness (which is obedience properly) but unto Christ, Which notion of our union to Christ is such, that according to it, wicked men, who live in sin, may be united to Christ: But the Scripture places the formal nature of our union to Christ in a subjection to his Authority, and obedience to his Laws; an holy life must not only follow our union to Christ, as an effect of it; but must at least in order of nature go before it; because by this we are united to Christ: We are not real members of Christ, till we sincerely obey him, till our minds are transformed into his Image. Our union to Christ is more or less perfect according to our attainments in true Piety and Virtue: The first and lowest degree of Union to Christ, is a belief of his Gospel, which in order of Nature must go before Obedience to it: But yet it includes a purpose of obeying it; and in this sense we must be united to Christ before we can be holy, because this belief of his Gospel is the great principle of Obedience, as our Saviour tells his Disciples: Abide in me, and I in you, as the branch cannot bring forth fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me, Joh. 15.4. But then our Union is not perfected without Obedience: This makes us the true Disciples of Christ, when we are fruitful in good works, as he adds in vers. 8. Herein is my Father glorified, that you bring forth much fruit, so shall you be my Disciples; A belief of the Gospel, and a purpose of Obedience is all can be expected from beginners; but this doth not give an actual title to all the promises of the Gospel, unless we actually obey it: But when in the strength of this Faith, we conquer the world and the flesh, and improve all opportunities of doing good: This makes us the Disciples of Christ indeed, and heirs of Glory. Nothing can be a greater dishonour to our Saviour, nor a greater contradiction to his Gospel, than to affirm, that wicked men, while they continue such, are actually united to Christ, and thereby have an actual right to pardon and eternal life: St. John understood not this Doctrine, when he told us: God is light, and in him is no darkness at all: If we say, we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness (live in any sin) we lie and do not the truth: but if we walk in the light, as God is in the light; then have we fellowship one with another, 1 Joh. 1.5, 6, 7. This doctrine doth not only take away the necessity of Holiness, in order to our Union to Christ; but destroys the necessary obligations to Holiness and Obedience for the future, and so thrusts Holiness quite out of the Christian Religion: Our Union to Christ is perfected, while we are unholy; and when we are united to Christ, there is less need of Holiness than before: For now the merit of Christ's death is imputed to us, to remove the guilt and punishment of sin; and his actual obedience is imputed to us, to make us righteous, and to give us an actual right to glory: So that if men will obey Christ out of a principle of good nature and thank fullness, they may, but according to this notion there is no necessity of it, because they are delivered from wrath, and have a right to eternal life without it.  
Still the Author goes on with this charge, 
Answer.  That wicked men, who live in sin, may be united to Christ. Mr. Shephard holds, that we are united to Christ by Faith: And are Believers wicked men? they receive Christ, whole Christ, as their Prophet to teach them, their Priest to satisfy for them; their King to rule them: and upon account of this receiving, they are the sons of God, Joh. 1.12. And are they wicked men for all this? they have the promise of pardon and justification, Act. 13.39. The promise of the Spirit, Joh. 7.38.39. The promise of eternal life, Joh. 3.16. And may we call them wicked men? If wicked men may be entitled to such promises, there is no need at all of Holiness or Obedience: But, saith the Author, an holy life must not only follow our Union to Christ: But at least in order of nature go before it, because by this we are united to Christ. To which I answer; Without doubt that Faith, which in Scripture phrase doth come to Christ, receive Christ, put on Christ, and feed upon Christ, must needs unite to him; and of this Faith, Obedience, or an holy Life is not a part, but a fruit; all those worthies, Heb. 11. First believed; and then by that Faith produced all those acts of Obedience there recorded: First, We are married to Christ by Faith, and then we bring forth fruit unto God, Rom. 7.4. And in that fifth Chapter of John quoted by the Author: First, there are branches in Christ by Faith, and then there is holy Fruit brought forth: An holy Life must needs presuppose Faith, it flows out of a pure heart, and the heart cannot be such without Faith: It is a conformity to the Divine Rule, and that Rule cannot be assured to be such but by Faith: It is leveled at the Glory of God, and the single eye, which looks at that great end, is Faith; without which the whole Body of our Works is full of darkness: Now if Faith unite to Christ, and precede Obedience or an holy Life; than it is evident, that Obedience or an holy Life do not go before our Union to Christ, but follow after it: But, saith the Author, our Union to Christ is not perfected without Obedience. Hence our Saviour saith, Herein is my Father glorified, that you bear much Fruit, so shall ye be my Disciples, Joh. 15.8. To which, I answer; Our Union to Christ is not indeed perfect before Obedience, as to its Fruit and Consequences: but it is as to its essentials; for the Believer in the very instant of believing hath a true title to the promises of pardon, of the Spirit and of eternal Life: So that should he immediately, and before any one act of Obedience departed this Life, he should undoubtedly, and without any scruple enter that blessed Region, where are the spirits of just men made perfect; as for that place, Joh. 15.8. where our Saviour tells them, That bearing of fruit they should be his Disciples, it is parallel to that place, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my Disciples, Joh. 8.31. In both they were Disciples before: In that Joh. 8.31. they were Disciples before that period of life, unto which their continuance in the word extends itself; or else their discipleship must have been adjourned to the other World: And in that Joh. 15.8. they were Disciples before their bearing of fruit, for they could not bear fruit without being branches in Christ; and Branches they could not be without being Disciples: when there fore our Saviour saith, so shall ye be my Disciples, the meaning only is, that by their fruitfulness they should give a real proof and demonstration, that they are indeed true Disciples and Branches of Christ. But, saith the Author, This Doctrine destroys the obligations to holiness, and thrusts holiness out of the Christian Religion; our union to Christ is perfected while we are unholy, and when we are united to Christ, there is less need of holiness than before, for now the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us. To which I answer, As to that, that our union to Christ is perfected while we are unholy: If by unholy, be meant only before a holy life, Believers before that are so perfectly united to Christ, as to have a true title to the promises of Pardon, the Spirit, and Salvation: If by unholy, is meant a wicked Man, no wicked Man is united unto Christ; this would be a dishonour to our Saviour, a contradiction to the Gospel; such a one walks in darkness, and cannot have fellowship with God, who is Light, as St. John speaks: But a Believer (who before an holy life is united to Christ) is not, must not be called a wicked Man. As to the other, That when we are united to Christ, there is no need of holiness, because of the righteousness of Christ imputed to us. I answer, That before I have proved, that this assertion, that imputed righteousness makes holiness needless, is but a Popish calumny, and without any ground at all.   

SECT. V  
ACcording to these principles, 
Mr. Sherlock.  there is no certain way to get into Christ; the method prescribed is, Conviction, Compunction, Humiliation, and Faith, which is the uniting Grace. Now I observe first, that a Man is passive in all this, and can contribute nothing to it himself, any otherwise than as he is acted by an irresistible power; and it is a vain thing to give such rules and directions, as no man can follow; this only tells us, by what methods God unites us to Christ, not what we must do, but what we must suffer in order to this union; A Sinner may stir up in himself some natural Conviction of sin, some natural fear, sorrow, etc. And in a sense of this, may set upon the work of Reformation, of leaving his sins and performing duties: But all this they tell us, is to no purpose, for unless this Conviction, Compunction, Humiliation, be wrought in us by the irresistible power of the Spirit of God, (which no Man can possibly tell whether it be or not) it is not of the right stamp, and will avail us nothing; so that the Sinner hath nothing to do but to sit still, and patiently expect, till God will do all for him.  
The method is Conviction, Compunction, 
Answer.  Humiliation, and Faith, but a Man is passive in all this: How passive? what is he to sit still, and do nothing at all? No surely, he may abstain from outward Acts of sin; he may do Acts of Sobriety, Justice, Charity; he may hear, pray, but internal Grace is God's work. Some have taken those words, Let us make Man, as if God hath spoke to the four Elements, and said, Vos date Corpus, ego dabo Animam: Do you give the Body, I'll give the Soul. If I may allude to this Gloss, thus it is, Man may frame a Body of outward Piety, but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the inward life of Grace, is from God only; it is he, Who quickeneth the dead in trespasses and sins, Eph. 2.1. Believers are not born of the will of Man, but of God, Joh. 1.13. But, saith the Author, It is a vain thing to give such rules and directions, as no Man can follow. To which I answer, Rules are not therefore vain, because Man cannot follow them by his own power; God gave not the Moral Law in vain, yet the spotless sanctity of it was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a mere impossible thing to any fallen Man in the World; God bid them not in vain, to make a new heart, Ezek. 18.31. and yet claims it as his prerogative, and as an act of special Grace to make such an heart, Ezek. 36.26. Christ did not in vain call Men to come to him; and yet withal tells them, That no Man could come to him, except the Father drew him, Joh. 6.44. Moses was but to lift up the Rod, but it was God only who could divide the Sea; we are to use the means, but it is God only who can work the great work of Grace: These Rules, though we cannot follow them of ourselves, may yet show us our duty; and if we reflect upon ourselves, they may point out our impotency to us, and withal they minister under that Spirit, which in the use of means infuses the life of Grace into Men. Polychronius in the 6. Council of Constantinople, offered by a Paper, containing in it the Doctrine of the Monothelites, to raise a dead Man to life again. Mr. Shephard never thought that his rules, though containing excellent truths in them, could raise the Spiritually dead; but this they do, they minister under that Divine Spirit, which breathes regenerating Graces into the Soul. St. Paul would have Timothy instruct the Opposers, not as if they had a power of themselves to repent, but if God peradventure would give them repentance, 2 Tim. 2.25. All Rules and Instructions do but minister under the Holy Spirit, who gives Faith and Repentance as it pleaseth. But saith the Author, These tell us not, what we must do, but what we must suffer in order to our union to Christ. To which I answer, we are to use the means, and thus far we must be doers, but, I suppose, we must suffer the Holy Spirit to have the glory of our Regeneration, we must not presume to be such doers, as if we could work Regeneration ourselves, or by our works procure it. Pelagius would have been a doer in this kind, alleging that, Gratiam darisecundum merita, that is, in the Phrase of the Ancients in those days, secundum opera, that Grace was given according to works: But, unless he had recanted, he had in the Palestine Council been by the Church turned into a Sufferer, by a just Excommunication; neither is our Church for any such doers, for it tells us in the 13. Article, That works done before Grace do not make Men meet to receive Grace, or deserve Grace of congruity; yea, rather they have the nature of sin. The Inspiration of the Spirit (which that Article mentions) must work the great work of Grace in us; which when we see in ourselves, we must needs acknowledge the insuperable power that was in it.  
Suppose a Man have this Conviction, 
Mr Sherlock.  Compunction, Humiliation, is this a sufficient reason to lay hold upon Christ by Faith? by no means: The end of Conviction is Compunction, the end of Compunction Humiliation; and all this carries us no nearer to Christ, than quietly to lie down before God, that he may do what he will with us, he may save or damn us: So that all this contributes nothing to our union to Christ, but brings us to such a temper of mind, as to be content to have Christ, or go without him as God shall please; this is all Men get by Humiliation, that if the Lord intent to do them good, this is the way in which he will do it; but though they be humbled, they cannot be sure whether God intent to do them good or not; therefore we are told, we are as much bound to submit to God, whether he will save or damn us, as we are to submit to the disposal of God, as to any common mercy; though you must pray for mercy, it must be with submission to God's good will; saying, the Lords will is good, whether it be to save or damn; but mine is evil, though it be to be saved, and have Jesus Christ: Nay, we are much more bound to submit to God, whether he will save or damn us, than we are to submit in the lesser concernments of this life; if it be pride to murmur, in case the Lord deny you smaller matters, the offalls of this life; is it not greater pride to quarrel with him, if he deny the greater, the things of another life? Is he bound to give thee greater, who doth not owe thee the least? The Lord gives you life, but you ask for treasures of Grace and Mercy; (now God hath given you life, you would live for ever, an unpardonable fault this!) thousands of pounds, Christ and all he is worth, and the Lord seems to deny you, and now you sink and grow sullen; may not the Lord say, Was there ever such pride & insolence? as to be unwilling to be damned for ever; though I dare say, this is not the pride which cast the Angels out of Heaven; so that though Humiliation be the way to Christ, yet it brings us never the nearer him; when all is done, we are where we were: Before Humiliation, it was at God's pleasure, whether we should have Christ or not, and so it is still.  
The humbled Soul may, 
Answer.  without doubt, lay hold upon Christ; but we must remember, that we cannot do it by the power of Nature, but must do it by the Grace of God: Faith is a great receiver, it receives Christ, and all blessings in and with him; but this Faith, this very receiving, must be received from Grace: Nothing is plainer in Scripture, than that Faith is the gift of God; hence it is called the fruit of the Spirit, Gal. 5.22. and Faith of the operation of God, Col. 2.12. It is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, Eph. 2.8, And such a gift it is, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it is freely gratuitously given, Phil. 1.29. Seeing then it is thus, should we not submit to God for every crumb of bread, drop of drink, and moment's patience, because they are his gifts; and must we not submit to him for Faith, because it is such? Had not God given a Jesus, a Saviour, to Men, they could not have made a just complaint against him; and now there being one, that he is not known all the World over, the Pagans may not open their lips against God; and in the Church where Christ is known, that all Men have no Faith, no Man may question God about it: Gifts are free and must be submitted for. The Apostle asserts God's Sovereignty clearly: He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth, Rom. 9.18. And if any dare repy or find fault, the Apostle takes him up: Nay, but O Man, who art thou that repliest against God? If thou hadst but any sentiments of thy own nothingness, or rays of the Divine Majesty, thou wouldst never dare to question, or to implead thy Maker; before whom thou art but a Worm, a piece of Clay to be disposed of at his pleasures: It is certain that God owes us nothing. Though we are in the use of means earnestly to seek Christ & Faith; and not in a careless indifferent manner (as without cause the Author would hint Mr. Shepherd's mind to be) yet we must still adore God's Sovereignty, and lie at his feet for all his Gifts, and particularly for Faith. It was horrible insolence and presumption in him, who prayed: Red mihi vitam aeternam, quam debes; And it would be no less for any one to pray: Red mihi fidem vivam quam debes: Verbum (debet) venenum habet, as Peter Lombard hath it. These things considered, Mr. Shepherd's words need no more but only a candid Interpretation.  
What then is to be done, 
Mr Sherlock.  in order to our closing with Christ by Faith? for hitherto there is no foundation for our Faith. Why, you must not catch at Christ, but stay till God give him to you, till God take you into his Arms, that you may lean upon your Beloved; you must stay till God give you a particular call, to come to Christ; and whether that will be ever or never, no Man can tell. Many a wounded Sinner will be scrambling from some general reports of him (such as his Gospel makes) before the day and hour of God's glorious call: Now, for any Man to receive Christ, before he is called, is presumption: (I, unpardonable presumption too, to attempt impossibilities, for no Body can come till he is called) no man should come unless first called (and therefore no crime to stay away) as it is in calling to an Office, so it is in our calling to special Grace: No Man takes this honour, but he that is called of God, Heb. 5.4. (It is a great presumption to usurp the Office of a Priest, Prophet, or King, without a designation; and so it is to be a good Man, or Christian, without a particular call.) For what hath any Man to do with Christ, to make himself a Son of God and Heir of glory, (to take care to please God, and to make himself happy) but he that is called of God, Well, Sinner! wait with patience till thou art called, and so thy work is at an end for this time.  
The Author laughs at Mr. Shepherd's particular call, 
Answer.  let us therefore consider it; there is a double call, a general external call reaching to all in the Church, and a particular internal call, vouchsafed to some: The first, is a command, a sufficient warrant to come to Christ; The second, is a special Act of Grace, which infallibly produces Forth in those to whom it is given: This distinction is clearly founded in Scripture, all in the Church are called, but all are not drawn of the Father, all do not hear and learn of the Father, Joh. 6.44, 45. For these taught and drawn ones do all of them come to Christ, which all Men in the Church do not; all in the Church are called, but all are not called according to purpose, Rom. 8.28. for then all would love God, as those called one's do, and by consequence all would have that Faith, which works by love. We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greeks foolishness, but to them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and wisdom of God, 1 Cor. 1.23, 24. All of them had an external general call; those to whom Christ was a stumbling block and foolishness, had such a call; for an unknown, an unreveiled Christ could not be a stumbling block or foolishness: But besides this call there is another, an internal effectual call, such as makes Christ the power and wisdom of God to Men, such as works Faith and other Graces in Men: Hence the Apostle saith, That they are the called, called with a more internal and efficacious call than other Men are. These things laid down, all things in Mr. Shephard are very easy; all Men in the Church have an external call, and so a sufficient warrant to believe in Christ, it will be no presumption at all in them to do so. The Object, Jesus Christ is evidently set forth before their eyes, but that they may believe in him indeed, they must wait for a particular internal call, for that Grace which works Faith in the heart; if not, the work of Faith must be their own; they must believe of themselves: And this I fear, though the Object, Christ be free for them would be presumption, because the Scripture assures us, that Faith is the gift of God. All Men in the Church should come to Christ, for the Evangelical command makes it their duty; yet, if we believe our Saviour, there must be internal teachings and tractions from the Father, to make us truly come to him: All in the Church are by the Gospel called to be Believers, & so to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the Royal dignity, to be Sons of God, Joh. 1.12. to the Divine Offices, to be Kings and Priests unto God, Rev. 1.6. But this believing is produced by that internal efficacious call, which calleth things that are not as though they were; I mean, which calleth Faith into being where it was not before. But than saith Mr. Sherlock: The Sinner must only wait till he is called, and so his work is at an end for this time. To which I answer, His work is not at an end, because he is still to wait; if the Scripture, which makes Faith the free-gift of God, be true, there is no nearer passage to Heaven, then by waiting upon God for Faith in the use of means. The Saints of God, if we observe their posture in the Scripture, endeavour all they do in a way of dependence upon the Grace of God; a famous instance is David in the 119. Psalm: With my whole heart have I sought thee, saith he: But O let me not wander from thy Commandments, vers. 10. I will run the way of thy Commandments but do thou enlarge my heart, Vers. 32. Consider how I love thy Precepts, but quicken me according to thy loving kindness, vers. 159. Lord I have hoped for thy Salvation, and done thy Commandments, vers. 166. all his endeavours were under Grace; and if Believers in all their endeavours wait upon the Grace of God, much more should Sinners wait upon God for Faith in the use of means. 
Mr. Sherlock   
But how shall a poor humbled Sinner know when he is called, that then he may come to Christ? You must not mistake the general offers of the Gospel for this special call, for they are not a sufficient foundation for our Faith, though they are made to the weary and heavy laden: Men cannot, will not come at such a call, and they have no reason to do it, for Christ is not intended for all; therefore though he be offered to all in the Gospel, yet it would be presumption for every one to lay hold on him, for Christ doth not immediately offer himself to all Men as a Saviour, whereby they may be encouraged to serve him as a King (that is he does not promise Salvation and Eternal life in the Gospel, with a design that every one that will, should take encouragement from these promises, to obey and serve him.) But first, as a King commanding them, to cast away their weapons, and stoop under his Sceptre, acknowledging that if ever he save me, I will bless him; if he damn me, his Name is righteons in so dealing with me, that is, every Man is invited in the Gospel to submit himself to the mercy of Christ; but then Christ reserves a liberty to himself to save or damn as he pleases; these are hard terms, and such as sound wore like the arbitrary will of an haughty Lord, than the conditions of a gracious Saviour.  
Christ died so far for all Men, 
Answer.  as to found the general promises of the Gospel for them, to make them saveable upon Gospel terms, which Devils are not; and these general promises are a sufficient groundwork and warrant, for them to come to Christ; it is no presumption for any Man to do so, but these general promises are not that internal call, which produces Faith in Men. Christ, saith Mr. Shephard, doth not immediately offer himself as a Saviour, to encourage them to serve him as a King; that is, saith the Author, he doth not promise Salvation, with a design to encourage every one that will to serve him. To which I answer, The promise is an encouragement to all Men to serve him; but, that this may be done, they must lay down their weapons, they must stoop under his Sceptre, or else surely they cannot serve him. But Mr. Shephard goes on, They must acknowledge, if he save me I will bless him, if he damn me he is righteous; that is, saith the Author, every Man is invited in the Gospel to submit to the mercy of Christ, but Christ reserves a liberty to himself to save or damn, which are hard terms: To which, I answer, God was under no necessity to give us a Jesus, a Gospel, a promise of Salvation: What if there had been none? would not the terms have been harder, or rather no terms at all? What hope of Salvation could there then have been? yet in all this God would have been like himself, the Righteous One; man could not have uttered the least just complaint against him: But now there is a Gospel, what is the Liberty to save or damn which Christ reserves? Is it a liberty to save men, though unbelievers; or damn men, though believers? No surely, the Gospel stands firm, that the believer shall be saved, the unbeliever shall be damned, and that without any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or difference among men; but still Christ reserves to himself his Prerogative, the key of David, to open the hearts of men, as he did Lydia's, to believe upon him; he dispenses Faith as he pleases: And no man may say to him, what dost thou? He gives not an account of such matters.  
What then must we do now? Why, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the only remedy is to venture and try, God hath elected but few: Christ hath shed his Blood for few; therefore we must venture (and a hard venture it is, where there is such great odds-against us, and yet our eternal happiness depends upon the success, too great a stake for such a venture) As many men among us do now, who hearing of a good living fallen; twenty will go for it, though but one can have it (though did they know it were irrevocably decreed, who should have it, none of them would stir, but wait for the news: Good God what Merchant adventurers are poor sinners, who after all their seeking for Christ, are in such danger of missing him?) Or as the Lepers in Samaria, if we stay here, we must die: If we go out to the Assyrians, we may live, Which is the resolution of desperate men, as it seems the Gospel condemns us all to be. No previous dispositions can give us encouragement to come to Christ, Humiliation cannot do it: After this we must expect a call still; we are but probationers, and may miss him; nay, assurance itself cannot do it, for if you come to Christ, because you have assurance, (That is, if you come to Christ, because you are sure you are come) or because you feel such Graces and Heavenly impressions of God's Spirit in you, than you may many a day and year keep at a distance from Christ, and live without Christ: This is an hard saying, though we come to Christ, we may be at a distance; nay, though we come because we are sure we are come already: It is time now to give over, when assurance is no security.  
What then must we do now? 
Answer.  We must venture and try, God hath elected but few: Christ hath shed his blood for few; therefore we must venture, and an hard venture it is, and great odds against us. Thus the Author: To which, I answer, God hath elected but few: But do secret things belong to us? May we pry into the eternal Rolls, and make them the measures of our acting? No surely, the Rule is before us in the Gospel, which we must not wave, because there are secret Decrees: A man, that would argue against himself; and his venturing upon Christ from these principles, must do it thus: If I am eternally reprobated, than it is to no purpose to venture upon Christ: but I am eternally reprobated; Ergo, it is to no purpose to venture: But how doth he know the Minor, or what reason hath he for it? What madness and desperate rashness is it to say that which he cannot know, and that against his own Soul and eternal Salvation? Is there any such reprobation in Scripture, as bars out of Heaven, such as by Faith venture upon Christ? No surely, Christ hath so far died for all men, as to found for them that general promise: whosoever believeth, shall be saved: This is a plain sure foundation for men to venture upon, none that by Faith venture upon Christ shall be barred out of Heaven by any Decree of God, because his Decree cannot clash with his Promise: It is very irregular arguing to say, I know not God's Decree, therefore I'll neglect my duty. St. Paul exhorts the Philippians to work out their Salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God, which worketh in you to will and to do of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.12, 13. Might the Philippians have said, how do we know what Gods pleasure is, or what he will work in us? Why should we work at such a venture, or at the pleasure of another? No, the fear and trembling in the Text was enough to keep them back from arguing at that rate: Suppose now, that there were no such thing as Election, will there not be a paucity, and an hard venture still? Our Saviour tells us, that few find the way to life, Matth. 7.14. And God, whose prescience is immutable, eternally foresaw that it would be so; and what must we do now? May we deny the truth of Christ's words, or of God's prescience? Surely we ought not, or may we argue thus: Few enter into life, why should I venture? It's an hard venture, and great odds against me; May I now cry out, Good God, what Merchant adventurers are poor sinners? Surely it doth not at all become me; I must look upon the Rule in the Word, and endeavour to do my duty: Duties belong to us, and issues to God: But to pass on, according to Mr. Shephard, it seems assurance itself cannot secure us, to which the bare recital of Mr. Shepherd's words will be answer enough: they are these; The Call of Christ is the ground by which we first believe: It is a constant ground of Faith; For, if you come to Christ, because you have assurance, or because you feel such and such Graces, and heavenly Impressions of God's Spirit in you, you may then many a day and year keep at a distance from Christ, and lie without Christ, for the feeling of Graces and assurance of favour are not constant: His meaning is very plain, the Call of Christ is the ground of our first believing; and it is a constant ground, if by after renewed acts of Faith we come to Christ, because we have assurance; we may many a day live without Christ, for assurance is no constant thing, as the Call is. The Author, I suppose, took out a little out of Mr. Shephard, not to interpret him, but to sport with him: Afterwards we have the Author concluding from Mr. Shepherd's particular Call, That the general Call signifies nothing; that there is no foundation for our Faith in Christ, but this particular Call. To which I answer; The general promises of the Gospel signify God's will to save Believers; and therefore are a sufficient foundation for a man to believe in Christ for Salvation; a greater warrant we cannot have for it, than Gods own Charter sealed with the Blood of his Son Jesus Christ: But that which works this Faith in us, is a special Call, or internal Grace, which shines into the heart, and calls forth Faith into being.  
But though we know not how to get into Christ; 
Mr. Sherlock.  it would be some comfort to know, that we are in him: But this is as impossible as the other; As the only foundation of our Faith in coming to Christ (aocording to these men's notions) is a special call of the Spirit; So the only infallible assurance that we are in Christ, is the testimony of the Spirit: The spirit of adoption, which teaches us to cry, Abba, Father: And yet God doth not afford this Testimony to all; but suffers many good Christians, to walk in darkness, and hides his face from them; for no other reason, but because they are desirous of it, and would be quiet, if they should know it; this is somewhat hard measure: But suppose you have, or think you have this testimony of the Spirit; how can you be sure, that it is not a cheat and delusion, the imposture of the Devil, or of your own self-flattering imagination? to satisfy this we are directed to marks: Thus this infallible assurance from the testimony of the Spirit must in its last resolve be founded upon some Moral evidence: As it is with the Church of Rome; who after a great noise and cry of infallibility, are at last forced to resolve their Faith into some Motives of credibility, or to dance round in an endless circle: Well, what are the marks of our being in Christ? You must inquire whether you have the Spirit of Christ; And it is just as easy to know this, as whether you be in Christ: But are you true Believers? Is your Faith of the right stamp? is it wrought by the Almighty Power of God? Or is it such an easy, common, presumptuous, false faith, as that which is in the generality of men? This is as easy to know, as any of the former: For if there be such a false presumptuous faith as takes Christ, when he does not belong to us, and rests and relies on Christ only for pardon and salvation, and yet shall never have Christ: How shall we know whether our Faith be true and genuine, such as will make Christ ours? and the answer to this brings us to that great mark of Sanctification. You must consider the effects of Faith; 
Dr. Jacomb. pag. 65.  doth it purify the Heart? overcome the World? work by Love? are you new Creatures? Is the state of your person changed from a Child of wrath to an Heir of Grace? (which is the thing to be proved) Or is your nature changed? Do you walk in newness of life? Have you crucified the flesh with its lusts? Do you bring forth fruit? That is, you must prove your justification by your sanctification, your Faith by your Works. I am glad it is no worse, that good works, and an holy life may at least put in for marks and evidences of a justified state, though the truth is, this is a mere compliment to Holiness; and as they order the matter, an holy life can no more be a sign of a justified state, than it can justify us.  
It would be some comfort to know, 
Answer.  that we are in Christ: But this is impossible; Thus the Author: Impossible? Nothing plainer in Scripture; we read of the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts, 2 Cor. 1.12. The sealing of the holy Spirit of promise, Eph. 1.13. The witness of the Spirit with our spirits, that we are the children of God, Rom. 8.16. But God doth not afford this testimony of the Spirit to all good men: Very true, he doth not, a Saint of God may walk in darkness: The face of God may be hid from him: And that (saith Mr. Shephard) because there is in many an one an heart desirous of his Love, and this would quiet them, if they were sure of it. The Author thinks this hard measure: But Mr. Shephard goes on; they never came to be quieted with God's will, in case they think they shall never partake of God's love; but are above that, opposite, resist, quarrel with that; the Lord therefore, intending his favour for humbled sinners, hides his face till they lie low: And now, I suppose, the measure is fair, it is very fit we should know ourselves to be but receivers; and withal unworthy of the Mercies we receive: But how do we know, that it is the testimony of the Spirit indeed, and not a cheat or imposture? To satisfy this we are directed to marks: Thus this infallible testimony of the Spirit must in its lastiresolve, be founded upon moral evidence. So the Author: To which, I answer, When the Spirit witnesseth with our spirit; when God's Spirit and Man's concur, and so heaven and earth agree in it; one would think it might pass without further examination: The Testimony of the Spirit is such, that he, to whom it made, certainly knows, that it is the Spirit of Truth itself which bears the Testimony, otherwise the Spirit itself testifies, and would not be believed by him, to whom the Testimony is made; that is, he testifies, and doth not testify, if he do not make a man sure, who it is that testifies. The Testimony is to make us sure, that we are the children of God; it is to make us with confidence cry out Abba, Father: It is to be an earnest and seal of our Salvation; and how can this be, if we know not who testifies. Hence St. Chrystom upon the place saith, The Spirit beareth witness, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; What doubt can remain? Hence reverend Dr. Ward saith, Parum abest à blasphemiâ dicere, 
De certitud. Grat. 221.  non esse certum illum, cui testimonium perhibet Spiritus Sanctus, utrum testimonium illud a Spiritu Sancto sit an à diabolo, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, By this it appears, that the Testimony of the Spirit is not such, as giveth only a conjectural certainty, but an infallible one: But to proceed, What are the marks of our being in Christ? Have you the Spirit of Christ? This (saith the Author) is just as easy to know, as whether you be in Christ: Yet this is a mark in the Apostle, If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his, Rom. 8.9. Is your faith of the right stamp, wrought by the Almighty Power of God? This (saith the Author) is as easy to know as the former: Yet the Apostle would have us examine ourselves whether we be in the Faith; that is, whether we have a true genuine Faith, 2 Cor. 13.5. True Faith, where ever it is, makes Christ to belong to him that hath it: Doth Faith purify the heart, overcome the world, work by love, bring forth holy fruit? These are, as the Author confesses, true marks, but these men do but compliment Holiness: And now we must hear his reasons for it.  
For first, Holiness is not necessary to our Union to Christ; 
Mr Sherlock.  and therefore can be no necessary sign of it: We are united to Christ 〈◊〉 we are holy, an unholy man may be united to Christ; and how can Holiness be the only sure mark of our Union to Christ? They tell us, That Holiness doth necessarily follow Union: But no man knows how long it may be before it follows; yet all this, while such a person is united to Christ, at least this gives evidence but to one part of the question, an holy life is an evidence of a man in Christ; but the want of it is no evidence, that a man is not in him: This mark may be rejected by any one, who hath no mind to it: Nay, secondly, according to these men's principles we cannot tell, whether we be holy or not, till we know, whether we be in Christ or not, our Union to Christ must be an evidence of our Holiness, not our Holiness an evidence of our Union; till we are united to Christ, we can do nothing to please God: The best actions of christless men are but Splendida peccata, glittering impieties, appearing fair, but odious to God, because the person who does them is out of Christ: Our persons must be first accepted in Christ, and then our services; we cannot judge of Holiness by the external performance of any duties, nor by the inward sense of our minds; but must first know, whether we be in Christ, whether our persons be accepted in him, before we can tell, whether any thing we do be good: And this is a plain demonstration, that Holiness cannot be an evidence of our Union to Christ, because we must first know our Union, before we can know that we are holy.  
So much Holiness, 
Mr. Sherlock.  as is included in true Faith, is necessary to our Union to Christ; an unholy man, that is, a wicked man, cannot be united to Christ, believers are not such; but an unholy man, that is, one who yet hath not lead an holy life, may be united to Christ, and his after holy life, is a sure mark of that Union, because a necessary effect thereof: But when doth the holy life follow that Union? I answer, immediately: Thus our Church tells us in the twelfth Article, That good works do spring necessarily out of a true and lively Faith; insomuch, that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known, as a tree discerned by the fruit: The want of an holy life, in the very instant of believing, is not an evidence, that a man is not is Christ, but soon after, the want of it will tell him, that his Faith was but a fancy, and his being in Christ but a dream: The best actions of christless men are, I confess, as our Church tells us in the thirteenth Article, not pleasant to God; nay, they have the nature of sin, without Faith it is impossible to please God, in our persons or actions: our persons must first be accepted in Christ, and then our services; the best actions of a man, not in Christ, are not acceptable to God: Those actions cannot be acceptable to him, whose defects are unpardoned, and the defects of those actions are unpardoned, whilst their Agent is so. But the Author from hence concludes, That Holiness cannot be an evidence of our Union to Christ, because we must first know our Union, before we can know that we are holy. To which, I answer, Our Union to Christ cannot be known to be so without a knowledge of Faith; nor an holy life cannot be known to be so, without a knowledge of Faith; because without Faith neither can be in reality: when we see our Faith flowing out in an holy life, we see the truth of our Union to Christ, and the truth of our holy life both at once: An holy life taken not merely in its outward acts, but in its efflux from Faith is an infallible mark of our Union to Christ.  
At other times these Men make the work of Sanctification so imperfect, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and so like an unsanctified state, that it is impossible to distinguish a sanctified and unsanctified Man; upon this account holiness must be a very sorry evidence of our union to Christ, when it is so imperfect that it cannot be known: An unregenerate Man is under the Law of sin, under the reigning power of it; and a regenerate Man (as they describe him) is in a state as like this, as one Egg is another: For a regenerate Man may be carnal, sold under sin, that is, a Slave and Captive to it, he may do those things he allows not; nay, those things which he hates, that is, he may sin against the clearest convictions of conscience and sense of duty; he may neglect to do those things which he knows he ought to do, and do those things which he knows he ought not to do; he may find a Law in his Members, that when he would do good, evil is present with him; a Law in his Members, warring against the Law of his mind, which brings him into captivity to the Law of sin, that is in his Members: For so they tell us, that St. Paul complains of all this in the person of a regenerate Man, Rom. 7. Now an unregenerate man does the very same, and indeed cannot do much worse; he sins against conscience, is brought into captivity to sin, is overpowered by indwelling sin; he finds natural fears and terrors, when he is tempted to sin, which gives some check to him, and makes him sin against his own will with some unwillingness and reluctancy; he approves the Law of God as just and equal, his conscience assents to it, but there is a strong bias upon his will, which runs counter to all those holy Commands, and makes him a Slave and Captive to his lusts. Now, not to dispute which of these two the Apostle means in Rom. 7. I think it is hard to assign any difference between them; the regenerate Man, according to this description, is full as bad as the ungenerate; or if there be any difference, the regenerate Man is the worst of the two, because in the regenerate Man the spirit is led into captivity; but in the ungenerate only natural conscience, which is a much weaker principle, and so is capable of a better excuse, is led into captivity: But which of these two it is, no Man can tell, and therefore a regenerate Man hath great reason to fear, that he may be unregenerate; and an ungenerate Man hath as much reason to hope, that he may be regenerate; and what becomes then of this evidence of Sanctification to prove our union to Christ, when Sanctification itself cannot be distinguished from an unsanctified state.  
According to these Men, 
Answer.  we cannot distinguish a sanctified and an unsanctified man, an unregenerate man is under the reign of sin, and a regenerate man (as they describe him) is so too. Why so? He may be Carnal, Rom. 7.14. but not as the ungenerate, totally altogether Carnal, without any spark of Spiritual life in him; but partially only, in respect of the Relics of corruption abiding in him: He is Spiritual, so far as he is regenerate; yet Carnal, because he hath some corrupt flesh in him. This appears, because though regenerate, he is still to go on mortifying the flesh, and the flesh is yet lusting in him against the Spirit: The Babes in Christ are called Carnal, 1 Cor. 3.1. yet they were not unregenerate, but their regenerate Man is sold under sin, Rom. 7.14. He is so; but what, as Ahab, who sold himself to work evil? What, as the unregenerate are, who are willing Captives, ready to obey the desires of the flesh? no; but he is a captive against his will, he cannot wholly rid himself of those lusts, which lie as so many heavy chains upon him; so far as regenerate, he is a freeman, but because Regeneration is imperfect, he is yet a Captive: But their regenerate man may do those things he allows not, nay, those things he hates, Rom. 7.15. Not that, as the profane, he does outward gross acts of sin, and wallows in them; but that the inevitabile malum, that unavoidable concupiscence, (though he disallow & hate it & all its progeny) will be stirring in his thoughts and desires; nay, and sometimes prevailing too. That the Apostle speaks of such unavoidable defects, is clear from the following words: It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me, vers. 17. which words can be only understood of unavoidable defects: But their unregenerate Man neglects duty, the good he would do he does not, vers. 19 not that he doth not do duties to God, but that the clog of corruption impedes him from doing them, in that pure and uninterrupted manner as he desires: He finds a Law in his Members warring against the Law of his mind, and bringing him into captivity to the Law of sin, which is in his Members, vers. 23. He hath a Divine Spiritual life in him, but because Regeneration is imperfect, the indwelling sin is still in him, struggling, though not reigning; by these things it appears, that there is a vast difference between a regenerate Man and an ungenerate: But if we understand Rom. 7. of an unregenerate Man, see if we do not saint him, and make him a regenerate Man; A regenerate man hates sin, Ps. 119.128. and so does the unregenerate, Rom. 7.15. which yet never any unregenerate Man did reach unto: A regenerate Man hath a will to that which is good, and so hath the unregenerate, Rom. 7.18. which is a lift beyond: A regenerate Man delights in the Law of God, Psal. 1.2. and so does the unregenerate, Rom. 7.22. which is a Divine strain much beyond him: A regenerate Man groans under the burden of the indwelling corruption, and so does the unregenerate, Rom. 7.24. who yet hath little or no sense of it: A regenerate Man blesses God for the great deliverance by Jesus Christ, and in gratitude serves him, and so does the unregenerate, Rom. 7.25. who yet never made it his business so to do: And thus the unregenerate Man is made as good as the regenerate; to conclude, the holiness of the regenerate, though imperfect and labouring under the indwelling sin, is yet a good evidence of their Union with Christ.  
Dr. Jacomb, 
Mr. Sherlock.  in his Discourse of the Law of sin, attempts to assign the difference between the Law of sin in the regenerate, and it in the unregenerate; and hath given such a Description of an unregenerate state, that there is scarce such an unregenerate Man in the World; and yet if we must judge what a regenerate Man is, by inverting the Character of the unregenerate, he is by odds much the worse Man: As first, When the whole bent and tendency of the heart is towards sin, when the propensities of the Soul thereto are entire and unmixed, there it is the Law of sin in the unregenerate: But is every one a regenerate Man, who hath some good propensities in him? who hath some wouldings and velleities to that which is good? then there are few unregenerate in the World. Secondly, which is the explication of the former, when all the several Faculties of the Soul are altogether on sins side, and wholly take its part, than it is the Law of sin in the unregenerate; where the understanding gives in its final positive dictate, that sin is good, represents it as eligible to the will, the will upon this closes with it, embraces it it, cleaves to it, the affections, desire, joy, delight, run out upon it; where it is thus, the case is determined, yea, without controversy: But where shall we find such a Man? I believe there was never such a Man born; too many choose evil though they know it to be evil, for the seeming advantages of profit or pleasure; but to choose evil, as believing it to be good, and to rejoice and delight in it, as good and eligible for itself, is such an unregenerate state as the Devil never arrived at; for though he be a wicked Spirit, yet he is no Fool, as those must be, who mistake evil for good in such plain instances: The Heathens themselves at this rate were all regenerate, for their consciences accused them for doing evil, Rom. 2. They knew good to be good, and evil evil: There was never such a Man as he describes, when he tells us, That sin comes to the Sinner, and says: Art thou willing that I should rule? Yes, saith he, with all my heart, I like thy commands, I am thine, I submit to be at thy dispose, I here swear fealty and allegiance to thee, etc. This Oath, etc. might very well have been spared, for there is enough without it; and yet if this be the difference, that the unregenerate Man chooses sin, believing it to be good, and the regenerate Man chooses sin, though he knows it to be evil, it is plain that the regenerate is much the worse, because his sins have the greatest aggravations that any sins are capable of, which the sins of an unregenerate Man have not: viz. That they are sins against knowledge; and so, according to our Saviour's reasoning, this regenerate Man will be beaten with more stripes.  
Dr. Jacomb assigns the difference between the Law of sin in the regenerate and in the unregenerate: 
Answer.  First, When the whole bent of the heart is towards sin, when the propensities are entire and unmixed, there it is the Law of sin in the unregenerate. But, saith the Author, is every one regenerate who hath some good propensities? Who hath some wouldings & velleities, to that which is good? Then there are few unregenerate Men in the World. To which I answer, The unregenerate may indeed have some wouldings and velleities to good, not of himself; for in his flesh (and such he is all over by Nature) there is no good, but from the common motions and operations of the Holy Spirit: Yet, notwithstanding these, the bent of his heart is to sin, the power of sin is habitual in him, which is all the intent and very expression of the Doctor in that place. Secondly, When all the faculties of the Soul are on sins side, when the understanding gives in its final positive dictate, that sin is good, represents it as eligible to the will, the will closes with it, the affections run out upon it; there the case, saith the Doctor, is determined. But, saith the Author: Never such a Man was born, as to choose evil believing it to be good, to delight and rejoice in it, as good and eligible for itself. To which I answer, The Author's discourse runs upon this, as if the Doctor had asserted, that the understanding in the unregenerate did represent sin as good; that is, as conformable to the Law and Will of God, and so good. Hence the Author tells us: That the Devil, though a wicked Spirit, is no Fool; that the very Heathen know good to be good, and evil evil: But all this is besides the scope; the Doctor never said or meant so, when he saith, that the understanding dictates sin to be good: No Man, I presume, will interpret the words thus; the understanding dictates sin to be conformable to the Will of God, that is, sin to be no sin: No, the understanding knows sin to be sin, sin to be contrary to the Will of God; yet it represents sin as good in other respects, and so good as to cast the balance in the heart on sins side; it may be there are baits of profit or pleasure in it: Nay, it is my own thought, that the pravity in sinsul actions comes sub ratione convenientiae, and offers itself as congruous, and so good to the corrupt Will and heart of Man, the very difformity or contradiction to the will of God, as intrinsically black as it is, blushes and looks fair to that Carnal mind which is enmity against God: An unregenerate Man drinks in iniquity as water, Job 15.16. being filthy himself, iniquity, though a very foul thing, goes down naturally with him, and is as it were his proper Element. St. Austin in his Confessions, speaking of his stealing of Apples, saith that he was: Gratis malus; 
Confess. li. 2 cap. 4.6.  Amavi defectum meum, decerpta projeci, epulatus inde solaminiquitatem, quâ laetabar fruens; si quid illorum intravit in os meum, condimentum facinus erat. He confesses, the very sin itself was grateful to him: If Sinners did not believe sin to be good in some respect or other; if they did look on it as evil, and nothing but pure impure evil, it were utterly impossible that they should choose it or delight in it; the will cannot appetere malum sub ratione mali, for that were appetere non appetible, which is impossible. I conclude with the words of the Doctor, in that place: Whosoever upon deliberation judges a sinful course to be the best, and thereupon chooses, embraces, falls in with it, delights in it, continueth in it, in this Man 'tis the Law of sin; this Man is, as I take it, a Servant of sin, and willing it should rule: There is, as learned Bishop Reynolds saith, a Covenant, a virtual bargain between him and his lusts, he agrees to serve and obey them.  
But Thirdly, 
Mr. Sherlock.  The Law of sin hath different workings in the People of God than in others; This working of the Law of sin in God's People, me thinks, is an ill thing. But let us hear how it is: First, Where sin is committed industriously and designedly, there it is the Law of sin in the Graceless; unless Men be very cunning at the trade of sin, they are not under the Law of it, as graceless persons are: Grace is consistent with taking all fair opportunities of sinning, so we do not design it before hand. Secondly, When the temptation easily prevails, than it is the Law of sin in the unregenerate; This is an Argument indeed, that a Man is a willing Slave; but when a Man is conquered by a temptation, though he make some resistance, it is an Argument, that sin is his Master, which rules and governs, especially if this be often, such a Man surely is none of Christ's freemen, and therefore not to fail. Thirdly, When sin carries it in spite of all opposition, against all external discouragements, threaten of the Law, the Sceptre of the Gospel, the Love of God, and his Wrath, the Death and Wounds of Christ, Reproofs, Resolutions, Vows, Promises, etc. then it is the Law of sin; So that it seems, when sin carries it in despite of all external oppositions only, it is the mark of an unregenerate Man; but when it carries it against internal and external oppositions, that is a sign of a regenerate Man; for a regenerate Man has the same external oppositions, to preserve him from sin, that an unregenerate Man hath, and besides these he hath internal oppositions, the checks of his own conscience, which he says the unregenerate Man has not. And Fourthly, When it is sinning and not sense of sin, no after Repentance for it, than it is the Law of sin: Now what bad Man is there, who does not at one time or other repent of his sins, & complain of them? And how many are there, that repent of their sins, and make large Confessions of them, and return to them again? There are no Men, but do at one time or other express some sorrow for their sins, (which he calls Repentance) and there are a great many, who pretend thus to be sorry for their sins, who it is to be feared, are never the better Men for it; and yet were there any such, who sin without any sense of it, they would be much better than those regenerate Men, who feel the gripes of conscience for sin, and yet return to it.  
This working of the Law of sin in God's People is an ill thing. 
Answer.  Oh! that we had perfection! But while we are here sin will be in us, and whilst it is in us, it will work in some measure: Concupiscere nolo & concupisco, saith St. Austin. 
De Temp. Serm. 45.  The first mark in the Doctor, is sinning industriously and designedly, and this is a sure one, and found in all the unregenerate; although all of them are not alike cunning, and Artists at the Trade of sin, all more or less make provision for the Flesh, the frame of their Heart, & stream of their Thoughts run this way. The Flesh (as the Doctor speaks) hath the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the projecting and forecasting ability at command in them, thus it is not with the regenerate. The Second is, The temptation easily prevails in the unregenerate; and what more certain? The old heart is as dry tinder, ready to take fire upon every little spark; thus it is not with the regenerate, who hath a higher and a better Spirit than his own, to guard him against the temptatation: If he be overcome in a particular Act of sin, sin is not yet his Master, because it cannot gain the bent of his heart, and the course of his life. The third is, When sin carries it against all external Discouragements, against the threaten of the Law, the Sceptre of the Gospel, the Love and Wrath of God, the Wounds of Christ, Reproofs, Resolutions, Vows, etc. then it is the Law of sin. Upon which the Author infers thus: It seems when sin carries it against external oppositions only, it is a mark of an unregenerate Man; but when it carries it against internal and external oppositions, that is a sign of a regenerate Man. To which I answer. It is true, when sin carries it in a regenerate Man, it carries it against such internal helps, and principles of Grace as are not in the unregenerate, but than it carries it only in a single Act: But in the unregenerate it carries it in a course of life too, against Law, Gospel, Wrath, Love, the Blood of Christ, the smitings of Conscience, Reproofs, Promises, Judgements, still he will sin on, whilst he is unregenerate; thus the regenerate doth not. The Fourth is: When 'tis sinning, and no sense of sin, no after Repentance for it, than it is the Law of sin. But, saith the Author: What bad Man is there, who does not at one time or other repent of his sins? and yet were there any such, they would be better than those regenerate Men, who feel the gripes of conscience for sin, and yet return to it. Unto which I answer, Surely all bad Men do not repent of their sins, such as God gives up to a reprobate mind, to a fat heart, to a spirit of slumber, to a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a brawny hardness, which feels nothing, do not do so; and yet, I suppose, these are the worst of Men: Sinning against gripes of Conscience is a great aggravation, but an hard senseless heart is the worst state imaginable on Earth. But suppose bad Men have some kind of Repentance; is it such as the regenerate have after their falls? No surely, the regenerate, as the Doctor hath it, are greatly humbled, they recover again by true Repentance, they rise after their falls, thus unregenerate Men do not.  
It is wonderful to consider, 
Mr. Sherlock.  how little a matter will serve for an evidence of Grace, (after all their talk of Sanctification) when they come to administer comfort to distressed consciences. Oh, saith the Soul, I find sin prevail, 
Sheph. Sts, Jewel.  and how can I be comforted! (not by Sanctification sure.) Answ. I will subdue your iniquities, and cast your sins into the midst of the Sea. Obj. But the Devil will be busy with me. Ans. God will tread him down. Obj. But I cannot go to God by Prayer, to fetch comfort. (Comfort! what hast thou to do with comfort? get quit of thy sins first, and then it is time enough for comfort.) Ans. Though it be so, yet believe and thou shall have thy desire. (But I doubt the Soul that cannot pray, cannot believe neither.) Obj. But I am afraid I shall fall away from God. (Afraid of it! thou art fallen from God already, if sin prevail so much, for sin is the great Apostasy from God.) Answer. None can pluck thee out of Christ's hands, neither sin nor the Devil. (But how if they be not in Christ's hands yet, sin I doubt may keep them out; if God cut off barren Branches, there is some danger of putrid ones.) God hath said, I have made an everlasting Covenant with thee, I will not turn away from thee. Obj. This is good news, had I a right to the promise; but alas! I cannot believe, and take a naked promise. Ans. Dost thou desire to believe and to have Christ, and say thus, If it were possible for Christ and Heaven to be separated, I would rather desire Christ without Heaven, than Heaven without Christ. Obj. But this is a hard matter; I cannot say, I desire Christ on such terms as I should. (This saying is the best sign of Grace I have met with; he is an honest Man, who will not contradict the natural sense of his mind, and say, he can do that which is impossible to be done: It is an odd proposal in order to comfort a poor Soul, that he must be willing to be damned with Christ, before he must take comfort in hopes of being saved by him.) Ans. But is it the grief of thy heart, that thou canst not deny thyself? Desirest thou to close with Christ upon any terms? Obj. Alas! I cannot grieve and mourn for sin. (Certainly they are at cross purposes, their Objections and Answers do so ill agree.) Ans. Hast thou any will to it? Art thou willing to part with thy sins? But the poor Soul saith, I fear I shall never do this. But art thou willing, that Christ should make thee willing, (against thy will) and pitch thee upon a promise and hold thee there? (for shame, poor Soul, refuse not this) than comfort thyself, thou hast a right to God's promises. Thus this evidence of Sanctification is dwindled away into a desire to be willing; Nay, into a desire to be made willing; and he is a strange Man, who cannot go so far.  
When a Minister comes to comfort poor afflicted souls, 
Answer.  he doth not offer them the Altitudes, the highest Statures of Holiness to measure themselves by, that would be horrid cruelty; but he sets before them that immense mercy, which stoops down, in its acceptance, to the least seeds or sparks of Grace, to grace latent in a desire or willing mind; Nay, to that poverty of the spirit, which, though it seem to itself to have nothing at all of Grace, hath yet a blessedness entailed on it; a broken heart, which hath some truth of Grace, may complain of the prevalency of sin in some sense. The pressure of inherent corruption may make him cry out: O wretched man! the flesh may so lust against the spirit, that he cannot do the things that he would, Gal. 5.17. Yet comfort may and doth belong to him, those promises of subduing iniquity, of treading down Satan; may, without straining them beyond their scope; let out their sweetness to him: When he thinks, that he cannot pray, God may find and accept of a prayer in his sighs and groans, when he fears by reason of the stirring lusts, that he shall fall from God; Grace is sufficient and able to make him stand, he may be in Christ's hands, and yet not know it to his comfort: He saith, he cannot believe, and yet his Faith, though little, and as the smoking Flax may be true: The deep sense which he hath of the power of sin and want of Faith, argues somewhat of Faith and a Divine Life in him, which struggles against sin, and aspires after more Grace: He saith, that he cannot desire Christ, as he should: And this sense of his want may speak him, not an honest man only, but a pious, such as indeed breathes after Grace: He saith, he cannot grieve or mourn for sin; yet that very saying argues a kind of mourning and lamentation over his hardness, and speaks his heart not to be totally hard or senseless: He complains his will is not such as it should be; and this shows, that in some measure he looks up to that Grace, which is able to make him willing, not as if he were to be made willing against his will; but that Grace can change an unwilling will into a willing one: In such deal as these with broken hearts; Sanctification is not dwindled away, but comfort is administered from the lowest measure of true Grace. 
Mr. Sherlock.   
But when they have a mind to take down the confidence of men, who are apt to presume too soon, that their condition is good; they do so magnify the attainments of hypocrites, who shall never go to Heaven, that it is impossible, for any sanctified man to do more than an hypocrite may do: So that, notwithstanding any evidences of Sanctification, he may be a hypocrite still, which quite spoils the evidences of Sanctification, because we cannot distinguish a sanctified man from a hypocrite: Thus for example, one may plead: I have left my sins I once lived in; I am no Drunkard, Swearer, Liar. I answer, 
Shep. Sinc. convert.  Thou mayst be washed from the mire, the pollution of the World; and yet be a Swine in God's account (which he proves from, 2 Pet. 2.20. Where the Apostle tells them: That if they have escaped the pollutions of the World through the knowledge of Christ, and are again entangled therein and overcome (if they return to their old vices) than their latter end is worse than the beginning; Which is point blank contrary to what he affirms, that those, who have escaped these pollutions, and are not yet entangled again in them, may, notwithstanding that, be Swine in God's account: For so he adds; Thou mayst live a blameless, innocent, honest, smooth life, and yet be a miserable creature: But I pray, says such a man, and that often; so thou mayst, and yet never be saved, Isai. 1.11. To what purpose is the multitude of your Sacrifices? To great purpose sure, when they are offered by men of blameless, innocent, honest, smooth lives; the want of which made those sacrifices abominable to God: But I fast sometimes, so did the Scribes and Pharisees: But it was to devour widows houses, which was not the fast of an honest, innocent man: But I hear the word, so did the stony ground, who for a season believed; And it had been well, and a good sign of Grace, if it had continued: I read the Scripture, so did the Pharisees, who were perfect in the Bible: But though knaves read the Scriptures, and be never the better for it; yet good men may read it to good purpose; reading of Scripture is no argument, that a man is an hypocrite, because the Pharisees were; But I am grieved and repent of my sins, so did Judas; but he hanged himself, and that indeed is no repentance to life: But I love good men and their company, so did the foolish Virgins; But they slept and suffered their Lamps to go out, which all that love good men do not: But God hath given me much knowledge, that thou mayst have and never be saved; Yes, and twenty good things more; but if a blameless honest man hath the keeping of this knowledge, it is never the worse for him: But I keep the Lords day, so did the Jews; had he been as well acquainted with the Scriptures, as the Pharisees were, he would not have said, that the Jews kept the Lords day; however this is one good thing, which doth well in the company of more: But I have good desires, and endeavours to get to Heaven; these thou mayst have, and miss of Heaven; And yet, when he was in a more gentle humour, he told the poor doubting soul, that desire, nay, that a desire only to desire, at two or three removes was enough: But I am zealous, so was Jehu, and Paul while a Pharisee, (in persecuting the Church; and therefore an universal, religious, well-governed zeal for God can be no sign of Grace) But I am constant, and persevere in godly courses, so did the young man; all these have I kept from my youth, (only he left Christ for the sake of his riches, and so did not persevere:) But I do all with a good heart for God; so thou mayst think of thyself and be deceived: (And if this be an objection, let a man have what marks he will; the objection will still be good, and so all evidences signify nothing; for after all a man may be deceived in it, and think he hath those marks, when he hath them not.) There is a way that seemeth right to man, but the end thereof is death; thou mayst live so, as to deceive thyself and others, and yet prove an hypocrite; as if because some men may think themselves good, who are in a bad estate; no man could ever be sure that he is in the right. And thus farewell all evidences.  
There is reason to administer comfort to wounded Souls from the lowest measures of Grace, 
Answer  and no less to pluck down the proud Plumes of Hypocrites from the inward and pure spirituality of Religion: Our Saviour doth both, he gave out gracious Promises to mourners, and to the poor in spirit, and he poured out woes upon the Pharisees, and upon all the pomp of their external righteousness: But, saith the Author, they do so magnify the attainments of Hypocrites, that a sanctified man can do no more than an Hypocrite; and so all the evidences of Sanctification are spoiled: But how so? do they paint the Hypocrite fairer than he is? Do they attribute to him a jot or tittle more than what is true? No surely, an Hypocrite may be no Drunkkard, or Swearer; he may escape the pollutions of the World; that is, gross sins; and, though he be not entangled therein again; and so a Swine in his outward converses: yet he may be such inwardly, his inward parts may be wickedness and uncleanness: He may live a blameless, innocent, honest, smooth life, and yet be foul within: He may fast, pray, hear, read the Scriptures, and yet his heart not right in the sight of God: He may have some kind of sorrow or repentance, some kind of love to good men; and yet like the foolish Virgins have no Oil in his Lamp; no true Grace with his profession: He may have a notional knowledge, and yet not be Sanctified by the Truth: He may keep a Sabbath in the outward decorum of it; and yet want the Spirit and Life of it, a delight in the Almighty: He may have some kind of zeal, and some desires after Heaven; and yet not of the right stamp: He may presume that he hath a good heart, and a godly course, and be deceived in both, all this is true: Now one Truth cannot oppose another: The truth which concerns the attainments of Hypocrites, cannot oppose that which concerns the evidences of Sanctification: The outward reformation is an evidence, not merely as it is outward, but as it flows from Faith, and a pure heart: Fasting, prayer, hearing, reading are evidences, not merely in opere operato, in the work done; but in the doing of them in a Spiritual manner; Faith, and Hope, and holy Love being actuated therein: Keeping the Sabbath is an evidence, not merely in the outward observation of it: But when it is filled up with Duties, spiritually performed: Knowledge, Zeal, Repentance, Love to good Men are Graces; when of the right stamp, but mere notion which swims in the brain, is not that sanctifying Knowledge, which influences Holiness into the Heart and Life: Every heat upon a Religious account is not true Zeal, but that celestial Fire, which rightly inflames the heart for the glory of God: Every sorrow or pressure from the Law, is not true repentance, but that which melts the heart into tears for the sinfulness of sin; Every respect to good men is not the right love, but that which flows out of love to God, and points to the Divine Image in them: Desires after Heaven may be a mark of a good Estate; but then they must be such as are virtually Grace, and issue out of poverty of spirit. A man may think he hath a good heart, and a godly course, and be deceived therein; yet it follows not, that we must bid farewell to evidences; an holy life issuing out of a pure heart, will still be an evidence to him who hath it.  
But after all this, 
Mr. Sherlock.  it would be worth while to know, how to distinguish a regenerate from an unregenerate man; and that he tells us may be done thus: An unregenerate man; let him go never so far, do never so much, yet he lives in some one sin or other: This now is very strange: What? go never so far? and do never so much? and yet live in some one sin or other; what live a blameless, innocent, honest, smooth life, and yet live in some one sin or other? Yet suppose he did, a regenerate man may be, in captivity to the Law of sin: And pray what's the difference? But then an ungenerate man cannot be poor in spirit; and so carried out of all Duties to Christ; That is, if an unregenerate man do good, he is conscious to himself that he doth it: If he have a good heart, he feels a good heart in himself, and in all he doth, and therefore feels not a want of all good, which is true poverty of spirit: So that according to this discourse, the surest mark of a regenerate man is either to have no good in himself: or, if he have any to be mistaken, and think he hath none; either of which, I think, is a very odd sign of Grace: But then an unregenerate man comes to Christ; but he never gets into Christ, never takes up his eternal rest and lodging in Jesus Christ only; I thought coming had been believing, and that believing would have done the business; And if so, God forbidden, that any man should be damned for want of that other Metaphor of taking up his eternal rest and lodging in Christ: Men in distress of conscience, (that 〈◊〉 unregenerate men under such distress) If they have comfort from Christ, they are contented: If Salvation from Hell by Christ, they are contented, (and I think they have some reason then to be contented) But Christ himself; that is, without Comfort, and without Salvation, contents them not. Now to be contented with Christ without comfort and salvation; is so far from being the mark of an unregenerate man, that I am not yet satisfied, that it is the mark of an unreasonable man.  
An unregenerate man, 
Answer.  let him go never so far, do never so much; yet, as long as he is in his old Sphere, in corrupt unregenerate nature, he lives in some one sin or other; in an unregenerate heart, while such, God's throne is not, cannot be, and therefore sins must be there: Such an heart, as yet not elevated by Grace to the true and immense goodness which is above, hunts after an happiness in the lower Sphere of its self and the world, embracing some vain Image or Shadow instead of a Deity: The young man in the Gospel, for all his smooth, innocent life, had yet a regnant World within. Trajan and Antoninus the Philosopher, as fair Moralists as they were, were yet enemies to Christianity: But a regenerate man, however he groan under the indwelling sin, doth not indulge his lusts; his heart, having found out God the true centre of Blessedness, rests no where else: But, saith Mr. Shephard, an unregenerate man cannot be poor in spirit, and so carried out of all duties to Christ. Upon which, saith the Author, if an unregenerate man do good, he is conscious to himself that he doth it; if he have a good heart, he feels it: And is it so indeed? If an unregenerate man may have a good heart, and do that which is truly spiritually good; Regeneration is altogether useless, internal and supernatural principles of Grace are to no purpose: Nature, though lame and lapsed, may do its own work: But I suppose rather, that all this in the unregenerate, is but pride and presumption; his feeling a good heart in himself, but a lie and imposture. But, saith the Author, the regenerate man is either to have no good in himself, or to think he hath none, either of which is an odd sign of Grace. To which, I answer; To be a regenerate Man, and to have no good in himself, is not possible, to think he hath none, if he know he hath some, is as little possible as the other: The regenerated man hath a Divine Life and Principle in him; yet, by reason of inherent corruptness, sees little or nothing in himself; and is ever in dependence upon the treasures of Grace in Christ. An unregenerate man may come to Christ in Profession or Ordinances, but not in believing: He takes not up his rest in Christ: He would, saith Mr. Shephard, like Judas, have Christ and the bag too: Or, as the young man, have Christ and the world too: He would live in his Lusts; and, if at last Christ would save him from Hell, it would be enough: But the regenerate are in love with Christ himself, 
Epist. ad Rom.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, My Love Christ was crucified, and with him my love to all other things, sait Ignatius, and the Reverend Usher, as Mr. Baxter relates, was of opinion, That by the first act of Faith we receive Christ's person, and by a second his benefits.  
Mr. Shephard Jaith, 
Mr. Sherlock  That men tired and weary in themselves, go to Christ to remove their sins: If they get these sins subdued and removed; if they find power to do better, they hope to be saved, (here is the evidence of Sanctification) whereas thou mayst be damned, and go to the Devil at last, though thou dost escape all the pollutions of the World; and that not from thyself, and thine own strength: but from the knowledge of Christ: Woe to you if you die in this state (with your sins mortified and subdued by Christ) and the reason is, because this is to come to Christ, to suck juice from him, to maintain his own Berries (his own stock of Graces) Alas! he is but the Ivy, he is no Member, nor Branch in this Tree: And hence he never grows to be one with Christ: So that Holiness and Obedience is no evidence of our Union to Christ, though we fetch strength from Christ to do his will; we may only grasp about Christ all this while, as the Ivy about the Oak; but never be united to him, and become one with him.  
Mr. Shephard's plain scope is no more but this, 
Answer.  that poor sinners tired with their sins, should not rest in any thing, no, not in some power to subdue sin, and do better, without Union to Christ: And the Scripture-Method calls for this, that we should have our being in Christ, put on Christ, and receive Christ, that we may have all benefits from him. 
1. Hom. of the Sacrament.  Hence our Church tells us, That we must make Christ our own, and apply his merits to ourselves. Thus the Learned Zanchy, Tota verae justitiae, 
De verâ dispensat.  vitae, salutis participatio ex hâc pernecessariâ cum Christo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pendet: The whole participation of Righteousness, Life, Salvation, depends on our Union with Christ, which is most necessary. A man through the knowledge of Christ, may escape the pollutions of the World; that is, gross sins; he may learn to do better in his life; but true mrtification of sins flows from our Union to Christ, and is effected by the holy Spirit in Believers: Holiness and Obedience, such as indeed is true and spiritual, doth not go before Faith and Union to Christ, but follow after it, and so evidence it, as the Fruit doth the Root. As for the Authors subjoined exclamation: Good God into what mazes and labyrinths do these men lead poor distressed souls? I must leave it to the Reader to determine, whether there be any just cause for it or not.  
The testimony of the Spirit concerns the general adoption of Christians for the sons of God, 
Mr. Sherlock.  not to testify to any particular man, that he is a good Christian, or in the estate of Grace: It is not a private, but a public testimony given to the whole Christian Church: That holy Spirit, which God bestowed upon the Apostles and Primitive Christians, which enabled them to work Miracles, speak Languages and Prophecy, was a plain argument to all the World, that God now owned the Christians, not the Jews, for his chosen and elect people; for his sons and children: For this was the great dispute of those days, whether Jews or Christians were the sons of God? whether God now owned the Jewish or Christian Religion? and the Apostles decide this Controversy by the Testimony of the Spirit; for God could not give a greater Testimony to the Christian Church, than the gift of the holy Spirit; for it was a plain argument, that he owned them for his sons, when he bestowed the Spirit of his Son on them, as the Apostle argues, Galat. 3.2. Received ye the Spirit by the Works of the Law, or by the hearing of Faith? that is, did God bestow his Spirit on you, while you were Jews, or upon your conversion to Christianity? For if God bestowed his spirit on Christians: This is a sufficient seal to the Christian Religion: This is plain and intelligible, the Testimony of the Spirit assures us, that all Christians are the Sons of God, and Heirs of the Promises; and every man's conscience will tell him, whether he be a Christian, whether he hearty believe and obey the Gospel; and herein consists our Union to Christ, and fellowship with him; let us then leave those other dim notions to men, who can believe, what no man can understand, who despise every thing, that can be understood, as if it were no better than carnal reason.  
The Author, 
Answer.  who hitherto hath highly, though without cause, charged his opposites with violating the evidences of Christians, doth now himself blast the highest of all evidences, the Testimony of the holy Spirit, which is so clealy asserted by the holy Apostle, that the Jesuits themselves, though hotly disputing against assurance, never yet attempted totally to deny it: The Testimony of the Spirit (saith the Author) concerns the general adoption of Christians, not to testify to any particular man: It is not a private, but a public Testimony given to the whole Church. But let us consider the Text itself in the Apostle: The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirits, that we are the children of God, Rom. 8.16. The Spirit, the Apostle speaks not of the Spirit, as showing forth itself in Miracles and Tongues; but as sanctifying and sealing Believers; he speaks of the spirit dwelling in them, vers. 9 Mortifying the deeds of the body in them, vers. 13. Leading of them, vers. 14. Making them cry, Abba, Father, vers. 15. And then follows, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the self same spirit beareth witness: Here is not one jot or tittle of Miracles or Tongues, the testimony of the Spirit in Miracles or Tongues, is an external one, which runs into the senses: But the Testimony of the Spirit in the Text is internal; it beareth witness not to our senses, but to our Spirits. It is said to be sent forth into our hearts, Gal. 4.6. The Testimony is not without in Miracles or Tongues, but within in the heart: The Spirit beareth witness with our spirit; the Apostle saith not, it beareth witness with the Spirit of the Church; for there is one body, and one spirit; the Spirit of the Church Catholic is the holy Spirit, which quickens the whole Mystical Body of Christ: And these words, The Spirit beareth witness with our spirit; cannot be translated thus: The Spirit beareth witness with itself; but the plain meaning is: It beareth witness with our spirit; that is, with the spirits and consciences of particular Believers: And what doth it testify? The Apostle tells us, That we are the children of God; We particular Believers are so. Thus in another place, ye were sealed with the holy Spirit of Promise, Eph. 1.13. Ye, particular Believers were so. And again, He hath sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts, 2 Cor. 1.22. He hath dealt so with us in particular. The Testimony of the Spirit in the Gospel is, that all Believers are the Sons of God: But the Testimony of the Spirit in our spirits is, that we are Believers, and so the Sons of God in particular. This Testimony of the Spirit, (though so fully asserted in Scripture: Nay, and I will add, though so sweetly experimented by the dear Saints of God, that they have thought themselves in the very borders of Heaven in respect of it) is yet with the Author no better than a dim unintilligible notion; and, as he speaks a little before, a private Enthusiasm: But why unintelligible? cannot the holy Spirit so illustrate and irradiate the heart, that the truth of Grace may appear to the Believer; that he may certainly see in his own heart, that this is precious Faith, and that is love in incorruption; and so of other Graces there: Or, what if it were unintelligible? Shall we cast off the Divine Revelation, because above our narrow reason? What then must become of those Mysteries of the Trinity, and hypostatical Union? What of that peace of God, which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, passing or transcending all understanding, Phil. 4.7. Surely in such things reason must veil and do homage to Revelations: Ephraem Syrus discerning an heretical propensity in his Disciple Paulinus, gave him that excellent advice, Vide, Pauline, ne te submittas tuis cogitationibus, sed cum te perfecte comprehendisse Deum putaveris, crede nec intellexisse: We must not commit Divine Mysteries to the measures of Humane Reason; but take them as they are in Scripture: But this Testimony of the Spirit is but a private Enthusiasm, saith the Author. To which I answer, We are now more afraid of Enthusiasm, than they were of old: Dyonisius would have the Hierarch to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
De Eccles. Hierarch.  to be a divine man and a kind of Euthusiast: Ignatius in the Epistle to the Romans, saith, That he wrote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Secundum arbitrium Dei, as if he had wrote by impulse and Inspiration: And, as Dr. Arrowsmith hath it, in Suidas, and Hesykius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Enthusiasm is, when the whole soul is irradiated by God: And in this sense, I wish with him, utinam essemus omnes Enthusiastae? Would we were all Enthusiasts. It's true, there is not now an Enthusiasm of gifts in an extraordinary way; but sure there must be still in the use of the means an Enthusiasm of Graces in Regeneration, and an Enthusiasm of comforts in the Testimony of the Spirit; or else, which is quite contrary to Scripture, there must be no new Creatures, but what are of Man's own making; nor no Divine comforts for them, but what are of Man's own gathering: The Just need no longer live by Faith, or in dependence upon the Divine Spirit, but may have his being and well-being, his graces and comforts, all from himself.    

CHAP. V.  

Sect. 1.  
CHrist hath reveiled the whole mind and will of God, 
Mr. Sherlock.  in such a plain and familiar manner, that every one may understand it, who will but exercise the same reason in it, that he doth to understand the Laws of his Prince.  
Before the Author took away the witnessing Spirit, now the illuminating one: 
Answer.  A Man may, according to him, understand the things of God by the exercise of his reason; Thus Episcopius: Men may by mere natural perception, without any supernatural superinfused light, understand the Will of God. After the same manner speak the Socinians: The darkness (for such are all the unregenerate Men) may, it seems, comprehend the Evangelical light. But the Apostle tells us, That the natural Man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2.14. That flesh and blood doth not reveil these things, but our Father in Heaven, Matth. 16.17. Hence the Apostle prays for the Spirit of wisdom and revelation for the Ephesians, Ephes. 1.17. Hence our Church tells us, 
2. Hom. of Scripture.  That the Revelation of the Holy Ghost inspireth the true meaning of Scripture into us: In truth we cannot without him attain true saving knowledge.  
According to these Men, 
Mr. Sherlock.  the love of Christ is a love to the person of a Believer; without considering any other qualifications, than that he is such an individual person; that is, the excellency of Christ's love consiss in this, that he loves for no reason: Now I confess this is a wonderful love, but wherein the excellency of it consists, I cannot see: I am sure we account that Man a Fool, who loves at this rate; we who are reasonable Creatures, think that we are bound to govern all our actions, and the passions of our mind too, by reason; and we accowt it a reproach to a Man, to act either against reason or without it, to do any thing of which he cannot give a reasonable account: And how that should come to be the perfection of the Love of God, which is a reproach to Men, is above my apprehension? Indeed were this true, it would undermine the very foundations of Religion: For the great end of Religion is to please God, and to procure his love and favour; but if God and Christ love for no reason, than it is a vain thing for us to think of pleasing God, or procuring his love by any thing we can do: Whether we obey him or disobey him, it is all one in this case; for if he please to love us without any reason, our sins cannot hinder it; and if it does not please him to love us, our Holiness and Obedience cannot alter him. When our Acceptation with God depends wholly upon a sovereign and unaccountable will, nothing we can do can hinder or promote it, and therefore all Religion is in vain. The foundation of this mistake is a Philosophical nicety, that God must act wholly from himself, and therefore must not be moved by any external cause; whereas should he love us because we are holy, or hate us because we are wicked, his love or hatred would depend upon an external cause: viz. The holiness or wickedness of Creatures, which unbecomes an independent Being, to depend upon any thing else: The sum of which reasoning is this, that because God is the first cause of all things, on whom all things depend, and he on nothing, therefore he must love or hate his Creature without any reason, but his own unaccountable will: For this is all the inconvenience they can Object, that when God loves or hates, rewards or punishes his Creatures, the reason of this difference he makes between his Creatures, must be fetched from the persons themselves whom he thus loves or hates; and so it must of necessity be, if he have any reason at all; for the reason of love or hatred ought to be in the Object, not in the Person who loves or hates; and yet in propriety of speech, God cannot be said to depend on his Creatures, or any thing without himself, for the reason of his love or hatred, but his own Nature is the reason of it: He is infinitely Holy, and therefore loves holiness and hates sin; and his natural love to holiness is the reason why he loves holy Men, and his natural hatred to sin, is the reason why he hates wicked Men: his own holiness is the reason why he loves holy Men, but the holiness of the Creature is the reason, why he determines his love to any particular person; And if they will call this a depending on creatures, we must acknowledge that God does thus depend on his Creatures, in the administration of his Providence, in distributions of rewards and punishments; and he should not be wise, & holy, and just, & good if he did not, that is, if he did not put such a difference between things & persons, as their Natures require: It is a strange notion of an independent Being, that he must have no other reason for what he does, but his own Arbitrary will; which is so far from being a perfection, that it destroys all the other perfections of the Divine Nature.  
There is a double love in God: 
Answer.  A love of complacence, whereby he delights in his own Holy Image in the Creature, where ever he finds it; And a love of Benevolence, whereby he designs to bestow good things on his Creatures: The first, points at goodness in the Creature; the other, is the great origin of all good things in the Creature. The first, Issues out of the perfect sanctity of his Nature; The other, proceeds according to his Sovereign will and pleasure. But then, saith the Author, God loves for no reason, or without reason. To which I answer, God's love of Benevolence is no Caecus impetus, there is summa ratio in it, it is irradiated with infinite wisdom; but the reason of it is not in the Creature, but in himself only: God would redeem fallen Men not Angels; but surely the reason was not in the Creature, for then all the Grace, Mercy, and Freedom of God in that work vanishes: The whole of it must proceed from the Nature of God, as it respects something in the Creature, and by consequence it could not fall out otherwise, because God cannot deny his Nature. After the Fall it is strange how God did sever, and pick out some to himself out of the rest of Mankind. 
De P●p●●●, Hebr. 〈◊〉  Ex Adami liberis tantùm Sethus, ex hujus stirpe Noachus, ex Nochi Filiis Semus, ex illius posteritate Abramus; ac postremò ex numerosâ Abrami sobole unus Isacus placuit electusque est: Cujus Familia Ecclesiae nomen at que dignitatem ineffabili ratione, velut per successionem, sibi vindicaret, caeterae gentes tanquam prophanae, spretaeque à numine sunt. So the learned Cunaeus: And it will be an hard thing to find a reason in the Creature for such a strange separation: God chose and set his love upon his Children of Israel, above all People in the Earth, he severed them from all other Nations unto himself; and was the reason in the Creature? No surely; they must not so much as say or mutter in their heart, That they had the Land for their righteousness, Deut. 9.4. No, God tells them, that they were a stiffnecked People, vers. 6. but he chose and loved them, because he loved them, Deut. 7.7. and 8. What he did was merely out of his good pleasure, and without any reason on their part. God gives the Gospel to some Nations, not to others; and is the reason in the Creature? No; the Apostle tells us: That God calls us not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and Grace, 2 Tim. 1.9. Christ was manifested to a Thief, and not to a Socrates or Plato; Impenitent Corazin and Bethsaida had a visible Deity before them in Christ's Miracles, when poor Tyre and Sidon, much nearer to Repentance, had it not, Matth. 11.21. Here the reason cannot be in the Creature, unless we will say with Pelagius: Gratiam dari secundum merita, That Grace is given according to works. But to come to the Church, there God gives Faith and Repentance to one Man, not to another; and is the reason in the Creature? Faith and Repentance are the very first Graces in Men, & therefore cannot be given to them for any precedent Grace in them, or indeed for any reason at all in them; unless, which is very odd, we presume them to be given to them for the goodness of their Nature: The Scripture clearly resolves it into the Sovereign will of God, He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, Rom. 9.18. He begets us of his own will, Ja. 1.18. He begets us according to his abundant mercy, 1 Pet. 1.3. He worketh to will & to do of his good pleasure, Ph. 2.13. Neither is it possible to be otherwise; his love of Benevolence, is the Fountain and great Origen of all the goodness in the Creature; and how or which way shall the goodness of the Creature be the cause or reason of that love? All the goodness in the Creature is but a donative of Divine love; and if so, than the Divine love was antecedent to that goodness in the Creature. Now these things being clearly so in Scripture and reason, I suppose there is little reason, and less Religion, to say, That God loves for no reason, or without reason; that that Man is a Fool who loves at this rate that it is a reproach among Men so to Act; with such other stuff, which I pray God to forgive unto the Speaker. If there be reason for any thing in the World, there is for this: That God the supreme Donor, should do what he would with his own: That Man, the poor Receiver, should not expostulate with God, or think to call him to an account for any of his matters: That the regenerating Spirit should be at liberty and breath where it lists: That all Gods gifts should be free, and of his good pleasure, there being in the Creature nothing that is good, but what is a mere gift only. But, saith the Author, This undermines the foundations of Religion, if God love for no reason, whether we obey him or disobey him, it is all one; if God love us our sins cannot hinder it, if he love us not our holiness cannot alter him, therefore all Religion is but in vain. To which I answer, This Argument runs upon two or three hypotheses which are untrue: The Author supposes first, that God's purpose or decretive love is, what it is not, the rule of our acting; next, that there is in God what indeed there is not, some purpose or decree to bar some Men, though never so holy, out of Heaven. And Thirdly, That there is not, what in truth there is, a complacential love in God towards all holy Persons whoever they be. Now, these things are not so, we say, that God commands all in the Church to Repent and Believe, that God hath made a general promise of Salvation to all that do so; and withal that God hath a complacential love towards all holy persons whoever they be: And these things considered, surely Religion cannot be in vain or to no purpose. As for the Philosophical nicety or verity rather, if God be, as he is, a God and the supreme Donor of all; in reason, all Creatures as Creatures must depend on him the Creator, and as Receivers must depend on him the Donor: And hence it is evident, that all the grace and goodness in the Creature, because a Creature, must depend on him its Maker; And because a gift must depend on him the Donor thereof. Man, though but a petty Benefactor, is free in his gifts, or else they would not be gifts; how much more must God the supreme Donor be so? It is true, when Men are good, God, such is the sanctity of his Nature, doth take pleasure in them; but to dispense grace or goodness to the Creature is his Royal prerogative, he doth it according to the sovereign unaccountable pleasure of his will; he was under no Natural necessity to give a Christ, or a Gospel, or a dram of Faith or holiness, to any one fallen Man in the World, what he gives, he gives as he pleases out of mere Free grace. It is true too, when Men are good, God, such is his gracious promise, will greatly reward them; but it is he only who makes us good, and so meet for the inheritance in light; our goodness is of Grace, and our reward is Grace upon Grace, remunerating Grace upon sanctifying; In a word, the love of God's Complacence respects goodness in the Creature, but the love of Benevolence causes it, and that freely in a way of unaccountable Sovereignty; and this is so far from being a love without reason, that without it, it is impossible that there should be any goodness in the Creature: Were there a goodness in the Creature, antecedent to the love of his Benevolence, it would be a beam without a Sun, a gift without a Giver a strange, independent, self-originated goodness, and that in the Creature, which is as great an absurdity as can well be imagine.  
Secondly, 
Mr. Sherlock.  These Men tell us too, that Christ's love is immutable, having once fixed his love upon us, though without any reason, he can never alter: Sin itself cannot separate us from the Love of Christ. If sin foreseen were not able to hinder him from planting his heart on us: How then shall it (that is, sin committed) be able to over-turn the thoughts of his heart, when once they are fixed on us? This is a strong fixed Love indeed, which sin itself cannot alter: But how wise, and holy a Love it is, let any man judge: Herein Dr. Owen tells us the depth of Christ's Love is to be contemplated, that whereas his holy Soul hates every sin, it is a burden, an abomination, a new wound to him; and his poor Spouse, that is, sinful Believers are full of sin, failings, infirmities, he hides all, covers all, bears all, rather than he will lose them. He adds indeed, by his power preserving them from such sins, as a remedy is not provided for in the Covenant of Grace. I suppose he means the sin against the holy Ghost; for there is a remedy provided for all other sins in the Covenant of Grace, and all other sins a Believer it seems may be guilty of; and Christ will hid all rather than lose him. Now this is as downright Antinomianism, as ever Dr. Crisp or Saltmarsh vented; There have been, and are to this day a great many wise learned men, who contend for the perseverance of the Saints, that those, who are once in a state of Grace, shall always continue so: But then they found this not on such an immutable Love, as sin itself cannot alter; for this is not reconcilable with the Holiness of the Divine Nature; nor with those threaten in Scripture against such backsliders: When the righteous man turneth away from his Righteousness, and committeth iniquity; and doth according to all the abominations that a wicked man doth, he shall die, Ezek. 18.24. If any man turn back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him, which is a plain demonstration, the truth of which is which is acknowledged by all sober Writers, that if such men can be supposed to relapse into a sinful state, God will cease to love them; therefore they found the immutability of God's Love to them on their perseverance in doing good, God loves all good men; but if they cease to be good, he also must cease to love: Herein the immutability of God's Love consists, not that he always loves the same person, but that he always loves for the same reason: For it is no perfection to be so fixed in our kindness; that where we love once, we will always love, whatever reason there may be to alter our affections; for by this means we may love undeserving Objects, which is the greatest degeneracy of Love; but the perfection of Love consists in loving deserving Objects, and in loving upon honourable reasons, and the immutability of Love consists in loving always for the same reasons, which is the only foundation of a virtuous immutability: The reason of Christ's Love to any person is Holiness and Obedience: If any love me, he will keep my words, and my Father will love him; and we will come to him, and make our abode with him, Joh. 14.23. The unchangeableness of his Love is seen in this, that he will continue to love, while we continue to obey him: If ye shall keep my Commandments; that is, continue to do so: Ye shall abide in my Love; I will continue to love you: As I have kept my Father's Commandments, and abide in his Love, Joh. 15.20. This is the immutability of the Divine Nature, that God always acts upon steady, constant Principles, that whatever changes there are in the World, which may occasion very different administrations in his providence; yet he is the same still, and never changes: Whereas, should God always love the same person; however he changed and altered, God must change and alter too; because though he still loves the same person; yet he must love for different or contrary reasons, or for none at all; and that is the much greater change of the two, to alter the reason, than the Object of Love: If God love a good man, because he is good, and continue to love him, when he is wicked, his love is a mutable thing, which can love goodness or wickedness, which can love for none, or for contrary reasons: But if God always loves true goodness, and good men, and never loves any other; whatever change there be in Creatures; God is the same still, and unchangeable in his Love.  
The Author admits an immutable Love in God towards goodness; 
Answer.  but the Scripture asserts an immutable Love in God towards persons: He hath chosen us before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1.4. Electing Love is eternal, and therefore immutable: Non enim est vera aeternitas, ubi orttur nova voluntas, nec est immortalis voluntas, quae alia et alia est: An eternal choice must be ever the same, and after one there cannot rise another. The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal; the Lord knoweth them that are his, 2 Tim. 2.19. Election, which is the foundation, is sure, and God's foreknowledge, which includes invariable Love in it, is the seal of it: The Book of Life hath all the names of the Elect written in it, and God's Love is the Seal that confirms it; whom he did predestinate, them he also called, and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified, Rom. 8.30. This Golden Chain of Grace comprises in it certain individual persons, as the words (whom and them) which fasten every link of it, doth evidently import; and that which holds all the links of it together, is immutable Love: Nay, besides Scripture evidence, reason will evince this immutable Love of the Elect; without this there can be no design of a Church, and without the design of a Church, Christ's blood must needs be shed irrationally, or upon a mere peradventure; I say, without this there can be no design of a Church; for the design of a Church must comprise in it, those individual persons, which shall make up a Church, and undertake that they shall infallibly believe and persevere till they come to Heaven; it must first comprise in it those individual persons which shall make up a Church, or else it is lame and imperfect, unworthy of the Divine Wisdom and Perfection; running much after this rate, as if God should say, I design a Church, but I care not of whom it consists, which is much one, as if God should design an Heaven, and not what Stars should be in it; or an Earth, and not what Plants should be there: All the members in man's body are written in God's book, Psal. 139.16. And can any man imagine, that those, who should make up the Mystical Body of Christ, as so many Members thereof, are not certainly designed? God calleth them by name, Joh. 10.3. Your names are all down in the Book of Life, Phil. 4.3. To design a Church, and not who, is too weak a thing for the alwise Deity. Again, the design of a Church must undertake, that those individual persons shall believe and persevere; unless this be granted, the design of a Church must be framed thus: God gives a Saviour and a Gospel in common, and over and above a power to men to believe and persevere; and so, though the issue hang upon man's will, hopes for a Church: But in Truth, this is not to design a Church; but the possibility of one; there may be one, as it may happen, and there may be none: And is this like that Divine Providence, which is perfect in all things, and especially in the great design of a Church? Nay, is it probable upon these terms, that any should believe and persevere! Innocent Adam (and yet alas! how soon was that Star shot?) was more likely to stand in his integrity, than any man since upon those terms hath been to believe and persevere: The disparity clears it. The Divine principles in Adam sweetly inclined him to obedience: But the power of believing in men doth not incline, but only put the will in aequilibrio. The Divine Principles in Adam, were pure and without mixture: But the power of believing hath in the same heart, where it dwells, an inmate of corruption, which continually counter-works it. In innocency the temptation stood without a courting the senses: But after the Fall it makes nearer approaches, as having a party within ready to open and betray every faculty. These things considered, methinks every one, who with humble eyes looks on that glass of Creature defectibility, which was made out of the broken pieces of fallen Adam, should conclude it very improbable, that any one in all the World upon those terms should believe and persevere; it being no less than a proud thought for any to imagine, that upon such great disparities he could act his part better than Adam did: And is it reasonable, that God should found the design of a Church upon such improbabilities? The first Covenant, in which the stock of Grace was in man's own hand, and the stress of all lay upon his will, miscarried and brought forth no happiness to man; and can we imagine, that the Alwise God, who made the second Covenant as a secunda tabulae to repair the ruins of the first, should frame it in that very same way in which the first miscarried? May the stock be in man's hand again, and his Bankrupt will trustee a second time? Will God hang up all upon a mere posse in the Creature, and expect it may do better in lapsed than innocent man? Alas! what miserable specimens' hath  given of itself in fallen Man! The old World, left to their own  (though, I suppose, according to the Author, not without a posse) all but one Noah, desperately corrupted themselves, till the Flood swept them away: And for that one Noah, it is not probable or indeed imaginable, that he, had he been left to himself only with the common Grace afforded to the rest, should have done better than they; nay, it is a World against one man, that he would have corrupted himself as they did. After the flood (and that was a startling warning-piece) hath free Will with the common Grace done better? All Nations have walked in their own ways, that is, in ways of wickedness, affording us a vast experiment in millions of men, that free Will left to itself will miscarry, and come to nought; and withal a pregnant proof, that nothing less than special effectual Grace could secure a Church or so much as a single Noah unto God. These things being so, I conclude that the design of a Church doth not only give a power to believe and persevere, but Faith and Perseverance to those individual persons which make up a Church; Hence our Saviour tells us, that all that the Father giveth him, shall come to him, Joh. 6.37. that is, shall believe and make up his mystical Body; and withal, that it was his Father's will, that none of them should be lost, vers. 39 that is, that they should persevere unto the end. Now after all this discourse, if there be such a design of a Church, that comprises in it those individual persons which shall make up a Church, and secures Faith and Perseverance unto them, than the love of God towards them can be no less than immutable, pitching upon them in election, and carrying of them through Faith and perseverance unto glory. Having said thus much to establish the point, I now shall attend the Author's objections, first he tells us. That sin itself cannot separate us from this immutable Love. Very well; I acknowledge it, that immutable Love, which gives Faith and Perseverance to his People, preserves them so, that sin, any other than unavoida-infirmity, shall not be at all; or if it be, shall not finally be in them: They shall not sin such sins, or if they do, the divine Grace shall raise them up by Repentance. They are, as Dr. Owen hath it, preserved from such sins, for which a remedy is not provided in the Covenant of Grace; that is, not only, as the Author glosses, from the sin against the Holy Ghost, but from final Impenitency too; which is not remedied in the Covenant of Grace: If they sin, they shall not lie in it by final Apostasy & Impenitency, & consequently they shall never fall under such threaten against Backsliders and Apostates as that mentioned, Ezek. 18. and in other Scriptures: and what Antinomianism there is in this I know not; neither can I see how that Love, which preserves from final Impenitency, should want Wisdom or Holiness. The Author goes on; Many wise learned men there are, who contend for Perseverance; but they found Gods immutable Love on their Perseverance: To which I answer, I know no such: They, who are for Perseverance, do not found Gods immutable love, on perseverance, but perseverance on God's immutable love, which causeth the same: Thus Fulgentius, Deus, Praedestinationè suâ & donum Illuminationis ad credendum, & donum Perseverantiae ad permanendun & donum Glorificationis ad regnandun, quibus dare voluit praeparavit; nec aliter perficit in opere quàm in sua sempiterna & incommutabili voluntate habet dispositum: Faith, Perseverance Glory, all are the effluxes of immutable Love. But the Author further tells us That the Immutability of God's love consists in this not that he always loves the same person, but that he always loves for same reason; he always loves true goodness and good men, and never loves any other, and so is unchangeable: To which I answer, God loves good men with a Love of Complacence; he cannot love a wicked man with a Love of Complacence; but may he not love him with a Love of Benevolence? Then he cannot design the least good to any fallen Man in the World, all being by Nature wicked, and children of wrath: If God love good men, and never loved any other, than he could not design to lapsed corrupt Man, a Christ, or a Gospel, or any the least means of Salvation: Goodness, the only reason of Love being gone by the Fall, nothing that is good can be intended to man: This, as the Author tells us, would be the degeneracy of Love, to love an undeserving object; & every man by Nature is no better: It is, saith the Author, the greatest change of all to alter the reason of Love; and therefore according to this Principle, God (as he would be a Self-preserver, and not suffer a Change in himself) having loved innocent Man, was bound not to love fallen Man; not to give him a Christ, or a Gospel, or any good thing. But rather than run ourselves into such Consequences, I think we were as good say, God's Love of Complacence is towards good men, but his Love of Benevolence is towards men, even before they are good, and is the fontal Cause of all that after-goodness in them which is the Object of his Complacence. As for that place, Joh. 14.23. If a man keep my words, my Father will love him, the meaning is, God will manifest himself unto him, as it is, ver. 21 I will love him, and will manifest myself unto him: If God did not love him before, whence came his Obedience? It must be an odd independent Self-originated Obedience, which came not from the Grace or Love of the great Donor.   

SECT. II.  
SOme men tell us, That as Christ falls in love with our Persons, 
Mr Sherlock.  so we must in requital to him love the Person of Christ: This is as certain as any Demonstration in Euclid, that if we love Christ, we must love his Person; for the Person of Christ is Christ himself, and if we love Christ, we must love him: But this will not serve their turn; they oppose our love to the Person of Christ to our love to him upon account of his benefits, to our love to ourselves, and to our duties. First, we must love the Person of Christ in opposition to his Benefits; that is, we must not consider what advantages we do or may receive from Christ, what he hath done or suffered for us, but we must love his Person purely for himself without any other considerations to endear him to us. This matter is gravely stated and determined by W.B. who tells us, 1. That it is a good and lawful thing to love Christ in reference to his benefits: This is a very liberal grant,; that Gratitude, which hath hitherto been accounted a great and excellent Virtue, is now owned as a lawful thing. 2. It is our duty to love Christ's Person: This is so true, that those men, who love Christ for his benefits, love his Person: 3. The Excellency of Christ's Person is not the Object of my Faith, but Christ crucified: 4. Though Christ crucified be the Object of my Faith, yet the personal Excellencies of Christ are the Object of my Love; yea, it is a more excellent thing yet to love the Person of Christ, than the Benefits of Christ; to have my heart drawn out in love to the Person of Christ, than to have it drawn out in love to him for his Benefits. Now what can be the meaning of all this, but that the Excellency and Perfection of our Love to Christ consists in loving him for no reason: The proper object and reason of Love is Goodness; to love that which is good for nothing is the folly and degeneracy of Love; and it is as foolish and impossible a task to love a person, who hath been good to us, not because he hath been good, but for no reason. Now this is the case here; for if you separate the Person and personal Excellencies of Christ from the consideration of his benefits, his personal Goodness from the expressions of his Love and Goodness to ourselves and others, it can be no Object or reason of our Love: for a Goodness which doth no good, or never did any, or, which is all one, is considered as doing none, is so far from being the Object of our Love, that it is not the Object of our Understanding: For we cannot understand what that Goodness means, which never did any good. God challenges our Love, not upon account of an imaginary Goodness of Nature, which never did any good; but for the real and sensible Effects of his Goodness in the works of Creation and Providence, and Redemption by Christ: And Christ challenges our love for the like reasons; because he hath loved us, and died for us, and now intercedes for us, and will at the last day bestow a Crown of Glory and Immortality on us, but never, as I can observe,, requires such an abstracted and Metaphysical Love to his Person, without any respect to his benefits.  
We love Christ for his Benefits, 
Answer.  these are the first impulsives of our Love; but our love, once kindled, is afterwards blown up into a purer flame by those attractive Excellencies and ravishing Beauties, which are in the Person of Christ; we come to love Christ for himself. The Spouse in the Canticles did not only love Christ for his Shadow and sweet fruits, for the Graces and Benefits communicated from him, but for himself, his incomparable Person, who is the chiefest among ten thousand, and altogether lovely. Neither is this Love to Christ for himself (what the Author would have it to be) a Love for no reason, or a Love in its folly and degeneracy: But it is a Love for the greatest Reason, and a Love in perfection. There is a greater worthiness and so an higher attractive of our Love in the Person of Christ than in his Benefits; and therefore in all reason Love is in a more high and superlative measure due to the one than to the other. All the Benefits of Christ are but as so many Mediums to draw up and attract our Love to the Person of Christ, and our Love in its ascent up thither, must not stay or take up its final rest in Means (for this would be to pervert the nature of Means and transform them into Ends;) but it must terminate in Christ the great End and Centre. Should we love the Benefits more than the Person of Christ, we should be lovers of ourselves more than lovers of Christ; our Love would then return and circulate into ourselves, and there rest and centre ut in ultimo termino, which is no less than Idolatry. If we are truly espoused to Christ, we will not love the Rings and Jewels, more than himself; nay, nor so much: The true noble Lover doth not acquiesce in other gifts, but in Christ, the Gift above all other gifts. But, saith the Author, A Goodness, which doth no good, or never did any, is so far from being the object of our Love, that it is not the object of our Understanding: To which I answer, It's true, if God had never done good, that is, had never created a Creature, he could not have been the Object of any created Love or Understanding; for there being no Creation, there could have been no such thing as any created Love or Understanding; however he had been an Object for a greater Love and Understanding than any created one, even for his own infinite Love and Understanding. Had he never created a Creature, he would have been for ever happy by amatorious and intellectual Reflections upon himself, and his own Perfections. It is true that God calls for our Love upon account of Creation, Providence and Redemption; but it is due to him for himself, for his Divine Excellency and All-sufficiency. Can we imagine, what is impossible, that there were a rational Creature, who never received any good from God, upon such a supposal, that Creature would be bound to love God for his intrinsecal Goodness and Excellency; or else the Will of that Creature might, which is very strange, pass by the Supreme Good unsaluted. But to leave that Supposition; now we have God and many blessings before our eyes, we are bound to love God above all, as the complete and adequate Object of our Love: Should we love any Blessings without or above him, it would be Cupiditas, Lust, (which is the formale of every sin) and not Love. I conclude with that of Bonaventure, 
Li. 3. distinct. 29. quest 2.  Secundùm Charitatis legem, impossibile est aliquid plus vel aequaliter Deo amare, Charitas enim, quia diligit Deum ut summum bonum, diligit eum super omnia; quia diligit Deum ut finem ultimum, diligit eum propter se. Blessings may be motives to us to love God, but they are not to be loved as the supreme End or Good, that is God only in his infinite Goodness and Excellency; upon account of these all Worship, and among the rest, Love is due to him.  
Indeed these men seem not to understand themselves; 
Mr. Sherlock.  for when you inquire what this Person of Christ is, which is the Object of our Love, than they describe his Beauty and perfections; the Comeliness of his Person, the sweetness of his Disposition, his great Riches, that he is a Good suitable to all our wants: Now either all this signifies the benefits we receive by Christ, or it signifies nothing; and how then do these personal Excellencies differ from his benefits? They teach us to use Christ much, if we would love his Person: Now this using must signify his benefits, and to love Christ much, because we use him, is to love him, because we receive many benefits from him; which is neither better nor worse, than to love him for his benefits.  
We love Christ for his benefits, 
Answer.  and for himself too: Hence these men describe Christ's Person by both; they set out his Beauty and Comeliness in himself, and withal his Suitableness to our wants: The first rise of our Love to Christ is from his Benefits, and afterwards our Love to him is for himself also; the Excellency and Amiableness of his Person in himself calls for our love, and must have it.  
The Love we own to God and Christ is no other than gratitude, because God loved us first, 
Mr. Sherlock.  and our Love is only a return of his: Now thankfulness and gratitude includes in it a necessary respect to those blessings and benefits we have received: It is peculiar to God, who wants nothing, and can receive nothing from his Creatures, to love without any respect to benefits; but the Love of indigent and dependent Creatures is a Love of thankfulness, a grateful acknowledgement of those many blessings we receive from God.  
Our Love to God and Christ is gratitude: 
Answer.  It is for Benefits, but is it only for Benefits? No surely; we are to love God and Christ for the infinite goodness and excellency which is in them; if we ask, what is the formal and adequate reason of Divine Worship? No other answer can be given, but that it is the infinite divine excellency and perfection which is in God: Our love to God, which is a part of Worship, though possibly its first rise or motive may be from benefits; yet it stays not in the benefits, but in and by them ascends to God; the ultimate Object and Centre of Worship, who is to be loved in and for himself.  
Secondly, 
Mr. Sherlock.  these men oppose our Love to the person of Christ, to our love to ourselves: The first destroys the Reason, and the Object of our Love; and this destroys the principle of it: It is made the character of a wicked man, 
Shep. Sinc. Convert.  who wants an inward principle of love to God and Christ; That though he seeks to honour God never so much, yet all that he doth, he doth out of love to himself, self-credit, self-ease, self-content, self-safety; he makes himself a God. Hence the same author exhorts sinners: away out of yourselves to the Lord Jesus, take hold on him, not with the hand of presumption, and love to thyself, to save thyself; but with the hand of Faith and Love to honour him: Here is the strongest difficulty of all to row against the stream, to hate a man's self, (our own souls and eternal Salvation) and then to follow Christ fully: Now is it not an hard case, that before we can love God and Christ, as we ought, we must root out the very principle of all love, that we may learn to hate Salvation and Eternal Happiness, before we can close with Christ for Salvation! This is the strongest difficulty of all; for indeed it is impossible: Love to ourselves is the foundation of our love to all other things, even to God himself: He that doth not love himself, will love nothing else; he that hates himself, his own soul, and despises eternal Salvation, will not care for Christ or Salvation by him: All the Motives and Arguments of the Gospel to persuade us to love and fear, and obey God, are founded on self-love; for how is it possible, that we should be affected with a due sense of God's goodness to us? That we should be excited and quickened by the hopes of such great rewards? That we should be restrained and governed by the fears of punishment? If we did not love ourselves, if we did not care what became of us; whether we were happy or miserable for ever. It is a vain thing to persuade a man not to love himself: For this is as natural and necessary, as it is for the Fire to burn, or Sun to shine: It is not matter of our choice; it is not in our power to do otherwise, all that such discourses as these can do, is either to make men hypocrites to pretend to do what they cannot do, or to make honest men, who cannot thus cheat and delude themselves, despair of their Salvation, because they cannot find themselves contented without Salvation, that Christ without Salvation cannot satisfy them. It is true, when men set up self in opposition to God; when self-love te●●●●s them to disobey God, to despise his Counsels, to renounce their Faith and Religion: This is a very vicious and mistaken self-love: Such men neither love themselves nor God in a proper sense, because it is our interest as well as our duty to obey God; such men are Idolaters, because they set up self above God, and in opposition to him: But when our love to ourselves teaches us to love God, and in all things to submit to his will and pleasure: We do as we ought to do, they who separate our love to God, from our love to ourselves, from the care of our Salvation, do plainly declare, that they neither understand the nature of man, nor the Gospel of Christ.  
Mr. Shephard speaks of a wicked man, 
Answer.  who wants an inward principle of love to God and Christ, that he doth all for himself, he sleeps, prays, hears, speaks, professes, for himself alone, that he commits the highest degree of Idolatry, and makes himself a God: And adds this reason; For a man puts himself in the room of God, as well by making himself his finis ultimus, as if he should make himself primum principium: And is there any question at all in this? may not a wicked man (not to say, sleep, which every man doth) but pray, hear, speak, profess? No doubt can be made of it, and if he do so, it must needs be for himself; he having, whilst wicked, no Divine Principle, nothing of grace to elevate him above himself: But Mr. Shephard would have men go out of themselves to Christ: And this is hard to row against the stream, to hate a man's self: And, saith the Author, this is impossible, this is to root up the very principle of Love: Love to ourselves is the foundation of our Love to all other things, even to God himself. To which I answer: No doubt we are to love Christ for the purchased Salvation neither doth Mr. Shephard deny it, but we are not to love him for Salvation, only or supremely, no, but for himself, his infinite goodness and perfection: This is not to root up the principle Love, but to rectify it: Indeed this is hard: Nay, I may add unattainable by lapsed nature in itself: but Grace elevates nature above itself, to love Christ (though not without a respect to Salvation) yet above ourselves, and so in a comparative sense to hate ourselves for him: Indeed, if love to ourselves were (as the Author would have it) the foundation of our Love to God, than it must be the measure of it too; and by consequence we should not need love God above ourselves; and our love of God might, for aught I see, centre and ultimately terminate in ourselves: But this cannot be allowed; As long as God is God, the supreme good and last end, he must be loved above all, and for himself; that inclination, which is in us to love ourselves more than God, is, as Bonaventure well observes, not the perfection, but the corruption of our Natures: But, saith the Author, he that doth not love or care for himself, will not love God. To which I answer: If we do not care for ourselves in a way of foolish neglect, we are unnatural to ourselves, and want true love to God: But if we care not for ourselves in a Paroxysm of holy Zeal for God, as when Moses prayed, to be blotted out of God's book: Or when St. Paul wished himself accursed from Christ: then our love to God is very great and fervent; if, whilst we pay that debitum naturae, love to ourselves; We subordinate it to the love of God, loving God above ourselves, and in that sense comparatively not estimating ourselves; then our love to God is true, and as it ought to be: We need not make men hypocrites or desperate, we need not break any of the sweet links, duty and interest may well consist together, our love to God, and our love to ourselves may stand in conjunction; yet still our love must keep its decorum, we must have a higher respect for Duty than for interest; and our love to God must be superlative, and above our love to ourselves.  
Thirdly, 
Mr. Sherlock.  they oppose our love to Christ to our own Duties; that is, to the most proper and natural expression of our love to him: Herein Dr. Owen places the chastity of our affections to Christ; (which you know is a great marriage duty) in not taking any thing (as our own righteousness) into our affection and esteem; for those ends and purposes for which we have received Christ; and God forbidden that any Christian should, for our own Righteousness and Duties, cannot be our Mediators and Advocates: What then is the difference? Why it is only this: The Doctor places the Righteousness of Christ, in the room of our righteousness, to be not only the foundation, but the condition of the Covenant of Grace, and then makes it an expression of our chaste affection to Christ, quite to thrust out our own righteousness, and to allow it no place in our Religion: He makes Christ all to us, and leaves no room for any thing else, and then warns us upon our vows of chastity, not to take any thing into Christ's place; Whereas, as he has ordered the matter, we must take our own righteousness into Christ's place, or else cast it quite away; for there is no other place left for it: But is it not very strange, that when our Saviour hath made our obedience the principal expression of our Love to him: These men should make such a competition between our Love to Christ, and our Obedience? should put such jealousies into people's heads: What great danger there is of their own Duties and Righteousness; lest they should prove like foolish Lovers, 
Sincere Convert.  who, when they are to woo for the Lady, fall in love with the Handmaid. Men dote upon Duties, and rest in the naked performance of them, (that is, in doing good) which are only Handmaids to lead to Christ. Is not this to persuade people, that our love to Christ consists in something more refined, and spiritual than obedience? Which will quickly teach them to love Christ without obeying of him, and not run the hazard of doting on duties.  
Doth the Doctor quite thrust out our own Righteousness? 
Answer.  Doth he allow it no place in our Religion? I have before noted what charge this is. The Doctor in his Book doth assert; That our Obedience is indispensibly necessary, 
Commun. fo. 208, 209, 210, etc.  and that, because of the Sovereign will of God the Father, Son, and holy Ghost, because of the Father's electing Love, the Sons purchasing Love, the Spirits operative Love, because of the glory of the whole Trinity, because Holiness is our Honour, and makes us like to God; our peace in communion with God; our usefulness in our Generations, because it stops the mouths of enemies, tends to the conversion of others, and profit of all, because justified persons are accepted, and admitted into God's presence; they are new Creatures, and the new Creature is not to be stifled, because holiness is the way to eternal life; a Testimony and Pledge of Adoption, a sign and evidence of Grace. Now if this be not enough to answer that charge, I must utterly despair, that ever it can be cleared: No man, that I know of, ever dreamt of an opposition between Love to Christ and Obedience; I should as soon be persuaded, that the Sun was fallen out with his Beams; or that all the causes and effects of Nature were at a variance among themselves, as conceit any such thing: Yet Christ must be upon the Throne, and Duties must stand at his Footstool: The Homage, which is in Duties, proclaims the preeminence of the Lord, we are not, as Mr. Shephard hath it, to rest in Duties, in the naked performance of them: Our Duties must not supplant Christ's Righteousness, but pay a tribute of gratitude to it; we must use them, as Noah's Dove did her wings, to carry us to the Ark, even to Jesus Christ, in whom only is the Sabbath of Souls. But, saith the Author, is not this to persuade people, that our love to Christ consists in something more refined than Obedience? which will quickly teach them to love Christ without obeying. To which, I answer: Love without obeying is to me an utter inconsistency: If we indeed love Christ, we do really will Christum Regem, that he should be King, and reign in and over us: Love sets his Throne in the Heart, and Obedience in the Life: The expression of our Love to Christ is in Obedience: Nothing is more refined within than Faith and Love, nor without than Obedience; it being, as it should, performed in a due manner, in the actuation of Divine Graces; for if it be only an outward naked performance, it is but the shell, and semblance of obeying without loving.  
Let us now inquire, 
Mr. Sherlock.  how they express their love to the person of Christ, and that consists in preferring Christ above all, they value him above all other things and persons, above their lives, above all Spiritual Excellencies, and other Righteousness whatever; he is their Joy, Crown, Life, Food, Health, Strength, Desire, Righteousness, Salvation Blessedness; The meaning of all is, that they prefer the person of Christ, which hath such a perfect righteousness for them, and will save them without requiring any legal conditions of them, infinitely before the Religion and Gospel of Christ, before Obedience to his commands; before the Love and Fear of God; So that the foundation of their love to Christ is a fond imagination, that he will save them by his Righteonsness, without any Righteousness and Holiness of their own: This makes them so fond of the person of Christ, because they look on him as a refuge and sanctuary for the wicked and ungodly, where the greatest, oldest, stubbornest transgressor, may shelter himself from the wrath of God, and I have some reason to think, that Christ will not much prize such Devoto's as these, nor their obsequious flatteries or praise.  
They prefer Christ above all; 
Answer.  and no wonder, all the Saints and Martyrs have done so; he is worthy of love in its height and tallest Statures: A Believer may love other things, but he loves Christ with a love more eminent and over-topping, such as is congruous for an Object so altogether lovely and desirable; he loves other things with reference to Christ: But Christ for himself; his infinite excellency and perfection: He loves Ordinances, because they are the Banqueting-House of Christ; he loves the Gospel, because it is his Royal Charter; he loves his own Graces, because they are his love-tokens, and bear his Divine Image: After all, the great centre of his love is Christ himself. But, saith the Author, the foundation of their love to Christ, is a fond imagination, that he will save them by his Righteousness, without any Righteousness of their own, that he will be a refuge and sanctuary for the wicked and ungodly: To which I say, That I have before noted this to be as it is, a Popish Calumny, and without any just ground at all for it; when Grotius drew up such a kind of charge against the common Protestant Doctrine, as if it were enough to say, Credo justitiam Christi mihi imputari, as if there were no need of true Repentance or holy walking. Dr. Arrowsmith makes this return; Quam nollem haec à te dicta vel ficta potius, 
Tact. Sacr. fol. 141  Hugo doctissime, cum nihil sit à praxi, nihil à sensu nostro remotius. 
Mr Sherlock.   
The devotion of these men consists in admiring, prising, valuing the person of Christ. This is that Evangelical Righteousness, we must gain by Duties; more prising of acquaintance with, desire, loving and delighting in Union with the Lord Jesus Christ; a Moral man, who rests in duties (that is, who does what God commands and expects to be saved by Christ) may grow in legal Righteousness; that is, in true Holiness and Piety: But this will not avail, unless we grow in this Evangelical Righteousness: 
Sincere Convert.  This is the great end of Duties, to carry us to the Lord Jesus. Hear a Sermon to carry thee to Christ; fast, pray, get a full tide of affections in them, to carry thee to Christ; that is, to get more Love of him, more Acquaintance and Union with him; sorrow for sins, that thou mayst be more fitted for Christ, and more prize Christ; use thy Duties, as Noah's Dove did her wings, to carry thee to the Ark of the Lord Jesus: As it is with a poor man, that is to go over a great water for a treasure on the other side, though he cannot fetch the boat, he calls for it, to carry him over to the treasure: So Christ is in Heaven, and thou on Earth: He doth not come to thee, thou canst not go to him: Now call for a Boat, though there is no Grace, no Good, no Salvation in a pithless duty; yet use it to catry thee over to the Lord Christ; when thou comest to hear, say, have over Lord by this Sermon; when to pray, say, have over Lord by this Prayer to a Saviour, etc. So that it seems the whole business of our Love to Christ and Evangelical Righteousness, consists in some flights of fancy and imagination, in admiring and valuing the person of Christ, in getting an acquaintance and union with him: The business of all Religion is, to have over to Christ, that we may love and prise his Person, and personal Righteousness, above all things in the World. It is not so much the business of Sermons to acquaint us with the Nature, Attributes and Works of God, to instruct us in our Duty, and encourage us to it by the Motives of the Gospel, as to have over to Christ: The design of prayer is not so much to affect our Souls with a sense of the Divine Majesty, to worship and adore him, and to express our trust in him, as to have over to Christ. Sorrow for sin is not so much to embitter sin to us, and to strengthen us against it, as to teach us to prize Christ: The Nature of Religion is now changed from being the Homage and Worship of God; the certain means of pleasing him, and transforming us in▪ to his likeness; which is the natural end of Religion, into a Cockboat and Scholar to waft us over to Christ: Here we see the true reason why these men do so despise Morality in comparison of those Gospel-duties, of hearing Sermons, Prayer, Confessions, Humiliation, etc. because as they handle the matter: The practice of Moral Virtues, cannot have us over to Christ, cannot apply the righteousness and fullness of Christ to us, nor ravish our fancies with glorious Images and Ideas of his person: And since all the Duties of Religion are such pithless things, which have no Grace, no Good, no Salvation in them, but as they have us over to Christ, poor Morality must needs be a worthless thing.  
That we are highly to prize Christ, 
Answer.  can be no question with Christians; when he comes in his Glory, he shall be admired of all them that believe, 2 Thess. 1.10. And before that coming, we are, as far as our Faith will carry us, to admire him, who is indeed an Object, in whom Heaven and Earth are so admirably blended together, that humane reason may well lose itself, and stand in a maze at such an Union: That Christ is to be highly prized by us; we need go no further, than the raptures and ecstatical passions of the Spouse in the Canticles, which are a kind of Commentary on that Admiration, which is the genius and communis sensus of Christians: Nature itself reveils God to be the great Object of Worship; but the Gospel assures us that there is no access, no coming to God but by Christ; That there is no Righteousness able to cover our persons and duties with the defects thereof but Christ's Righteousness; That there is no doing Duties in a right and spiritual way acceptable unto God, but by the Spirit and Grace of Christ; and upon these strong important Reasons, the Gospel calls and presses upon men to come to Christ; and therefore all Evangelical Duties (because they are by infinite Wisdom framed in a perfect Symmetry to the Gospel) must needs be, not to say Cock-boats and Skullers, but Divine Mediums and Conveyances to have us over to Christ; without whom we cannot have any access to God, or standing before him, or power to do any thing in a spiritual and acceptable manner. Sermons are to instruct us in our Duty, not as if we could do any thing truly and spiritually as of ourselves: But that in the sense of our own weakness and impotency, we may be drawn to Christ, the Wisdom and Power of God; who can teach us inwardly, and empower us by his Grace to do the Will of God: In Prayer we are to have a sense of the Divine Majesty, to worship him, and express our trust in him: But a true sense of the Divine Majesty tells us, that we must not approach immediately thither without Christ our Mediator, that our trust and other acts of Worship must find their acceptance only in and through Christ: Sorrow for sin without coming to Christ and prising him, is so far from being repentance unto life, that it drives a man down into the Black Gulf of horror and desperation. The Nature of Religion is not now changed, but only turned into such a Channel, as is congruous to fallen man, that all access and acceptance with God may be in a Mediator, and all Grace and Glory may be from him. Morality is a beauty, and good in suo genere; but (because it sacrifices only to Reason, and Reason cannot supply the room of a Mediator) it must needs fall much below that Evangelical Religion, which would have all transacted through a Mediator: Sermons, Prayers, Confessions, Humiliations are Divine Media: But, if we stay in the means, and never arrive at the Mediator, we pervert the means from their true end, and fall short of that scope, to which they were appointed; possibly the phrase, have over to Christ, may to some have but a rough aspect; yet the thing is as amiable as can be imagined, its importance being no more than that the whole managery of Religion must be in and through a Mediator.  
To conclude, whether these men have transformed Religion, disfigured the Gospel, undermined the fundamental design of it; misrepresented the ends of Christ's coming, abused his Expiation, Sacrifice, Righteousness, intercession to the patronage of Vice, laid Snares to betray some men to a licentious life, and to entangle others in endless troubles, have under pretence of advancing the person of Christ, banished his Religion out of the world? I shall leave to the judicious Reader. Narcissus the old Bishop of Jerusalem laboured a while under grievous accusations: But at last providence brought forth his innocency as clear as the Light: However, good old Truths may be clouded, and aspersed for a time; yet sooner or later they will appear again in their lustre, recommending themselves to the Consciences of all true Christians.    
FINIS.   

Erratas.  
PAge the 6. line the 7. read pervert: p. 11. l. 19 r. hearing: p. 13. l. 10. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: p. 36. l. 26. r. laugh at this Gal. p. 46. l. 25. r. righteous: p. 61. l. 30. r. penality: p. 80. l. 1. r. of immense Love: p. 113. l. 6. r. adapt: p. 204. l. 4. r. us really: p. 234. l. 22. r. distinct from the Graces of his person: p. 256. l. 13. notions: p. 258. l. 16. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: p. 258. l. 20. r. received his fullness: p. 280. l. 21. r. trusted: p. 290. l. 5. r. Faith: p. 291. l. 27. r. inherent: p. 299. l. last r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: p. 319. l. 16. r. ascended: p. 330. l. 22. r. concerning: p. 399. l. 19 r. not essential: p. 405. l. 19 r. contendo: p. 409. l. last, r. to make it our personal righteousness: p. 431. l. 28. r. reduplicative: p. 471. l. 25. r. imperfect: p. 484. l. 17. r. cele●●●●ius: p. 486. l. 1. r. they who come to Christ, come in a sense: p. 536. l. 16. r. and after in two pages, unregenerate: p. 539. l. 9 r. beyond nature: p. 544. l. 28. r. appetibile.