THE TRUE NOTION OF Imputed Righteousness, AND OUR Justification thereby; BEING A supply of what is lacking in the late Book of that most Learned Person Bishop Stillingfleet, which is a Discourse for Reconciling the Dissenting Parties in London; but dying before he had finished the two last and most desired Chapters thereof, he hath left this main point therein Intended, without Determination.  
By the Reverend M. S. a Country Minister.  But now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets: Even the righteousness of God, which is by Faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all that believe, for there is no difference: For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God: Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Rom. 3. 21, 22, 23, 24. 
LONDON: Printed for Tho. Parkhurst, at the Bible and Three Crowns, near Mercers-Chappel in Cheapside. 1700.   

THE EPISTLE TO THE READER.  
Courteous Reader,  
THese Sheets were sent from an humble and modest, and therefore the more considerate Minister of the Country, to a Minister in London, to be printed as he thought meet. They came up without any Title at all to them, and without any Partition; and the Title therefore and the Sections are put to them by another, when they came hither. It is like that the Author never saw nor heard of this late Book of the Bishop, seeing few that see it and read it but are displeased; and they may well be so, with that Person, or Persons (whosoever they be) who were entrusted with his Papers, that they should give an unfinished Discourse to the Bookseller or Printer (who for their part yet cannot be faulted for accepting their profit) to be published, to the great disappointment of so many as expected satisfaction from such a hand. The truth is, they have herein dealt with the Bishop's Book, as Hanun dealt with David's Servants, they have sent the poor thing out with the garments, as it were, cut off in the middle, and thereby (as it needs must be) greatly ashamed. If for the covering this nakedness now we should have made use of any present clouts that were at hand, though we had no such rich attire for it as himself would have put on it, we might be excused: But seeing the Clothing we bring is for being homespun and Country made, the more substantial, it may not only be excused but accepted; as like to serve the purpose better than if it were finer, in regard to such for whom intentionally the sheets were written.  By one who was desired to peruse the Manuscript, but unknown to the Author.  

THE AUTHOR TO THE READER.  
Readers,  
HAving done my Book, there is one thing you are to understand, or I am farther to acquaint you with, that whereas my Adversaries charge me with contradicting our Reformers, and being one with the Papists; they cannot make good the charge, and therefore 'tis a slander. For our Reformers, what they writ upon the point was against the Papists, who contended for Justification by inherent Grace and good Works, as a Conformity to the violated Law; i. e. the Law of Innocency, and also that this Righteousness was in its own Nature Meritorious of Justification and Salvation; but here, or in this I do as much oppose the Papists as our Reformers, and so am one with them in this respect in the point, so far am I from contradicting them: So that if the Persons my resolved Adversaries will have me to be one with the Papists and against our Reformers, when I affirm that Faith in Christ is the qualifying, though not the meriting matter of our Justification, or that which is the Qualification, giving right to Christ and his purchased saving benefits which follow hereupon, they must prove that it is so accounted by me, as it is a Conformity to that Law which requires sinless perfect Works, and condemns for non-performance of the same, and also to be meritorious of Life according to that Law, or else all they say contradicts not me, and if not, than all their noise is but a beating the Air, and so to no purpose, seeing they are quite off from the matter in question. The Papists affirm that the Law of God may be perfectly kept in this Life, and that they intent the Law injoining perfect sinless Works, is manifest; seeing that our Protestants in opposition assert, that no mortal Man is able to keep the Law of God perfectly in this Life, and that it is no way possible to keep the same perfectly; for if Man by Grace (as the Papists say) might perform the Law, he might deliver himself by Grace from the Curse; but now are we redeemed from the Curse only by Christ who was made a Curse for us, and again say they, if the Righteous Man keep the Law, than he is without Sin; for where there is no transgression of the Law there is no Sin but no Man is without Sin; so that the opinion of the Papists upon the point is, that the uniea formalis causa Justificationis, est justitia Dei, qua nos justos facit, quam quisque in se recipit. i e. The only formal cause of our Justification is the Righteousness of God, whereby we are not reputed just, but are made just indeed, This is the Righteousness which a Man hath within himself, and is inherent in him, and this justice or Righteousness it is plain they account an exact Conformity to the Law which requires perfect sinless Works; for they teach that it is not only possible for Men to keep the Law of God in this Life but to do more than is prescribed or commanded; in that Men of their abundance may allot unto others such works of supererogation. These therefore who bring me into such worthy company as Mr. Baxter, Mr. Humphrey, Mr. Clerk, whom they charge with Popery, as they do me, in the Doctrine of Justification, because they affirm a practical Faith to be the qualifying matter of right to Christ, and his saving purchased benefits which follow thereupon; when every where they deny it to be the meriting matter, asserting that to be Christ's Righteousness and his only, do manifestly wrong and slander them and me, for before our Adversaries can make us one with the Papists upon the matter in Question; i e. in the point of Justification, they have to prove that we hold these following things. (1.) That a Man in this Life by the Grace of God received, may be perfectly conformed to that Law which requires sinless Works. (2.) That Grace and good Works in their own nature considered as inherent do justify. (3.) That they do so in the account of the above mentioned Law which injoins sinless Works. (4.) That the same Law which requires sinless Works, is the Instrument of our Justification, or that by which God doth judge or account Persons righteous upon their Conformity thereunto, and so justifies them by it. Now these things are so far from being holden by us, as that we oppose them more than any of our Adversaries, who account themselves such great Antipapists, yea and are further of from the Papists herein than they, for upon the principles our Adversaries go in the point, it cannot be avoided but they make that Law which injoins perfect sinless Works (which as such condemns us all) to be God's Instrument whereby he justifies, seeing that they say the matter of their personal justifying Righteousness (not only meriting, but qualifying, or else they oppose not us, observe that) must be that which is every way perfect in the sense of the violated Law of Innocency: And indeed were we to be justified by that Law we must say the same with them. So that let any Man who is not altogether prejudiced against the cause, judge whether those Men be not much nearer the Papists in this point than such as they charge to be one with them: for the Reverend Persons named above, and others with them, proceed in this point upon another Principle, then either the Papists or such as profess to be their Adversaries; holding God's Covenant or Law of Grace, to be the rule of judgement, and so the Instrument by which God doth justify us, or that by which God doth justify for the sake of Christ's satisfactory and meritoriorious Righteousness, when by the Grace of God we are conformed thereunto, which Conformity consists in a turn from Sin, and an unfeigned consent sincerely to be Obedient unto Christ and his Law to our Lives end; upon which God doth account or reckon us Righteous in the sense of the Gospel, and so such who have that right unto and interest in Christ, (which impenitent and disobedient Souls have not) and this for the Righteousness sake of Christ, as I have sufficiently proved. And whereas (Readers) some Persons would bear you in hand that we give Repentance and Faith the place, Office and use of Christ's Righteousness, and look to be justified only by this as inherent; 'tis either an Ignorant or Malicious slander: for we say that although the Lord Jesus hath satisfied offended Justice and merited all saving privileges, yet we can neither have peace with God nor right to Christ, nor his purchased benefits, nor be accepted of God through Christ, until we be qualified with that Grace the Gospel requires, which Grace doth not give us the right in its own Nature, or as it is inherent, but as God accounts and reckons it to do so; that is, as he imputes it for Righteousness. The Papists place Justification in the Infusion: We in the Imputation. Whatever you hear therefore from Adversaries or read in any Books, that is, or shall be an endeavour to prove these forementioned Persons, or others of their mind to be one with the Papists in the point of Justification, you may assure yourselves 'tis nothing but a slander; and the slanderers are nearer themselves in the point to the Papists, until they have fully proved, that we whom they abuse, do hold the four particulars I have mentioned above, which I am sure they cannot do so long as they have a Tongue to speak with, and if they cannot, all their attempts against us are in vain, and not to be regarded: for if they do not this, they do nothing to invalidate our Doctrine, and therefore I desire you Readers, to observe this, that if any Answer be made to mine, that you will see whether in the pretended Answer, it be proved that I hold the four things above mentioned; and if you find they prove not that (which they are not like) you may assure yourselves their Answer is none.  
M. S.   

An Advertisement.  
WHereas the Author of this Book seems warm against the Righteousness of Christ being the formal cause of our Justification, and argues that if it be so, than it must be the Believer's proper personal Righteousness (which those Divines who say that Christ and the Believer do so coaless into one Person, that his Righteousness is transferred to them upon that account, must assert) and if it be his personal Righteousness, his Person, being not separable from his Nature, which is himself, than he must be the subject of Christ's Righteousness, and consequently it must be inherent in him as the subject thereof; the candid Reader is to observe▪ First, That he drives the Argument thus home for conviction only of his Adversaries, who know that Imputed and Inherent is a Contradiction: Secondly, That he understands well they need no driving to a concession that his Righteousness therefore is not, and cannot be the Believer's Physically, but they say Legally only, and by Imputation; nevertheless so long as they say it is imputed so as to be his formal Righteousness, the Absurdity remains: Thirdly, That to hold Christ's Righteousness, to be the Believer's, or accounted his legally, or in a Law-sense, so as God looks on him as having fulfilled all Righteousness in Christ as our legal Person, is that Doctrine which Mr. Baxter hath set himself to oppose in all his Books, as such which subverts the Gospel; and he that will go about to maintain it must Answer his Arguments, which I suppose cannot be done by any: Lastly, That if the more Judicious of his Adversaries would consider a little more of the matter, and come to be content with such an Imputation of Christ's Obedience as answers the End of his performance of it, which is that upon our believing Men shall enjoy the benefits, than would they soon find out the right knowledge how to give a fair construction of what is said by former Divines, who agreeing in this, that there is indeed an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to the Believers, but because it is not express in Scripture, they not considering or mentioning any such distinction, are misconstrued to understand an Imputation in se, when there is indeed (or can be) not such, but Quoad fructus aut Effectus only.  By the Hand unknown aforesaid.  

THE TRUE NOTION OF Imputed Righteousness, AND OUR Justification thereby, etc.  

SECT. I. The Subject Matter proposed.  
SEeing the apprehensions of Persons are so different about the Doctrine and Nature of Justification, and so much depends upon the having a right notion hereof: At the entreaty of some of my Friends, for their satisfaction, and for the benefit of others, I shall (God assisting) with all possible plainness declare my Sentiments in this particular.  
1. I do believe that by and through the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of our Redeemer the Lord Jesus Christ, a Covenant of Grace hath been purchased for, and granted by God unto sinners, after they by their sin had violated or broken that Law which enjoined perfect sinless works, and thereby made themselves incapable of performing obedience to that Law, which at the first it required as a condition of life, and so of having Justification thereby. Heb. 12. 24. Christ is called the Mediator of the new Covenant, and that because he hath purchased by his death a grant of pardon and life by promise for sinners upon their sincere repentance and faith. There are promises of pardon and everlasting life to sinners that repent and believe, Acts 3. 19 John 3. 16. Now for any to affirm that these promises are made, and the grace promised granted to sinners who repent and believe, without regard had by God unto Christ, as the purchaser of them by his meritorious satisfactory righteousness; is for them to affirm, that God grants and gives saving grace to penitent sinners which Christ never purchased nor merited, and this is for none but the Socinian to hold.  
2. This Law or Covenant of Grace thus purchased and granted, injoins sinner's faith in Christ, which faith is never without repentance nor sincere obedience, if the believer be continued after the gift of faith; for undoubtedly if the believer live in this World after the gift of faith, so long as he doth live, through the grace of God he continues obedient, 1 John 3. 23. Matt. 21. 30. Heb. 5. 9  
3. Christ by his righteousness hath purchased and merited the Holy Spirit to work faith in the hearts of all those sinners who thereby are brought to believe, John 14. 26. John 15. 26. The Spirit is sent by the Father in Christ's name; and sent by Christ from the Father. Let any one now prove, that what the Father gives in Christ's name, and what Christ sends from the Father is not purchased and merited by him. And the Spirit is called the Spirit of Faith, i. e. the principal Efficient, or Author of it, 2 Corinth 4. 13.  
4. I believe that all those who by the Grace and Spirit of Christ do sincerely believe, shall for and upon the account of Christ's satisfaction and meritorious righteousness be saved: but as for such as live and die in infidelity they shall be damned, notwithstanding Christ's merits; and that because they have rejected the remedy through their unbelief; I speak of the Adult, John 3. 16. 18. 36.  
5. I do believe that as the first Covenant did require sinless, perfect constant obedience, Galat. 3. 10: so this obedience performed by innocent Adam, would have been his justifying righteousness, or that righteousness upon which this Law or Covenant would have justified him, or given him a right to Life promised, which is all one with Justification, if confusion can but be removed, and this without any regard had to the righteousness of another, Rom. 10. 5.  
6. I believe that as the second Covenant, i. e. the Covenant of Grace doth require true Faith; so where there is this true Faith, which is the righteousness this Covenant calls for on the Sinner's part; this Covenant doth as certainly justify the sinner thereupon; i. e. give him a right to Pardon and Life, as the Covenant of works would have justified Adam, and given him a right to life, had he continued in the state of integrity. Though observe, That it is with regard had to the righteousness and satisfaction of Christ, that this Faith is accepted and accounted by God in the Covenant of Grace for a sinner's personal justifying righteousness, instead of that sinless perfect righteousness which the Covenant of Works enjoined; And is not this wonderful Grace? I add, it is Faith in the sense of the Gospel giveth Sinners interest in Christ, and a right to all saving benefits he hath purchased and so merited; which right given by the Covenant of Grace is its justifying the Soul as God's moral Instrument. Though still I most firmly hold, that it is for the sake of Christ alone and his righteousness that the believing sinner hath this right; and that this his Faith, which is the gift of God, is accepted as a personal righteousness, instead of sinless perfect obedience I do not say by the same Law; i. e. the Law of innocency or perfect works no, but by the Covenant of Grace which accepts of sincerity instead of strict legal perfection. I deny then with abhorrence, that Faith is any such thing, as a satisfactory and meritorious righteousness in whole or in part, such a righteousness being proper to our blessed Mediator the Lord 〈◊〉: But then I do not deny, but affirm that a true and living Faith is by God in the Gospel constituted, that righteousness which giveth sinners right both to Christ and all the blessings of the Covenant of Grace. And grant me but according to Scripture, Rom. 3. 21, 22. Rom. 4. 13. Philipp. 3 9 that Faith is a righteousness, and such a righteousness as the Gospel calls for, and that it giveth right according to the Gospel promise to Christ and his purchased benefits, and see then what ground there is to deny it the place of a justifying righteousness. I ask doth it give any interest in Christ, and right to the blessings he hath purchased? if not, than an Infidel must have as great an interest in Christ, and as much right to Pardon and Life as a believer. If you say, that Faith doth give interest in Christ and right to these blessings, than you say the same with me; i. e. that for the sake of Christ God by the Gospel hath constituted Faith to be our personal justifying righteousness, or that which gives us interest in Christ, and an actual right to the blessings purchased by, and promised through him, and this is the justification by Faith I intent, and all that I know of in and by the Gospel.  
Justification by all is acknowledged to be a Law term, if so then, the matter of Justification is jus secundum legem, a right in Law, and this right in Law results immediately from a conformity to that Law, and the conformity to that Law is the righteousness which that Law requires: And the Legislator or Lawmaker justifying a person, is his judging, asserting, or accounting by this his Law a person upon his conformity thereunto, to have right to the privileges contained in the premiant or rewarding ●art thereof.  
If the matter stand thus then in the nature of Justification, as is clear, none can be justified by the Law of Innocency, or that Law which injoins sinless perfect works, for we can have no right in or by that Law to Pardon and Life; and that because tha●●●w relates to Man considered in the state of sinless ●ntegrity, who as such having no need of Pardon, it makes no provision for it; And, 2 We cannot have right in or by that Law to Life, seeing none of the fallen race of Adam can yield conformity thereunto, and so cannot have that righteousness which answers this Law. And if so, as is plain, than God the Legislator or Author of this Law doth not, cannot judge, assert, or account that any have a right in or by this Law to Pardon and Life, and so doth not, nor cannot justify us by it, and if not, doth not, nor cannot account a perfect legal righteousness, such as Christ's is, to be our personal justifying righteousness, for if so, than we should be personally righteous in the sense of the Law of Innocency.  
But are we? If it be said, not in ourselves, but in Christ we are, I answer, if not in ourselves, than we are not, nor cannot be personally righteous, or righteous in our own persons by a perfect legal righteousness, and so according to your grant, the righteousness of Christ is not nor cannot be our formal personal righteousness, seeing that, that is a perfect legal righteousness. If it be said we are personally righteous in the sense of the Law of Innocency in Christ; then we must be righteous in ourselves, and this contradicts the former, that we are not thus righteous in ourselves; for how can a Man be righteous in his person, but he must be righteous in himself? Find me who can, the person of a Man without the nature of a Man? and further, to say we are perfectly legally righteous in another, suppose by imputation, or in God's account in our own Persons, is to say that God accounts us to he perfectly legally righteous in ourselves ● for so he must, if he account us thus righteous in our own Persons, and not to be perfectly legally righteous in ourselves, because only so in another, and not in ourselves, and does this become the infini●● wise God of Truth?  
Now than if Justification be a Law act, or the act of God as Legislator by his Law, and it is not, nor cannot be the act of God by the Law of Innocency: then we must either have another Law, and such a righteousness as is a conformity to that Law, or else we must have no Justification. And look what Law it is, conformity to which gives us for the sake of Christ a right to Pardon and Life, that conformity must be our justifying righteousness, and God by this Law doth judge, assert, or account (which is all one with ●mp●tation) that we have a right for Christ's Merits sake to the privileges above mentioned; what Law now can this be, but the Law of Grace the Gospel called the Law, of Faith; because it commands Faith, and threatens damnation in case of unbelief, and promises ●or Christ's sake Pardon and Life upon believing: Joh● ●. 16. This Faith is a practical Faith, and so includes the whole of what the Gospel commands and consequently repentance and sincere obedience to 〈…〉 of the Moral Law, (Isa. 55. 3.) for I am for from thinking that a notional Faith is a 〈…〉 ●●ne, manifest it is, that God by his Law 〈…〉 justifies us for the ●●isfaction and merits of Christ upon conformity hereunto, and this conformity in our personal righteousness, or that which gives us right by this Law to the benefits, respecting eternal Salvation which Christ hath purchased, and thus it must be, unless Persons will say and prove, that to justify is not to have a right in Law; and then Justification must not be a Law act, if it be granted it is, than this right must be a righteousness, and the righteousness of our persons, as we through God's Grace in our own persons do yield conformity to it.  
But some may say, it must 〈◊〉 sinless perfect righteousness which must justify us; but Faith is no such righteousness. This Objection speaks great Ignorance in the Objectors; 1. Of the nature of the two Covenants, i. e. the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace; and, 2. Of the nature of Justification, or justifying righteousness as it is jus secundum legem, a right in Law: But to the Objection I Answer, If you speak of Justification by the Law of Works, I grant it must be such a righteousness; but what do you hope to be justified by that Law? if so, you must not be offended if I tell you in the words of the Apostle, you are fallen from grace, Galat. 5. 4. But if you speak of Justification by the Gospel, which is the Justification I plead for, and I hope shall ever stand by, than such a righteousness is not required, but faith is that righteousness, as hath been proved; though still this faith is neither accounted nor accepted for a justifying righteousness, but for the sake of a sinless perfect righteousness; that is to say, the righteousness of Christ God man Mediator, Rom. 3. 24, 25, 26.  
But it may be further said, faith is our own righteousness, and if we be justified by faith, we must be justified by our own righteousness.  
I Answer, that we are justified by faith relatively, or as it respects Christ as the Object, the Scripture is express and full for it, Rom. 3. 30. Gal. 3. 8. Rom. 3. 28. Rom. 5. 1. Galat. 2. 16. Acts 13. 39 let any Man prove that in these Scriptures faith is not intended, but only its object. But further for Answer, if by our own righteousness be meant such a righteousness, of which we are the Efficient Causes or Authors, or the purchasing meritorious Cause; I deny that faith is our own righteousness, but if by our own righteousness be meant such a righteousness as is the gift of God, and the fruit of Christ's Merits, and of which we as qualified Subjects are the performers, so I grant faith is our own righteousness, and though we are justified by it, yet we are justified freely by Grace. Rom. 4. 16. Ephes. 2. 8. But the Objection may be retorted, when it is said Christ's righteousness in its self, or in its own nature in our Justification is by God accounted our very ●ormal personal righteousness; doth not God so far as he accounts it make it ours? if not, than we have no propriety at all in it, and if not, how can it then be our very formal personal justifying righteousness? if he do make it ours in this imputation, than it must be ours by gift, and what is ours by gift, must be our own. So that those who are for this strict imputation of Christ's righteousness, must hold also Justification by their own righteousness, or by a righteousness which by God is accounted their own.  
But again it may be said, if we be justified by faith we must be justified by an inherent righteousness and we are not. I Answer, if God's imputing or accounting by his Law or Covenant of Grace, faith for righteousness, which is the form of Justification, be Justification by inherent righteousness, than God's imputing Christ's righteousness unto us for Justification, must be justifying us also by an inherent righteousness, for the form is the same in both; and if it be the form that makes the justifying righteousness inherent, then justifying righteousness must be inherent in the one as well as the other. But the form speaks that Justification is not by Faith absolutely inhering.  
But if it be said further, that Christ is the subject of that righteousness, which is our formal personal justifying righteousness, but we are the subjects of Faith; I Answer, if the righteousness of Christ be our formal personal righteousness, than whatever Christ be, we must however be the subjects of this righteousness; and if so, it must be our inherent, as well as our imputed righteousness. Thus then for the making this good, I proceed. To constitute Christ's satisfactory and meritorious righteousness according to Scripture, we must suppose,  
1. That he was sinless, and perfectly Holy in his very Nature, Luke 1 35.  
2. He must be sinless, and perfectly Holy in the whole tract of his Life, 1 Peter 2. 22.  
3. That he was perfectly Holy in his sufferings Hebr. 9 14.  
4. That his righteousness might be a satisfactory and meritorious righteousness, the conjunction of his Divine righteousness was necessary, and this did result from the personal union of both natures, John 1. 14. I will grant then upon the matter, that this righteousness, the whole of it is the satisfactory and meritorious righteousness relating to my Person; i. e. that which satisfied offended Justice, removed the punishment due (mark my explication) for the violation of the Law of innocent Nature, and hath m●erited all good, and for which I and others have a right to, and interest in all saving good promised, upon true Repentance and unfeigned Faith, which Repentance and Faith, I and others have wrought in us (if we have it) for and upon the account of the merits of his righteousness: But then that this righteousness of Christ is the formal righteousness of mine or another's Person, here is my stick, for (to me) if this righteousness of Christ (above described) be the sole formal righteousness of my Person then it is only this that must constitute my Person righteous, and by which I am denominated righteous; and if so, it must be my inherent as well as my imputed righteousness; for if it be the righteousness of the Person, it must be the righteousness of the Nature, and if it be the righteousness of the Nature than it must be inherent, seeing it is that which makes the very Nature righteous, and from whence it is so accounted. And can any Man that is well in his Wits think, that Christ's perfectly Holy habits, acts, spotless sufferings all in conjunction with his righteousness as God, is the righteousness, and the sole righteousness of every individual Believer and so inherent? if so, than every individual Believer must either be the proper subject of this righteousness, and so it must not be Christ's at all, or else the common, and so it must be attributed to Christ and them as a generical, or specifical Nature, let what part will be taken it is gross and irrational: therefore we must (until further light) stick to this, that if God do account the righteousness of Christ to be the very righteousness of our Persons, he must also account it to be the righteousness of our Nature; for to say that Thomas is personally righteous by such a righteousness, and yet not righteous by it in his Nature, is to say that Thomas is a Person without the specifical and individual Nature of Man, than which nothing can be more absurd, seeing that the Nature goes to the constituting of the Person. There may indeed (as in Christ) be the individual Nature without the personality; but there cannot be the Person without the Nature. So that if Persons will have the righteousness of Christ (above described) to be the only formal righteousness of their Persons, it must also be the righteousness of their Natures, and so inherent. And thus that which is called sanctifying Grace, is taken away as needless; for if Persons be righteous in their very Natures subjectively by the righteousness of Christ, which (it is evident) they must be, if it be the formal righteousness of their Persons, it cannot be avoided, but in God's account, and so really and indeed they must be sinless and perfectly Holy, unless they imagine the righteousness of Christ to be imperfect: so that I have cleared this, that such as hold the righteousness of Christ in their Justification, is made by God, or accounted by him to be the very formal righteousness of their Persons, must also hold it to be the righteousnss of their Nature, and so inherent, and as such themselves to be the subjects of it.  
But to advance a little further upon this, thus then, agreeable to the righteousness of the Nature, such must be the acts which proceed from that Nature, so or after such a sort righteous: If therefore the righteousness of Christ be the righteousness of our Nature, which it must be if it be the formal righteousness of our Persons, (as hath been proved) than they ●ust not only be sinless, but satisfactory and m●●●toriou● acts, of which that righteousness is the principle, which we in our own persons exert and put forth; yea such as do answer the infinite Justice of God, they being acts of which not only an Humane, but a Divine righteousness in conjunction is the principle, for such was Christ's righteousness.  
Now it is no small matter of wonder that Men should be charging me and others with holding merit, and setting up ourselves, and making Saviour's of our own Duties, all which we deny: while they themselves must hold merit and satisfaction in the strictest sense in their own persons, they expressly affirming, they have a righteousness to be the formal righteousness of their persons, which hath this efficacy; and if this be not more gross than ever any merit was that the Papists held, I will leave to any thinking unprejudiced Person to determine. One would think Men professing the Knowledge of Christ above many, bearing the name of Christians, above all about them, should know and acknowledge the righteousness of Christ (above described) to be essential, and so proper to him as Mediator; and how or after what manner then this same righteousness must be the personal righteousness, and that only, of every particular Believer, I profess is strange. But if it be said, they affirm it to be the personal righteousness of a Believer by God's Imputation. I Answer, God in this Imputation they speak of, either communicates after some sort the righteousness of Christ, or he doth not, if he do, than it cannot be essential and proper to Christ; if he do not after any sort communicate it, then how can it be the formal righteousness of any Man's Person? Can a Man's Person be righteous, with a righteousness that is altogether incommunicable, except in its fruits and effects? Will God impute that same righteousness to me, so as to account me to be only righteous formally in my Person by it, which he knows ● neither have nor can have in whole, or in part itself, it being essential and proper to his Son as Mediator? Men that shall endeavour to persuade me this is so, or that it may be so, must deprive me of the free exercise of my Reason first.  
I have made it appear, that if Christ's righteousness be the formal righteousness of our Persons, than it must be the righteousness of our Nature; if any contradict it they must know, they have this to prove; i. e. that God in justifying Peter, or any other doth account them to be formally righteous by Christ's righteousness as Persons, but not as they are Men, and if so, than they must prove the Person is justified, but not the Man; or the Person is formally righteous with Christ's righteousness, but not the Man: how this will be performed, if the proof of it be undertaken, I cannot tell.  
But before I pass this, I further urge, if Christ's righteousness be the righteousness of our Nature, which it must be if it be our formal personal righteousness; than it must be a quality inhering, and if it be a quality inhering, than we are made the Subjects; and so we must have that which is proper unto, and inseparable from such a Subject; i. e. Christ, removed, and existing separate from its own proper Subject, in this and the other Believer, which cannot be the Subjects thereof, no more than Christ's Body can be the Subject of the accidents of Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper: Alas! alas, that Men should be accounting the Popish Transubstantiation such a Monster, and yet cannot nor will not see what they themselves are forming. And upon the matter, I would desire it might be considered, whether there be any such thing as a personal justifying righteousness, the matter of which is not inherent.  
But it may be further objected, if Faith be our formal personal justifying righteousness, is not the difference betwixt Justification and Sanctification hereby taken away, and so these two great privilege which in Scripture are spoken of as really distinct confounded, and jumbled into one?  
By what hath been said above, the Objectors if they will but consider, are strangely intanged in the briers of this Objection themselves; asserting Christ's righteousness to be their formal personal righteousness, and so the righteousness of their Natures, and so make the sanctifying Grace of the Spirit of no use. But however for Answer to the Objection, I shall (I hope) make it appear, that although I affirm that Faith is our personal justifying Gospel Righteousness, and also own it to be a sanctifying Grace; that Justification and Sanctification are yet distinct, and by this Doctrine not confounded, but still keep the difference assigned unto them by God in his Word.  
Faith then as sanctifying is that which purifies the Heart, Acts 15 9 it is a renewing by the Spirit of the moral Image of God, consisting in Knowledge, Righteousness and Holiness; Coloss. 3. 10. Ephes. 4. 24. so that the Soul which was only carnally disposed and inclined before, is having Spiritual Illumination, disposed and inclined principally to embrace Spiritual Objects; and here we consider Faith absolutely as a change of the Nature. Faith as justifying gives a right to Christ, and for his Merits sake to Pardon and Life, by virtue of God's gracious appointment in his Covenant of Grace, in his Imputation of it to give this right; and here I consider Faith relatively as a change of the state; i. e. the Sinner that before was a Child of Wrath, and an Heir of Hell, upon a sincere Faith hath that relation changed, and is accounted by God for Christ's Righteousness his Child by Adoption, and an Heir of Heaven and Eternal Life, John 1. 12. Galat. 3. 26. Faith as sanctifying relates to Christ, as Physician healing by his Spirit of Grace the sinful distempered Soul: Faith as justifying relates to Christ as Rector and Judge, who by his Law of Grace hereu●●● doth declare that Soul who was as a Criminal, was condemned in Law before, now to be pardoned, and to have right to everlasting Life. There is as much difference betwixt Faith as it Sanctifies, and as it Justifies, as betwixt an healing Medicine, and a Title and Right in Law to Pardon and an Inheritance: So that as the same Person may have divers Offices, and may be distinguished according to his Offices; so is the same Faith distinguished as sanctifying and justifying: The same Man may be both a Physician, and a Judge; Now will any Man that is right in his Head say, that the administering of Physic, and the dispensing and executing of Law are both one, because both performed by the same Person? Those who accuse me and others of confounding Justification and Sanctification, when we say that Faith is our personal justifying Righteousness, according to God's gracious Constitution or Law, they themselves say, that Faith doth not only Sanctify, but that it is the Instrument of Justification. Now give me leave upon the Point to ask these Men, whether they themselves do not make a difference betwixt Faith as it Sanctifies, and as it is an Instrument of Justification? if they say, yea they do; do not they than themselves according to their own notion, distinguish of the same Faith as sanctifying and as justifying in their Sense; and seeing they will not call this a confounding of Justification and Sanctification, What reason have they to call our Notion so? when we consider Faith as absolute in Sanctification, and relative in Justification, as hath been cleared.  
If this be so, than it may be said, Sanctification must be before Justification; I Answer, They that make the Objection, say this as much as we, in case they will have Faith to be the Instrument of Justification; for surely Faith must be had before it can be an Instrument, unless they can prove a Man may use Hands that hath none. But however, since this is cast in our way, we shall a little essay to clea●●. If we take Sanctification then for the very first Seeds of Grace, which in their own Nature have a virtue to dispose and incline the Soul to a thankful acceptance of Christ; so that the real consent of the Will is gained, thus Sanctification is before Justification: But if we take it for a more fixed and rooted habit of Grace, so it is after Justification. The Heart must be first disposed and inclined to open to Christ, that so he may have it for his habitation before it will actually open. Hence so soon as ever the Soul upon this disposition doth give its consent to accept of the Lord Jesus to be its only Propitiation, Head and Teacher; the Sinner hath interest in him, and by virtue of the Gospel promise hath an actual right unto the blessed benefits of Pardon and Life purchased by him. 'Tis said of Lydia, the Lord opened her Heart, and so, Revel. 3. 20. But it may be said, are not the first Seeds of Grace saving? I Answer, The Seeds of Grace considered as such, they have an healing or saving virtue in their own Nature; but they are not actually healing or saving to me, until they prevail against the corrupt sinful disposition and inclination of my Will. I know in what Soul so ever God Sows the Seeds of true Grace, those Seeds shall prove healing and saving through Christ; they shall prevail against the sinful corrupt disposition of the Will, 1 Peter 1. 23. but they are not thus healing and saving to any Soul until they do so: Such a Medicine appointed for the recovering of Health, it hath an healing quality, but though it be taken, 'tis not actually healing to the Sick, until it prevail against the Distemper, and it is so with Grace. And thus it may be known in what Sense Sanctification is before Justification.  
Touching the gift of the first Grace, know there is much good purchased by Christ, and given without respect to any condition on Man's part, and thus the gift of the first Grace, God ordinarily by his Word 〈◊〉 Spirit, concurring doth convince, humble, and incline the Sinner to accept of Christ in all his Offices; i. e. to be Propitiation, Head and Teacher; and when the consent is gained, then hath the Soul an actual interest in, and right unto the Lord Jesus to be his Propitiation, etc. to the sanctifying Spirit, to Reconciliation, Adoption, and Glorification. The former work was to prevail with the Soul for its consent, but when prevailed with, then hath it an actual interest in and right unto Christ, and the saving blessings of the Covenant promised upon consent. A Man that Courts a Woman for her Consent to be his Wife, until this be given by her, and she actually give up herself unto him to be his Wife; she hath no interest in him as her Husband, nor interest in nor right unto any of his Goods as one in that relation, and thus it is in the Case before us. If any Man, saith Christ, hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and sup with him, and he with me, Revel. 3. 20.   

SECT. II. How the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is to be held, and how not.  
AFter these things cleared, I proceed to tell the World how I do, and how I do not ● 〈◊〉 ● the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness. I do not deny, but affirm God's Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in these following Senses.  
1. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it was for our Redemption and Salvation. Rom. 3. 24, 25.  
2. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it to be the sole or only Merit and Purchase of the New Covenant, and the benefits thereof, Heb. 7. 19 2 Tim. 1. 10.  
3. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it to Merit the Blessed Spirit for us, to work Grace in our Hearts. John 1. 16. Ephes. 1. 3.  
4. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it is for this that all the Grace and Duties of his People are accepted, Ephes. 1. 6.  
5. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it is for this he pardons us, and receives us into his favour, and justifies us by his Covenant of Grace upon believing, and so accepts our Faith for Righteousness; it is not without Christ, but for him; Acts 13. 38, 39 Golos. 1. 21, 22, 23.  
6. I do believe that what Christ did and suffered, he did and suffered for us in the Person of a Mediator; and God doth account what he did and suffered as Mediator, doth and shall avail as much for the obtaining of Pardon and Life for us upon Faith, as though we had been able to have done and suffered the same in our own Persons 1 Pe●●r 3. 18. Heb. 9 15. 1 Tim. 2. 5, 6. Rom. 4. 23, 24, 25. John 3. 16.  
Now I desire to know in what any Christian in his Practice can make further use of the Lord Jesus, than in those particulars forementioned; and if he cannot make any use of Christ by Faith, but what may be reduced to some of those particulars; Can it be thought that God doth make over Christ unto him after some sort wherein he shall be of no use? If not, then ● desire to know what needs any further, or any Imputation of Christ's Righteousness of another sort than hath been expressed? I desire it may be taken notice of, that whereas I have been accused by some as an Adversary to all Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, they have misrepresented me, and so have wronged me. And I challenge any Man to show in this Profession wherein I have detracted from the Grace of God, or Merits of Christ.  
But now having shown in what Sense I hold the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, I must plainly tell the World, that God doth not so impute the Righteousness of Christ unto us, as that he accounts it in itself to be our very formal Personal Righteousness, reckoning that what Christ did and suffered as our Mediator, we did and suffered in our own Persons; i. e. obeyed in him, and suffered in him in the Sense of the violated Law of Innocency. This is that I profess I dare not believe, and the reason is the many gross, and to be dreaded consequences with which such a Doctrine as this is loaded.  
1. It chargeth God with an untruth, for God judgeth of things as they are, and not as they are not; if we then affirm that God accounts that what Christ did and suffered for us, we did and suffered in our own Persons, in the Sense of his violated Law, (which he must do, if he account the very Righteousness of Christ to be ours in itself) than he must account us to have done and suffered that in our own Persons which he knows we neither did nor suffered, and if so, then let it be considered what must follow.  
2. If Christ's Righteousness be imputed in itself, than the Law of perfect sinless Works must justify us; for if God in our Justification do account the Righteousness of Christ in itself to be our formal personal justifying Righteousness, than he must account us to be such as have a sinless perfect habitual and active Righteousness: for such was the Righteousness of Christ, and if God do account us to have such a righteousness as this in our own Persons, than it must follow that the Law of Innocency must justify us as well as it did Christ; for what should hinder if we have the very same righteousness which is Christ's to be our formal personal righteousness? and have it we must, if God do impute it unto us in itself, and account it in that Imputation to be such a righteousness as formal and personal. And from hence we must implicitly hold that God in our Justification doth account us to be as righteous as Christ, which some have had the Confidence to affirm, and all from this Doctrine; for I hope People are not to learn that Christ's righteousness habitual and active was a perfect conformity to the Law of Innocency, and if we be such in the Sense of that, it accounting that what Christ was and did, we were and did in him, in point of conformity, then in this very account it justifies us.  
3. God must account us such as are habitually and actively sinless and Holy, such as have neither Sin in our Nature and Life, for Christ was such, and if we have the very same righteousness personally which he had (which we must have if God account us, as they say, to have it) then how can we choose but be such as have neither Sin in Nature nor Life.  
4. That follows which hath been asserted, and is yet asserted by some, God neither seethe nor can see Sin in his People; and indeed how should it be, if he account them habitually, and actively sinless and Holy, for where it is thus, there can be no Sin in their Natures, and if so, than no Sin of Omission or Commission in the Life, and if no Sin neither in Nature nor Life, how should God see any?  
5. If we be such as God accounts in our Justification to be both habitually and actively Holy and sinless, than we need no Pardon, for there needs no Pardon where there is no Sin nor Fault, and if we who are justified have no Sin to Pardon, than there needs no Confession of Sin, nor Repentance, nor Faith in Christ for Pardon, and so no Gospel Obedience; seeing we have the same legal Righteousness (as they say) in God's account which Christ had, and so we must be justified by the Law of Works as he was; and thus the Gospel and Covenant of Grace which offers Pardon to Sinners upon Confession, Repentance, and Faith, becomes a mere nothing, and the whole frame of Christianity is taken down. Well, but they may say we are not inherently righteous by Christ's Righteousness; I Answer, if they be personally righteous with Christ's righteousness, they must be inherently righteous with the same, as I have before manifested.  
6. If God impute the righteousness of Christ unto us in itself, and so in the Sense of the violated Law of Innocency reckon us to have done what Christ did, and to have suffered what Christ suffered in our own Persons, than he must reckon us such as have performed the very acts of Mediation and Redemption; for wherein did Christ's Mediation and Redemption consist, but in his Obedience and Sufferings (I speak of this his work upon Earth) which constituted his Active and Passive Righteousness: And if so be that God in justifying of us do account us to have the very same righteousness which Christ had for our formal personal righteousness, than he must account us to have that which is and was a mediating and redeeming righteousness, and so to have that of our own by his gift, as our very personal righteousness whereby we may be Mediators and Redeemers for ourselves and others.  
7. If God impute the righteousness of Christ in itself, and account it our formal personal righteousness, than it is only the righteousness of Christ he imputes as Man: or the righteousness of Christ as God man. If the former, than they must hold that the righteousness of Christ as Man only is efficacious, and he needed not be God; if the righteousness of Christ as God-man, than God must account them such as have a Divine righteousness as well as an Humane to be their formal personal righteousness, and if so, than that opinion hereby is established of being Godded with God, and Christed with Christ, and what I dread to say, they must implicitly affirm themselves to be partakers of the very Essence of God, and so God's Essence must be divided into so many parts as there are justified Believers, and these Believers must be made partakers of the incommunicable Attributes of God.  
Now upon the matter, to hint it again; when I say that Faith is our Gospel Righteousness, and that God by the Gospel doth account it our personal justifying Righteousness, it is manifest from what I have already said, I do not intent only the ●●NR●● credere, or the very act of Faith without relation to its Object Christ and his righteousness: though some for all I have said have been bold to affirm I do; for that would be no true Faith at all, and far then from justifying, for Faith justifies as it unites unto, and gives the Soul interest in Christ, and this it doth as it is the Souls free consent to take Christ (as it is to be said) in all his Offices, upon which the Soul hath an actual right unto him, and the benefits of the Covenant purchased by him, and this is plain Gospel Justification; as for instance, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, Acts 16. 31. When therefore any Soul believes this his Faith is his Obedience and Conformity unto the Gospel command, and so his Gospel Righteousness, and as such his actual right through and for Christ, to the Salvation promised. Would the Jailor have had a right unto the promised Salvation had he not believed, I mean an actual right, must it not be said not? Upon his Faith then he had a right, and this his Faith was his obedience to the Gospel command; therefore it was his obedience to the command which was his Gospel Righteousness, and so his right by Christ (according to God's own fixed Law of Grace) unto Salvation. Hath any Man an actual right to Heaven but a Believer? if he have, let it be proved from Scripture; if none have but such an one, than the Believer only (I speak of the Adult) hath the actual right, and is it not plain then, 'tis his Faith that gives him this right. To illustrate this, such a Man makes a Purchase of an Inheritance: After Purchase, bequeathes it by Testament or Will, to this or the other Person, upon the performance of such or such conditions specified in the Testament or Will; if the conditions be performed according to the Testament of the Donor, than he hath an actual right in Law unto the Inheritance, if not, he hath no right of claim: if he perform the conditions, the Law will vindicate his right, and the Judge by Law, if he do Justice, if he do not perform the conditions, the Law cannot nor will not give him a right to the Inheritance, nor the Judge by Law; 'tis just thus in the matter before us, and the application is easy.   

SECT. III. Scripture to prove the Imputation of Faith, and an Answer to such Texts as are alleged for Imputation of Christ's Righteousness.  
IF I should pass on further to prove from Scripture that not Christ's Righteousness in itself, but Faith as it accepts of Christ, as offered in the Gospel, is now a Sinners formal justifying Righteousness before God, I should have a large Field, and might multiply express Scripture Texts for the Imputation of such a Faith, but not one express Text in all the Bible can be found for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in itself, nay nor implicit. Let us consider a few Texts among many, Rom. 4. 3. Abraham believed God, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness. What was accounted unto him for Righteousness? Well, say they, not Faith, but its Object; i. e. the Righteousness of Christ. But pray where have we any such word in the Text? and besides here is the object of his faith express, and that is God, Abraham believed God, now if they will have not Faith but its Object to be counted for Righteousness, than the words must be read thus, Abraham believed God, and God was counted unto him for Righteousness, and if they will have Christ's Righteousness brought in here, than we must read the words thus, Abraham believed God, and God was counted unto him Christ's Righteousness for Righteousness. I would desire them to tell us what Sense they can make of either reading? So Verse 5th. But to him that worketh not but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righteousness. And Verse 9th, For we say that Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness. The Scripture saith expressly, Faith was counted, and Faith was reckoned for Righteousness; they say nay, but by Faith is meant Christ's Righteousness; now let any Man judge whether we are to believe the Scripture or them. Though let it ever be marked when I according to Scripture say Faith is counted, imputed or reckoned for Righteousness. I do not (as I have said) exclude the object Christ, or God in Christ, but say it is not Christ's Righteousness in itself that is accounted by God to be my formal personal Righteousness, but that Faith which doth accept of the Lord Jesus as offered in the Gospel, this Faith gives me interest in him, and right to Pardon and Life, and as such is my justifying righteousness in the Sense of the Gospel, and that because God by the Gospel doth declare unto me, and assure me, that if I thus believe in Christ, I shall both be pardoned and everlastingly saved. I must still urge that Text, John 3. 16. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting Life, and let it I pray be well considered, for what can God's declaring and assuring by the Gospel be, that I shall have these great benefits upon such a Faith, but his justifying me thereupon, or his accounting by this his express word my right to these blessings upon such a believing.  
But it will be said, do you not bring Faith into the very matter of Justification?  
I Answer, I shall distinguish of matter of right,  
1. There is the meriting purchasing matter of right, and this is solely or only Christ's Righteousness.  
2. There is the qualifying matter of right, and this is Evangelical Obedience included in Faith, seeing that without Faith it is impossible to please God, now if Persons judge, when I say Evangelical obedience is the matter of right, that I intent the purchasing meriting matter of right, here they mistake me. But if they judge when I affirm Evangelical Obedience to be the matter of right, that I only intent the qualifying matter, in this they bitten right. As thus now, Persons will grant me there are such gracious benefits as these; i. e. Pardon, Reconciliation, Adoption, Acceptation of the services of a real Christian, etc. The purchasing and meriting Righteousness then of all these benefits is only the righteousness of Christ. But now consider me or any other Person as an Impenitent Infidel; the Question will be whether as such an one, I have an actual personal right unto, or interest in these blessings? I think it will not be said, as such an one I have, for than I should be in a saving state, while in a state of Impenitency and Infidelity, which is manifestly repugnant to the Scripture. If not, than I must be a Person or Subject qualified with something, that according to God's appointment must give me interest in and right unto, I mean an actual right unto these benefits which I had not while an Impenitent Infidel: And what must this be? not the Righteousness of Christ, for that cannot be a qualification in me; and if not, than Faith and Repentance, by which of an impenitent Infidel, I come to be a penitent Believer. And this I would have observed, that those which are against my notion; yet if they be true practical Christians, their practice must and doth agree with my notion. To instance in one thing, I offer up Prayer and Supplication to God, they do the same, I know my Prayers will not be accepted in themselves without a Mediator, they know the same, I say here, I must have right to Christ as my Mediator, by accepting of him and trusting unto him as such, and pleading the promises of grace in his Name, they say the same. I say further, I may hope for acceptation of my Prayers for his meritorious intercession, if I have the qualification requisite, and that is Faith. Whatsoever, saith Christ, you shall ask in my name, believing ye shall receive; so that this Faith is not the merit of my acceptation, but the gracious qualification of my Person, without which I cannot have an interest in, or right unto (in this particular) Christ's intercession, seeing that is offered up with the Prayers of Saints, and these most certainly must be Believers. Now are not they of the same mind? see than if their practice do not agree with my notion more than their own. And it looks odd on't, that Men should contend against that which must be found in their own Practice if they be true Believers.  
Having proceeded thus far, my next undertaking shall be to examine a little their gloss upon some of the main Texts they bring for the proof of this their rigid Imputation of Christ's Righteousness.  
1. One is Psalm 37. 1. Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Here is the Pardon of Sin express, but not a word of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in itself; it is said indeed whose sin is covered. But what can the meaning be, but that God for the sake of Christ's Merits and Satisfaction so pardons Sin to a Penitent Believer, as that it shall never be brought in against him, or laid to his charge in judgement to his condemnation and everlasting shame, and thus it is said to be covered, and thus covered for Christ's Righteousness.  
But seeing that Christ's Righteousness is the cover, How is it so in their Sense? well, they say, as a Garment or Robe; if it cover then as a Garment or Robe, Will they say that properly, or that it is really, and in itself a Garment or Robe; i. e. Physically so? surely no, for this would be gross, to conceive it to be a Coat or Gown, etc. if not properly a Garment or Robe, then improperly they must say it is so, and so comparatively in respect of its use. A Robe or Garment than it may have these uses, to cover our nakedness, to defend from cold and storms, to keep our bodies warm, and to adorn: We will grant then that Christ's Righteousness may be compared to a Robe or Garment in regard of these uses, considered as satisfactory and meritorious. It is for this that a true penitent Believer having his Sins pardoned, shall be delivered from everlasting shame; it is for this he shall be secured from the storm of God's eternal wrath and displeasure; it is for this he is adorned and beautified with the Graces and Gifts of the most Holy Spirit; it is for this that he hath all the Heart quickening influences of the blessed Spirit. But then if I be a Believer, that I have it in itself, and that it is of all these uses to me, as it is accounted by God to be my formal personal Righteousness, this I must deny; for if so, it must not be the Righteousness which is Christ's, and proper to him as Mediator, for which a Believer shall be delivered from everlasting shame, and secured from God's wrath, but the Righteousness of Christ as it is a Christian's formal personal Righteousness, and so as a quality in himself; and it must not be the Graces of the Spirit, and so not God's moral Image wherewith the Soul of a true Christian is adorned, nor the Holy Spirits influences whereby it is quickened; but only the Righteousness of Christ imputed in itself, and so accounted to be his formal personal Righteousness: And if it be thus, than the Righteousness of Christ as Mediator, and the quickening and sanctifying operations of the Holy Spirit must be needless. For whatever is a Believer's formal personal Righteousness, it must not only be imputed unto him, but be a quality in him, as I have cleared above, that whatever is the formal Righteousness of the Person, must be the Righteousness of the Nature; if therefore the Righteousness of Christ (as they say) be the formal Righteousness of the Person, than that Person who is formally righteous by it, must be perfectly righteous, seeing Christ's Righteousness in itself, which they say, they have to be their personal Righteousness is such: And if so, what need of the Righteousness of a Mediator, or the graces and influences of the Holy Spirit for a Christian, he being perfectly righteous in his very Nature with Christ's Righteousness? Now they will say this they will not own, and if not, then why do they own and stick by such a Doctrine, which hath such natural and unavoidable consequences as these?  
I would gladly have these Persons consider, whether they dare trust to this Righteousness of Christ for their Justification and Acceptation, as it is their formal personal Righteousness without any further regard had to Christ as Mediator without them: if so, then what need of Christ's Mediation without them? if not, than they must have Christ's Mediation without them for the acceptation of Christ's Righteousness upon them, and doth Christ's own Righteousness stand in need of Christ's Mediation for its Acceptation? I know not how they can come off here, without either denying that a Person considered as justified needs Christ's Mediation, or accounting the Righteousness of Christ upon them in the Sense of the Law of Innocency to be imperfect. Take the former, and they exclude Christ from being a Mediator for a justified Person as such: take the later, and they destroy their own Assertion, that there is no Justification but by a perfect legal Righteousness, but I shall leave them in their own sna●e, and pass on, and I am like, for they will not suffer me or any Man to help them.  
2. Another Text alleged to prove that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to Believers in itself, and so is their formal personal Righteousness, and so accounted by God, is Jer. 23. 6. And this is his Name, whereby he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness. That Christ is the Lord our Righteousness I grant, but where is it said in this Scripture, that his Righteousness is accounted ours, as to be the formal Righteousness of our Persons? And if it be said, Although it be not expressed, yet it is intended, I Answer, it cannot be, for Christ's Righteousness being a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness, it must be proper ●o him as Mediator, and what is proper to him as Mediator cannot be in itself the formal personal Righteousness of another, nor so accounted by God; for God doth not look upon any Believer to have a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness (which he must have if he have the Righteousness of Christ to be his personal Righteousness) for his personal formal Righteousness: But God doth account every true Believer to have that Righteousness, or to be so personally Righteous by the Righteousness of Faith, as that he hath right by virtue of the promise of grace to those blessed and glorious benefits purchased by Christ, by whose satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness this his Faith is accepted for Righteousness, upon which Christ is the Lord of this Righteousness, this Gospel Righteousness, as the Purchaser, Lord-Treasurer and dispenser of all Grace, and may well then be called the Lord our Righteousness: but than it doth not follow that the Righteousness of Christ which is proper to him as Mediator (and so for us) is ours in itself, and our very formal personal Righteousness.  
3. Another Text is in Isa. 45. 24. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I righteousness and strength. We may from this Scripture groundedly conclude, that a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness is to be found only in Christ, and that this is sufficient to satisfy offended Justice, and merit all good for us: but what is this to prove that God accounts this his righteousness to be our personal formal Righteousness: The Text saith no such thing: and if it mean Christ's Righteousness as Mediator, the Text saith expressly it is in him, and the Believer doth acknowledge it so to be, and therefore not in himself, which yet it must be if it be the Righteousness of his Person, as hath been already shown.  
4. A fourth Text is in Isa. 61. 10. I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my Soul shall be joyful in my God: for he hath clothed me with the Garments of Salvation, he hath covered me with the Robe of Righteousness, as a Bride. groom decketh himself with Ornaments, and as a Bride adorneth herself with her Jewels. That this Text cannot be meant of a Believer's being clothed with Christ's Righteousness, as a Robe in a proper Sense hath been made manifest, and if it be so improperly; i. e. a Robe, then only in a comparative Sense as to its use, and that it may fitly be compared unto a Garment or Robe, as to its use as satisfactory and meritorious, with respect unto a Believer; I grant, but that it hath the use of a Garment, so as to be any Person's formal Righteousness; this I deny, and that upon the Reasons above given, which Reasons are sufficient to manifest that whatever Text of Scripture be brought for proof that Christ's Righteousness is a Robe in their Sense is mistaken by them.  
And whereas they allege among the rest, that in Revel. 19 8. speaking of the Church, And to her was granted, that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of Saints. 'Tis not said this fine linen is the Righteousness of Christ, though the Righteousness of Christ (we acknowledge) did purchase and merit it: But the Righteousness of the Saints; i. e. the purity and holiness of the Saints, and that it is so, let the Psalmist determine, Psalm 45. 13, 14. The King's daughter is all glorious within; her clothing is of wrought gold. She shall be brought unto the King in raiment of Needlework: the Virgins, her companions that follow her, shall be brought unto thee: And so the Apostle Paul, Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27. Husbands, love your Wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it: That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water, by the word: That he might present it to himself, a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing.  
5. A Fifth Text is in Rom. 3. 22. Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference. This Righteousness of God, say they, is the Righteousness of Christ imputed and accounted to be a Believer's formal personal Righteousness; but that by the Righteousness of God in this Scripture, and others cannot be meant the Righteousness of Christ is manifest.  
1. Because this righteousness which is called the righteousness of God is opposed unto the righteousness of the Law, and is said, ver. 21. to be without the Law: But the righteousness of Christ is not opposed to the righteousness of the Law, he being conformed unto the Law both in habit and act.  
2. By the righteousness of God cannot be meant God's righteousness itself, I hope they will grant, and if not, then from it they cannot gather that the righteousness of Christ in itself is imputed, seeing it is a divine as well as an humane righteousness: unless they will say it is the humane righteousness of Christ only which is imputed in itself, and if so it could nothing avail them, for though it be true the humane righteousness of Christ would have availed himself, as the Law of Innocency justified him thereupon as a righteous Man. Yet it would have availed us nothing at all without the conjunction of his divine righteousness, seeing without this it would not have been for others satisfactory and meritorious: therefore I conclude, that Faith in Jesus Christ is the righteousness which is here called the righteousness of God, and that because God by the Gospel hath constituted and appointed this to be that which he will accept instead of legal perfect righteousness, and for the sake of Christ's satisfactory and meritorious righteousness will justify us by his Law of Grace, and thereby give right to Pardon and Life. What hath been said to this Text, may be sufficient to give light to understand the meaning of that Text so much urged, Phil. 3. 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. And so Rom. 1. 17. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. Rom. 10. 3. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. 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.  
6. The sixth Text is, Rom. 4. 6. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the Man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works. This righteousness say they, which God in this Text is said to impute, can be no other but the righteousness of Christ. There hath been enough said to show it cannot be righteousness of Christ in itself which is imputed. I would gladly have Men to consider, what the Apostle in this his dispute undertakes to prove; can any thing be more clear than that it is Justification by Faith, in opposition unto the works of the Law, both of Innocency and Moses. But here is the grand mistake of these Men, when the Apostle is only excluding works with relation to the Law of Innocency, or the Law of Moses from Justification; they understand him universally, as excluding also Gospel works, such as Faith, etc. which yet nothing can be more express and plain the Apostle is pleading for Justification by; Verse 9 For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. And this Apostle at the fifth ver. of this Chapter affirms, that faith is accounted for righteousness. And if so, which is express, than faith must be the righteousness of which the fifth Verse speaks. Well but say they it is not faith that is this righteousness, but the object Christ's righteousness, if they mean it is not faith abstracted, or separate from its object that is this righteousness, I say the same, for it is no true faith which hath not Christ for its object. But if they mean that it is the object itself that justifies, and not faith with relation unto the object, here I must leave them, and that because I must believe the Apostle before them, and there is nothing in all the Scripture more manifest, than that though there be neither conformity to the Law of Innocency, nor the Law of Moses, though a Man neither can nor shall be accounted by God righteous in the sense of these Laws; yet where there is a consormity to the Gospel Law, we have David's testimony, saith the Apostle, that Man shall be blessed, and this his conformity shall be by God accounted for righteousness. And what wonderful grace is it that God will accept for the sake of Christ, the sincere obedience of faith instead of a sinless perfect obedience.  
But say these Men if you are justified by faith, you are justified by works, and so exclude the grace of God. The Apostle saith the contrary, Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace, Verse 16. But this I suppose they cannot or will not understand, but think that if it be by faith, it must be by a work exclusive of grace. They consider not that faith is the free gift of God through Christ, and that it is by grace that God saves through faith. Ephes. 2. 8. For by grace ye are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. A Soul being by the Holy Spirit convinced of its own sinful and lost condition, and its own inability and insufficiency to save itself out of this condition; by the light of the Gospel it hath a discovery there is a sufficiency of Satisfaction, Merit, Power, and Spirit in Christ for its Pardon and Life; beside a free offer herein of this grace unto it immediately as it is really burdened with Sin, and under the fears of eternal perishing, and so truly willing of Christ and his Grace above all the World; upon which the Soul penitentially renouncing the World, the Flesh, and the Devil, gives its actual consent to accept of Christ for its Propitiation, Head, and Teacher, and so to be subject to God in him by the Holy Spirit. Here now is the union of the Soul with Christ by Faith, and so its actual right hereupon through Christ to Pardon and Life; and this ●aith as it is the matter of right, is the Souls personal justifying Righteousness, and the Gospel's afferting such a Soul; i. e. a Believer to have this right is God's mediate justifying act. Consider still, John 3. 16. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. See then upon the matter if it be not of Faith that it might be by Grace, and pretend not to exclude Faith for fear you should exclude Grace, but fear to exclude Faith, seeing that if you do, you most certainly exclude Grace, for the more of the Obedience of Faith, and the more is the creature depressed, and God in Christ exalted. Rom. 4. 20. He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief: but was strong in faith, giving glory to God.  
7. A Seventh Text they would have speak for them is, Rom. 5. 19 For as by one Man's disobedience many were made sinners: so by the obedience of one, shall many be made righteous. If they mean, by what this Scripture saith, that God did account Adam's act of his disobedience in violating the Laws to be ours: so he accounts Christ's obedience in fulfilling the Law to be ours in itself, and that we fullfiled the Law in him, I Answer, God did not account Adam's act in eating the forbidden Fruit so to be ours, as though we had eaten ourselves; for God knows we neither took, received, nor did eat of the Fruit in our own Persons, our Persons then having no Existence or actual Being: And God is true, and will not account that to be done by us which he knows we did not. Indeed we partake of the sad Fruits of that disobedience, having derived from Adam originally by natural Generation, a nature sadly corrupted and violated: and so are guilty before God, and are accounted both by him and his Law really to be so: And so God doth not account the Obedience of Christ in his fulf●ing the Law to be ours, as though we had performed it in our own Persons, for he knows, and we may know ourselves we did not. But this God doth for and upon the account of Christ's sinless perfect meritorious righteousness, constitute us righteous by his Gospel Law upon true Faith, and accounts us as we are Believers for Christ to have an actual right to Pardon and Life.  
8. Another Text is, Rom. 8. 4. That the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit. I take the meaning of this Text to be this; i. e. Christ Jesus having answered the ends of the violated Law by his perfect Obedience and Suffering, hath obtained hereby that a Christian's sincere Obedience, which consists in conformity to the Law of Grace, shall be accepted for Christ's sake as really by God, as though he had fulfilled or perfectly obeyed the Law of Innocency in his own Person, which now as a fallen Creature he is incapable of doing. The ground of this my apprehension are the words that follow; who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit. Now though every true Christian, as to the bent of his Heart and Life doth walk after the Spirit, and not according to the Flesh or corrupt Nature; yet it cannot be that by this the Law of Innocency is fulfilled in him, seeing that it must be a sinless conformity that must be a fulfilling of that Law; now mark the Text speaks of a personal fulfilling, and this by a walking according to the Spirit; therefore this Law which is fulfilled in them or by them must be the Law of Grace, and not the Law of Innocency. And let not Man say still that God accounts that a true Believer doth fulfil the Law of Innocency in Christ, for if so that Law must justify and the Covenant of Grace be made void. Christ fulfilled that Law for us, but we did not fulfil it in our own Persons in his fulfilling of it.  
9 The Ninth Text is in Psalm 71. 16. I will make mention of thy righteousness, even of thine only. What is there in this Text to prove that God accounts the righteousness of Christ to be the formal personal righteousness of every Believer? Plain it is the Text speaks of God's righteousness in keeping and fulfilling his gracious Promises, which righteousness is no other but his truth and faithfulness. But suppose we this Scripture to speak of the righteousness of Christ as Men would have it, what will it still be to their purpose; all that they can gather from it upon any likely ground upon this supposition, is only that David would make mention of Christ's righteousness as the merit of all the good which he both had and did expect, and the ground of his acceptance, which is a great truth in itself: but I do not say it is that which by the Holy Spirit is intended chief in the Text.  
10. Another Text is in Ezech. 16. 14. And thy renown went forth among the Heathen for thy beauty, for it was perfect through my comeliness which I had put upon thee, saith the Lord God. This comeliness, say they, which God put upon this People, and from whence they had their beauty, was the righteousness of Christ imputed in itself. Now if the People would but a little consider what follows, they might see this comeliness God put upon them spoken of here was a civil comeliness; i. e. the Peace, Plenty, fulnses of all temporal good things; the Honour, Greatness, Dignity, etc. that God had advanced them unto, especially in David's and Solomon's times above their Neighbours. But come on, if so be they will have the righteousness of Christ meant, then belike it must follow.  
1. Believers how mean or contemptible soever they be in this World, must be renowned and very famous among the very Heathen for Christ's imputed righteousness. And yet alas! the poor Heathen are mere strangers to it, knowing nothing of it, and here is the wonder indeed.  
2. Believers they may trust too much to Christ's righteousness; now I ever thought these Men that are for this strict Imputation, had been of a mind that a Person could not trust too much to Christ's righteousness, but its like Persons may, if by this comeliness be meant Christ's righteousness, as they will see ver. 15. But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot, because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.  
3. Persons valuing Christ's righteousness too much, and trusting too much unto it, may thereby be drawn to commit Spiritual Whoredom, to break their Covenant with God, and become Apostates from God by falling into Idolatry, etc. If they will have the righteousness of Christ meant by this comeliness, and the beauty that was upon this People, than they must have these consequences, as is plain from the 15th and 16th Verses. This may be enough to convince any Person that hath not drunk in a fixed prejudice, that their cause must be very weak, who are put for the vindication of it so manifestly to pervert the Sense of Scripture, as that a Child of an indifferent capacity who can but read may with a very little ado understand it.  
11. Another Text is in Matt. 22. 11, 12, 13. concerning the Man which had not on the wedding garment. This Wedding garment, say they, is the righteousness of Christ. I shall give here the Sense of the Reverend Dr. Manton upon this. In a Sermon upon this Text he puts the Question, what this Wedding garment is? To find out this, let me tell you, saith he, First, That it is usual in Scripture to set forth Sin by nakedness, and Grace by a garment, that one place which we have in Revel. 3. 17, 18. showeth both thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. Therefore I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich, and white raiment that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear. Grace's are a beautiful ornament to the Soul, as garments are to the Body, therefore we are said to put on the new Man, which is created in holiness and righteousness. Ephes. 4. 24. And again, to put on, as the elect of God holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long suffering. Coloss. 3. 12. It is such a garment as becometh the solemnity of the Marriage feast of the King's Son; Christ's Gospel-feast is a Royal feast, and a Spiritual feast, becoming the nature of God's Kingdom; Therefore the ●●NR●●, the Wedding garment is that new array which becometh such a solemaity. As 'tis a Royal feast, it must be something more than ordinary excellency that is required of us at a Spiritual feast, a Spiritual excellency. Therefore the Wedding garment is holiness, habitual and actual, which is the glory of God and the beauty of God and his People. Habitual holiness, Revel. 19 8. And to her was granted, that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of Saints. ●●NR●●, the righteousness of Saints; these are those graces which constitute us Saints.  
By the way Observe, how far this Reverend Author was from thinking that, which is here called the righteousness of Saints to be the righteousness of Christ, as some have taken it, and Mr. Hildersham among the rest. And then saith he, actual holiness is an holy conversation. Philip. 1. 27. Only let your conversation be as it becometh the Gospel of Christ. Ephes. 4. 1. I therefore beseech you, that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called. We put on the Wedding garment to honour the Marriage; Therefore those that come to the Wedding feast without a Wedding garment, who take up a bare profession of the Gospel, without newness of Heart and Life, which may be an honour and ornament to it, are a dishonour and disgrace rather unto it. Thus far this Pious and Learned Author. And let me add Christ and his righteousness together, with the gracious privileges of the Gospel are the feast; now certainly the Wedding garment must not be the same thing with the feast.  
12. A Twelfth Text is in 2 Corinth. 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. The meaning is, God made him who was an Innocent Person to be a Sin-offering, or a Sacrifice for Sin, that we for his satisfactory and meritorious righteousness might be made and accounted righteous according to the Covenant of Grace by Faith in him. For observe, that which is the meritorious cause of a thing, the thing of which it is the meritorious cause, cannot be the same thing with that which merits it, but the effect of it: therefore plain it is the righteousness of God here spoken of must be the effect of the meritorious righteousness of Christ, or the thing merited by it, and so cannot be the righteousness of Christ itself, but a righteousness appointed by God hereupon, which he will accept as the righteousness of our Persons, for the righteousness sake of Christ, instead of sinless perfect righteousness, and that righteousness is no other but the righteousness of Faith, which is a conformity to the Gospel Law, which Faith as it is the Souls free consent to accept, and take the Lord Jesus not only to be its Propitiation; but also its head and teacher, includes a real engagement sincerely to be obedient to all his commands, and so to trust only, and depend upon him in faithful Obedience for the gift of all necessary and saving good he hath purchased, and God for his sake hath promised. Hence we read of the obedience of Faith, Rom. 16. 26. Rom. 4. 20, 21.  
13. Another Text is in 1 Corinth. 1. 30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. Because, say they, it is said, that Christ is made righteousness unto us of God, therefore Christ's righteousness in itself is imputed unto us by God. I Answer, if so be that it will follow that Christ's righteousness in itself is imputed unto us by God, because he is made righteousness unto us of God, than it must also follow that the Wisdom of Christ, and the Holiness of Christ in themselves must be imputed unto us, because he is said to be made of God unto us Wisdom, and Sanctification, for after what manner he is said to be made of God righteousness unto us, after the same manner is he said to be made Wisdom and Sanctification, etc. Now if he be not made of God unto us Wisdom and Sanctification by this strict Imputation, than neither righteousness in that Sense. As Christ then by God is made over to all his People to be the Purchaser and Author of their Spiritual Wisdom and Holiness, so is he also made over to them to be the Meriter and Efficient cause of that Gospel righteousness; i. e. a practical Faith, which God for his sake accepts instead of a legal perfect righteousness, which the Law of sinless works injoins.   

SECT. IV. Reasons against the Imputation of Faith, and for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness answered.  
HAving spoken something to the principal Texts urged for the strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness, and shown that they can be no proof that Christ's righteousness is our formal personal righteousness; let us now hear what in reason may yet be said against the Imputation of Faith.  
1. Say they, Faith is no Righteousness, and therefore cannot be imputed for righteousness. I Answer, If the Antecedent can be proved in that Sense in which faith is called righteousness, the Consequent must be granted. But know, Conformity to the Law of Innocency that is a righteousness, but faith is no such righteousness: Conformity to the Gospel or Law of Grace that is a righteousness, and faith is this righteousness, it is a conformity unto the Gospel command. John 3. 23. And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave commandment. And it is expressly said to be counted for righteousness, in the 4th of the Romans. Therefore if there be no righteousness but what is a conformity to the Law of Innocency, so indeed faith is no righteousness, seeing it is not a conformity to that Law, and thus the Antecedent would be true but know there is a righteousness which is a conformity to the Gospel Law, and faith is this righteousness, seeing it is a conformity to this Law. And thus the Antecedent appears to be false, and so the Consequent.  
2. Say they, Faith is not our personal justifying righteousness because it is a work. I Answer, This Argument supposeth that there is no Justification by a personal righteousness, and if no Justification by a personal righteousness, than there must be no such thing as a Justification of any Person at all; for if there be a Justification by a personal righteousness, than there must be Justification by a work: for to tell of Justification by a personal righteousness, and yet also to tell that there is no such thing as Justification by any work, is to say that there is a Justification by a personal righteousness, and there is not a Justification by a personal righteousness, because no Justification by any work; than which nothing can be more absurd. But it may be said there is no such thing as Justification by a personal righteousness of our own. I Answer, To tell of a personal righteousness, and yet say it is not mine after any sort, is as much as to say a personal righteousness and not a personal righteousness, which still is a manifest contradiction, for how can I be personally righteous with a righteousness that is not mine after some sort? Yes, it may be it will be said Christ's righteousness whereby we are justified is our own by Imputation: If so, then God accounts it to be the righteousness of your Persons, or how can your Persons be justified by it? And if God account it to be the righteousness of your Persons, than he must account you in your own Persons to be conformed to some Law hereby, (or else how should Justification, as all that call themselves Protestant's confess, be a juridical or Law act) And can you be conformed in your own Persons to a Law without a work? We are, you may say, conformed to the Law in our own Persons by the work and obedience of another; i. e. Christ, to that Law. This now is as much as to say, that you are conformed to the Law in your own Persons, without any personal conformity, still contradiction. Well, but Christ's personal conformity to the Law is reckoned by God in our Justification to be our personal conformity; if so, then God must account you to be perfect fulfillers of the Law, and if God do this, he must account you also to be performers of the obedience that Law calls for, or he cannot account you fulfillers. After all this, now here is the mystery, still you will deny that you are justified by a Covenant of Works, or by any work accounted by God to be your own. Here is the Riddle, look who can unfold it; so that plain it is, some Persons will not have Faith to be a justifying righteousness, because it is a work, and yet they themselves according to their own notion must and do hold Justification by perfect legal works, which are excluded from Justification by the Holy Scripture, while it speaks expressly of Justification by Faith, as hath been shown above.  
Well, but we are not justified by any works subjectively in us, or done by us. I Answer, you say they are yours by Imputation, and if so, God must account them not only to be done by you, but to be subjectively in you, for if God do account me to have personally done this or the other (which he must do if he impute what Christ hath done to me, and so account his obedience to be my formal personal righteousness) he must account me to be or to have been the subject of that work. Actiones sunt suppositorum, but this I have cleared above.  
But why will they not admit of Faith as justifying righteousness because it is a work? I suppose they think it would occasion boasting, now the Scripture speaks far otherwise. The Holy Spirit in it saith, where all is received of free gift, there is no ground for boasting, and sure I am nothing is more express than Faith to be freely given. And the Apostle is express, that boasting is excluded by the Law of Faith, or that Law which commands Faith in Christ, and if by the Law of Faith, then by Faith itself where it is: for true Faith where it is, 'tis of that nature as to set the Crown wholly upon Christ's Head, and keep the Soul that hath it low and humble. But now as to the other Law; i. e. the Law of perfect sinless works, such works as have no Sin attends them, if we seek for Justification by a righteousness which is a conformity thereunto, here is a foundation for boasting, and that because if I be justified by it, I must merit and deserve in my own Person Life by my conformity thereunto, and so the merit of another must be wholly excluded, this is that now which some Persons do not take heed unto, when they say that Gospel works such as Faith in the matter of Justification, I mean the qualifying matter; lays a foundation for boasting, they should prove, before they can have ground for their Assertion; that Faith hath a purchasing meritorious efficacy, but this they do not, nor cannot. For though Adam had what he had both of Moral and Natural integrity by the grace of Creation; yet had he continued to have yielded conformity to the Law of Innocency, he might have boasted in this, and depended upon it as a righteousness which would have merited and deserved the continuance of Life for him. Persons may be high pretenders to exalt Christ and his righteousness; but if they will have a righteousness which is a conformity to the Law of Innocency to be their personal justifying righteousness, they must have a personal meritorious righteousness, and these must open a wide door for boasting. But if Persons will have Justification by Faith, as a personal Gospel righteousness to give them right, which is for this constituted by God for Christ's Merits, this wholly excludes all boasting as to the having a personal righteousness that is in itself, or in its own nature satisfying and meriting, and thus Christ and the grace of God in him in a Sinner's Justification and Salvation is exalted. This Law of Faith is that which the Apostle opposeth to that Law he speaks of in Philip. 3. 9 the righteousness or observation of which ●e disclaims in point of Justification, or as that which gives any right to Christ, Pardon and Life. And therefore the righteousness of this Law; i. e. the Law of Faith is called by the Apostle in this Verse, the righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ, and the righteousness of God by Faith, this, this is the righteousness which hath Christ for its Object, and is appointed by God in his Covenant of Grace to be our personal justifying righteousness. This was the righteousness the Apostle would have that he might be found in him; i. e. united unto him. Very few of our Divines but they hold we are united to Christ by Faith, and this was that the Apostle valued above all union with him; seeing then the Apostle opposeth that which gives interest in Christ, and union with him unto his own righteousness in this Verse, that which gives interest then and unites must be Faith, and so he must be far from disclaiming it as dung. Now if so Persons will have the righteousness of Christ meant by this righteousness through Faith and by Faith, than it must be the righteousness of Christ which unites to Christ, and so the same thingmust unite unto, and give interest in itself; But whoever said this?  
But to proceed no further in this, let us hear what they have to say for the vindication of this strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness.  
1. Christ's righteousness (say they) must be our only personal justifying righteousness, because there will be no standing in judgement before God, unless we be clothed with a perfect righteousness, and there is no such righteousness, but that of Christ's.  
I Answer, if the process in judgement should be according to the terms of the Law of Innocency; i. e. that Sentence must pass upon Persons according to conformity or nonconformity to this Law, than the reason would be cogent: But seeing it shall not there is no force in it at all. That it shall not, See Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Christ Jesus according to my Gospel. 2 Thes. 1. 7, 8. And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven, with his mighty Angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: which Scriptures with others make it manifest, the Gospel shall be the rule of judgement. Hence therefore as Persons in judgement shall be found, such as have been obedient or disobedient to the Gospel, so shall the Sentence pass to Life or Condemnation, John 3. 36. He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting LIfe; and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him. Though know it shall be for the sake of Christ's perfect righteousness, that such as are found true penitent Believers shall be adjudged to eternal Life at that day; seeing had it not been for this his meritorious righteousness, there had been no Covenant of Grace, and so no accepting of any to Life upon such terms as the Gospel requires; so that the whole glory of Believers Salvation must redound to him, I speak here of the Adult, unless Persons have an interest in and a right unto a perfect righteousness, and so unto the righteousness of Christ, they shall not be cleared and adjudged to Life in judgement. But the Question is, Whether all have an interest in, and a right unto his righteousness? If not, Who are they that have? Will you say any, speaking of the Adult, that live under the sound of the Gospel, but such as are found obedient thereunto? And are not true penitent Believers the Persons which are obedient? if so then, they are the Persons who shall be cleared and adjudged to eternal Life in judgement. But it may be said not for their Repentance and Faith. I Answer, still not for these as the purchasing meriting causes: but upon these as the qualifying matter of right, which qualifying matter of right, though it be not as is acknowledged a righteousness answerable to the Law of Innocency, and so can be no justifying righteousness in the account of that Law, yet is a righteousness agreeable to the Gospel; and so is a justifying righteousness in the judgement of that Law.  
2. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only personal justifying righteousness, because all that are justified are justified by the righteousness of another, and this other by whose righteousness they must be justified can be none but Christ's.  
I Answer, I do not deny but affirm that those that are justified are justified by the righteousness of another, and that by Christ's, and his only as the purchase and merit of Justification: But then that this is the qualifying righteousness of mine or another's Person, which gives interest in Christ, and a right to Pardon and Life according to the Gospel, this I deny. For though it be for Christ we are justified; yet it is by Faith in him as imputed by God we are formally justified and made righteous, which Faith though it be our own, and so our own righteousness by free gift and possession, yet is none of our own, but Christ's in point of Merit, and thus we are justified by a righteousness Christ hath merited, and God's in point of Efficiency, as he by his Spirit is the Author of it. And there is this I would ask by the way; i. e. Whether Justification be not a Gospel privilege? if it be, as I hope it will not be denied, Then are not all Gospel privileges purchased and merited by Christ? if so, then certainly Justification among the rest. And if Justification, give me leave further to ask, Did Christ purchase and merit his own righteousness? you grant he purchased and merited the privilege of Justification, and you say that Christ's righteousness is the only formal justifying righteousness of our Persons; must you not then also say that he purchased and merited his own righteousness, certainly, yes. Now pray! When, or how, or by what did Christ this? if you say that Christ did not purchase and merit his own righteousness; then I ask, How did he purchase and merit Justification? And how is Justification then in your Sense a Gospel privilege purchased and merited by Christ? It may be you will say that Christ purchased and merited that his righteousness might be imputed by God unto us for our Justification; grant this, still you must say that he purchased and merited not that which you call the matter of your Justification, and so what you say must come to this that Christ did not merit and purchase that which justifies you, and if so, then that which justifies you must not be that which is purchased and merited by Christ. See then however in this, if the charge of Socinianism do not fall foul upon yourselves, as to the material part of your Justification. Whereas the Scripture saith we are justified by his blood; i. e. his Blood must purchase and merit that which justifies, as well as God's Imputation of it; but will you say that Christ's Blood purchased and merited Christ's righteousness, which you say is the very matter of Justification.  
3. Christ's righteousness only, say they, must be our justifying righteousness, because Believers have union and communion with him.  
This is no Argument; we grant that all true Believers have union and communion with Christ; but than it is affirmed generally this union is by Faith, and communion of his part not by the communication of his righteousness, which is proper to himself as Mediator, but by the communication of his Grace the fruit of his purchase, by virtue of his righteousness the merit hereof.  
4. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justifying righteousness, because this was the end of his fulfilling the Law.  
I Answer, if they speak of Christ's Obedience to the Law of Innocency, I grant he yielded perfect conformity to that Law both in habit and act: But then that this was the end that his righteousness should be imputed unto us as our very formal personal righteousness remains to be proved; for if they speak of Christ's active Obedience here, it was an ingredient into the meritorious cause of our Redemption, Reconciliation, and Acceptation; Galat. 4. 4, 5. For when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a Woman, made under the Law. To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of Sons. Heb. 7. 26. For such an High Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. And as such it cannot be imputed unto us as our personal righteousness as is manifest. And there is this upon the matter I would have considered; i. e. in God's justifying you doth he account the righteousness which you say is the very matter of y●●r Justification, to be Christ's, and his only, or does he account it to be the righteousness of another; if he account it to be his only, then how doth he account it to be your personal righteousness? If he account it to be the personal righteousness of another, suppose of a Believer, then how doth he account it to be Christ's, and his only? That which is Christ's, and his only cannot be mine in itself, that which is mine and the very formal righteousness of my Person cannot be Christ's, and his only, because God must account it to be mine as well as Christ's. True indeed, Grace is Christ's, and his only both as the purchaser, Lord Treasurer, and the great mean of conveyance; but then Christ's righteousness which is proper to him, is nor cannot be for communication to us as grace is, seeing it is for satisfaction, and so respects God immediately, and for merit and so the grace of Justification, Adoption, etc. must be the blessed fruits hereof. We have upon Repentance and Faith, Reconciliation and Peace with God, for the satisfaction given to God; but we have not that which made satisfaction; we have likewise Justification, Pardon, and Life for his Merits, if true penitent Believers; but we have not that in itself which merited this Grace. It is very strange that Persons should so much as think that that which was the satisfaction and merit should be given to them in itself, and that God should account them such as satisfied God's Justice in Christ, and merited Pardon and Life in Christ. These Men they condemn the Papists, for saying Christ merited that we might merit, and yet cannot nor will not see that they are holding the same themselves in the strictest Sense. True it is, for Christ's satisfaction we have Peace, and for his Merits, we have Spirit and Grace: But then to tell of our satisfying in Christ, and meriting in Christ, as though we might have Peace for our satisfying in him, and Grace for our meriting in him, 'tis mighty gross. I know here they will say, they hold no such thing; I Answer, If ●en will hold that they either do not, or will not understand, what, or who can help them? But it would do well if they would consider that so long as they hold Christ and themselves to be one legal Person, 'tis not possible whatever their practice be, they should hold any less in the notion.  
5. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justifying righteousness, because we are debtors to the Law, both to perform perfect obedience, and also to suffer punishment for the violation of it. Now seeing, say they, we can do neither so as to make satisfaction, and have Justification; the righteousness of Christ in itself must be our personal justifying righteousness, and so accounted by God.  
I Answer, Though we can neither by our Obedience nor suffering make Satisfaction and have Justification by the Law; yet for Christ's Satisfaction and Obedience whereby the Justice of God is answered, and the repute and credit of God's violated Law is kept up, and the ends of God's governing Justice secured: there is no obligation lying upon any Believer, seeing a new Covenant is purchased, to perform perfect Obedience; nor can any true Believer be under obligation to suffer the punishment threatened by the violated Law, seeing that such an one is actually delivered from the execution of the Curse by Christ's satisfactory righteousness. Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Rom. 8. 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit, true soul uniting Faith to Christ, giving him a right hereunto for Christ's sake, and this God imputes unto them for righteousness, according to the Law of Grace.  
6. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justifying righteousness, because Do this i. e. perfectly obey the Law and live, is a fixed Rule; but no Man can perfectly fulfil the Law of Innocency, therefore Christ's righteousness must be so imputed by God, that so in his account believers may be said to have done this, i. e. perfectly fulfilled the Law that they may live.  
It is manifest by this Argument the Objectors will have Justification by that Law which requires perfect sinless works. But let them know do this according to that Law and live or be justified, is not a fixed stated Rule to any Man upon Earth, but believe and live for the sake of Christ, John 3. 26. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Mark 26. 26. He that believeth, and is baptised, shall be saved: but he that believeth not, shall be damned. Acts 26. 31. And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thine House. Therefore the Reason given is of no force, for the strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness.  
7. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only personal justifying righteousness, because it is that which God accepts on our behalf.  
I Answer, If they mean that God accepts the righteousness of Christ on the behalf of Believers, so as to account it a sufficient satisfaction for them, and the merit of all good, which they partake of, and that for which he accepts all their sincere duties, I grant them the whole: But if they mean, God so accepts it on their behalf, as to account it to be the very righteousness of their Persons, by which their Persons are righteous according to the Law of Innocency; this I deny, and they can never show any solid proof for what they affirm.  
8. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only personal justifying righteousness, because Christ was a public Person standing in the place, and stead of all those that should believe in him, so that all that he did and suffered are to be looked upon, and are reputed by God as done and suffered by them, and consequently are imputed to them.  
I Answer, That Christ did sustain the Person of a Mediator, for the making atonement, and purchasing reconciliation; I grant, but that he sustained the Person of all those (as a sinner) that should after believe in him; this I deny, seeing then he should have been accounted the offending party, and so as such had been incapable of purchasing and making peace betwixt the offending and offended. For he that is accounted guilty, and so an offender should have needed a Mediator and reconciler for himself; but this Christ did not, therefore to tell of Christ's being a public Person in this Sense is false, and not only so, but destructive of his Office as Mediator, and so also of his Satisfaction and Merit, as is manifest. And whereas it may be said, How could he have suffered, if by the Law he was not accounted guilty, and an offender? I Answer, The Law did not account Christ as guilty, or an offender, nor did it ever condemn him; but on the contrary it accounted him a righteous Person (not considering him at all as a Mediator or Surety) and justified him as a fulfiller of it both in Nature and Life, and therefore he was under no obligation at all by the Law of Innocency to Suffer, but the obligation was from the Law of Redemption or Mediation, by his own free and voluntary susception, according to the paction betwixt him and the Father. The just suffered for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. If just, then by what Law was he just? He that is just in Law, by that Law that accounts him just, as such he cannot be accounted guilty or an offender, but Christ was just in the account of the Law of Innocency. Hence therefore that which they would gather from Christ's being a public Person must fall with its foundation, for neither the Law, nor God by the Law did account that Christ did so personate Sinners, as to reckon what he did and suffered, they did and suffered. What Christ did and suffered, it was accounted to be done and suffered for us, but not accounted to be done and suffered by us; for if so, then God should accept satisfaction immediately from us, and not from Christ, and God must account us immediately to have merited, and not Christ; i. e. Christ should only be accounted by God as the means whereby we satisfied his Justice, and merited Life for ourselves; for if all that Christ did and suffered be by God reputed as done and suffered by us, than I ask for what end? for that which was done and suffered by Christ was satisfactory and meritorious; now if Christ obeyed and suffered for this end, that God might account what he did and suffered to be done and suffered by us, than Christ must have obeyed and suffered for this end, that God might have satisfaction from us, and that we by his means might merit a right to Life. Can they prove this, thinkest thou, Reader?  
9 Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only personal justifying righteousness, because we cannot be justified by it any other way, than by God's imputing it to us as such.  
I Answer, If this be so, there must be no Justification of a Sinner at all, for no Sinner is nor can be formally, personally, righteous with Christ's righteousness, and therefore God doth not account him to be so, as hath been proved above.  
10. If we may truly be said to be dead, and crucified with Christ, to be quickened with Christ, to have risen again with Christ, to sit in heavenly places in or with Christ, etc. then may we be said to have fulfilled the Law with Christ also, and consequently the fulfilling of the Law by Christ is imputed to us, and accounted ours.  
I Answer, The Scripture it is granted saith concerning true Believers that they are dead, and crucified with Christ, etc. But what are they said to be so properly and personally? Did they lay down their natural lives with Christ, and a●ise in his rising again, unto a corporal and glorified Life? Or did God account them so to have done in Christ, when he knows they did not? If not, as is plain, than the meaning is by way of efficacy and likeness. Christ indeed hath merited the Holy Spirit, and this Spirit is given for the sake of his Merits unto his People, by the power and efficacy of which Spirit sin is mortified, the Heart crucified to the World, and the Soul made alive to God, raised from a Death in Sin to a Life of Grace and Holiness, and the affections are set upon things above, where Christ sits at the right hand of God; from whence results a Christian, assimulation, or likeness to Christ, in his Death, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension and Exaltation. But what ground from hence to draw such an inference; i. e. that we have fulfilled the Law in Christ's fulfilling of it. Plain it is no ground at all; but the consequence leans to that false supposition, that what Christ did and suffered, God accounted us to have done and suffered, which beside what hath been said already, if true, than God must account us if Believers, to have been born of a Virgin in a Stable, to have been circumcised, to have disputed with the Doctors in the Temple at Twelve years of Age, and to have been subject to Joseph and Mary as our Parents, to have been baptised by John the Baptist, to have wrought Miracles, etc. in Christ. But who will say this? if none, than all must hold the thing supposed formerly by many, must be false, and if they will let the notion go, the consequences are none of theirs.  
11. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be our only justifying righteousness, because all are and continue Sinners while they live, and therefore cannot be personally righteous, but by God's accounting Christ's righteousness in itself to be theirs, or accounting them righteous in their persons with Christ's righteousness.  
I Answer, This Argument supposeth that Persons may be formally personally righteous with a sinless perfect righteousness, for such is Christ's, and so accounted by God, and so sinless and perfectly righteous in their nature, as hath been shown before, and yet for all this are and remain Sinners, which is a contradiction. Now I grant that all Men that are justified are and do remain Sinners in the account of the Law of Innocency, but as justified they are accounted though not sinless, yet righteous by the Law of Grace, being true penitent Believers, for Repentance and Faith, etc. are a Conformity to what it commands, upon which Conformity it asserts and maintains their interest in Christ, and right to Pardon and Life. There is no satisfaction for a Sinner, nor merit to procure him any good, but in and by a sinless perfect righteousness, which is Christ's, but then that God accounts the sinner whom he justifies to have such a righteousness to be the very righteousness of his Person, so as to be formally righteous by it, this I deny.  
12. Believers, say they, are righteous with Christ's righteousness, seeing they are members of that mystical body of which he is the head.  
I Answer, I do not deny but Believers are members of that mystical body of which Christ is the head; but though it be so, yet it doth not follow, that they are righteous with his righteousness, and have it to be their formal personal righteousness; indeed they are righteous for it but not with it, for though Christ be the head of his Church, and his Church and each member hath benefit from him as such; yet I hope none will say that each member of Christ's mystical body is accounted by God to perform the very function and office of Christ as head, which they must say and prove too, or else this they bring for an Argument bears no proportion, and so is of no force; Christ is a governing head, Will they say that God accounts each of his members to be so? He as head communicates spiritual Life, Sense and Motion to his members, Will they say God accounts each member to do so?  
13. Say they, Believers are married to Christ; now as a Woman's debts in Law account when married are her Husbands, and all that he is possessed of is hers: so it is betwixt Christ and those that are united unto him by a spiritual Marriage Covenant, he hath in Law sense their debts, and they have his righteousness.  
I Answer, Similitudes illustrate, but they are no proof, neither do the things compared in all points bear an equal proportion; We grant then that Christ and true Believers are really, though mystically united in a Marriage Covenant, and that as Believers they have forgiveness of Sin for the sake of his meritorious and satisfactory righteousness; and all that he hath done and suffered, and hereby purchased is for them in special, and their benefit; but than it doth not follow hereupon, that the Law of God violated by them doth account that they have fulfilled it in Christ, and suffered the penalty for their violation in him, for if so the Law should adjudge them first to be perfectly righteous, and then after that apply forgiveness unto them as Sinners, which is a manifest contradiction; for he that the Law doth account to be perfectly righteous (I speak of the Law of Innocency) cannot be a Sinner, and if so must need no forgiveness. If it be said the Law first acquits from guilt, and so forgives, this is no other but to make it a Covenant of Mercy and Life, and if it account a Person after the first forgiveness perfectly righteous in Christ, than he must not after that be a Sinner, and so need no Pardon. Christ cannot in a sound Sense be said to have taken our debts upon him any otherwise than he voluntarily and freely undertook to satisfy for our offences as Mediator, neither was he under obligation hereunto by any Law, but that of mediation. And further as to Believers having his righteousness, this can be no further than it may be of use and benefit unto them; and the use and benefit Christ's righteousness is of unto Believers, What is it? sure, 'tis for the satisfaction of an infinite God offended; and what doth God account it to be their personal righteousness as to this use? If so, then God must account he hath satisfaction from them in their own Persons. And as to its further use and benefit unto Believers; What is it? certainly, to merit all the good of Grace and Glory. And what now doth God account it to be their personal righteousness as to this use? If so, then God must account them to be righteous in their Persons with such a righteousness as merits all the good of Grace and Glory. Now true it is Believers have Christ's righteousness, or interest in it, or right unto it, as that for which God is reconciled unto them, and for which they shall have Grace and Glory, but they have it not so, nor are interested in it so as to be personally righteous with it, neither doth God account them so to have it. If they say God doth not account it the righteousness of their Persons, or that their Persons are righteous with it, as it is satisfactory and meritorious, it cannot be the righteousness of their Persons under that formality. If they grant this, than I say they cannot have it all, so as to be personally righteous with it, for a righteousness divested and stripped of satisfaction and merit can be none of Christ's, for it is essential to his righteousness, as Mediator to be satisfactory and meritorious; and if it be none of Christ's which is accounted by God to be their personal righteousness, or the righteousness their Persons are righteous withal for Justification; pray, What or whose can this righteousness be which they say is accounted by God to be their personal justifying righteousness, beside that of the righteousness of Faith? let them exclude Faith and tell us.  
14. Say they, the Gospel is nothing but a Revelation or Declaration of what Christ hath done and suffered, and that by his obedience and suffering he hath fulfilled the Law and satisfied God's justice; So that Christ having thus answered for us, upon believing neither the Law, nor Justice of God hath any thing against us, because the righteousness of Christ whereby he hath fulfilled the Law and satisfied Justice is made over to us by God's Imputation, as though we had wrought it out in our own Persons.  
I Answer, it is granted the Gospel doth repeat what Christ hath done and suffered, etc. But then that it is nothing but a revelation of this sort, this I deny, for besides this, it injoins us Repentance towards God and Faith in Jesus Christ, Acts 20. 21. Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, Repentance toward God, and Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ; and it threatens the Impenitent Unbelievers with God's eternal wrath, Mark 16. 16. He that believeth, and is baptised shall be saved: but he that believeth not, shall be damned. Luke 13. 3. I tell you, nay, but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Now to say that Christ having satisfied Justice, and fulfilled the Law, neither the Law nor Justice hath any thing against us, what is it but to say the Law accounts us righteous, and so indeed the Justice of God can find no fault in us; and if so, than we must have no Sin, and if no Sin, than no need of forgiveness, and if no Sin, and so no need of forgiveness, than no place for Repentance and Faith. I have granted and do grant that Christ hath satisfied the Justice of God, and fulfilled the Law for us, that we for and through this his righteousness might have Pardon and Life, upon our Conformity to the commands of the Gospel: but then if he have satisfied and fulfilled the Law for this end that neither the Law nor God's infinite strict Justice may have any thing against us, how comes David to pray, Psalm 143. 2. Enter not into judgement with thy Servant: for in thy sight shall no Man living be justified. And how come the best of God's People many times to be under desertion and temporal Afflictions? If it be said, it is not for Sin, I Answer, let the Scripture determine, Psalm 51. 12. Restore unto me the joy of thy Salvation: and uphold me with thy free Spirit Psalm 89. 30, 31, 32. If his Children forsake my Law, and walk not in my judgements: If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments: Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. If it be said to this, it is not in pure Justice God Afflicts, grant this: yet I hope they will not deny, but that Afflictions are from God, and he is just in what he doth. They are castigatory, yet none of them are satisfactory, nor are they exercised with them for that end. But there is this I would take notice of, whereas they say the Gospel reveals what Christ hath done and suffered, they destroy this by another assertion, and so confound Law and Gospel, in making the very threatening of the Law of Innocency to reveal Christ and Salvation by him. In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die; i. e. say they, either thou or thy surety, so that here they make the very penal sanction of the Law to be their Gospel. And as a learned Person observes, If this was the meaning of the penal sanction or threat, than it must follow that a Mediator was promised before the fall: for this Covenant; i. e. of Works was struck with Man in Innocency. And that either Adam understood not his Covenant that was made with him, or else knew of a Surety and Redeemer before his fall, at least being in a readiness for him, in case he should fall. And I add, if this be the meaning of the threatening, that either thou, or thy surety shall die, then upon the sureties undertaking and suffering Sinners must be immediately cleared, seeing the penal sanction or threat had all that which it required, and so there can be no punishment due unto them at all in the Sense of that Law; neither must they be under the curse of it, nor in danger at all of condemnation by it, and so however the Elect cannot be Children of wrath by nature, though the Scripture saith they are. Ephes. 2. 3. Among whom also we all had our conversation in time past, in the lusts of our fl●sh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind, and were by nature the Children of wrath, even as others.  
15. Christ's righteousness, say they, must be accounted a Believer's personal justifying righteousness, because it cannot be consistent with the Justice of God, to justify without such a righteousness.  
I grant, according to the Revelation of God's pleasure it cannot be consistent with the Justice of God to justify without such a righteousness as Christ's: but it doth not follow that therefore he must account it a Believer's personal formal righteousness, indeed if there had not been satisfaction given to the justice of God for the securing the honour hereof, there had been no such thing as the Justification of a Sinner; but now God having received satisfaction from Christ, it is very consistent with his Justice and Honour thereof, to justify a penitent Believer, for the sake of his satisfactory righteousness by virtue of his Gospel constitution, Rom. 3. 25, 26. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God. To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. The Reason above alleged for the strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness, supposeth that Christ's righteousness is not satisfactory for any Sinner, until it be made over by God to be the Sinner's personal formal righteousness; but so soon as it is the Sinner's personal righteousness than it hath the actual virtue, or is actually Efficacious to be satisfactory for that Sinner, but not before, and thus it is further evident from this their Doctrine, that a justified Soul hath a righteousness to be its formal righteousness which is satisfactory to God's infinite strict Justice, and so (as hath been said before) God must immediately receive satisfaction from the Soul, accounted by him to be personally righteous with the very righteousness of Christ, and thus God must not look upon the Soul in and through Christ, and accept it immediately for him, but through the righteousness of Christ, as it is upon itself, and as (according to them) the Soul is clothed with it.  
But here I shall take notice of an Exception made, Although say they, we affirm Christ's righteousness and obedience unto the Law is made ours, and so in him as our Surety we fulfil the Law; yet doth it not follow that we are justified by the Law, and that because it is not the righteousness which we in Person have wrought.  
I Answer, This Reason will not invalidate the consequence; for if so be that Christ's righteousness and obedience unto the Law be so made ours, as that we are counted by God to have fulfilled the Law in him as our Surety; then God must account us to have obeyed the Law in his obeying of it, for how can he otherwise account us to have fulfilled it in him? and ●● God do account us to have performed in Christ that obedience the Law requires, then certainly he must account us to be righteous in the Sense of that Law; and if so, How then can that Law choose but justify us? Can any Man account me in truth to have obeyed such a Law in another's obeying of it, and yet at the same time account me a Transgressor of it? so that plain it is, if God do account us to be the fulfillers of the Law in Christ, he must account us as such to be righteous according to that Law, and if righteous then justified by it.   

SECT. V The Nature of Gospel Justification farther opened.  
HAving briefly dispatched the Objections which are most material; I shall proceed a little further to open the Nature of Gospel Justification.  
1. God endued Man at the first not only with Natural but Moral perfection; having adorned him with his own Image. Gen. 1. 26, 27. So God created Man in his own Image, Male and Female created he them: and this Image of God which we call Moral, consisted in Knowledge, Righteousness, and Holiness, Coloss. 3. 10. And have put on the new Man, which is renewed in knowledge, after the Image of him that created him. Ephes. 4. 24. And that ye put on the new Man, which after God is created in righteousness, and true holiness. He had Light for his Understanding, Holy Love for his Will, Righteousness for his Life and Conversation.  
2. Man being such a Creature must be capable of Moral Government; i. e. of being ruled by Law; for that Creature which is capable of knowing, loving, and obeying God, must also be capable of being ruled by the Law of a Wise, Holy, and Righteous God.  
3. God therefore from the first put Man under a Law. To say that God did not, is to affirm. That the capacity which Man had of knowing, loving, and obeying God resulting from his Moral perfections was in vain: but God gave Man nothing in vain. And it would be to affirm that God did not stand in relation to Man as his Rector and Governor, nor Man in ●elation to God as his Subject by right.  
4. God ever suited his legal Constitutions or Laws to the state and condition of Man; in the state of integrity God suited that his state with a Law requiring personal perfect Obedience. Man considered as fallen from that integrity into a state of Sin and Misery, God suited this his state with a Law injoining sincere Obedience, and this not only initial, or upon his first subjection, but continued, and constant to the end of his Life: the one for giving him right through Christ to Pardon and Life, the other for continuing that right.  
5. Both these Laws, i. e. that of Innocency and that of Grace, have their sanction both premiant and penal; i. e. a promise of reward in case of Obedience, and the threatening of punishment in case of Disobedience.  
6. These things being so, I put the Question, whether Innocent Adam's Obedience to the first Law, would not have given him right unto the Life promised? And whether this same Law of Innocency would not have maintained this his right? The first we must grant, or else say, that the promise gives no right to the benefits promised, though the condition be performed, which to say is against the rule of common equity: we must grant the latter also, or else say that the very Instrument God hath appointed for the conveying of right to Life to Innocent Adam, should not be regarded by him in point of claim for all Adam's perfect Obedience, suppose his right should have been called into Question, which to say must needs be to charge God with unfaithfulness and injustice.  
Now if so be (as is clear) Adam's Obedience to the Law of Innocency would have given him right to the Life promised, and also maintained this his right; then will not our Obedience to the second Law; i. e. to the Law of Grace give us right unto the reward promised, and secure us through Christ from the punishment threatened? And secondly, Will not this same Law of Grace also maintain our right? It must, or else we must say, that the promise gives no right unto the benefits promised, though the condition required be performed by the Grace of God, also that the very instrument God hath appointed for the conveying of right unto us should by him not be regarded, or not be at all of any benefit unto us, notwithstanding our performance of the condition, if our right should be called into question.  
To illustrate what I have said, suppose that we should have a deed of gift of such an inheritance upon the due performance of such or such conditions therein expressed; Will not the performance of these conditions give us right according to the deed unto the inheritance? and if so be our right be called into question, what must vindicate our right but the deed whereby it was given and granted unto us upon the performance of the conditions expressed. If then these things be so (as is evident) than I gather from hence that which I intended; i. e. that there must be such a thing as Justification by constitution or Law, and seeing there can be no Justification by the Law of Innocency, or Covenant of Works; then there must be another Law which we must have Justification by, and what can this be but a Law of Grace and Mercy, which is the same with that we call the Gospel; now if Persons will not grant such a Law, than Justification must either be by the Law of perfect Works; i e. by the Covenant of Works, or that Justification we now have must be no Law act, and if so they who contend against us to destroy their own declared Opinion, asserting that Justification is a juridical or Law term: those therefore that deny the Gospel to be a Law, they must either deny Justification by it, and so account we are justified by the Law of Works, or else they must contradict themselves in affirming Justification not to be by Law.  
But because some Persons do not only deny but ridicule such a thing as a Law of Grace, calling it an humane invention; it will not be amiss a little to clear this that there is a Law of Grace distinct from that of Works.  
Observe then, I hope those that oppose us will grant that God required of Man while in the state of integrity a sinless Obedience; Now the Question will be, seeing Man is a fallen Creature, whether God doth require any Obedience of him? If not, than Man must be at his own will to do what he listeth; and is he so? If God doth require Obedience, what is it? Is it sinless Obedience? If so, than all Mankind must be lost, for none of the fallen race of Adam can perform it. If they say that Obedience is performed by Christ for us. I ask, Hath Christ performed this Obedience that we might be exempted and obey none at all? If so, than he obeyed to set us free from all subjection to God, if not, than it remains, for all Christ perfectly obeyed that, yet still we are under obligation to obey in our own Persons. Seeing then we cannot yield sinless Obedience, or Obedience without Sin attending it; Are not we through the assisting Grace of God to perform sincere Obedience? If not, than none at all; if we are, than it will either be accepted of God, or it will not: If it will not, Then to what purpose is it performed? If it will, Then is it of Grace that God accepts it. And if of Grace, must it not be accepted in and through Christ's Satisfactory and Meritorious Righteousness? If so, than it must be revealed by God in his word to be his will that we should thus obey; i. e. sincerely, and that we shall be accepted through Christ hereupon: this will of God commanding is either a Law or it is not? If not, then there is no Transgression if we do not obey; if it be, than they must grant us a Law of Grace which for the sake of Christ will accept of sincere obedience instead of perfect; and also they must grant that Christ hath purchased this, or else they and all Mankind (upon a supposition that God had continued Man) should still have been obliged to sinless obedience, as a condition or qualification of Life; and so for want of obedience of this sort, we should all have been left to the execution of the Curse, and been damned for ever. And observe this Law of Grace of which we speak doth not destroy the Moral Law summarily contained in the Ten Commands, for we say still we are under obligation to have respect unto, and obey all its commands in avoiding Sins which are forbidden, and performing the duties which are commanded therein. But this is that, we say that we cannot nor do not perfectly obey, though we have a principle of Grace wrought in us by the Holy Spirit; but yet we sincerely obey, and have respect unto its commands, this shall be pleasing and acceptable to God for the sake of our blessed Mediator. And seeing such obedience would not have been accepted of God (upon a supposition that fallen Man could have performed it of himself, which I am sure he could not) had not the Lord Jesus Christ by his Satisfaction and Merit procured it should; is not here a plain different constitution, and so a new Law purchased by Christ distinct from that which Adam in the state of Innocency was under.  
But upon the matter some say the obedience enjoined Adam, and the obedience commanded us now is the same specifically or in its own nature, and differs only gradually, and therefore the Law must be the same, and there is no necessity of a new one; I Answer, grant we that the obedience doth only differ gradually considered materially, yet the obedience enjoined us formally differs from that of Innocent Adam's, and therefore cannot be of the same nature with his, for our obedience is to be performed by us as penitent Subjects, not so innocent Adam's, and also in Faith of acceptation through a Redeemer and Mediator, but not so innocent Adam's, so that our obedience now formally differs from that of Adam's in Innocency, and therefore differs from it specifically, and not only gradually, and hence there must be a new constitution or Law injoining it, Or else what warrant have we for it? But suppose there should be only a gradual difference, when indeed there is more as is manifest, yet it doth not follow that the Law commanding is the same; for it is sinless obedience the Law of Innocency requires, and it will accept of no less; now if less be accepted we must have a new Revelation, and so a new warrant for it from a command, or else what foundation for it, or encouragement unto it, and seeing we have a new Revelation, and so a new warrant from God's command of this obedience, than we must have a Law to which it relates distinct from that given to Innocent Man; but in the very matter of obedience, we shall find that enjoined us, which was not commanded Adam in the Law of Innocency, nor indeed did suit at all with the nature of such a Law; which will make it further evident we must have a new Law as fallen Creatures distinct from that. Isa. 1. 16, 17, 18. Wash ye, make you clean: put away the evil of your do from before mine eyes, cease to do evil, Learn to do well, seek judgement, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow: though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. Isa. 55. 7. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous Man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. Ezech. 18. 21, 22. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done, he shall live. Acts 3. 19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord, etc. What is required in these Texts, is the revealed will of God which Sinners through his Grace are to be subject unto; And is not subjection where it is yielded obedience? Can this will of God then thus commanding be any other than a Law, seeing that non-performance must be a manifest transgression and disobedience?? Let it be considered then if what we find commanded in these Texts, was enjoined Adam before his fall; had he needed to wash him and make him clean, and put away the evil of his do? was he then wicked, and called upon to forsake his wicked ways and sinful thoughts, and turn unto the Lord, before he was guilty of any transgression, was he called upon before his fall to repent and be converted that his Sins might be blotted out, before he had any Sin? and to believe in a Redeemer that he might be saved? or are these the commands of the Law requiring sinless works? One would think those that oppose us should not affirm it and if not, is not all this required of Sinners? and must not that be a distinct Law by which it is required? and is not God's own constitution? how dare some Men than call it an humane invention? It shall come to pass in the last days that the Mountain of the Lord's house shall be established, and many People shall go and sup, come ye, and let us go up to the house of God, and he will mark us his ways, and we will walk in his paths; for out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the word of the Law from Jerusalem.   

SECT. VI Justification described, and made good, partly in this, and partly in the Sections ensuing.  
HAving proved that there is a Law of Grace distinct from that which requires sinless works, and that God justifies by this Law, you may take this definition or description: of Justification; i. e. Justification is God's asserting and maintaining act by his Law of Grace of our right to Pardon and Life for the sake of Christ upon our believing.  
1. It is an act, and that ad extra, an act which makes a relative change, and the subject upon whom this relative change is made is Man, a guilty and condemned Sinner, one upon whom the sentence of condemnation is passed by the Law, and he under obligation thereby to suffer eternal punishment, this is Man's condition antecedent to God's act of justifying, Rom. 3. 19 Now we know that what things soever the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the World may become guilty before God. Galat. 3. 22. But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by Faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. John 3. 18. He that believeth on him, is not condemned: but he that believeth not, is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Ephes. 2. 3. Among whom, also we all had our conversation in times past, in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind, and were by nature the Children of wrath, even as others.  
2. In this act of justifying there is the term from which, or the state from which Man a Sinner is brought upon his Justification, and that is from an obligation to punishment, and the omission or loss of right to Life and Happiness. Every poor Soul before Faith is under an obligation to Eternal Punishment, and must lose Heaven and Eternal Happiness if he leave the World in this condition. How much then should it be our concern to see that we have true Faith, that we have thankfully accepted of, and are sincerely subject unto Christ, that so we may have through him a right to Pardon and Life. John 5. 24. Verily, verily I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation: but is passed from death unto life. Rom. 8. 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the Flesh, but after Spirit.  
3. In justifying there is the term to which or the state a poor Sinner is brought into, and that is a right to this Pardon and Life spoken of before. No sooner is a Sinner justified, but Pardon and Life are his; they are by Gospel or Covenant right his. John 3. 16. For God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son: that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life; and Verse 36. He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him.  
4. There is the agent or he that justifies, and that is God, we are before Repentance and Faith guilty and condemned, and until God do justify us we remain in that guilty and condemned state; therefore if ever we have a right to Pardon and Life God gives it, Rom. 3. 26. To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Rom 4. 5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly: his faith is counted for righteousness. Rom. 8. 30. 33. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? it is God that justifieth. 1. Hence learn first, how much we should adore and admire the riches of mercy in Christ, that after we had greatly offended him, and exposed ourselves to his wrath and displeasure everlastingly; having involved ourselves in a state of guilt and condemnation, having forfeited all right to Life; I say, that after this, all this, yet he should be willing to become our justifier the forgiver of our Sins, and the Donor of a right to Happiness, and this upon honourable terms with relation to himself, and reasonable with respect to us; How much doth this call for our Admiration and Adoration, certainly it will be the work of Heaven. 2. How great folly are poor impenitent Sinners guilty of, for though God be willing to justify, ready to pardon, and receive into his favour, and make over unto them a sure title to Erernal Life, if they will but now humbly come in upon his call, and thankfully accept his Son to be their Propitiation, Head, and Teacher, and be subject to him in Christ; yet they refuse, they hold fast deceit, and will not return; they set no value upon this great good offered, they prefer their Soul damning Lusts, and the Profits and Pleasures of a vain transitory World, they content themselves to live unforgiven, at enmity to God, Heirs of Hell, destitute of right to Life and Salvation. O what folly How much is the condition of such to be lamented, who choose death before Life, guilt before Pardon, execution in Hell before the fruition of a glorious rest in Heaven. God calls them to incline their ear and come unto him, hear, and their Souls shall live, and he will make an everlasting Covenant with them, even the sure mercies of David, Isa. 55. 3. he assures them by his promise that if they will forsake their wicked ways, and sinful thoughts, he will have mercy, and abundantly pardon; Verse 7, but alas! all this moves them not, they are still as unconcerned as before. 3. That Justification is not from Eternity. For any to affirm this is to affirm a contradiction; i. e. that we were both guilty, condemned, and justified from Eternity; for who now are justified but such as before were guilty and condemned: so that first God condemns us from Eternity as guilty, and then justifies us from Eternity according to these Men; touching what they allege; i. e. God's purpose and decree, they may as groundedly gather from it that Persons are effectually called from Eternity, conformed to the Image of Christ, and glorified from Eternity.  
5. In the description, I say, it is God's act by his Law of Grace, it is not by an immediate, but a mediate act that God justifies, seeing it is God's act by this his Law; and that it is will appear further, if we consider that we can neither be justified by the Law of innocent Nature, nor by the Law of Moses. And if not, then by some other Law, for as condemnation is by Law, so Justification. As disobedience then to the Law of Grace brings upon us condemnation; so obedience to the same Law gives right to Pardon and Life which is Justification: If so be that Sinners remain impenitent unbelieving Rebels against Christ, by this Law they are condemned; but on the contrary, if they through Grace become Penitent, Obedient Believers, than this Law entitles them to impunity and Life. Prov. 17. 15. He that justifieth the wicked, and be that condemneth the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord. Now then if both these be an abomination to the Lord; he can neither do the one, nor the other; i. e. he will neither justify the wicked, nor condemn the just; but on the contrary he will justify the just. The Judge of all the Earth will do right. Gen. 18. 25. He will undoubtedly act according to his Prescription. Deut. 25. 1. The Judges were to justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked; so then, as a Man must be wicked before God condemn him; and just before God justify him; then he that is wicked must be so accounted from his disobedience to some Law; to say a Man is wicked, and yet he is not disobedient to some Law, is to say there is no transgression where there is no Law; and seeing those are only wicked who go on in the practice of Sin unrepented of, and will not believe, nor give their consent to be subject to God in Christ, than such must be accounted wicked from their rebellion and disobedience to the Law of Grace, seeing it is this Law only that requires Repentance towards God, and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ: But then on the contrary a Man must be accounted just also by his Conformity to some Law; to say a Man is just and righteous, and say he is not in Heart and Life conformed to some Law, is to frame a righteousness without relation to a Rule, which cannot be. Now seeing those are righteous who are penitent Sinners, obedient Believers; they must be accounted such by the Law of Grace, seeing this is the righteousness which it doth require; and whoever they are that have this righteousness the Law of Grace will for the sake of Christ justify them hereupon; i. e. they have a right hereupon to Impunity and Life, both which are promised by the Covenant of Grace to all Penitent and believing Sinners. And further both Justification and Condemnation are accounted to be acts of a Judge, and a Judge he both justifies and condemns according to Law; so that in Law a Person is either justified or condemned before the Judge by public Sentence do justify or condemn. Thus then, as God hath constituted a Law, according to which he will both justify and condemn, it is manifest that this Law of God, which is his Instrument, doth itself condemn or justify before God's public Sentence as Judge either of Condemnation or Justification; hence it is ordinary for Persons to say, they think such an one is guilty in Law, or clear in Law before they come upon their Trial before the Judge, or he pronounce them either clear or guilty. Seeing then that, Christ is the great Legislator, Lawgiver, and Judge; Isa. 33. 22. For the Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King, he will save us. Then he must have Laws from whence he hath this Title and Office, and if he have Laws, he must rule by Law, and so by Law he must justify and condemn: so that manifest it is before Christ do pass the Sentence either of Justification or Condemnation, Persons are justified or condemned by that Law which he hath appointed to be the Rule of Judgement, and this Law is no other but the Law of Grace, called the Gospel. Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel. As the Gospel or Law of Grace is the Instrument whereby Christ doth justify or condemn Sinners now; so it is the Rule according to which he as the righteous Judge will pass Sentence at the great day to everlasting Happiness or eternal Damnation. To illustrate the matter, suppose a Person hath committed a capital Crime, i. e. a Crime for which he is to die, the King draws up, and sends unto him a conditional Act of Grace, in which he offers Pardon; and not only so but his favour and great advancement, in case he will perform such or such conditions expressed in that Act; if the Criminal consent, he is pardoned ipso facto, immediately by virtue of the Act, and also hath right unto the favour and advancement promised, and this before the Judge's acquitment according to the Act, and this right thus to be acquitted did result from his consent: this is just the case with us, we all deserve Death, and that Eternal; now the great King of Heaven as it were hath drawn up and sent unto us a conditional Grant or Act of Grace, in which he offers Pardon, and not only so, but his favour, and the greatest advancement, in case he will perform those conditions, offering us his Grace that we may, now if we perform, than we immediately for Christ's sake have right to his favour, and this high advancement, before the Judges public Sentence.  
Seeing further that there is the Preceptive and Retributive part of the Law of Grace; i. e. that part which commands duty, and that part in which God doth distribute rewards or punishments: The Question will be what part it is whereby God doth justify? I Answer, The command itself when obeyed, doth implicitly justify, sincere obedience to the commands of the Gospel implies our right, in that we cannot hereupon but beactually justified: But then directly and actually I take it to be the Gospel promise which doth justify; for obedience to the command which is the performance of the condition, hath resulting from it a right to the promise both of Pardon and everlasting Life, and it is by the promise that God doth assert us to have this right, which is his justifying of us, and will maintain this our right if called into question. A little for the proof of this, He that confesseth and forsakes, shall find mercy, confessing and forsaking of Sin is that which God commands, now this being obeved; i. e. if there be an unfeigned confessing and forsaking of Sin; then saving mercy is by God through Christ conveyed in the promise, and this same promise asserts, and vindicates in this conveyance the Souls right, which is its justifying act. That also, Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous Man his thoughts, and turn unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, and he will abundantly pardon; Now upon the wickeds forsaking his ways, and the unrighteous Man his thoughts, the promise annexed makes over his right (which consists in his obedience to the preceding command) to the Pardon and Mercy promised; and will maintain and vindicate this his right in case it be called into question. Now those Persons that will not admit of a Justification of this sort, they will urge (that if we be Penitent returners) to flee to the Promise, and plead the promise, and will tell us that we have right unto the good promised, forasmuch as God by his Spirit hath wrought the qualifications which gives right, and if we must flee to the Promise and plead the Promise, as having a right through Christ upon such qualifications which are of Grace; Doth not this speak that the Promise doth both assert our right, and also will maintain our right to Pardon and Life? And what is it but justifying? Saith a Reverend Divine, you shall hear a Protestant in his Prayer appealing from the Tribunal of God's Justice, to the Throne of his Grace, and yet in his Sermon be telling the People, that it is nothing else but the perfect Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ imputed to them (you must know, to be accounted by God as their personal righteousness) that saves them; which is to bring them back from the Throne of his Grace, to the Bar of his Justice to be judged.  
6. When I say that Justification is God's asserting act by his Promise of Grace our right to Pardon and Life for the sake of Christ upon our believing, I do not think that Pardon is any part constituting our Justification, but a benefit which doth immediately follow thereupon. For consider we Justification first, Actively, so it consists in God's giving us a right through Christ by his Promise upon our obedience to the preceptive part of the Law of Grace; or if you will, upon our performance through his Grace of the conditions of the new Covenant, I mean such upon which we have a right at the first, or at the first an interest, or our first acceptance into favour through Christ, Ephes. 1. 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. Or 2ly, Consider we Justification passively, so it is our having this right. Now observe, Pardon is that which God gives right to by his promise, and which we have right to, considered as subjects qualified; i. e. as true penitent Believers, and so must be a precious benefit devolved upon us as Persons who have right. But seeing that many worthy Divines have affirmed, and undertaken taken to prove that our very justifying righteousness consists in Pardon of Sin, I shall here give my thoughts and the grounds of them upon the point, and shall not impose upon any, but leave Persons to take or leave as they shall have light and evidence.   

SECT. VII. Wherein Pardon and Justification agree, and wherein they disagree.  
I Shall then first show wherein Justification and Pardon agree.  
1. They agree in the principal Efficient, which is God, 'tis God that Justifies, and 'tis God that Pardons. Rom. 8. 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? it is God that justifieth. Ephes. 4. 32. And be ye kind to one another, tender hearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. 1 John 1. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.  
2. They agree in the Meritorious Cause, Christ hath purchased the one and the other, it is for his Merits we are Justified, and for his Merits we are Pardoned. Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. Rom. 5. 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. Matth. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins. Acts 13. 38. Be it known unto you therefore, Men and Brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins.  
3. They agree in the Subject, both Justification and Forgiveness relates to a Penitent Believer, and such an one only (I speak of the Adult) that is Justified, and 'tis a Penitent Believer, and such an one that is Pardoned. Acts 10. 43. To him give all the Prophet's witness, that through his Name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. Acts 3. 19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.  
4. They agree in the Instrumental Cause, and that is the Covenant of Grace, or God's gracious Promise, for this is God's Instrument whereby he doth convey a right to Pardon, not only Pardon, but a right unto it. Isa. 43. 25. I, even I am he, that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. Isa. 44. 22. I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and as a cloud, thy sins return unto me, for I have redeemed thee.  
5. They agree in time, when a Person is Justified, he is Pardoned, there is no time wherein a Person is Justified, but he is Pardoned, nor wherein he is Pardoned, but he is Justified.  
I proceed Secondly, To show wherein they differ.  
1. And First, They differ as Justification hath the priority of Nature; i. e. Justification is in order of Nature before Pardon, a Man must in order of Nature have a right to Pardon before he have it, he must Repent and Believe, and so be conformed to the Gospel Law, before he be righteous in the Sense of that Law, and so have right to Pardon.  
2. They differ in their habitude or relation, Justification properly relates to a false Accusation, Pardon of Sin to a true and just one, he that is accused falsely (when his Innocency is cleared as to the Crime of which he is accused) may be said to be justified. Deut. 25. 1. If there be a controversy between Men, and they, come unto judgement, that the judges may judge them, than they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked. But now he that is truly and justly accused, he may have Pardon of the Crime committed, but he cannot by that Law whereby he was Convict be justified, or accounted as righteous, with respect to the Crime of which he hath been truly and justly accused. He that is accused of Impenitency and Unbelief, if the Accusation be false, the Law of Grace accounts him righteous, and so justifies him against that Accusation; But if a Person accused of Impenitency and Unbelief, and the Accusation be true and just, this Law will Pardon upon Repentance and Faith through Christ, but it will not justify upon Repentance and Faith, as a Person that hath been falsely accused, for he was truly and justly accused before he did Repent and Believe, though not when he believed.  
3. They differ in their Essence or Nature, that which constitutes Justification is our Conformity to the Law of Grace, upon which God in his gracious Promise through Christ accounts us righteous, but that which constitutes Pardon is not a Conformity or Obedience of this sort; but our acquittance and discharge from obligation to Punishment due, true it is upon this Gospel Righteousness for Christ's Satisfaction and Merits we are pardoned, but yet Pardon is not nor cannot be that Righteousness which the Gospel calls for to our Justification; for if so, we should first have forgiveness, and then forgiveness upon the account of that forgiveness, and so Pardon of Sin should be a condition of itself, and be in order of Nature before itself, which I know not how to free from a contradiction.  
4. They differ in the different formality of the Subject to which they do relate, for the Law of Grace in justifying considers Persons as conformed to its commands, and upon that accounts them through and for Christ righteous; but in pardoning it considers them previously as transgressors, though yet as those who have right to Pardon by reason of their Conformity through Grace unto its Precepts; and therefore for Christ's sake assures them of Pardon hereupon, for upon Confession and forsaking of Sin, and turning unto the Lord, God by his gracious Promise assures us of Pardon. And that the Gospel Law in pardoning doth previously consider the Person as a transgressor, appears, for as much as it Pardons not only such as have right to Pardon, but those who have need of it, and who have need but such as before Pardon are altogether in a special sort unpardoned transgressors.  
5. There is a difference betwixt Justification and Pardon, as touching the Moral Efficiency of the Law of Grace justifying and pardoning; for in the one it asserts a Person's right, but in the other it conveys that which it asserted his right unto. These things being laid together, and duly considered, to me 'tis evident that Justification and Pardon cannot be the same, nor yet that Pardon can be our justifying Righteousness, but a special benefit immediately following our Justification.  
But it may be said Condemnation and Justification are opposed, and therefore as Condemnation consists in the Laws Sentence of a Sinner to punishment: so Justification must consist in acquitting the Sinner by Law Sentence from punishment; and if so, Is not here Pardon? and if Pardon, Then must not Justifi-fication consist in Pardon?  
1. I Answer; First, Justification and Condemnation are opposed materially, for as the matter of Justification must be a Righteousness: so the merit of Condemnation must be Unrighteousness; or thus, the matter of Justification must be Conformity to a Law: the merit of Condemnation must be the violation of that Law.  
2. They are opposed in the different account of the Law, for whom the Law Condemns, them it accounts. Guilty: But whom it Justifies, those it accounts Righteous. But now though Justification and Condemnation be thus opposed, yet it doth not follow that what is the form of the one, the contrary to that is the form of the other; or it doth not follow that as Condemnation consists in bearing the Laws Sentence to Punishment, so Justification in acquitting from Punishment. (Indeed all justified Persons are most certainly acquitted, but Justification in its own nature is not an acquitment). Pardon and Condemnation are thus formally opposed, but not Justification and Condemnation. But it may be said further, must he not be innocent, who is acquitted? and is not every innocent Person righteous? I Answer, an acquitment implies the Person who is now acquitted was once guilty of that from which he is now acquitted; and so by Innocent, here can only be meant one that is discharged from deserved punishment, and such an one is clear indeed, but then this his clearing doth imply a right by some pardoning act, or act of Grace. Every justified person is discharged from the Condemnation of the Law, or the Execution of the Law's Sentence, but then this discharge implies a previous Righteousness, not for which, but upon which he is accounted to have right to that discharge, and without which he might not have it, for he that believes not is condemned, and the wrath of God abides upon him, so then a Person is righteous formally by this previous Righteousness, and not by his discharge, for that is only, as is plain, the immediate fruit of his Righteousness.   

SECT. VIII. How our right to Pardon and Life is through Christ, and how he is our Surety, and hath procured the New Covenant for us.  
I Come now to show that it is through Christ that Sinners have right to Pardon and Life upon believing; and it is through Christ in a double regard. In regard to a Ransom paid, and Covenant obtained.  
It is through Christ in the first place, as having paid the Ransom for Sinners Redemption. Matth. 20. 28. Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. 1 Tim. 2. 5, 6. For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and Men, the Man Christ Jesus. Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. We are all by Nature Sin's Slaves, Satan's Captives, loving the World, and the things of the World, cursed and condemned by the Law, being Transgressor's, liable to the intolerable wrath of an Almighty God; Christ paid a sufficient Ransom by his Obedience and Sufferings, From the power and dominion of Sin. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar People, zealous of good works. From the thraldom of Satan. Coloss. 2. 15. And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them, openly triumphing over them in it. Heb. 2. 14. Forasmuch then as the Children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death; that is, the Devil. From this present evil World. Galat. 1. 4. Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father. From the Curse of the violated Law. Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. From the wrath of an offended God. This ransom paid by Christ gave such satisfaction to an offended God as that he deals with none of the Sons and Daughters of Men, now upon terms of the violated Law of works: but is so far through this satisfaction given reconciled, as that he grants them a reprieve from Hell, and much riches of goodness and mercy to lead them to repentance; yea, and reveals himself further willing in a saving manner to be at peace with, and reconciled unto Sinners, upon their subjection to the Gospel Law, who have the explicit offer. And this satisfaction given by Christ's sufferings was no strict fulfilling of the Law threat, but a fulfilling the Law of Mediation or Redemption, for the Soul that sinned was to die; though for the satisfaction given by Christ a stop was put to the execution of the Law threat. When Persons say that the satisfaction Christ gave by his sufferings was a fulfilling of the threatening, part of the Law of Innocency which Man had broken, 'tis a great mistake, for in what was threatened by the Law, was included corporal distempers, and spiritual and eternal death and damnation. But Christ though he suffered did not suffer after this sort, or in this kind, and therefore as is plain his sufferings could not be a strict fulfilling of the threatening part of this Law; though yet observe his sufferings were for us and in our place and stead: But yet so as God did mercifully accept of these sufferings of Christ, as a sufficient satisfaction instead of that which we deserved to suffer for ever.  
Satisfaction is not the giving or paying the same which was due in Law; but it is the giving or paying something to the offended party which is equivalent, or that doth amount to as much as though that same had been given or paid which was due in Law; 'tis granted by the most of Divines that Christ, though he did not, nor could not suffer the Idem, or that same which was due to us, yet as his sufferings were a satisfaction, they were the Tantundem; they were equivalent, yea, infinitely more in value, than the sufferings of Mankind in Hell, for these could never have pacified an offended God, made atonement, nor procured new terms of Peace, being only the sufferings of finite Being's; but the sufferings of Christ were the sufferings of an infinite Being; i. e. the sufferings of that Person who is God as well as Man, and therefore must have an infinite virtue and efficacy in their own nature. Acts 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.  
But did not Christ fulfil the Law by his Passive Obedience?  
I Answer, First, There is a strict fulfilling of the Law by Passive Obedience, and that is when the very same in kind is suffered which was threatened, this Christ neither did nor could suffer, as hath been showed above. Secondly, There is a virtual fulfilling of the Law, by Passive Obedience, and that is when satisfaction is given hereby to the Lawgiver, who hath left himself a liberty to accept of such satisfaction, and so dispense with the threat as to its chief and main execution, and thus Christ by his sufferings may be said to have fulfilled the Laws threat.  
But Christ was our Surety, and as such he must be under the same obligation with us.  
For Answer to this, let us inquire in what Sense Christ cannot be said to be our Surety, and then in what Sense he may.  
1. Then Christ in undertaking for Sinners was not such a Surety, as bound himself to pay or discharge their Debt in case of non payment, upon good Security from them: There are such Sureties as these, as oblige and bind themselves to a Creditor for others, upon good Security from them, so that if the Creditor come upon these Sureties in case of the real Debtor's nonpayment, they again may come to save themselves harmless upon the Debtor, or such as were bound for him. But Christ was no such Surety for us, he did not engage to pay our Debts upon good Security from us, that we would pay them ourselves, or if we did not, he might by virtue of our Security recover his own of us. I think none will say Christ was such a Surety as this.  
2. Christ was not such a Surety as put himself into the same bond with us, and obliged himself to pay the same in kind which was due unto us; for let us put the Question, Whether he was immediately upon Man's transgressions bound over to suffer by the Laws threat, or did voluntarily engage himself to make satisfaction for Man's offence? If the former, than he must have been bound for Man's performance of the condition of the first Covenant; for if he was not, How could he have been immediately bound over to suffer by the Laws threat? Immediately to fall under the penalty for the non-performance of another, supposeth he that doth was bound for that other he should perform; and if it be thus, then Christ must have been a Surety for Innocent Man that he should perform personal, perfect, and perpetual Obedience, and so the first Covenant must have Christ a Mediator and Surety, and yet Man fell too. If he did voluntarily engage himself to suffer for Man's offence, than I ask by what Law? If it be said by the Law of Works, in putting himself under it as Man's Surety, I grant under the preceptive part of this Law Christ put himself voluntarily, and therefore is said to be made under the Law. But that he was under the penal part, so as that the Law did account him Man's Surety, that had bound himself in the same bond with him to suffer for him in case he did transgress, this could not be; for this runs us upon the former, i. e. that Christ must be bound for Man as his Surety upon the drawing up of the first Covenant, while Man was yet in his integrity, to suffer the punishment threatened in case he did transgress: or else how could the Law as they say immediately proceed against him in binding him over to punishment upon Man's offence? and if it be said, he voluntarily put himself into our bond upon the breach of the Covenant, than it must be proved, that the Law did make provision for and accept such a Surety for fallen Man, and his sufferings for his discharge from the penalty due; and if it be so then this Law must immediately without any more to do acquit Man from guilt, and so be a pardoning Law, which yet curseth and condemns all Mankind as transgressor; for observe if a Law do accept of the sufferings of another in my stead who have violated the Law, it must acquit and discharge me from punishment which was due hereupon.  
It may be said were not the sufferings of Christ in our stead and place? I Answer, yes, though not accepted by the Law as such but by the Lawgiver: for as I have said, so I say again if they be accepted by the Law of Works in our place and stead, than it cannot choose but be a pardoning Law, and if so it must be the same with the Gospel. Hence then  
1. Christ is such a Surety as interposed for us, and obliged himself freely to make satisfaction for us poor offenders, who were altogether insufficient.  
2. Christ is such a Surety, as by the consent of his Father did make satisfaction, or give a valuable consideration for our acquitment and discharge from the Curse and Condemnation of the Law, upon condition that we offenders should have no benefit by this his satisfaction but in and through and from him, and that upon his own appointed terms.  
Seeing I have above put the Question by what Law Christ was bound to suffer, I shall a little more fully and distinctly resolve it, before I pass further. Distinguish we of Laws.  
1. There is the Law or Covenant of Works made with Innocent Man; that Law which promised the continuance of Life and Happiness upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, and threatened Man with everlasting death upon his disobedience. Now this Law first, did not only bind us to obey God our Creator, and Rector, but Christ also as Man, for Christ considered as God Creator and Rector, he cannot be under a law given to his Creatures; but then as Man partaking of the same Nature with us, he must be under this law as binding him to obedience, I mean, as to the preceptive part. But than Secondly, This Law transgressed by us, doth only bind us to suffer punishment, not Christ; and the reason is because the Law doth not bind any to suffer the penalty it threatens, before it by them be violated and broken; now we have violated and broken the Law, and it binds us over immediately to suffer the punishment threatened, but not Christ, and that because Christ considered as Man was ever Innocent, and never in the least violated or broke the Law of Works, and therefore could not be bound by this Law to suffer the penalty, not for himself, it may be said, but yet for us as our Surety; I Answer, No, he was not bound for us by the Law of Works to suffer as our Surety, and that because the Law of Works reveals nothing of, nor makes any provision for a Surety.  
2. There is a Covenant or Law of Grace, and by this Christ was neither bound to Obedience, nor suffering; for the Covenant or Law of Grace, it commands Faith and Repentance, and threatens damnation to the unbelieving and impenitent: But Christ is not by this Law or Covenant to believe or repent: indeed he hath bound himself in the promissory part of this Covenant to give the saving blessings thereof to all believing and penitent Sinners; but he is not bound by the preceptive part to repent and believe, or by the threatening part to suffer in case he do not.  
3. There is the Law of Mediation, that which Divines call the Covenant of Redemption, in which he freely engaged to purchase our Redemption, and this is the Law by which Christ was bound to suffer for us, to satisfy, and make atonement, and this both by his Father's appointment, and his own free consent. John 10. 17, 18. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No Man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself, I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. It is plain from this Scripture that Christ was obliged by no Law, but his Father's command, and his own consent, and in what Law shall we find the Father's command to Christ to lay down his Life, and Christ's free consent thereunto, but in the Law of Mediation? As thus, such a Man hath committed a capital Crime; i. e. a Crime that deserves Death, another freely consents and engageth to suffer in his stead; now this Man that thus freely consents and engageth himself, no Law previous to his own consent and engagement doth bind him thus to suffer for the other, seeing he is Innocent as to the Crime, and so cannot be charged with the Crime the other is guilty of, and this was the case in Christ's suffering for us; so that from what hath been said, it is granted that Christ as our Surety hath suffered in our place and stead; but that this was according to the intention or direction of the Covenant of Works, this I deny. I will grant that if the Covenant of Works had not been broken, Christ had not been our Surety, nor suffered to satisfy Justice, and make our atonement; but then that eventually, Christ actually became our Surety, was from the purpose of an alwise, just, holy, and merciful God above and besides either the intention or direction of the Law of Works. Him hath God set forth to be a Propitiation for Sin. Rom. 3. 25.  
As it is said before, he became actually Surety by his own free offer to make satisfaction to the justice of God by his Death, for Man's breach of the Law of Works, and God he accepted the offer, and this not according to any thing intended of this nature in the Law of Works; but of his mere grace and good pleasure towards us, and yet with a design both to secure the glory of his own justice and holiness, and to declare the glory of his own Wisdom and Mercy, and to keep up the repute of his Law which Man had wilfully violated.  
These things are clear from Scripture.  
1. That God accepted of the offer of Christ's Mediatorship, or Suretyship of his mere good pleasure. Having predestinated us unto the Adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will.  
2. That God accepted of this offer with a design to advance the glory of his Justice. Rom. 3. 26. To declare, I say at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.  
3. That he might advance the glory of his Wisdom and Mercy. Ephes. 1. 6, 7, 8. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace. Wherein he hath abounded towards us in all wisdom and prudence.  
4. That he might keep up in the World the repute of his Holy Law, in that he would not dispense with the breach thereof without satisfaction. Isa. 42. 21. The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness sake, he will magnify the Law, and make it honourable.  
2. It is through Christ, in the second place by his meritorious and satisfactory righteousness, procuring the grant of a remedying Covenant or Law of Grace, a Covenant or Law of Grace suited to Man in his lapsed or fallen state; for whereas it was become naturally impossible for fallen Man to have Justification or right to Life by the Law of Innocent Nature. Christ he purchaseth a new Law, that should be a remedy to fallen Man, notwithstanding his violation of the first Law: So that now if Man do perform the conditions of the Covenant of Grace, his Sin shall be pardoned, and he shall have right to Life; so that it is Christ who hath purchased the new Covenant, and it is upon the account of Christ's Merits that God will mercifully accept the obedience which this Covenant requires (instead of that Innocency which the Law of perfect Works called for, I mean works without any Sin attending them, or works performed by an Innocent Creature) and justify, and give right to Pardon and Life thereupon. When I say that God upon the account of Christ's Merits will mercifully accept the obedience which the Covenant of Grace injoins instead of that Innocency the Law of sinless perfect Works called for; the meaning is not, as some are prone to imagine, that our Evangelical or Gospel Obedience will answer that law, or be accepted by that law, or that that law will justify us upon that Obedience, No, no, for it is only the obedience of Christ that answers that law, removes the Curse of it, and merits Pardon for our breach of it; but the meaning is, that whereas God might in justice after Man's wilful fall, have insisted upon the very terms of that law which was violated, he was pleased in his abundant free grace and rich mercy for the sake of Christ, to declare by the new Covenant, that now he would accept of the sincere Obedience of poor Sinners, and account them Subjects united to Christ, and as such having right through him to Pardon and Life, which is his justifying of them. Now because not only such as profess themselves Socinians; but also those that pretend to be Enemies unto them do deny the Covenant of Grace to be purchased by Christ, exclaiming against me at a great rate, and saying, O, he is wrong in the very foundation, he holds Christ hath merited the Covenant of Grace, when it is only the free gift of the Father. I judge it a fit place under this head a little more fully to correct the Socinian Spirit in these Men, who yet know not it is any such thing that they are in the least possessed with; and this by clear proof from Scripture, that Christ hath purchased this Covenant.  
That than which constitutes the Covenant of Grace betwixt God and Man is God's gracious promise on his part of the gift of saving benefits to Man, and Man's engagement on his part through the grace of God to perform all that which may give him right unto and interest in the promised benefits. Now if I prove from Scripture, that there is no saving benefit which God promiseth to give unto Man, nor yet any grace which is required of Man to give him right unto and interest in these benefits: but Christ hath purchased them, I hope I shall sufficiently have discharged my province in proving the Covenant of Grace to be purchased by Christ.  
1. In the first place let us consider the benefits that by God are promised, or offered in the Promise to Man, and as we go along prove that they are purchased by Christ.  
1. God promiseth Justification. Isa. 45. 25. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory. Christ hath purchased Justification, Rom. 5. 8. 9 But God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us: Much more than being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.  
2. God promiseth reconciliation and peace, Isa. 27. 5. Or let him take hold of my strength that he may make peace with me, and he shall make peace with me. Christ hath purchased this, Rom. 5. 10. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by life. Colos. 1. 21, 22. And you that were sometimes alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy, and unblameable, and unreprovable in his sight.  
3. God promiseth remission of Sin. Isa. 43. 25. I, even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. And this is purchased by Christ. Matth. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Ephes. 1. 7. In whom we have redemption through his blood, according to the riches of his grace.  
4. God promiseth Redemption, Psalm 34. 22. The Lord redeemeth the Soul of his servants, and none of them that trust in him, shall be desolate. Christ hath purchased this Redemption from Sin. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar People, zealous of good works. From Hell and wrath. 1 Thes. 1. 10. And to wait for his Son from Heaven, whom he raised from the dead even Jesus, who delivered us from the wrath to come. From the Curse and Condemnation of the violated Law. Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. From the power of the Devil. Heb. 2. 14. Forasmuch then as the Children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the Devil.  
5. God promiseth Adoption, 2 Corinth. 6. 17, 18. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord: and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my Sons and Daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. And this is by Christ merited. Galat. 4. 5. To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of Sons.  
6. God promiseth Eternal Life. John 3. 16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Christ hath purchased this. Ephes. 1. 14. Which is the earnest of our Inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession unto the praise of his glory. Rom. 5. 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord.  
This I have proved that the rich benefits promised by God, which are his part of the Covenant, are purchased by Christ.  
I will proceed to prove also that what Grace is required of Man to give him right to and interest in these benefits of the Covenant is purchased by Christ.  
1. We cannot have right to, nor interest in any of the above mentioned benefits without Repentance, for without Repentance we must perish. Luke 13. 3. I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Christ hath purchased this. Acts 5. 31. Him hath God exalted with his right hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And for certain Christ gives nothing but what he hath purchased, or the Spirit for this end to work it.  
2. We cannot have right to, nor interest in any of the above mentioned benefits without Faith, he that believes not, the wrath of God abideth on him. Now Christ hath purchased this. Philip. 1. 29. For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake.  
3. We cannot have right to, nor interest in any of the above mentioned benefits without sincere Obedience, which is virtually included in our first consent to be the Lord's. Heb. 5. 9 And being made perfect, he became the Author of eternal Salvation, unto all them that obey him. And this Christ hath purchased. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar People, zealous of good Works.  
This I have also proved, that what is required on our part Christ hath also purchased; and if Christ have purchased all that which constitutes the Covenant; i. e. God's gracious promises, and grace to enable us to perform the duties required to give us a right to and interest in the above mentioned benefits, then let the Reader judge, whether he be of the foundation that holds Christ hath purchased the Covenant, or he that denies it.  
It is through Christ furthermore, that Souls have right to Pardon and Life upon true Faith, as God upon the account of his Meritorious Righteousness, and all prevailing Intercession, communicates still further and further aids of Grace for Believers perseverance. As Faith and Repentance are required by the Gospel to our initial Justification or right to Christ, and the benefits of Pardon and Life through him, so perseverance in Grace is required to our continued and final Justification. He that endureth to the end the same shall be saved. And Christ hath merited persevering Grace. John 10. 10. The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have Life, and that they might have it more abundantly. Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27. Husbands, love your Wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. That he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing: but that it should be holy, and without blemish. Heb. 2. 19 For it became him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things in bringing many Sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their Salvation perfect through sufferings.  
From what hath been said we shall Observe, That none of Mankind now can be accounted righteous, and so have Justification by the Law that injoins sinless perfect Works, for if so, we must in the account of the Law be sinless and perfectly righteous: And if so, it must either be by having such a Righteousness of our own; but this cannot be, there being no mere Man that hath such a sinless perfect Righteousness of his own as this Law requires; or Secondly, It must be by having such a Righteousness of another's; but this cannot be, for there is no Righteousness of another that can answer the Law of Innocent Nature, but Christ's; and this Law neither doth nor can account us sinless and perfectly righteous with Christ's Righteousness; for if it should or could account us perfectly righteous, by accounting the Righteousness of Christ in itself to be ours; or accounting us perfectly to have obeyed and fulfilled it in Christ's Obedience: It must account us to be thus righteous, either absolutely, or upon performance of some condition by it required. If upon the performance of some condition, it must either be the condition it required of sinless Man, which is personal, perfect, and perpetual Obedience; and if we could perform this we should not need Christ's Righteousness at all; for there had been no necessity of Christ's Righteousness, if Man had continued to have performed a personal perfect Righteousness: or it must be upon the performance of the condition of a sincere Repentance and Faith: But the Law of Innocent Nature reveals not, and therefore cannot prescribe such a condition, upon the performance of which it will account us perfectly righteous through or by Christ's Righteousness; for if it did, 'tis evident there would have been no need of God's publishing the new Covenant, or of promulgating the Gospel. If it account us to be thus righteous, absolutely without any condition at all, than it either accounts all Mankind to be perfectly righteous by Christ's perfect Obedience; or only some part of Mankind: if it account all Mankind to be perfectly righteous through Christ's Righteousness, than all must have Justification, or a right to Life, and none of Mankind must perish, and if so, than we must have universal Salvation. If it account only some to be perfectly righteous with Christ's Righteousness, than it must consider them either as Elect, or non-elect; if it do not consider them as Elect, than the forementioned consequence is established. If it consider them as Elect, than the Law of Works must consider them as Sinners, and so make provision for the Salvation of some, and none for the Salvation of others, that which I do not know, any that will undertake to prove. But if it should be granted that the Law of Innocent Nature absolutely, without requiring any condition of them should account the Elect righteous upon Christ's perfect Obedience or fulfilling of it; than it must follow that Christ's sufferings are a mere nullity, and there is no need of them: for if upon Christ's active Obedience the Law do account all the Elect sinless and perfectly righteous (which it must do if it account them righteous personally with Christ's Righteousness) and justify them as such who have perfectly obeyed Christ's perfect Obedience, than it cannot require suffering too, seeing that it only calls for suffering in case it have not the actual Obedience it requires. And it must follow further that there is no need of a Covenant of Grace, nor Repentance and Faith commanded therein, if the Law of sinless Works do account us perfectly righteous in Christ's perfect obeying it for us. But none of these things can be, as is plain if Persons will lay aside prejudice and consider. And if so, that cannot be sound and true which some have affirmed, that Christ and we are one Legal Person, or that Christ and Believers are one Person in Law Sense, the Law accounting that what Christ did they did  
But it may be said, when Persons become true Believers than the Law of Works 〈◊〉 them righteous with the Righteousness of Christ, this is as much as to say, the Law of Works justifies upon Persons performing of the condition of the Gospel, and it knows nothing of, nor doth it prescribe any such condition, and so if it justify, it must justify upon terms unknown, and therefore unprescribed in itself, and thus it is made a sort of a blind justifying Instrument.   

SECT. IX. Faith described and explicated, in order to our Justification by it.  
HAving shown how it is through Jesus Christ that God doth assert and will maintain our right to Pardon and Life: I shall proceed to show what Faith is, which is the thing required to give us right. John 3. 16. Acts 13. 39 Acts 16. 31.  
An acute Author gives us this Description of it, 'tis a believing acceptance of Christ a Saviour, it is a short one, but yet a full one; for it implies First, Assent, Secondly, Consent, and Thirdly, our resolved following of Christ in his way, trusting and relying upon him whatever we meet withal.  
First, It implies Assent, to these following things.  
1. That by Nature we are all lost perishing Creatures, for how should a Man look after, or be concerned about Salvation by Christ, if he be not convinced of, and give his assent unto this, i. e. that in himself he is in a lost helpless condition. Luke 19 10.  
2. That Sin hath brought Mankind into this condition, Man was not in a perishing case, as he came forth of God's hands; but Sin hath made him miserable; a Subject liable to all the Miseries of this Life, and to the Pains of Hell for ever. Rom. 5. 12. 18. and 6. 23.  
3. That God made Man sinless and upright, Man came not out of God's hands a crooked, but a strait piece of Work: He had not only the Natural but Moral Perfections which he was capable of, God saw all that he had made, and it was good; i. e. had the Perfections which were suitable and agreeable unto its Nature. Eccles. 7. 29.  
4. That as God made Man a sinless upright Creature, and capable of Moral Government, so sinless and perfect Obedience from Man became due unto God.  
5. That God gave Man a Law as the Rule of his Obedience, and this Law did require of Man personal, perfect, and sinless constant Obedience, promising Life upon his Obedience, and threatening Death upon his Disobedience.  
6. That this Obedience the Law required was due unto God from Man, as his absolute Owner, rightful Governor, and great Benefactor: for whom should Man obey, but him who made him, hath the absolute dispose of him, the absolute Authority over him, and from whom he hath all his good.  
7. That we have by our Sin violated the righteous Law of an Holy God, alienated and estranged ourselves from him, cast off his Government, and made ourselves voluntarily Vassals and Slaves to Satan, and thus have cast off our best good and last end, and are turned to the Creature, and so have forsaken God the Fountain. Jer. 2. 13.  
8. That by this our Sin we have brought upon ourselves the doleful Curse and Condemnation which the Law threatened against the Transgressor's.  
9 That we cannot deliver or save ourselves from this cursed condemned state; seeing that 'tis impossible that he who hath once sinned should be accounted by the Law an Innocent Person, or one that never sinned; and so also it is impossible that finite Creatures who are Transgressor's, should ever pay a sufficient Ransom, or the full price of Redemption to offended Justice.  
10. That there is need of a Saviour or a Redeemer for such poor lost undone Creatures, one that may be an Innocent Person, and able to make full satisfaction to God for Man's offence.  
11. It implies an assent that there is a Saviour, and this Saviour is appointed by God, and that he is able to save, yea, mighty to save.  
12. That this Saviour is the only begotten Son of God given and sent by God for this purpose. John 3. 16.  
13. That God by the Gospel did reveal and promise this Saviour to our first Parents upon their Apostasy. Gen. 3. 15. And so also to us. 2 Tim. 1. 9 10.  
14. That this Gospel in which Christ a Saviour is revealed is true, the very truth of God. Coloss. 1. 5.  
15. That it was the mere love and mercy of God that moved him to give and send his Son to be a Saviour, no previous deserts in Man could be the motive. 1 John 4. 9, 10.  
16. That Christ our Saviour is true God, of the same Essence with the Father, equal in Power and Glory. Rom. 9 5.  
17. That Christ that he might be a fit Saviour though he was God yet became Man, not that he ceased to be God, but by becoming what he was not, God and Man in one Person for ever. It was fit he should be Man that he might obey, and God that his obedience might be meritorious: it was fit that he should be Man that he might suffer, and God that his sufferings might be satisfactory. Heb. 2. 14. 16. Philip. 2. 6, 7, 8. John 1. 14. Galat. 4. 4.  
18. That he was conceived by the Holy Ghost in the Womb of the Virgin Mary; and born of her, and that without Sin. Matt. 1. 20. Luke 2. 6, 7.  
19 That his Name was given him according to his Office, and the great work appointed for him by the Father; i. e. Jesus, because he should save his People from their Sins. Matt. 1. 21.  
20. That this Lord Jesus having lived upon Earth, in perfect constant Obedience without the least Sin, teaching and preaching the way of Salvation, working many Miracles for the testimony and confirmation of the Divinity of his Person, and the truth of his Doctrine and Office; he freely gave himself to be a Sacrifice for our Sins to pay our Ransom, and make our Atonement in suffering the shameful and painful Death of the Cross, and also to free us from the Curse of the Law. Heb. 4. 15. Heb. 7. 26. Heb. 2. 3, 4. Titus 2. 14. Heb. 9 26. Matt. 20. 28.  
21. That he expired, died, or gave up the Ghost upon the Cross. Luke 23. 46.  
22. That he was taken from the Cross and laid in the Grave. Luke 23. 53.  
23. That he risen again the third day; though he did really die, and was laid in the Grave, yet he saw no corruption, he could not be holden by the bonds of Death, but arose by his own Power. Luke 24. 46. Acts. 10. 40.  
24. That he about Forty days space after his Resurrection ascended triumphantly into Heaven, in the sight of many Witnesses. Luke 24. 50, 51. Acts 1. 3. 9, etc.  
25. That he is advanced Lord over all in Dignity, Honour, Power, and Glory with the Father. Acts 10. 36. Acts 2. 36.  
26. That he hath by the Gospel purchased a Covenant or Law of Grace, and appointed that those in and among the Adult shall be saved, who do unfeignedly repent, believe in him, and love him above all things, and persevere in the following of him in the ways of Holiness unto the death. Acts 2. 38. Ephes. 6. 24. Heb. 5. 9 Revel. 22. 14.  
27. It doth imply on the contrary, that such as do not sincerely repent, believe, and obey the Gospel, and persevere in the ways of Holiness, they shall lose Salvation, and have Damnation for their everlasting portion. Luke 13. 3. John 3. 18.  
28. That Christ hath appointed and set up a Gospel Ministry, and enjoined them to cry aloud, to give Sinners warning, to offer them terms of Peace, and beseech them to be reconciled.  
29. That though Christ be ascended and exalted in Heavenly Glory, yet he is appointed by the Father to be the judge both of the quick and dead, and will render to every one according to their Works. Acts 10. 42.  
30. That though he be now exalted on the right hand of the Majesty on high in Heaven, yet he will descend from thence with Angels and glorified Spirits, and will by his glorious and mighty Power raise all the bodies that now are, and shall be then found sleeping in the dust, in order to judgement and a final sentence. Acts 1. 11. 2 Thess. 1. 7. John 5. 28, 29.  
31. That all both good and bad, that ever have been, now are, or shall be in this World, shall be gathered before him; the good shall as Sheep be set upon his right hand, and the bad as Goats upon his left. Matt. 25. 31, 32, 33.  
32. That he will sentence those upon his right hand to everlasting Happiness, but those upon his left to eternal Punishment. Matt. 25. 34, to 41.  
33. That according to the sentence given by Christ the righteous and impartial Judge, so must execution be done both upon the good and bad; there shall be no appealing from his sentence, nor no repealing of it. Matt. 25. 46. Matt. 3. 12.  
Let Persons consider upon the matter, that there are none that assent to the truth of this aright, that Christ is a Saviour, but they do and must assent unto the truth of all these things which are above mentioned. And seeing that Christ a Saviour will save and do●h save by the Spirit proceeding both from the Father and the Son; it will be necessary to know what truths we must assent unto with relation to the Spirit.  
1. An assent, That he is true God of the same Essence with the Father and the Son, and that appears, seeing those who are baptised are to be baptised into the Name of the Holy Ghost, as well as into the Name of the Father and Son. Matt. 28. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all Nations, baptising them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He is expressly said to be one; i e. one God with the Father and the Son. 1 John 5. 7. For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Those that lie or act hypocritically they lie or deal hypocritically to God; and this God is the Holy Spirit as well as the Father and the Son. Acts 5. 3, 4. But Peter said, Ananias why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whilst it remained, was it not thine own? And after it was sold, was it not thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto Men, but unto God. We find Omnisciency and Omnipotency attributed unto him. Isaiah 40. 13, and so on, Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? etc. 1 Corinth. 2. 10. But God hath revealed them unto us by the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea the deep things of God. He is both the Author of Gifts and Grace, 1 Corinth. 12. 11. But all these worketh that one and the self same Spirit, dividing to every Man severally: as he will. We find the work of Creation ascribed unto him. Psalm 104. 30. Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth. Immensity or Infiniteness is attributed unto him, he is omnipresent. Psalm 139. 7. 8. Whither shall I go from the Spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into Heaven, thou art there: if I make my Bed in Hell, behold, thou art there.  
The Power of the Highest or Almighty God is ascribed unto him, Luke 1. 35. And the Angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. We find the fitting and furnishing of Christ for the Office of Mediator or Redeemer is attributed unto him, Isa. 61. 1, 2. The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek, he hath sent me to bind up the broken hearted to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound. To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all that mourn. The Miraculous work of casting out Devils is ascribed unto him. Matt. 12. 28. But if I cast out Devils by the Spirit of God, than the kingdom of God is come unto you. He may be sinned against unpardonably. Matt. 12. 32. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.  
2. An assent that this Spirit as to its personality proceedeth both from the Father and the Son: Hence we find him sometimes called the Spirit of the Father. Matt. 10. 20. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. Sometimes the Spirit of the Son. Galat. 4. 6. And because ye are Sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba, Father.  
3. An assent that he hath his mission, or is sent both from the Father and the Son. John 14. 16, 17. 26. John 15. 26.  
4. An assent that this Spirit was sent both from the Father and the Son for these ends and purposes. 1. To move and infallibly guide those who were Prophets and Apostles, that they might perfectly declare the Doctrine of Christ respecting our Salvation. 1 Peter 1. 10, 11, 12. 2. By many and plain Miracles and wonderful gifts this Holy Spirit might be the great witness of Christ, and of the certainty of his blessed and holy word. Heb. 2. 3, 4. 3. To take up the Hearts of all true Believers for his habitation, and operate powerfully and savingly in them. 2 Corinth. 6. 16. Philip. 2. 13.  
5. An assent that this Spirit doth unite such as by the Father are drawn to Christ as their head. Ephes. 4. 15. 1 Corinth. 6. 17. Into one Church, which is the body of Christ. 1 Corinth. 12. 12, 13. That so these being pardoned, and made the Children of God, they may be a peculiar People sanctified to Christ. Acts 10. 43. John 1. 12. Titus 2. 14. That they may mortify the Flesh with the Affections and Lusts, obtain Conquests over the World, and vanquish the Devil according to their Covenant in Baptism. Galat. 5. 24. 1 John 5● 4, 5. James 4. 7. That they might serve God with an Holy Heart in Righteousness of Conversation. Luke 1. 74, 75. That they may live in love unto, and communion with the People of God John 13. 34. Acts 2. 42. That they may live in hope of Christ's coming and eternal Life. 1 Thess. 1. 10. 2 Thess. 3. 5.  
The sum of these things may be found in the Worcestershire Agreement. Now I shall put the Question, Whether is not the belief of all these  Articles included in a Person's believing in Christ a Saviour, and if they be, whether can any one (I speak of the Adult) have Salvation by Christ who denies these, and refuse to give their assent unto them? If they cannot, how can they be justified without such an assent? Being thus, it may be said, you will have many assenting acts of Faith unto Justification, or in that Faith which justifies. I Answer, implicit I will grant, explicit I deny. As thus, Suppose I propound the  Articles to any in order to his assent, as I read these Articles, if he give credence, he implicitly gives his assent to each Article, as I go along: But then after that I have read them, I ask him whether he doth assent to the truth of the whole, if he say, yea, 'tis manifest his explicit assent is but one, or one explicit act, which we call assent.  
But besides assent, our consent is requisite to the constituting of true Faith, and this consists best in a cordial accepting this one only God to be our God, giving him the pre-eminence in our affections. Exod. 20. 2, 3. An accepting of him to be our chief or best good, that God who is essentially good, the fountain of all goodness. Hence he is the principal object of our love, desire, and delight. Psalm 73. 25. Whom have I in Heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth I desire besides thee. And besides it implies a free consent to be disposed of by him according to his good pleasure, and a being freely willing to be ruled and governed by him according to his Law and holy Commands.  
2. A consent to take Christ Jesus to be our only Propitiation, all prevailing Intercessor, and also as our head and Teacher; i. e. Christ in all his Offices.  
3. An accepting of the Holy Spirit to be our Sanctifier, to mortify Sin, to bring our hearts in love with holiness, to assist us in duty, and excite grace in the performance, to alienate our Hearts from this World, and fix them upon Heaven and heavenly things.  
4. A sincere consent to perform our Baptismal Vow or Covenant, renouncing the World, the Flesh and the Devil, resolving through God's grace for the future to be his obedient Children and faithful Servants, fight against all his and our spiritual Enemies. Those who are our Opposites, I would gladly know of them, or rather I desire them to know of themselves, whether any less than such a sincere consent as this above spoken of can bring or put them into a saving justified state, or give them (which is all one) a saving interest in Christ, and a right to Pardon and Life through him? If they say, less will, let it be made appear from Scripture; if not, then why do they make any opposition? upon this consent sincerely given follows practical trust; i. e. a well grounded confidence upon God in and through the Lord Jesus by the Holy Spirit, that God for the sake of Christ will be faithful to his promises, and make them good unto such who reduce their former consent into persevering practice, such who by patiented continuance in well doing seek for Glory, and Honour, and Immortality, Eternal Life. Rom. 2. 7. Though many times under dark and afflicting providences and dispensations. Thus Abraham against hope believed in hope, he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strong in Faith, giving glory to God: And being fully persuaded that what he had promised, he was able also to perform, upon our first assent and consent we have an initial right to Christ and Life: upon our practical trust we have this right continued, which practical trust doth include sincere Obedience, and when a Believer is incapacitated for the act and exercise, the principle or habit is accepted. The heart of Asa was perfect all his days. 2 Chron. 15. 17.  
This practical trust is our adherence to God in Christ by the blessed Spirit, in the ways of holiness notwithstanding opposition. Acts 11. 23. Who when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.  
Having showed what a Faith it is which is requisite both to our initial and continued Justification, or what Faith it is which is requisite both to our initial and and continued right to Christ, and to Pardon and Life purchased by him. Let us now consider what this Faith includes, as it gives the initial right, and so I consider it especially as consisting in consent, assent being previous.  
1. Repentance is included, for in our sincere consent to take God to be our God, Christ to be our Redeemer, which includes an accepting him in all his Offices, and the Holy Spirit to be our Sanctifier, there is implied a cordial confessing and forsaking of all Sin, and this with self loathing, self judging, enmity, and opposition in the Heart against it.  
2. Love to God and the ways of holiness is included; for it cannot be that ever any should sincerely consent to be the Lord's, and make choice of the ways of holiness to walk in, unless there be such a sight of their excellency and amiableness as draws their Love from Sin and the World, and fixeth it principally hereupon.  
3. This consent includes Obedience radically, for there can be no real consent to be Christ's, unless there be a full resolution to do and suffer whatsoever he calls us unto, this consent we speak of brings Christ and Souls into the Relation of Master and Servants; and there cannot be a real consent to be Christ's Servants, unless there be a willingness to do the work which he commands us, and a resolution through Grace to continue in it, so that it is manifest that Faith which justifies or gives right to Pardon and Life, it includes Repentance, Love to God, and radically new Obedience; and though it is like upon the matter, I may procure to myself the name of a Papist, I must not for that be affrighted from owning a truth that bears its own evidence before it: But by the way, I would have such Persons who are so ready to fix such names upon others as they judge may render them odious to consider, what our Divines mean when they say that where there is one Grace, there is every Grace; and tell me where there is the act and exercise of that Faith which unites to Christ, whether there can be this without the exercise of Repentance and Love inclusive? what hath been said may give sufficient light to know how to answer the Question, to such as desire to learn, and think not themselves wise enough already. Though seeing I am upon this, I shall take leave further to offer this to consideration, and let it be under correction, that where there is the exercise in truth of Grace, the exercise of that one Grace, (I speak of the sensible exercise) doth include the exercise of the most, if not the exercise of all Grace. As thus, Suppose we the exercise of true Repentance, there must be a real willingness in the Soul that sincerely reputes, to deliver over himself to be taught and ruled by Christ: and to trust to God's ability and faithfulness by virtue of his promise to Pardon, and save him through and for Christ's satisfaction and Merits, which is Faith. And where there is this Faith, such a Soul must hate Sin, and love God in Christ, and his grace and favour above the best of this World; and where there is such a love there must be self denial, the Soul must be free to let all go for its part in God and Christ, and the things above. And where there is this self denial, there must be an heart actually disposed patiently to bear and endure all the trials and troubles the Soul may meet with, and thus the affections must be heavenly and the Souls greatest hopes must be there. Though some may quarrel at this, as they are ready to do at all things which have not their sentiments to be their measure and Rule: yet I do think this much may be a great help unto a Soul under darkness and casting down, and so in the exercise of true humiliation, for if it can but clear up this, it may have ground to conclude the rest of the graces are included or are exercised implicitly. I look upon one grace drawn forth into exercise, to be as the Wheel in a Clock, which set upon motion, the rest move together with it.  
But to offer further light upon the matter, I am inclined to think that one grand occasion of Persons mistakes at this day about the great Article of Justification, is their looking at and insisting upon the Priestly Office of Christ, so as that they regard little, or very much overlook his Prophetic and Kingly Office, not that we exclude the Priestly Office: But let us see to it in our believing that we have such a Faith as accepts of whole Christ, Christ in all his Offices, and not such a Faith as pitcheth upon his Priestly Office only, for this is no other but a dividing of Christ; therefore whoever they are that do not look at whole Christ, and embrace him in all his Offices as the object of that Faith which justifies they are under a mistake. The Apostle counsels the distressed Jailor, when he seriously enquired what he might do to be saved to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, was not the Faith here spoken of such a Faith as gave right to and interest in Christ and Covenant benefits? And what as such did it only respect Christ as Priest? If so, than my consent to take Christ in part, or to take Christ as Priest will give me a right and interest in him as divided from my consent to take him as a Prophet and King, and will it so? no surely, for know that we can have no right to Christ nor benefit by him as a Priest, unless we consent to take him as Prophet to teach, and King to rule us, is evident from Scripture, Acts 3. 22, 23. For Moses truly said unto the Fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, of your Brethren like unto me, him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every Soul which will not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among the People. Luke 19 27. But those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.  
There are these few things which I would gladly have Persons understand, which if they do, and make a Christian use of them, they need not much to trouble themselves with disputes upon the matter, though they should by degrees endeavour to increase in knowledge.  
1. Christ hath merited all saving blessings.  
2. Persons so long as impenitent and unbelieving have no right to nor interest in Christ, or any of his purchased benefits. But  
3. So soon as God gives Souls the Grace to turn from Sin, and give their unfeigned consent. 1. To take Christ as the meriter of all saving good. 2. As the satisfier of offended Justice. And, 3. Become sincerely willing to be taught and ruled by him as Prophet and King.  
4. Resolve through his Grace to walk in all Holy Obedience before him.  
5. Depend upon his Mediator and intercession alone for the acceptation of all their services and duties, than they have a right unto him, and interest in all his benefits, and are most certainly in a justified state.  
Now whereas some Persons affirm that all our Righteousness is as filthy rags; If they mean by our Righteousness a mere external hypocritical Righteousness where there is neither the Truth nor exercise of Grace, I grant them this as filthy rags, 'tis an abomination to God: But if they mean by our Righteousness true Repentance, Faith, sincere Love, and Gospel Obedience, that this is as filthy rags, an abomination to God, this I deny, and the Scripture that is brought to prove the contrary, doth not intent it; i. e. Isa. 64. 6. but only an hypocritical Righteousness for the Prophet in the Verse foregoing saith, Thou meetest him that rejoiceth, and worketh righteousness, those that remember thee in thy ways. And if so then that Righteousness here spoken of, cannot be an abomination to God; for God will not meet, own, or grant such his gracious presence who work an abomination, neither will he account such to remember him in his ways. The Sacrifice of the wicked indeed is an abomination to the Lord; but the Prayer of the upright is his delight, And the Righteous Lord loves Righteousness, and his countenance beholds the upright. But now saith the Prophet implicitly confessing Sin in the person of the People, They are but few that are such as rejoice and work Righteousness, etc. for take us generally and we are so degenerate and hypocritical, that we are but as an unclean thing, and all our Righteousness are as filthy rags, and what is added, Verse 7th. is a further proof of this Exposition. And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee, which cannot certainly be meant of the sincere, or those spoken of at the 5th Verse. But if this Exposition will not give content, let Persons read the Assemblies Annotations, and Pool's English Annotations upon the place, and those that can may consult Pool's Critics in locum, and see wherein I and they differ. And there are such as are for having our sincere Christian Righteousness to be no better than filthy rags will find three of the Romish Church to be of their mind. Not that I think this to be any argument, suppose what they hold to be a truth, but I allege it because these Men profess themselves such Antipapists, as that they judge it a sufficient Argument (so far as I find by some of them) against what others hold, that is contradictory to them, if a Papist do but hold it, or seem so to do.  
But say they again, Did not Paul account his Christian Righteousness, the best of his grace dung? I Answer, no, if we may believe his own express words, for he saith Philip. 3. 8. that he counted all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord; and was his knowledge of Christ no part of his Christian Righteousness? or was it no Grace? or did it not include Faith? if so, then how could he account it dung? or how did he so? But it may be said, Suppose that a Person be sincere, and a true Believer, Doth not Sin attend the best of his Graces and Duties? I Answer, Yes, for certain. But than is Grace and sincere Obedience in itself or in its own nature Sin? Surely no. Persons would do well if they would distinguish betwixt Grace and Sin, I am sure God doth, and that both those that are in Heaven and Hell know; Sin, I grant, is dung and filth wherever it is, but so is not Grace, true Grace. Indeed I must say to such as are sincere Christians, you have cause and occasion to bewail and beg Pardon for the want of the free exercise of Grace; i. e. of Repentance, Faith, love to God, etc. in duty. But then do you, or ever did you mourn and grieve and sorrow because you have Grace? I trow not. And what is it which hinders the free exercise of Grace but Sin; this you are to bewail, and crave pardon for, and believe assuredly that your duties cannot be accepted without the Mediation and Intercession of Christ.  
Well, but it may be said further, our Repentance and Faith we account them only dung in point of Justification, I Answer, they are so I grant, if either you or I set them in Christ's place, or make them that which they neither are, nor can be; i. e. the merit of our Justification, or a meritorious Righteousness; but they are not so, as they are appointed by God in the Gospel to give right unto, and interest in Christ.  
For let me ask Persons whether they think that God doth ever accept any of the services and duties of his People? Must they not say yes, through Christ and his Mediation? And so say I, I do not expect the best of my duties should be accepted any other way. Well then, if God accept the services of his People, I ask again, whether God will accept of Sin or no? must it not be said no; if so, that God will accept of his People's duties, and yet neither can nor will accept of Sin, then how can their duties be Sin? But it may be said again, our best services are no better than Sin till they be offered up by Christ, I Answer, still I grant that Sin attends our best services, and so we need pardon in our best performances, and the Mediation of Christ for their acceptation: But now if our best services in themselves be no better than Sin, until Christ offer them up; then Christ doth either tender to God that which is no better than Sin in itself; or else he makes our Christian duties another thing than they were, and so offers them up to God: And if so, it is not the very service he tenders, but another thing; a thing of another nature: and if so, the consequence must be, that Christ doth not at all offer up a Believers service to God. This then is that which I believe upon the matter.  
1. That God for Christ's sake pardons the Sins that attend the sincere services of his People.  
2. So far as they are sincere he is well pleased with them, and accepts them for Christ's sake.  
3. Whoever they are who are not sensible of, and lament the Sins of their best duties: Look not unto, and rest not upon the Merit of Christ for Pardon: And do not rest alone upon Christ's Mediation and Intercession for their Acceptation, their duties cannot be pleasing to God. And I shall take leave here to tell such as make Conscience of the performance of Christian duties, if you have true Faith and the exercise of it in a duty, it will direct you to trust to, and rest in Christ alone and his Mediation for your acceptation. It is of the very nature of true Faith exercised in a duty to lead the Soul to rest upon and trust unto a blessed Mediator for its acceptance: and whoever they are who pretend to Faith, and yet do not make this use of Christ, I must tell such their Faith is not true; for I say, it is of the nature of true Faith not to lead Persons to rest in themselves, nor to rest in their duties; but to rest in a Mediator alone for the acceptation both of their Persons and duties, and therefore I conclude, that if Persons be such as have true Faith, and the exercise of Faith in a duty, it is not possible for them to rest in that duty, or in themselves as performers of it.   

SECT. X. Concerning resting in Duty, Pride, of Grace, and an unopperative Faith, with some sensible concluding Instructions thereupon.  
MUCH hath been said to caution Persons against resting in their Duties and Graces, and I am satisfied was well meant, and I do not deny but that Persons may rest, yea, and I am afraid too many do rest in their Duties, but that any Person doth rest in the performance of Duty, where Grace is in exercise, this I deny. For when a Person in the performance of Duty doth rest upon Christ and his Mediation for Acceptation; 'tis either one that hath Faith, and the exercise of it; or it is as he who is destitute of Faith and so of the exercise of it; If the former, manifest it is, that where there is true Faith in its exercise, that Soul cannot but rest upon Christ; if the latter, than the consequence must be supposing that a Person perform Duty, that is destitute of true Faith, and so without the exercise of it; he is a Person that rests upon Christ, and whose duties shall be accepted when yet the Scripture saith, that without Faith it is impossible to please God.  
Touching Persons trusting in their Graces, and making Saviour's of their Graces, I affirm in like manner, that where there is the truth and exercise of Grace, it is impossible for that Person to rest in his Grace, or make a Saviour of it, and that because (as before) it is of the very nature of Grace to lead thither from whence it came; i. e. to God in Christ as the Souls rest and Centre, whatsoever is from ourselves, leads us into ourselves; but whatsoever is from God, as a moral good, tends towards God. Well, but say some, though Grace be from God, and so be good; yet it no sooner passeth through us, but it is defile●. I wonder for my part what notion Men have of this Allusive term passing through, or when they say that grace passeth through us: but I shall let that pass, as a thing I understand not, neither I think they that use the Phrase. But if Grace be defiled so soon as we are the subjects of it, or so soon as it is given unto us or wrought in us, then how comes it by this defilement, it must either be from some change, or it remains what it was; if it be from some change that it is defiled, seeing that this defilement must be moral, than it must partake of the nature of Sin, and if so, it must cease to be Grace, and if it do, and become Sin, as it must if it partake of moral pollution, then in whom will mortifying and sanctifying Grace be found? If Grace remain what it was, and it was pure and good, as granted, as it had the Spirit as its Author, then how comes it to be defiled? I do not deny, but there is Sin, and much Sin, where Grace is, but than that this Sin pollutes Grace, so soon as it is given, and so it becomes morally defiled, and partakes of the nature of Sin, this I cannot reach, for I think that what is morally evil must be sin, and what is morally polluted, must either be sin or sinful; and to say, sinful Grace and Holiness sounds harsh.  
But (it may be said) doth not a true Christian exalt and set up his grace above Christ in a time of temptation to spiritual pride, because of his grace, if the temptation prevail? I Answer, in a time of temptation to pride, if the temptation prevail, a Person that is a Christian, doth exalt and set up himself; but he cannot be said to set up and exalt his grace above Christ hereby, nor indeed doth he exalt grace at all, because this exalting and high esteem of himself, is a depressing of his grace, and a putting a stop unto its exercise, whereby he should exalt Christ: so that grace cannot be the cause of this his pride, for it is against its nature; but the suppressing of grace, or a putting a stop to its exercise, by the prevalency of the contrary corruption.  
So then, you I say, a Man cannot be proud of his grace; I answer, he cannot be proud of his grace, that hath his grace in exercise, because a Person is never more humble, nor is God in Christ ever more exalted by him, than when grace in him is most exercised: for it is of the very nature of true grace to depress self, lay low the Creature, and exalt God and Christ, so that the more of grace and the exercise of grace, and the more of this.  
But may not a Christian be proud of the exercise of grace? I Answer, he may be lift up in himself, and proud of himself after the exercise of grace, not that this exercise is the cause hereof, it may be an accidental occasion, but than it is the abuse both of grace and the exercise of it. The truth is, Christians, if you would be secured from spiritual pride, be kept humble, labour to be much in the exercise of grace, fear not that the exercise of grace should lead you to rest either in it, or in yourself, for it is against the very nature of it, the more of the exercise of grace, the more doth the Soul take up its rest in God through Christ.  
It is very strange in some Men, O, say they, you must cast away all your graces and sincere duties, and account them as dung, and rest wholly upon Christ and his Righteousness, just as though there was such an inconsistency and opposition betwixt Christ and the graces of his Spirit, and Holy Obedience, as that Christ and his Righteousness could not be relied upon and trusted to for acceptation, except we laid by grace and sincere duty as useless here, when for my part it is a matter quite beyond my reach, to know how, or with what, or in what to rely upon Christ and his Righteousness for my acceptation without grace and the exercise of it in holy duties, for think I, if I rely upon Christ and his Righteousness, I must have some way in which, and something by which I must thus rely, or how can I? But it is like som● Men will have neither, if both grace and sincere duty must be accounted and cast away as dung here: O, but say they, you must beware of resting upon your grace, and sincere duties for your acceptation, and so of making a Christ of them; I Answer, for my part I do not fear this, if I have but the truth and exercise of grace, for God hath given grace, and draws forth grace into exercise for this very end, that Persons should rest upon and trust unto Christ's M diation for their acceptation; and sure I am, grace where it is in act, will act according to its nature, and this is to lead the Soul that hath it towards God in Christ, as its centre and rest, and therefore if some Persons will amuse themselves and others unnecessarily, I cannot help them: but I shall pray the Lord to measure my Faith, and quicken Grace, and grant me the free exercise of it in every duty, and then I know I shall be humble, advance Christ, and rest upon him as my only Mediator to obtain for me the grant of all saving good, both Grace and Glory. For in whose Hearts soever the Lord is pleased to suppress Pride, Hypocrisy, and Formality; and keep them humble, sincere, and lively in the practice of Piety; it is not possible but such should depend upon Christ both for pardon for the iniquities which attend their best duties, and also for their acceptation: for whose Hearts so ever are kept humble, sincere, and lively in grace, and so in obedience, such Persons cannot choose but see and know their own sinfulness, nothingness, spiritual emptiness, as considered morally in themselves; and so on the contrary admire and adore the grace of God in Christ Jesus by the Holy Spirit, for any thing of distinguishing grace and love towards their Souls, and is this some resting in themselves, and in their own graces and duties? The grace and love of God in Christ Jesus, certainly is the most highly advanced in Heaven, and what is the rea●on? but because their grace is perfected in the Spirits of just Men: hence therefore the nearer any Soul upon Earth comes towards this Heavenly perfection, by the growth and exercise of grace, the more humble that Soul will be, and the more God in Christ will be adored and glorified in and by that Soul. John 15. 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit: so shall ye be my disciples. So that while some Persons caution others against resting in their grace: I say, beware of Pride, Hypocrisy, and formality; and endeavour after the growth and exercise of grace, and then no danger, while grace is in its growth and exercise. I wish it be not the case of many Professors, that while they are pretending highly to advance the Lord Jesus, and to rest in him, and trust solely unto him, they do not content themselves much with formality, and take little care to see they have that grace in truth and the exercise of it by which the glory of Christ is exalted, and he rested in as the only Saviour and Mediator; for sure I am, how high soever their pretences may be without true grace and fruitfulness in it, they neither do nor can do that which they themselves pretend unto.  
What some Men have been doing, and what their thoughts are as to matters of this nature, I shall leave, only they seem strange to me; for after I have affirmed that such as have the exercise of true Faith and other graces, it is not possible while it is thus for them either to rest in Grace or Duty: they in opposition have asserted that such Doctrine is the high way to make formalists and hypocrites, but than you must know it was without proof, and it was like to be so; for sure I am that such as perform duties without true Faith, and the exercise of Grace, they have nothing wherewith to rest upon Christ or his Mediation, and so must content themselves with the work done, and these are and can be no other while it is thus but formalists and hypocrites. What it is to some Persons I know not, but to me it is a Paradox, that true grace and sincere obedience should lead off from Christ and God in him, and that Men should be in danger thereby, while it is prevalent, to degrade Christ and set up themselves: it is just as if a Man should say, such a Servant as is faithful, diligent in his Master's service, and very obedient, his Master is in danger so long as he is such to be rob of his due honour by him, while yet the Master accounts it a credit and honour unto him to have such a Servant, and loves him entirely, and entrusts him with those secrets that he will not intrust with the rest, though know the Servant doth but what he ought to do in all this. And thus the best and most faithful of God's Servants, after all they have done in God's service, must account themselves unprofitable to God, because they make no return of any thing unto him, but what they first have received from him through Christ by the Holy good Spirit, though observe where there is faithfulness they shall reap the profit, for God will for Christ reward his own work in them, and that which is done faithfully by them. He that comes to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of such as diligently seek him. Eliphaz. intimates, Job 22. 2. that though no Man can be profitable to God, yet a wise Man, one that is spiritually wise, saith Mr. Caryl, may be profitable to himself. And he hath this Observation upon the words, He that is truly Wise, Godly, and Holy shall find fruit and benefit by it, we car, saith he, never want fruit ourselves, while we are bringing forth fruit unto God, all obedience, i. e. which is sincere, is attended with a blessing. For my part with relation to what hath been said, I do not think that any thing is accounted by God morally unclean and filthy but Sin; and therefore must be yet to learn that sincere obedience to the commands of the Gospel is Sin: if it be said (as usual) it is so, as it is in us. I Answer, as it is in us so Sin attends it, I grant as we are sinful and unclean in ourselves, and this Sin must needs be filthy and abominable but then that obedience which is the obedience of Faith and Love considered in itself as abstracted from our Sin, that this, I say, is filthy and abominable, I dare not affirm, but indeed must deny: for the principle must needs be the work of the Spirit, and the performance must be by the Spirit's assistance, and as such than the obedience must be accepted of God. Now how that which is a work of the Spirit, and performed by the assistance of the Spirit, and offered up to God by Christ through his intercession can be filthy and abominable in itself, I shall leave under consideration, whether is it rational to think that Christ will offer up to God by his intercession that which is filthy? or suppose he should, whether will God accept it. But it will be said (as before) it is only filthy in point of Justification; I Answer, if it be not filthy in point of acceptation through Christ and for his sake, it cannot be filthy in point of Justification so far as it hath its use and office there, for will God accept that for the sake of Christ, which he will not so far as he accepts it, justify us upon? God accepts of a Soul's sincere obedience, which is the obedience of Faith through Christ, as it his Spirit's work, and a Conformity to the Gospel Law; now what is God's acceptation but his being pleased with the Soul and its service through Christ, which well pleasedness implies his judging that Soul to be one that hath right, (as it is a sincere obedient Soul still for Christ's merits) to the blessings promised unto such, and what is God's judging a Soul to have right but his justifying of that Soul? It is very odd to hear some Persons in their confessions casting away all that is in them, and all that is done by them in the special service of God though sincere as dung, and yet profess they will rest and depend upon Christ's Intercession for the acceptation of that which they called and accounted dung; as though Christ would offer up to God on their account by his intercession, or that God would accept that which is as dung, and so filthy and abominable in a moral sense. And then further these very Persons in the same duty will thank God for any ground of hope he hath given of the truth of a work of Grace in their Hearts, and the exercise of Grace in the Duty, and the hopes they have had of the Spirits assistance, and yet all this before in their confessions they cast away as dung. I do believe many have meant well in all this, and were for the main good Christians; but plain it is matters were not so well considered as they should have been here. Think of it, we have all Sin to bewail which attends us in our best services, and to crave pardon for through Christ; but then so far as our Hearts are sound and sincere, and we find the exercise of humiliation, Faith, and love to God in the performance of that service; we have ground to believe it shall be accepted of God in Christ, and therefore may depend upon his Mediation for this very thing, being encouraged by God's gracious promise, and if so, we neither may, nor aught to look upon such a service in itself to be dung, and so an abomination to God.  
Now the reason that some give for accounting our Gospel holiness dung is this; i. e. because of its infirmity and imperfection. This reason implies that all that Grace and Holiness which is not a perfect conformity to the Law of Innocency is as dung, and so abominable to God, and sure I am this looks odd on't; for is not this Grace and Holiness a work of God? and is not every work of God perfect in its kind? hath not a perfection of parts been all along granted? and is there not an Evangelical perfection consisting in sincerity, which hath been and is acknowledged by Divines? was it a strict legal perfection, or a perfection consisting in sincerity that David intended when he gave Solomon his Son the charge to serve God with a perfect heart? and so when it is said of the People they offered with a perfect heart. 1 Chron. 29. 9 Was that a strict legal perfection in Heart and Life that was so sweet to Hezekiah in the reflection, after he had received the sentence of Death in himself. Isa 38. 3. And said, Remember now, O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in truth, and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight: and Hezekiah wept sore. Mr. Caryl from that part of Job's description. This Man was perfect, saith, not that he had a legal perfection, such a perfection as the Papists now contend for, and assert to be possibly attainable, yea, actually attained by many in this Life: But, saith he, the perfection here spoken of is the perfection of sincerity, and he observes from the words after his explication. First, It is sincerity that especially commends us to God. Secondly, Saith he, sincere and sound hearted Persons are in God's esteem perfect Persons. It is not all that you can do, or all that you can say, or all that you can suffer, or all that you can lose that can make you perfect in the esteem of God without sincerity; add sincerity but to the least, and it gives you the denomination of perfect. Thus far this Reverend Author, which Doctrine some Men call Popish, so well are they acquainted what Popish Doctrine is.  
Some Men separate Faith and good Works, and speak of them so, as though there might be good Works without Faith. Now for my part, I know no good Works formally in a Theological sense, but such as are done in Faith, and I know nothing done in Faith that leads not to Christ and God in him, and therefore for Persons to speak of good Works as such separate from Faith, and to speak of Faith leading the Soul off from Christ, is manifestly vain. Some Men will not grant that Faith is a qualification of right to Christ, and his benefits, and ●et they say to justify is to make one legally just, or just in Law; so say I, and can a Man be legally just without a legal righteousness? and is not that which is a Righteousness a quality? how then can a Man be just legally and not qualitatively? Find me a Man that ever was legally just, and yet not personally just in the sense of that Law which accounted him just, and if personally just, then primarily inherently just, and if personally just, just in his nature. As I have said above, so I must here say again, let it be proved that Thomas is a Person without the nature of a Man, or that the nature doth not go to constitute the Person; when I speak of Faith as the qualifying matter in a Gospel sense, some Persons have inferred from hence, that this is all I intent in Justification, whereas there is the form (as I have said) i. e. God's imputation by his Law of Grace, his accounting such a Faith as accepts of Christ as our great Propitiation, Head, and Teacher, by this his Law for the sake of Christ's satisfaction and Merit, for Righteousness and forma dat esse. Hence their inference is a mere fallacy, à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter. Will the Gospel assert a Person's right to Christ and his benefits before conformity thereunto? and when through grace any Person yields Conformity, is it not a Gospel Righteousness? and is not a Gospel Righteousness jus quoad eam legem, a right in that Law to Christ, Pardon, and Life promised? and is jus ad rem, a right to a thing no qualification in a legal sense? if not, than the consequence must be, that a penitent Believer as such subjectively hath no more actual right to Christ and Life according to the Gospel promise then an impenitent Infidel; I speak not of a right by merit, but both by qualification unto him that hath merited, and unto Pardon and Life merited by him for us.  
Faith itself as it is the Soul's first consent to accept of Christ to be its Propitiation, Head, and Teacher is really Gospel Obedience; Rom. 16. 26. But now is made manifest, and by the Scriptures of the Prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations, for the obedience of faith, and that because it is the Soul's conformity to the Gospel command. 1 John 3. 23. And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ, love one another, as he gave us commandment. And Faith thus considered is that which unites to Christ, and the qualifying matter which first gives the right. John 1. 12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on his Name. And as Faith is the Soul's consent to accept of Christ, etc. this consent includes the Soul's free engagement sincerely to be subject to what Christ commands, so long as he continues it in the World, in a dependence upon his power and faithfulness. And this sincere obedience performed according to the Soul's first Covenant consent during its abode in this World, is that whereby its right to Christ, and saving blessings is continued. Revel. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the City. And this is agreeable to the mind of a Reverend and Judicious Divine, as he Illustrates it by a Marriage Covenant including constant fidelity. And this Faith with him is a condition as it relates to the Covenant, and a Righteousness in the sense of the Gospel as it is the performance of the condition. And when he speaks of Christ's Righteousness being the cause and matter of Justification, his declared sense is the meriting matter, not that we might merit, but have that by virtue of his merit, which the Gospel requires to give us right to Pardon and Life, and what is this but our sincere consent, which is Faith?  
Our Divines excluding good Works from the matter of Justification, spoke of good Works with relation to the Law of Innocency, (and indeed Evangelical Obedience will be no qualifying matter of right in the sense of that Law) and that they did so is plain, forasmuch as their argument is, because they are imperfect, perfect, therefore, (say they) it must be a perfect sinless Righteousness, even the Righteousness of Christ that must justify, because no other Righteousness can be adequate to the Law, and we say the same with them, that if we are justified by the Law of Innocency, no less than a perfect sinless Righteousness would avail us here; but we are not, (as hath been made appear) but by the Gospel: and though I affirm that Faith is our personal justifying Righteousness according to the Gospel Law, yet it doth not follow from hence, that Believers shall stand upon their points with God in judgement according to his strict Justice; no, they must say with David Psalm. 143. 2. And enter not into judgement with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no Man living be justified. But I say upon conformity to the Law of Grace, they have interest in Christ the Mediator, and a right to his Righteousness, upon which they do depend and trust for the satisfaction of God's offended Justice, and the answering the violated Law, for the procuring of their acceptation with God, and a grant of all saving promised good: so that as to process in judgement, my thoughts are that Believers shall not personally plead at all, but Christ as their blessed Advocate for them: But then this he will do for them as such who have been, and are found recti in curia Evangelica, right in the Gospel Law, which still I say is and shall be the Rule of Judgement, Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel, and so justified by this his fixed constitution. The ground I have is Matth. 25. from Verse 34 to 41. Whereas some that they may hold their ungrounded and unscriptural notions do confidently affirm that our Faith, Repentance, and sincere Obedience hath only the place of an Evidence; I do not deny the Obedience of Faith to be an Evidence, but then I must not confound but distinguish of its primary and secondary use and office, and the result of both, Christ saith, John 15. 14. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. Dare any Man say they were friends actually, before any subjection to Christ? if not, was not this their subjection a conformity to the Gospel so far as revealed? And is there any conformity to the Gospel without Obedience to its commands? And is there any Obedience to the commands of the Gospel in truth, which is not the obedience of faith? Those who will contradict, let them prove, and then take the cause. If they cannot, than they must give us leave, and if they will not, we must make bold to take it, it being allowed by one that is greater than they to distinguish of the Obedience of Faith, as it constitutes us friends through Christ's Mediation, continues us friends, and as it is an evidence resulting from both, where God is pleased to give the light.  
Say some, Job when accused by his friends for being an hypocrite, pleads his own Righteousness as much as any; But as to Justification thereby before God he speaks otherwise, Job 9 20, 21. If I justified myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me: if I say, I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse, Though I were perfect, yet would I not know my Soul: I would despise my life. Now will this, or the other really and in itself justify a Person from the charge of hypocrisy before Men, that will not so far justify him from the charge or accusation in God's account? when a Person is falsely accused of hypocrisy as Job, must not he so far as he hath a discovery of his sincerity, plead this to justify him against that accusation, and if he be sincere is he not so in God's account? and so clear of that predominant hypocrisy of which he is accused; and doth not God so far as he accounts a Person clear of a false accusation justify him? Let Persons who contradict prove if they can, That sincerity will only justify a Person from the charge or accusation of hypocrisy before Men, while yet the accusation stands in full force before God, and he accounts the Person who is in himself sincere to be a downright hypocrite. The meaning then of the above quoted Text in Job seems to be this; If I justify myself as one unjustly afflicted by God this very Justification of myself and charge uttered against God would be sufficient to condemn me; if I say I am in a strict sense legally perfect, and so have no Sin, for which God may correct me, this very boasting would prove me perverse and sinful: yea, though I were perfect, yet would I not know or look upon myself as such an one whom God might not deal withal as he pleased considered as absolute Lord and owner. Now to argue from this Text according to this clear Exposition that Faith is no qualifying matter of right to Christ, Pardon and Life, is no better than to argue à bacculo ad angulum, ut patet attendenti. From what I have affirmed above, i. e. That there is no danger of a Soul's resting in duties, where true Faith is in exercise, seeing the exercise of Faith will lead that Soul to rest in Christ and God in and through him for acceptation; it hath been inferred, that such as have throughly imbibed this opinion, are if unregenerate in the snare of Satan almost secure from conviction. And if this be so, than these Men who draw up such a conclusion from the Doctrine have this to prove, look where they will find a proof, that whoever holds that there is no danger of a Soul's resting in duty where true Faith is in exercise, etc. he is in the snare of the Devil if he be unregenerate, and like to be, for this Doctrine will keep him there. And if this Doctrine be it that will keep an unregenerate Person in the snare of the Devil, how can any one be out of his snare that holds it; for if it be the Devil's snare, he that holds it must needs be in it: If then a Person have been regenerate before, yet according to this assertion, if he imbibe this Doctrine, it brings him back into the snare of the Devil, so that he must fall from grace, falling from a regenerate state, and I for my part, by these Men sentenced to the black Pit, and in their account there is no hope for me; but by the grace of God in Jesus Christ, I do not dread their Sentence. This intus existens prohibens alienum is very much to be lamented at this day, seeing it opposeth manifest truth.  
I suppose the consequences that I have deduced from the common Doctrine of Justification are very offensive to some, and they call them absurd. But I say again, whosoever they be that holds Christ's Righteousness in itself to be their very personal formal justifying Righteousness, the inferences are natural from the Notion, and whereas they are called absurd, the contradiction betwixt the abovesaid Doctrine and the inferences must be shown, or else when Persons call them absurd they understand not what they say, Dans formam dat consequentia formam. And hath it not been generally affirmed, That the Righteousness of Christ considered as Mediator, is made the Believers by Imputation as really as if it had been wrought and performed by them: and it being the sole matter of their Justification, they are made formally righteous hereupon by God's Imputation? who knows not that hath read any thing almost, that the active and passive obedience of Christ by the most that have been accounted Orthodox hath been made the material, and God's Imputation the formal cause of our Justification. And yet some have made a challenge, saying, Where did any of our Orthodox Writers ever assert or intent that we were justified by the very formal, personal, numerical, intrinsic Righteousness of Christ? Whoever imagined that the Righteousness of Christ by Imputation is made ours according to its universal value, but according to our particular necessity? I Answer, Certainly tell I cannot, who these Persons mean by Orthodox Writers; but this I know, that many of those Holy Men of God whose works are extant, and who were very Orthodox in their Lives, and in the most of things in their judgement also, yet held as much in this point of Justification as what is in the challenge comes to Mary, saith Mr. Norton in his Orthodox Evangelist, under the Cross was more just imputatively than Christ, which was also true of every believer then living. If Adam's peace had been perfect in case of his fulfilling all Righteousness, than the Believer's Peace is perfect, who hath fulfilled all Righteousness in his surety; Page 324. In Justification, saith Mr. Tho. Vincent, we are not only acquitted from guilt, but accepted as perfectly righteous in God's sight through the Imputation of Christ's perfect righteousness. Supplement to the Morning Exercise. Page 716.  
Having spoken of Pardon, the other part of our Justification (saith Downham) is that whereby God imputeth unto every believer the righteousness of the Mediator Jesus Christ, as if it were properly their own, and performed by them, that being clothed therewith they may be perfectly righteous in God's sight, and so obtain right unto everlasting life and happiness. Christian Warfare. Lib. 2. Cap. 50. Pag. 271. But it is needless to take up time or fill up Paper in quoting Authors, Dr. Manton might have served for all, whom I account as moderate a Man as any that descent, yet hear what he saith upon Hebr. 11. 4. Being united to Christ, we are interested in all his actions, as if they were ours, for when we are one with him in the Spirit, we are considered by God to be one with him in Law; therefore by union we are said to put on Christ with all his personal merits and righteousness, upon this God looks upon us as righteous, and this by the donation and application of Christ's Righteousness, and this righteousness must be in justification, and is such a righteousness as satisfies God's justice, and the Law. Now upon the matter I ask, can God look upon us as righteous, and this by the donation and application of Christ's Righteousness, which is such a Righteousness as satisfies God's justice, and the Law; and put us on, upon union with Christ, with all his personal Merits and Righteousness, and yet we not have the very formal, personal, numerical, intrinsic Righteousness of Christ? What is not a satisfactory and meritorious Righteonsness the very essential, formal, and numerical Righteousness of Christ's Person as Mediator? And is not this affirmed to be imputed in itself in our Justification, and to be in itself our personal justifying Righteousness? If not, why am I and some others so much opposed for the denying of it, and holding that it is only imputed unto us in its fruit and effects? If they affirm it is imputed or accounted by God to be in itself our personal justifying Righteousness; then I ask, how can it be accounted ours in itself for our Justification, and not be one and the same essential, formal, and personal Righteousness of Christ as Mediator? can that be the Righteousness of Christ in itself, that is not one and the same essential formal Righteousness which is Christ? If so, than we may say idem non idem, the self same and not the self same, which is manifestly absured and contradictory.  
And whereas it is said further, whoever imagined that the Righteousness of Christ by Imputation is made ours according to its universal value? I Answer, he that says the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in itself, and not only in its blessed effects; how can it be itself, and want its full value? let any Man find me that can, a Righteousness of Christ as Mediator that is not satisfactory to infinite justice, and meritorious of all good, and is not here its full value? take away, as I have said above, it's satisfactory and meritorious property from Christ's Righteousness as Mediator, which is its value, and see then if that which remains can be the Righteousness of Christ. I am afraid if some men were left to act according to their own notions, it would be an odd sort of a Righteousness they would make at last to be their justifying Righteousness, for according to what they say it cannot be Christ's, and Faith it must not be, and what then must it be, it is well if they know themselves, for sure I am I do not. And what can a Man think of that which remains? which is, that the Righteousness of Christ is made ours by Imputation according to our particular necessities. But that in the opinion of these Persons God doth divide and parcel out Christ's Righteousness one part to this, and another part to that Believer; and that some have need of more, and some of less, of it: and is this God's manner of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness? According to these Men it is, but I say it is not; and for any to assert such a thing is grossly absurd. Indeed I had like to have said this is a notion but of yesterday coining, but I find the substance both of this latter, and the former part of that I have now spoken to by Mr. Burgess, in his Book called, Vindiciae Legis, Pag. 135.  
As for me, I say, I must either have interest in and a right unto the whole of Christ's Righteousness, or I am undone; for no less than the whole will satisfy God's justice for any Soul, or merit Pardon and Life for it: And when I plead with God for Pardon, Life, and Acceptation, I plead the whole, and not a part only of Christ's meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness; but then observe, I plead it as it is properly Christ's as Mediator, and so in itself incommunicable, though some Persons speak of its communication to us, which in its blessed fruits I grant, but in itself I deny. For the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in itself, and against the Imputation of Faith as it unites to Christ, the greatest Argument is Authority, what Orthodox Divines as they call them say; In Answer to which I shall say as the Divines did at the late Portsmouth Disputation, My Religion is in the Bible, I own myself a Protestant, and with such it is a fundamental or Principle, that the greatest and best of Men are fallible, and therefore our assent is not concluded by mere words of one or other name how great soever; we pay a very just deference to the Worthies these our Adversaries intent, but we cannot think ourselves obliged to believe every thing they have said: we must not turn Papists yet, and satisfy ourselves with a mere implicit Faith, a judgement of discretion, whether some will allow us or not, we must make bold to take; It is not very rational for Men to be angry, because we will not shut our own Eves, and see altogether with other men's. He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his Neighbour cometh and searcheth him.   
FINIS.   

A DEFENCE OF THE Foregoing Doctrine, AGAINST SOME Glowing Opposition, Among Neighbours, Ministers, And Others.  
Printed in the Year 1700.   

A DEFENCE OF THE Foregoing Doctrine, Against some glowing Opposition among Neighbours, Ministers, etc.  

PART I.  
HAVING for avoiding the offence of good Men drawn up a Confession of my Faith, and sent it abroad for the satisfaction of some that were overmuch concerned at my delivery of something which disgusted them in my preaching: A Friend of mine transcribed and sent the same Confession to one that goes under the Name of an Antimonian Preacher (what he hath that name for I know not) whom he knew, with others of his professed who Friends had been hot against me: This being received, he, whether with others I know not, took himself so far concerned as that some time after whether by his doing or not I cannot tell, there came forth in his Name a Manuscript consisting of 27 Articles of his Faith, and at the back of those 25 Interrogatives or Queries, all which were intended in opposition to me, though not by him sent directly and immediately to me, I thought sometimes it would not be worth the while to meddle with such matter; but finding my Name so frequently made use of by him, and the Doctrine I had preached and writ even scorned and derided, I thought it no less than duty for the good of others; i. e. for their better information in the truths of the Gospel, to take a little notice of, and animadvert a little upon some of the Articles of his Faith. In the first place,  
1. I believe, saith he, first, that the Justification and Salvation of poor sinners had its beginning and rise in God's eternal purpose of love and grace.  
Answer, I deny not God's eternal purpose of love and grace; but I am far from thinking that any were justified from eternity, if that be intended by him in this Article: and that there is no such thing, I have shown above. And though God had an eternal purpose of love and grace; yet know God purposed to justify and save none but by Jesus Christ. I do not believe that God did decree the justifying or saving of any sinner without Christ.  
2. I believe, saith he, that God in his eternal purpose and counsel secret to us, hath freely from the good pleasure of his will chosen a certain number of Persons to Salvation without respect to foreseen Faith, Repentance, or any other work whatsoever as a condition of the grace of Election.  
I grant that neither Faith, nor Repentance, nor any other work foreseen were the Impulsive or moving causes of God's choice of any; the Impeller being only God's free love and good pleasure: but then that God did choose to bring any to Salvation who live under the Gospel (I speak of the Adult) without Faith, Repentance, and sincere Obedience, this I deny.  
3. I believe, saith he, that in order to the manifesting and bringing forth of the eternal purpose of grace and love for the Salvation of the Elect, a Covenant of Grace was made, past, and agreed upon between God the Father and God the Son in the early morning of eternity, etc.  
I grant the Covenant of Redemption or Mediation had respect unto the Salvation of sinners, and so the making of it with Christ was of Grace to them; but it was not a Covenant of Grace and Mercy with him as Man's Mediator, who was by virtue of this Covenant to fulfil the Law and  God's Justice. God indeed deals with sinners in a way of Grace and Mercy for Christ's satisfaction and Merit, but he did not deal in a way of Mercy and Grace with his Son as our Mediator, but in a way of strict justice. Here observe, he confounds the Covenant of Redemption with the Covenant of Grace.  
4. Saith he, I believe that this Covenant is a free, immutable, and everlasting Covenant that stands fast in Christ with whom it was made, and in whom all the conditions of it are found.  
I grant (if he speak of the Covenant of Mediation and Redemption made betwixt the Father and the Son) it was freely made on the part of both confederates; i. e. the Father and the Son, and that Christ is the only performer of what was required on his part in this Covenant: But I do not think that Christ is bound unchangeably and everlastingly by this Covenant to be fulfilling the Law in a state of humiliation and suffering of death upon the Cross, etc. and therefore as to Christ's performing the conditions of this Covenant it was not immutable and everlasting, though as to the benefits and blessed fruits thereof, the enjoyment of which constitute everlasting happiness, it will be granted him it is so, we do not deny but affirm the Covenant of Mediation was betwixt the Father and the Son from before all time: But then that those Texts he allegeth, 2 Sam. 23. 5. Hebr. 13. 20. Ezek. 37. 26. Do speak of this Covenant of Mediation betwixt the Father and Christ, this cannot, nor must not be granted him, seeing they speak of a distinct Covenant from that; i. e. the Covenant of grace, betwixt God and his People, as is express; and if he should say this cannot be because of the term everlasting which is the Adjunct of this Covenant, and there could not be a Covenant made betwixt God and his People from everlasting distinct from that which was made with Christ, because they only have a being in time: I Answer, it was agreed upon from everlasting betwixt the Father and the Son, that for the satisfaction of Christ Sinners should have Pardon and Life, upon a practical Faith; i. e. a Faith (as I have before shown) inclusive both of Repentance and sincere Obedience, for all the chosen of God were given to Christ in his purpose from eternity to be brought in time to glory in this way, and upon these terms, and so in this respect the Covenant is everlasting, though the publication of it was but in time, and the actual conferring of the benefits; as the virtues of the Covenant of Redemption, and Christ's performance, his actual performance of the conditions of it were but in time, yet these did not hinder that Covenant from being everlasting.  
5. I believe, saith he, that as Christ was chosen and constituted the Covenant head of his People, and the Covenant made with him as the person undertaking, so the Elect were therein given to him by the Father to be redeemed, as his People, Children, Seed.  
That there is a number according to the Election of Grace, I grant, and that all the Elect were given by the Father to the Son in the Covenant of Mediation to be redeemed by him; not because as he intimates they were in his People, Children, and Seed● by mere Election, but that they might be so by Redemption, and the participation of the benefits thereof. Ephes. 1. 4, 5. According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy, and without blame before him in love. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will. Titus 2. 14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar People, zealous of good works. I deny not Election, but do not lay that stress upon it, as to think the chosen of God are thereby constituted his People and Children, as though Redemption by Christ and the work of the Spirit of grace upon Souls were not necessary. Christ is the head of the Covenant of grace made betwixt God and his People in and by him, as the Purchaser, Efficient, Author, and the great mean of conveyance of all good therein, I grant: but then that such a Covenant as this should be made with Christ, this I deny; for this Covenant is a Covenant of reconciliation, and it was not Christ, but poor miserable Sinners that needed peace with God. Whatsoever this Man thinks, I am certain according to the Scripture, that the Elect themselves before effectual vocation are enemies to God both in Heart and Life, (I speak of the Adult) 1 Colos. 21, 22. And you that were sometimes alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled, In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy, and unblameable, and unreprovable in his sight; and if so (as is manifest) they must be so wrought upon by the blessed Spirit to give their consent to be subject to God as his Children and Servants, before God after a special sort be reconciled to them as his Friends, and is there not implied in this their renouncing their former Masters, the World, the Flesh, and the Devil, and devoting themselves to God and his service sincerely, upon which for the sake of Christ, God becomes by promise their Sin pardoning God and reconciled Father, and is not here a Covenant in form struck betwixt God and them? of which Christ though he be the head in the sense mentioned above, yet he cannot be a party.  
6. I believe, saith he, the Covenant of grace was made with Christ the second Adam, and with all the Elect in him as his Children and Seed, As the Assemblies Catechism saith.  
It must be granted him, the Assembly saith the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in him with all the Elect as his Seed. But if it be as they say, then that which they call the Grace of God manifested in the second Covenant in their Answer to the following Question, must be given to Christ, for with whom a Covenant is made, of what nature soever the Covenant be, to him must be given that which is promised in that Covenant upon his performance of the conditions: so that if the Covenant of Grace be made with Christ; then God must provide and offer to him as a Sinner a Mediator, for this is one part of the Grace of the second Covenant, and Christ must be obliged to perform the condition of this Covenant which the Assembly say is Faith to interest him in this Mediator, and this Covenant must promise and give the Holy Spirit to Christ as the Elect to work in him that Faith with all other saving Graces, and to enable him unto all Holy Obedience, as the evidence of the truth of his Faith, and thankfulness to God, and as the way which he hath appointed him to Salvation. But seeing the Assembly do apply expressly this Grace of the second Covenant to Sinners of mankind, the Covenant of Grace must upon a practical Faith he made with them and not with Christ, unless this Man will say, and prove this Reverend Assembly do contradict themselves. And if so, it is a wonder he should make what they say in this particular an Article of his Faith. I would have this considered by the way, i. e. did not Christ freely engage himself to be a Mediator, and so oblige himself to fulfil the Law of Innocency violated by Man, make himself a Sacrifice for Sin to satisfy God's Justice, and so merit Pardon and Life; now was any of mankind in this same Covenant, and bound under the same obligation with him; If any say yea, than they must be under obligation as well as Christ to do and suffer, to satisfy and merit Christ, if not, then how could Christ and any of mankind with him be in the same Covenant? for to be in the same Covenant, must needs be to be under the same obligation. If it be said Christ bound himself freely to do and suffer all this for us; we deny it not, but what is this to prove, That Christ and we were in the same Covenant, and so bound in the same bond? Let it be proved, that ever Christ was under a Covenant of Grace, and that he was dealt with in a way of Mercy, and not in a way of pure Justice; and will any say that God's dispensations towards his People are in a way of justice, and not in a way of Mercy?  
7. I believe, saith he, that as Adam was a public Person, and common head in whom his posterity were to stand or fall, Rom. 5. so Christ as a common head and public person is the head and Representative of all the Elect in whom their state and standing is sure and safe, so that they shall never fall nor finally perish.  
I grant all that are given by the Father to the Son shall come, and that being brought over effectually they shall have persevering grace. John 10. 27, 28, 29. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, they follow me. And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me, is greater than all; and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. And that this their standing is secured by the merits and intercession of Christ, Luke 22. 31, 32. And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sister you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. And that Christ is the Head of his Church, which is called his Body, I deny not: But then that Christ was a public Person in such a sense, as that the Law of Innocency accounted what Christ did, the Elect did, and what he suffered they suffered, I deny; and have showed the vanity of this above: And though this Man speak not out plainly, yet this seems to be at the bottom, and the comparison betwixt Christ and Adam will afford him no such thing. I grant that as all mankind were seminally in Adam as the common root, so in that respect they fell in him, as the prime progagator of a guilty and corrupt nature to his posterity, to all that were to proceed from him by natural Generation, yet that if Adam had stood, and had propagated an Holy Seed; that this Seed thus propagated had been secured in their standing by their Parent standing, and had not any of them fallen, this I want a word from God for its warrant, I dare not make it an Article of my Creed: Let him find me a promise in the Bible that runs thus, or to this purpose either expressly or implicitly; Adam, if thou keep thy standing, than an Holy Seed proceeding from thee, by virtue of thy standing shall most certainly stand too, and then I will be of the same Faith with him, but until then he must excuse my dissent, for this is certain to me, that though Adam had stood and propagated an Holy Seed, yet that Seed would have been under the same Law with their Parent, and must have performed in their own Persons the same obedience that Law required of their Parent, or else the Law would have condemned them, notwithstanding the obedience of their Parent; see then if his obedience would have secured their standing without their own personal obedience; and that all mankind should have performed a personal constant obedience to the Law of Innocency, suppose Adam in his own person had never fallen, this we want proof for. And so that Christ hath secured by what he hath done, and suffered the state and standing of all the Elect, without obedience to the Law of Grace, (I speak of the Adult) i. e. though they live and die impenitent, disobedient Infidels, I deny: for all such shall most certainly be brought to Heaven in the way of Repentance, Faith, and sincere Obedience, and the reason is because the Lord Jesus Christ hath merited this for them; but let it be proved by them that can, that Adam besides his own Justification had he continued Obedient, would over and above have merited assuredly grace and strength for the infallible standing of all his posterity, which this Man's notion, and the notion of others with him upon this point implies. Men talk against, and decry works of Superarogation holden by the Papists, and see not how near they come to this themselves in attributing so much to a mere Man, and to his Righteousness.  
8. I believe, saith be, that the Lord Jesus Christ the second Person in the blessed Trinity did when the fullness of time was come according to God's purpose and promise (for the fulfilling of the conditions, and bringing forth of the Grace and Life of this Covenant) take upon himself the Nature, Flesh, and Humanity of the Elect, and become God-man, having both Natures, in the unity of his Person, the Godhead and Manhood.  
I grant that Christ the Son of God did in time take upon him Man's Nature, and united that Nature into one and the same Person with his Divine Nature: but he would have done well if he had shown first, the difference betwixt Christ's Nature, Flesh, and Humanity, considered as Man, and secondly, how the Nature, Flesh, and Humanity of the Elect differ from these in other Men.  
9 I believe, saith he, according to the Scriptures that as Christ the Covenant head of the Elect was made under the Law, so he was thus made and constituted in the room and stead of his Elect.  
There is nothing in this Article of his Creed, but what I have spoken to before.  
10. I believe, saith he, according to Scripture (he should have said so far as I understand it) that the Father by way of Imputation laid all the iniquity and sin of the Elect upon Christ the Son of his love, that he was made sin in a Curse for them, and that he bore their sin in his own Body upon the Tree.  
My reply is, that Christ who suffered for us was an Holy, Innocent Person, Holy, Harmless, Undefiled, separate from Sinners; He knew no Sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. The Sacrifices under the Law they were to be without blemish, and without spot, and as such were types of the sinless purity of Christ the great Sacrifice. He by the eternal Spirit offered up himself without spot to God. The Apostle Peter saith, the just suffered for the unjust, and we are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish, and without spot. Therefore Christ as our Mediator did not take our Sin upon him, so as to be accounted by his Father (as some say) guilty of our faults and offences; nor did God the Father account and reckon him as such, indeed by his free and voluntary undertaking to satisfy offended justice for us, he obliged himself to suffer for our Sins; but he never so took our Sins upon him, as to be accounted and esteemed by God one that was wicked, or a Sinner; for if God his Father had thus accounted him, as such he must have hated him, but did God hate Christ, either in his own Person, or as our Surety? Surely no. The contrary is plain; this is my beloved Son, and we are said to be accepted in the beloved. He was the Holy and Just one in his sufferings, yea, as our Mediator, for he suffered as such.  
Whereas then it is said, Isaiah 53. that God laid upon him the iniquities of us all, and by the Apostle Peter, that he bore our Sins in his own body upon the tree, we are to understand by sin and iniquity, punishment; for Christ's satisfactory sufferings were a punishment, tho' not inflicted upon him, considered as a Sinner, or transgressor of any Law, but voluntarily undertaken, and suffered by him in our place and stead for the making our atonement. A punishment Christ's sufferings were, but yet not with relation to any Sin in or upon himself, as our Mediator: but with relation to our Sins, which were the remote occasion and procuring cause of his suffering, though not as God did account them to be his, but as he voluntarily suffered for them, which would not have been, had we never sinned. Christ was not immediately obliged by or upon our sinning to suffer whether he would or no, as a surety in the same bond is immediately obliged in Law to discharge the debt whether he be willing or no in case of the failure of the principal Debtor. No, for it so, his undertaking to suffer would not have been in its nature voluntary and free, which undoubtedly it was. By this little, Readers, you may understand in what sense Christ's sufferings were a punishment, when therefore you read of our Iniquities and Sins being laid upon Christ, you are to understand that punishment which he suffered for us in the sense above. It is like some Men at this day do esteem Christ to have been stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted, as he was reputed by God to be the greatest Sinner, but God tells such that he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed Isaiah 53. 3, 4, 5. Now whereas it is said according to our Translation in Isa. 53. 6. The Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all, we shall find the like in very many places of Scripture translated punishment. To instance in some. Levit. 26. 41. If then their uncircumcised Hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity ●●NR●● the very same word with that in Isaiah, translated iniquity is translated punishment, only the affix is added. In 1 Sam. 28. 10. Saul speaking to the Witch of Endor, assures her that no punishment should happen unto her for that thing, useth the very same word ●●NR●● which we have in Isaiah, translated iniquity. But it may be said, what will you say to that Isa. 53. 10. When thou shalt make his Soul an offering for Sin? The word translated an offering for Sin is ●●NR●● guilt, and so some read the words when thou shalt make his Soul guilt, or guilty, and doth not this clearly hold forth that Christ had our Sins translated upon him, and was really reputed the Sinner, the guilty Person instead of the Elect? I Answer no, for it is manifest the trespass offering was denominated or called ●●NR●● guilt, not because it was guilty, or reputed so to be by God, but because by its Blood as a typical Sacrifice, it was to expiate and make atonement for the Sin and guilt of the Person for whom it was to be a Sacrifice, as many things both in our common acceptation, and in the Holy Scriptures receive their denomination from their end and use. And further the Learned tells us when this word ●●NR●● is applied to Christ, and to the offerings for trespass as types of him, it signifies an expiatory Sacrifice, a Piaculum, a Sacrifice to atone for heinous crimes. These words in Isaiah, when thou shalt make his Soul an offering for Sin, Musculus reads thus, Si posuerit, vel posita fuerit anima ejus ●●NR●●, sacrificium pro peccato; i. e. if he shall lay down his Soul, or if his Soul be laid down a Sacrifice for Sin: And in his application of the Text, he further saith, Utitur Propheta voce legali ●●NR●● quae in Levitico, cap. 5. pro oblatione sumitur, quae offerenda erat pro delicto. The Prophet useth this Law term ●●NR●● which in Levit. 5. is taken for an oblation, which was to be offered for a fault or trespass. And he goes on, cum ergo●hic dicit ubi posuerit se anima ejus ●●NR●● nihil aliud intelligit, quam sacrificium pro peccato; fecit hoc Christus in cruse, in quâ semet ipsum Deo Patri pro peccatis nostris sacrificicium expiatorium obtulit. When therefore he saith in this place, when his Soul shall make herself ●●NR●● he intends no other, but a Sacrifice for Sin, and this Christ performed on the Cross, upon which he offered up himself an expiatory Sacrifice to God the Father for our Sins. Another thus upon the words, cum subjecerit seipsum paenis, when he shall subject himself to punishments or sufferings. And Buxtorf himself a Person familiarly acquainted both with the Rites and Dialect of the Jews reads this word ●●NR●● oblatio pro reatu, an offering for guilt, or for the guilty.  
But it is said, Verse 12th he bore the sins of many, and the word in the Original translated Sin is, ●●NR●● and where do you find that this is translated punishment?  
I Answer. In Zechar. 14. 19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, the word in the Hebrew for punishment is ●●NR●●. And let it be observed, this very word translated punishment here is the very same in form with that which is translated Sin-offering, denoting that it was so called because it suffered and was offered up for, and instead of the Sinner to atone for him. And thus and upon this account did Christ the great Sacrifice suffer, and was offered up, of whom all the Legal Sacrifices were types.  
But it may further be said, was not Aaron the High Priest a type of Christ our great High Priest?  
I Answer, Yes. If so then, it is said that Aaron as a type of Christ was to bear the iniquity of the holy things of the Children of Israel; which imports that Christ was to have the Sins of all the Elect charged upon him, and be accounted by God the Sinner.  
I Answer, It is a manifest mistake in this, sc. that the Persons of Believers are accounted by God clean, and their services clean and holy, by their having the Sins of those services and duties laid and charged by God upon Christ, and reputed his. But it is manifest that the Persons of Believers and their duties are accepted by God, and the Sins that attend them and their duties pardoned upon the account of Christ's Sacrifice, his holy Merits, and spotless Mediation and Intercession. If Christ take away the filthy garments of his People, so as I have shown, when they approach the presence of God, and rebuke Satan for them, I dare not say, let them that will, that either God or he puts them upon himself. And it is to be observed, the word ●●NR●● translated to bear, Exod. 28. 38. hath various acceptations in Scripture, and among the rest it signifies, deportavit, he hath born away or exiled, and not only so, but condonavit, he hath pardoned, Numb. 14. 19 Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this People according unto the greatness of thy Mercy, and as thou hast forgiven this People from Egypt, even until now. The word in the Hebrew translated thou hast forgiven, is ●●NR●● the same as to the root we have in the Text before quoted; so that the intent of the Holy Spirit therein comes to this; that the Lord Jesus Christ, our great High Priest, and so our Intercessor, by the sweet Incense of his Mediation obtains Pardon for all the Sins and iniquities which attended the Holy things of his People; so that all their iniquities are hereby born away, and as it were exiled, and their spiritual performances made acceptable to God. But say some further, the word translated Sin● offering we find to be, ●●NR●● which signifies the Sin.  
I grant this word in Scripture is translated Sin, where it can admit of no other acceptation: But then when it is applied to that which was to be Sacrifice for Sin; if these our Adversaries must needs have it read in the abstract in this acceptation Sin: I would have them to consider, it may be more fitly translated expiation than Sin; and the reason for this is, because as Buxtorfius observes, the Verb from whence this Noun comes, in the same Conjugation Pihel signifies mundare, purgare à peccato, expiare, i. e. to cleanse, purge from Sin, and expiate, or make expiation. And so we find the word used, Levit. 14. 52. And he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird, &c The word for he shall cleanse is ●●NR●●, which I hope none that understand themselves will read, he shall Sin the House with the Blood of the Bird. And we find the same word translated to bear loss, Gen. 31. 39 That which was torn of beasts, I brought not unto thee, I bear the loss of it ●●NR●●, which Buxt orfius renders thus, Ego expiabam illud, id est, luebam pro illo. I did expiate that, i. e. I suffered for it, I paid for it, or made satisfaction. Now I would gladly know of them we have to deal with, how did Jacob make expiation or satisfaction, what by taking upon him the form of the Beast that tore it, or by sustaining the Person of the Thief that stole it? or was this at all requisite? would this have given any satisfaction to Laban, let Men consider. We have indeed torn as it were the Law of God by our disobedience, and offended the justice of God, now our Lord Jesus Christ did not expiate or make satisfaction in our stead by sustaining our Persons as Rebellious and disobedient, and as an offender of justice; but as Jacob suffering for us, and making full recompense. These observations have been occasioned to be taken by me on another account, but do well serve my turn here.  
Touching that Text by the Man I have to deal with alleged; i. e. 2 Corinth. 5. I have above spoken somewhat unto it.  
This Assertion that Christ took our Sins upon him is grounded upon a false supposition, which is, that Christ did not only take our nature upon him, but also our legal Person; i. e. our Persons in a Law sense. Now if Christ was the same Person in the sense of the Law with Sinners: then there could be no such thing as hath commonly been affirmed; i. e. Christ's active perfect obedience to the Law, for the Law of Innocency accounts us all as transgressors, and if it account Christ also a transgressor, which it must do, if he be the same Person with us in Law sense, where then shall we find his active perfect obedience thereunto? He that is looked upon to be of the same Person legally with him that breaks the Law cannot be looked upon as a perfect obeyer and fulfiller of the Law; what can be more plain?  
Touching the passive obedience of Christ, i. e. his sufferings, if Christ be accounted the same Person with Sinners in the sense of the Law, than his sufferings could not be a satisfaction, and if not, than not accepted by God for that purpose. And the reason is, if they had been the sufferings of a Person accounted by God as our Mediator a Sinner, they would have been the sufferings of a Sinner, for God judgeth always according to truth, for the Law doth and ever did since the fall account us Sinners, and if Christ be the same Person with us in the sense of the Law, then by the Law he must be looked upon as a Sinner, and if as a Sinner, than his sufferings must be accounted by God the sufferings of one that was a Sinner, and if so, how could they be a full satisfaction to Justice? But that Christ's sufferings were not the sufferings of one accounted by God a Sinner, 'tis plain from Ephess. 5. 2. And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour. And Hebr. 9 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works, to serve the living God.  
But suppose I should grant these Men what they would have; i. e. That the Lord Jesus Christ did perfectly obey, suffer, and satisfy in our legal Person, which I have proved could not be; I hope they will give me leave to show them what will follow upon it, and after this I shall leave them to determine whether this notion can be right or no, if they will but follow the conduct of Scripture. If therefore the Lord Jesus Christ did perfectly obey, suffer, and satisfy in our legal Person, that is, the Law accounting him the same Person with us; than it must follow that even the Elect themselves in the sense of the Law, did perfectly obey, suffer, and satisfy. And if they (Christ obeying and suffering in the sense of the Law) did obey, suffer, and satisfy in him in their own Persons, than these things must follow according to the Law.  
1. It must discharge them from all Sin, as it accounts them perfect fulfillers of it in their legal Person.  
2. It must discharge them from all obligation to punishment, as it accounts them to have suffered and satisfied in their legal Person.  
3. In the sense of the Law of Innocency (according to these Men) it must be injustice in God to charge any Elect Soul either before or after conversion with Sin, and he cannot now afflict them for Sin, but must be bound in the sense of these Persons to give Eternal Life to the Elect for perfect legal obedience performed in the account of the Law in their own Persons, as Christ and they (say these Men) are one legal Person.  
But it may be said, was not Christ our Surety? Yes. Did he not undertake as our Surety to satisfy for our Sins? Yes. And was not Sin debt? No. It was that which brought us under the obligation of suffering, but it was not our debt: that is a Man's debt which he is under obligation to pay, but were either we or Christ bound to pay Sin? I trow not.  
Doth not Christ cry out upon the Cross, because of the Father's forsaking him? I Answer, though he did, this was no total withdrawment of Divine favour and love; for God loved Christ as our Mediator while upon the Cross, but a withdrawment of his sensible comforting presence, and as a Reverend Divine saith, letting ●ut upon his Soul a deep afflicting sense of his displeasure against Man for Sin, which was his penalty as he was our Surety, and suffered in our stead a Sacrifice for Sin.  
But again say they, could Christ be afflicted in his Soul for the Sin of Man, if it was not accounted his own, and so laid upon him? I Answer, can we think that Men can be ignorant this might very well be in this case, and was so? when many of the Servants of God were greatly afflicted for the Sins and Miseries of others, as David and Jeremiah, and those that were mourners in Jerusalem, though they were not as Christ, to suffer in their stead for them.  
If they say, they do not think that God accounted his Son in himself to be a Sinner, but as he was our Surety. I Answer, If God did account Christ as our Surety, a Sinner, and so guilty, pray! what did he account him guilty of as our Surety? there are these things in Sin, the Act, the Pollution, and the Punshment. If then God the Father did account Christ as our Surety guilty of the Act, than he must account him the actual Sinner. If of the Pollution, than one that was morally impure in his Nature. If of the Punishment, so far as it includes his suffering to satisfy for our Sins, and make our atonement from his own free and voluntary obligation, this I grant. For if this were so that God the Father did account our Lord Jesus Christ considered in relation to us as Mediator to have been guilty of the Sins of all the Elect; then as such (as I have said) he must have been odious to God, and if so, how could those acts respecting our Redemption and Reconciliation performed by him as our Surety or Mediator have been of a sweet smelling savour to God? It would be as much as to say, God the Father loved superlatively his Son in himself: but abhorred him considered as Man's surety and Mediator; and if so, those acts which were of the greatest moment, performed by him in this relation to us, such as giving himself to be a Sacrifice, must have been odious to God; and if so, where must we state our hopes of Salvation? It is certainly a vain and ungrounded distinction to say that God accepted of the act of Obedience as they were acts of the Person without Sin, but condemned him as standing in the relation of our Mediator as a Sinner; ●eeing that whatever acts are relative acts, those also are the acts of the Person standing in that relation, for actiones sunt suppositorum. And besides the very typical Sacrifices (which the Adversaries allow) are a clear evidence of this; i. e. that Christ the great Sacrifice, and our Sacrifice to be offered for expiation and making atonement must not be so much (under that notion) as reputed a Sinner, much less the greatest Sinner; for these were to be without blemish and without spot, (as hath been said) and as such offered up unto God. Surely they will not say here, they were to be so considered in a Physical, but not in a Legal sense; for God did repute them so in a Legal sense, seeing they were appointed by the Law for the People's typical expiation, we find Levit. 6. 25. the Sin-offering by God is called most Holy; or as the words in the Original are, Holiness of Holiness ●●NR●● and the LXX ●●NR●●; now how dare any Man contradict the word, and say, these were by God accounted legally unclean, what reputed by God Holiness of Holiness, legally most holy; and yet also uncleanness of uncleanness, legally most unclean? Let them reconcile this that can. And if so be those typical Sacrifices were accounted by the Lord legally most Holy; then undoubtedly the Antitype the great Sacrifice for expiation; i. e. our blessed Lord Jesus, must be so accounted in the offering up of himself. As Christ's Righteousness (say some) is imputed to us, so our Sins are imputed to Christ. They that affirm this, some of them say, that it is not only passive, but the habitual and active Righteousness of Christ which is imputed. Pol. Syntagma. p. 457. If therefore our Sins be imputed to Christ, as Christ's Righteousness in his sense is imputed to us, then from this Doctrine it must follow, that our habitual and actual Sins must be imputed to Christ; i. e. both the corruption of our nature, and all our actual transgressions, seeing then that to impute signifies to judge, account, or reckon, the sense of these Persons must be, that God did account and reckon the Lord Jesus Christ as our Surety or Mediator to be both an habitual and actual Sinner, and was Christ so in God's account? Christ is said to be made a Curse for us, as Mr. B. saith, by suffering as a Sacrifice for us a cursed death, not that he was under either in himself, or as our Mediator a Spiritual or Eternal Curse, or as some may mean, cursed by the Law as a Sinner, which is all one, for the Law of Innocency justified him.  
11. I believe, saith he, that Christ by his obedience active and passive in his holy life and bitter death of the Cross hath completely fulfilled the Law, and perfectly satisfied the offended justice of God for all the Elect.  
I Answer, Christ did both obey and suffer, he yielded conformity to the Law, and suffered and satisfied the offended justice of God for Sinners, and this in their place and stead. The sufferings of Christ were a full satisfaction to an offended God, and the principal way and means for the securing the Glory of his Justice and Holiness, and for the manifestation of the Glory of his Wisdom, and Mercy in the Salvation of Sinners: But then that Christ did properly fulfil by his sufferings the threat of the Law of Innocency, which we had violated, this I deny: for if so, than he should have suffered the same Spiritual and Eternal as well as Corporal punishment in kind which was due unto transgressions; and if so, where had our Redemption been? our Divines generally have said, Christ did not suffer the Idem, or the same that we should have suffered, but the Tantundem, what did avail, yea, infinitely avail to make satisfaction for our offences; for any Man to say the Laws threat was properly and perfectly fulfilled in Christ's suffering, it includes a contradiction, for eternal sufferings were included in the Laws threat; but seeing Christ's sufferings were long since finished, they cannot be said to be eternal: Now for any Man to affirm that Christ properly and perfectly fulfilled the Laws threat without suffering such a death as the Law threatened, if it be not a contradiction, it looks as like one as ever Man saw. But of this I shall say no more, having spoken of it above. Only there is this which seems intimated further in this Article of his Faith; i. e. that what Christ did and suffered was only for the Elect, and that others have no benefit thereby; which if intended by him, I must make bold to tell him, it is a great mistake as I have also shown above: for I do not think that any in the World enjoy any Mercy, but upon the account of Christ's undertaking, upon which he is said to be the Saviour of all Men, though in a special distinguishing sort of those that believe.  
12. I believe, saith he, that the obediential righteousness of Christ is by the act of God's free grace counted, imputed, and reckoned to the Elect as the material formal cause of their Justification in the sight of God, and yet we are not Godded with God, nor Christed with Christ, (as such an one saith, mentioning me) for I believe, saith he, that in Christ there is four sorts of righteousness; three of which cannot without blasphemy be said to be imputed unto us. First, there is the righteousness of his Godhead. Secondly, Of his Manhood. They are Essential to his two natures and cannot be imputed. Thirdly, The righteousness of both natures united together in one Person, which is the righteousness that qualifies, fits, and makes him meet for the Work and Office of a Mediator, and is Essential to his Office as such, and thus he is God's righteous Servant, Jesus Christ the righteous, a faithful High Priest. Fourthly, There is the righteousness of his obedience in his life and death, to the holy and just Law of God, and this is that righteousness which is imputed to sinners for Justification.  
Now he hath led us into the clouds to purpose, here is darkness and confusion with a witness, yea, and such as we have his own testimony for, as will be manifest.  
1. He intimates the Elect are justified, but whether as such only while in a state of impenitency and infidelity, he tells us not. If he intent they are while in that state, than they must be justified and condemned at the same time, for he that believes not is condemned already, John 3. 18.  
2. He saith that Christ's Righteousness is counted, imputed, and reckoned to the Elect as the material formal cause of their Justification; and yet, saith he, we are not Godded with God, and Christed with Christ. I grant indeed neither he nor any other whoever they be, are or ever shall be Goded with God, or Christed with Christ: but that this must be the consequence (which is the thing I say) if they hold the Doctrine of being formally, personally Righteous with Christ's Righteousness, this I have given reason for above.  
Touching his distribution of Christ's Righteousness into four sorts, his first and second sort supposeth that the humane nature of Christ did once exist separate from the Divine, seeing he saith the third sort is the righteousness of both natures united. Now if the humane nature after it did exist, never did exist but in Union with the Divine; what ground can there be for this distinction; First, The Divine Righteousness; Second, The Humane; Third, The Righteousness of both Nature's united. I would know when and where they were disunited after the humane nature had once an existence? I deny not that Christ's Righteousness as God is distinct from his Righteousness as Man, as well as humane nature is distinct from the Divine, though united in one and the same Person: But this is that I desire to know when or where there was a Righteousness of both these natures considered as existing disunited? If not, to what purpose then is that which he calls his two first sorts of Christ's Righteousness; I mean the distinction of his Righteousness into Divine and Humane from the Righteousness of both natures united? And how can he make three sorts, go we upon his own supposition? for he saith there is the Righteousness of Christ as God, and his Righteousness as Man, and then the Righteousness of both natures united. Now if he consider the natures as divided, and if again as united; He hath but still the Righteousness of the Divine, and the Righteousness of the Humane nature, which righteousness is but twofold, where now is his third sort, or where will he find it? His fourth sort of Christ's Righteousness (as he calls it) is his obedience in Life and Death, and this, saith he, is the Righteousness which is imputed: Now as he makes this a fourth sort, and so specifically distinct from the other, than this obedience of Christ according to him must neither be his righteousness as Man, nor his righteousness as God, nor his righteousness as God and Man united; for it is blasphemy, quoth he, to say that any of these sorts of Righteousness as he calls them are imputed; and if Christ's Obedience in Life and Death be none of these, what or whose Righteousness must it be? it cannot (according to what he saith) be the Righteousness of our Lord Jesus, for he is both God and Man, and his Righteousness then must be the Righteousness of that Person who is both God and Man: And if this Obedience in Life and Death, which he saith is the Righteousness imputed, be neither the Obedience of the Divine, nor the Obedience of the Humane nature as he supposeth in separation; nor the Obedience of the Divine and Humane nature in union, than it is manifest it cannot be Christ's according to his Doctrine. Hath not this Man thinkest thou Reader, run divisions to a purpose, in Christ's Righteousness until he hath wholly cut off and cast away from him his active and passive Righteousness, besides his dividing the Righteousness of his Divine and Humane nature which are but two into three. Consider, consider, I beseech you, you that are so stiff for such an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as to be formally in your own Persons righteous with it, what this Doctrine leads to, shut not your Eyes against clear light; The Lord make it a conviction unto you, when you hear that Men will have the active and passive obedience of Christ to be that they are materially and formally righteous with; and yet will not have this active and passive obedience to be either the righteousness of Christ as God, or the righteousness of Christ as Man, or the righteousness of Christ as God and Man, and so to be none of Christ's Righteousness at all. So that now according to this Man, we must have a righteousness, and a righteousness imputed for our Justification, which is the active and passive obedience of some Person, but whose I cannot tell, seeing he excludes the righteousness of Christ as God, Man, Mediator, saying it cannot without blasphemy be said to be imputed to us, and without doubt the active and passive obedience of Christ was a righteousness, and the righteousness of Christ God, Man, Mediator; and such a righteousness as was Essential to his Office, seeing he would not have been a Mediator without it.  
But some may say Christ's active and passive obedience was essential to the execution of his Office as Mediator, but not to the constitution. I Answer, yes, to the constitution, as an actual and perfect Mediator, so far as respected his undertaken work both upon Earth, and now in Heaven, Heb. 5. 8, 9 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the Author of eternal Salvation unto all them that obey him▪ Heb. 9 14. 15. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, to purge your Conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first Testament, they which are called, might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Heb. 7. 25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the utmost, that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.  
But it may further be said (for I shall deal fairly, and let him have what advantage upon the point he can) He speaks only of the righteousness of both natures united in Christ, and intends this is not imputed.  
I Answer, there cannot be the imputation of the active and passive obedience of Christ in his sense without the Imputation of this, for consider we his obedience in Life and Death, as the obedience of one who is not God, Man united, and so essentially, infinitely righteous as God, and perfectly in his nature righteous as Man, that obedience could not be the obedience of Christ, but if we consider his obedience in Life and Death, as the obedience of one who is God, Man united in one Person, and so essentially infinitely righteous as God, and perfectly in his nature righteous as Man; then if it be imputed in this Man's sense, it must be imputed as the obedience of such an one; and how can the righteousness which constituted him a ●it Mediator not be imputed; when the acts as they are the acts of such a Person, a Person so and so qualified are imputed? And were Christ's acts any further satisfactory and meritorious than they were the acts of such a Person as he was? If not, then take away that which qualified and made him meet to be a Mediator, and see then if his acts in obeying and suffering can be satisfactory and meritorious; and if the Persons have satisfactory and meritorious acts imputed unto them in this Man▪ s sense, then that which makes them such they must also have imputed. And if they say, they have not the righteousness of Christ as satisfactory and meritorious imputed, than they must not have it imputed at all, and consequently deny all imputation of Christ's Righteousness in any sense, which I do not; for (as I have said above) if we could take away from Christ's Righteousness, (which we cannot) it's satisfaction and Merit, that which remains with respect to our Justification and Salvation will be none of his.  
But further, saith he, it is the acts, works, do, and obedience of this blessed Mediator that are imputed and counted to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness. Mark, if God do impute or count the very acts, works, do, and obedience of the Mediator to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness, or as he saith in this his Article to be the material and formal cause of their Justification, than God must account them to have that Righteousness which in its own nature is a Mediatory Righteousness (for such were Christ's acts as Mediator) to be their personal justifying Righteousness: Now if any Man be accounted formally righteous in his own Person, with that Righteousness which in its own nature is Mediatory, than he must be counted to be righteous personally with such a Righteousness as is satisfactory and meritorious after an infinite sort; and if he be one that is personally righteous with a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness, and this of an infinite value, for such was and is Christ's, then how should he choose but be Godded with God, and Christed with Christ, and be accounted to have that whereby he may be a Redeemer, Saviour, an● Mediator both for himself and others, yea to have Christ's Office wholly put into his hand; now I have so much charity for this Man, though he be my professed Adversary, and for others that have the like notions with him, as to believe that they do neither hold nor intent these consequences which are so gross; but they themselves lead me by their hot opposition to show that these are the unavoidable consequences of such a Doctrine; if peradventure they may be convinced. It is out of doubt with me, that many good and gracious Persons have imbibed and stuck to this notion of the strict Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in itself, who yet have abhorred the consequences that have been natural therefrom: But then their practice hath ever contradicted this notion, and hereby they were kept in the way of safety. But then I think it somewhat dangerous when God hath set up before Persons more clear light, and yet they are so hot in their opposition, as that they will not take time to consider whether it be light from the word or no, but almost upon the first hearing, or upon a very slight trial, cry out, Popery, Quakerism, Arminianism, Socinianism, and what not. Suppose we now that such as pass under any of these names do hold this or the truth, what must it be a sufficient Argument for me to relinquish that truth because they hold it? for my part I do profess to the World, let Men think and say what they please, that I am for Catholic truth, that is, truth wherever or in whomsoever shall be owned by me, so far as I can have evidence; for the Devil himself believes that there is a great, dreadful and terrible God, and I believe the same, and am certain in that I do well, James 2. 19 And I must not therefore because the Devil believes this, turn Atheist. But after these Men have done what they can, they can never make that they oppose into what they fain (I am afraid) would.  
13. I believe, ●aith he, that by this obediential Righteousness of Christ, all the Elect of God are or shall be freely justified from all things, Acts 1●. 39 for it is by the obedience of one (and not by the Faith and Obedience of many) that many are justified and made righteous R●m. 5. 19  
Observe, the Scripture Acts 13. 39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that believe are justified, and he saith, all the Elect, 〈◊〉 seems he likes not this Scripture expression, his Wisdom thinks another better, and therefore, for all that believe, he puts in all the Elect; perhaps he is for Justification before Faith, and so thinks Elect a term more agreeing to his purpose than believe, and he thinks not far amiss if that be his notion; but than it might be asked from whence he had his dispensation for such a change. I believe according to that Scripture, Acts 13. 39 that by Christ and his satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness, all that truly believe are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses; i. e. according to the Covenant of Grace, have a right to Christ, Pardon and Life purchased by him, and also I believe the truth of that Text, Rom. 5. 19 that by the obedience of one, i e. the Obedience of Christ, many shall be made righteous, but this not by accounting the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ to be the formal Righteousness of their Persons, for this is proper to him as Mediator, and cannot be appropriated to them. But by this, i. e. for the sake of this Righteousness of Christ, all those that by Faith accept him shall by the Covenant of Grace be accounted Righteous, or their Faith shall be accepted for Righteousness. Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for Righteousness. And whereas he adds in this Article, for it is by the Obedience of one, and not by the Faith and Obedience of many, that many are justified, that is a mere jumble, for who saith that it is by the Faith and Obedience of many that others are justified? And who saith that any are justified without the Obedience of that one; i e. Christ, giving that its proper place and office? which is to be a meritorious Righteousness. And whereas they themselves make Christ's Righteousness to be the meritorious cause of our Justification; and yet after that make it the material cause, or that with which we are personally righteous: they themselves affirm hereby, that justified Persons are righteous in the sense of the Law, and in God's account with the meritorious Righteousness of Christ; and how Persons can in God's account have a meritorious Righteousness with which they themselves are in Law-sense righteous, and yet be wholly stripped of that in their own Persons that will merit, is a great Paradox, for Christ's Righteousness is denominated meritorious from its inseparable property merit, as he is our Mediator.  
14. I believe, saith he, that this Obedience and Righteousness of Christ imputed is as able, powerful, and certain for the Justification of the Elect, as the Disobedience and Sin of Adam was for the condemnation of him and his posterity.  
It may be doubted whether this Man do believe that those he calls the Elect were of Adam's posterity, seeing that he opposeth them in this Article, and touching Adam's Disobedience and Sin which he calls his ability and power implicit for the condemnation of him and his posterity; alas, it was his moral impotency! if he had said it was that which merited, procured the condemnation of him and his posterity as they derived a guilty and corrupt nature from him, it had been more like and near the truth. And thus I grant that Christ's Righteousness had infinitely more merit in it to procure Justification for Sinners upon their believing, than Adam's Sin had merit to procure his own or his posterities condemnation.  
15. I believe, saith he, that Jesus Christ by his Death, Blood, Merits, Righteousness, and obedience hath purchased, bought, and redeemed his Elect Church and People: but that he obeyed and died to procure and purchase a new Law or Covenant with terms and conditions to be performed by them to give them a right and title to Justification. I see no ground as yet to believe.  
Indeed I believe him, such a stranger belike is he to the blessed Covenant of Grace, and yet for sure he looks upon himself to be a Gospel Preacher, if there be one in the World. In this Article further he wants my proof, that there is a Law or Covenant of Grace with terms and Conditions to be performed by Souls to give them a right and title to Justification, and this purchased by Christ. That I have already done, as he may find above, and if it would do him any good, I should be glad of it.  
16. I believe, saith he, that the satisfaction made by Christ to the Law and Justice of God gives the Elect a right to Justification and Life, in way of title, and that the Adult by Faith receive and enjoy that right.  
That Christ gave full-satisfaction to an offended God, I grant; but then that that satisfaction consisted in Christ's suffering the same in kind which was due to us transgressors by the Laws threat, which I suppose is that which he aims at, this I deny, and have showed above it cannot be. I believe that Christ hath undoubtedly purchased a right to Pardon and Life, which is Justification by his satisfaction and merit for all those the Father hath given him: But then that any of these (I speak of the Adult) have an actual interest in him, or right and title to Pardon and Life so long as impenitent unbelievers, this I deny, seeing so long as they remain such they are in a perishing condemned state. Luke 13. 3. I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. John 3. 18. He that believeth on him, is not condemned: but he that believeth not, is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God. And is it like Persons should have an actual interest in Christ, and an actual right and title to Pardon and Life by the Gospel, so long as they are in a perishing condemned state in the account of the Gospel? And then further, saith he, the Adult by Faith receive and enjoy this right. I say the Adult receive Christ (which receiving is not Physical, but Moral) which consists in a sincere consent to take Christ to be their Propitiation, Head and Teacher; and by this consent which is Faith they are united to Christ, and have an actual right hereupon to the great privilege of Adoption, which includes Pardon and Life. John 1. 12. But as many as received him to them gave he power, or the right of privilege, or the privilege of right to become the Sons of God, and this right is continued by our yielding that subjection through Grace to Christ which we promised in our first consent, or when we first did consent to be his Servants. Revel. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the City.  
17. I believe, saith he, that all those thus elected and chosen and by the Father given to Christ, redeemed, etc. are in God's appointed time, the day of his power effectually called from a state of nature, sin, and death to a state of Faith, Grace, Justification and life: and that all those who live and die in infidelity being Adult shall as certainly be damned as though they were in Hell already.  
Mark, Reader, how he hath confirmed by thus much what I have said above. But then, saith he, that any of the Elect being Adult shall live and die Infidels, such an one speaking of me, quoth he, hath not yet proved. That many of the Elect do live many years in Infidelity is out of doubt with me: But that any of them shall die Infidels, this I never said nor thought, for saith Christ, John 6. 37. All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me: and him that cometh to me, I will no wise cast out. And therefore he accuseth me falsely.  
18. I believe, saith he, that as one great end of the Father in electing, and of the Son in redeeming was the making of the Elect holy: so the blessed Spirit the third Person in the glorious Trinity (which is as free in working Faith, Regeneration, and Sanctification, as the Father in electing; or the Son in redeeming) doth in time make the Elect Holy, Humble, Heavenly, righteous, sincerely Obedient, and fruitful in good works contained in the first and second table of the holy Law.  
Very good thus far, I deny not, but grant the same, only there is this I would have him reminded of; i. e. How it comes about, or what revelation there is for it in the word, that God will now accept of sincere obedience to his commands through Christ, whereas sinless perfect Obedience was once enjoined Man? That it is pleasing unto and accepted by God through Christ is certain, I mean sincere Obedience to his commands: But that it should be so without any further revelation that this is the will and command of God, beside what was commanded Adam in Innocency, as he insinuates when he saith in scorn he is not acquainted with my new Law, this rests upon him to prove, and is like to do. It would be his mercy if God would convince him, and humble him for his deriding of that as my Law, which he must shortly know is God's Law, and that which he will judge him by.  
19 I believe, saith he, the Elect, the redeemed and justified by Christ are under the greatest obligation to duty both moral and positive in their own house and God's house, in the Church and in the World, (this Man hath words enough) And that those that talk of Election and Justification by free Grace, and yet live ei●her in practical wickedness, or in the wilful neglect of Christian duties in their Families or Closets, or slight the appointments and Ordinances of Christ in the Church when they have opportunity, are the greatest enemies that Christ hath, that they have caused many to stumble at the truth, and tempted some to lay out their parts, Wisdom, and Reason, (all which should be used for God) in opposing the truth, stadying out ways, words, and methods to cloud and render it odious, and these abusers of grace by their Omissions and Commissions do cause the way of truth to be spoken of; so they hereafter shall m●et with the greatest condemnation, and shall have the hottest place in Hell except they repens, for whose practice I never have, nor shall I hope be an Advocate.  
The most of what he here saith is truth in itself, only as for his own practice he speaks of, I can neither say with it nor against it, being very much a stranger unto it, but if he mean by truth, what he hath drawn up as Articles of his Faith, I grant and accept somethings in some of them to be great truths: but as for very much contained in them, I do not at all question but they are great untruths as I have made appear, and may yet further do, though I will have this charity for the Man, that he doth not think or intent them to be so, though in the mean time he deceives himself, and is in danger of deceiving others with false notions; though I grant a contrary practice, a practice that is repugnant to false notions, so long as Persons do not willingly oppose clear light, it altars the case very much as to Persons states and safety.  
20. I believe, saith he, those Scriptures, Rom. 3. 21, 22. Philip. 3. 9 Rom. 4. 13. which such an one, speaking of me, brings to prove that Faith itself is our Justifying Righteousness are not for his purpose; the two first speak of the Righteousness of Christ God, Man, which Faith apprehends, embraces, and takes hold of and  the Soul with as the best robe, and whether the word Righteousness of Faith in Rom. 4. 13. ought to be understood of the object, or of the act of Faith, I shall leave to consideration, being persuaded the Scriptures ought not to be expounded against Christ, but for him of whom they testify.  
Mark, Reader, upon this Article, he saith Article 12th, that to say the Righteousness of Christ's Godhead or his Manhood, or the Righteousness of both his natures united is imputed is blasphemy; and here he saith that Faith apprehends, embraces, and takes hold of the Righteousness of Christ God, Man, and  the Soul with it as the best robe, and how he will free himself from the heavy charge of Blasphemy propronounced by himself, he must see to it.  
Touching the Righteousness of Faith spoken of in the forementioned Texts, the Apostle either speaks of Faith, or wholly excludes it, if he speak of and include Faith, then how can the object; i. e. only the Righteousness of Christ (as he saith) be intended? unless he think that Faith goes to the constituting of Christ's Righteousness, but surely he will not say this; if Faith be wholly excluded, and the Righteousness of Christ, and only this meant, then why doth the Apostle mention Faith? If he say because it takes hold upon, and embraceth the Righteousness of Christ, I ask then where this Faith is, if the Apostle only speak of the object, Christ's Righteousness in these Texts? He cannot find it, unless he will say that Faith itself is part of this object, and if so, than it follows, First, That Faith is a part of Christ's Righteousness. 2ly, That Faith taketh hold of and embraceth Faith for Christ's Righteousness; and so Thirdly, That one part of the object takes hold upon and embraceth another. Thus Persons may see if they will not on set purpose shut their Eves what a confusion and jumble this makes; i. e. the asserting the Righteousness of and by Faith to be Christ's Righteousness, not Faith, but the object ●nly. But if this Man will take notice, and labour ●o understand, I will tell him again what I hold in this particular; i. e. Faith as it is the Souls consent to renounce the World, the Flesh, and the Devil, and thankfully to accept of Christ to be its only Saviour, which includes his taking him in all his Offices, and a purpose through assisting Grace of Obedience to the Death, is a conformity to the Gospel which is Christ's Law of Grace, and as it is a conformity hereunto by the Scripture it is called a Righteousness: and this Faith justifies not, nor gives any Soul interest in Christ, and a right to the blessings purchased by him contained in the Covenant of Grace as a mere act, but as by it the Soul renounceth all Christ's Enemies, and accepts of him in all his Offices, etc. and so relatively, so that this same Man with others do me open wrong, in bearing Persons in hand that I affirm that Faith justifies or giveth right as a mere act.  
21. I believe, saith he, that such an one, naming me, chargeth many things upon I know not who, and question whether he do or know; for where is the Man that ever affirmed that God reckoned that we did, and suffered in our own Persons what Christ did and suffered. I am sure the Scripture asserts the contrary, saying, he trod the winepress alone, and there was none with him.  
As to that which he calleth a false charge, thou mayst Reader, look back unto his 12th Article, and see if it be not true of himself however: there saith he, it is the acts, works, do, and obedience of this blessed Mediator that are imputed and counted to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness; so that from hence he may judge; If God doth account the very acts, works, ●oings, and obedience of Christ as Mediator to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness, how it can be avoided but he must reckon them to have in Christ performed those acts, works, do, and obedience of Christ the Mediator, and what are they to whom God doth reckon those acts, works, do, and obedience of Christ the Mediator but their own Persons? doth God account Christ's acts, works, do and obedience to such as are no Persons? God indeed accounts what Christ did and suffered for the good, and in the place and stead of and poor lost Sinners. But than doth he account them in their own Persons in the sense of any Law to have obeyed and suffered in Christ, which he must do, if he account the very acts, works, do, and obedience of Christ as Mediator unto them, as this Man saith? for if God do impute the very acts, works, do, of another in obeying and suffering unto me, and reckon them as mine in themselves: then he must either account me to have performed those very acts, works, and do in that others obeying and suffering, or he must not. If he do, than the charge is true, and just against himself, I mean this Man who is so brisk and confident: If he do not, then how can they in Law sense be imputed and reckoned to me as mine in themselves. I suppose the mistake of this Man is here, when I speak of Persons in a Legal sense, he would have me understood in a Physical sense only, and whether he do this on set purpose or from ignorance I know not. But ●urther having proved that that which he calls a false charge is true of himself from his own assertion, I shall inform him of another, and that a Person in his day of worth and learning who saith, Christ stood in a double relation for us unto God, First, Of a Surety. Se●ondly, Of a common Person. And a common Person, saith he, with, or for another he goes for, is one who represents, personates, and acts the part of another, by the allowance and warrant of the Law: so as what he doth as such a common Person, an● in the name of the other, that other whom he personates is by the Law reckoned to do; and in like manner, what is done to him (as being in the others stead and room) is reckoned as done to the other. Mr. Tho. Goodwin in his Treatise of the support of Faith from Christ's Resurrection. Cap. 2. Now let any judge if what he saith in this matter be not the same with that which he calls my false charge. And in his Application. Cap. 4. Sect. 3. saith he, Christ was considered and appointed by God as a common Person both in what he did, and in what was done to him: so as by the same Law what he did for us is reckoned or imputed to us as if we ourselves had done it; and what was done to him tending to our Justification and Salvation is reckoned as done to us.  
22. I believe, saith he, that in this weighty point of Justification, such an one, naming me, is one with the Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and Quakers, and against the ch●●f of those counted Orthodox since the Reformation, as Luther, and worthy Calvin of old, etc. And Thomas Goodwin, Dr. Owen, and Mr. Chancey of later times.  
I Question not if this Man had been acquainted as he should what I hold in this point, and such as go under the names he mentions, that he durst not have made this an Article of his Faith. But what will not malignity say? and leave all without proof, as this Man doth this Article of his Creed; It is like he expects his testimony should be received without any more to do, and here he is saying as they did in Jeremiah's time, come, let us smite him with the tongue; and I do expect if any thing come forth that will bear the name of a reply to this of mine, it will be railing language much what of the same complexion with this, though indeed if this Man had offered any likely proof for the truth of this his charge, as I do where I apply any of these names; I should not so have called it; When therefore he hath made it good,  
1. That I hold Justification by an inherent Righteousness which is a conformity to the Law of sinless perfect Works, or that Faith is a meritorious Righteousness, or that Christ merited that we by Grace or Duty might merit. Let him make it good  
2. That I hold, that the 〈◊〉 credere, or the very act of Faith justifies; i. e. as an act. Or  
3. That I hold, that Christ did not purchase the Covenant of Grace; or that I deny Christ's Merit and satisfaction; and place grace or sincere duty in the room and place of Christ's Meritorious and Satisfactory Righteousness.  
4. And when he hath made it good that I hold, I need no more to answer the Law of Innocency, or to free me from the curse and condemnation of it, and procure Salvation for me, but what is inherent, and a walking accordingly. When he hath proved, I say, that I hold all these above mentioned things, than I will confess he believes a truth concerning me: But so long as he doth not, and that because he cannot, I must say he believes a lie, until he retract, and acknowledge he hath wronged me in saying I am one with the Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and Quakers in this point of Justification.  
Touching those he saith I am against in this his Article, I have this to say, whatever unwary expressions our Reformers, and others that follow their Phrase may have left in their Writings, with which so far as their notion did agree, it was not sound; yet to me it is out of doubt, that as to what is the main in this point, and respects especially the practic part, both Luther, Calvin, and the rest of our Reformers as such never held that any Man or Woman ever had (I speak of the Adult) actual interest in Christ, and right to Pardon and Life, while remaining in a state of Impenitency and Unbelief, and Rebellion against God. And if not, then wherein am I against them in this point.  
If it be said, but where will you find in their Writings that Faith is imputed, or that it is our formal justifying Righteousness?  
I Answer, Luther in. Galat. 3. 6. saith, Christian Righteousness is an affiance or faith in the Son of God, which affiance is imputed unto Righteousness for Christ's sake. And in the same place not long after; God for Christ's sake in whom I have begun to believe, accounts this my imperfect faith for perfect Righteousness; And in the 2d Cap. 16. saith he, For the Righteousness of the Law a Man is not pronounced righteous before God: but the Righteousness of Faith God imputeth freely through Grace for Christ's sake. And a little after, saith he, wherefore, God doth accept or account us righteous only for our Faith in Christ.  
Calvin on Rom. 4. 3. saith, Wherefore Abraham by believing doth only embrace the grace tendered unto him, that it might not be in vain. If this be imputed unto him for Righteousness, it follows that he is no otherwise righteous, but as trusting or relying upon the goodness of God, he hath boldness to hope for all things from him.  
Bucer on Rom. 4. 3. saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for Righteousness, that is, he accounted this faith or believing for Righteousness, so that ●y believing he obtained this, that God esteemed him a righteous Man.  
Musculus on Galat. 3. 6. saith, What did Abraham that should be imputed unto him for Righteousness, but only this that he believed God?  
But it may be said, they make the Righteousness of Christ, i. e. the Imputation of it, the formal cause of our Justification.  
As to this if some Men be guilty of self contradiction, I am prone to think they did not intent it. But now these worthy Men, who say the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is the formal cause of our Justification, if they mean only by God's Imputation, that God doth account the Righteousness of Christ to be that, and that only which hath the form of a Satisfactory and Meritorious Righteousness, and so as such for which God justifies us upon believing, than there is no contradiction. And in the judgement of charity, I think no more was intended, notwithstanding their unwary expressions which many have made but a bad use of: seeing that they have ever affirmed this Righteousness of Christ, which they call by God's Imputation the formal cause of our Justification, to answer for the violation of God's Holy Law, satisfy God's Justice, remove the curse of the Law due unto us Sinners, purchase Pardon and Life; and yet that none shall have in or an actual right unto Redemption from the curse, special Reconciliation with God, Pardon and Salvation, but such as truly believe. And therefore when they speak of being clothed with Christ's Righteousness, as a robe and garment, I would think they mean no more, but that it is this which is the screen or sanctuary to secure all true penitent believers from the execution of the Laws curse, or the wrath of God; but then not this as it is the only Righteousness of their Persons, but as it is the proper and only Righteousness of their Mediator, though the blessed benefits hereof, as is plain, redounds to their Persons. And thus as it was for them to remove the great evil that was due, and procure all saving good, so it is (as I have above expressed it) the formal satisfactory Righteousness for their Persons by God's Imputation, but then not the formal Righteousness of their Person's by God's Imputation; i. e. God doth for this Righteousness of Christ account them upon such a Faith as I have above described, personally righteous in the sense of the Gospel, and so to have interest in Christ, and a right to Pardon and Life promised; but then not personally righteous with it, seeing, (as I have said) it cannot in itself after any sort be communicated to Believers, although it be in its fruits and benefits. I think if this little which I have here inserted was but well considered and our old Divines thus understood, the difference would not be great betwixt them, and those that are called new upon the matter. But the holding ungrounded notions from the manner of expression keeps us far from an accommodation: And if some Men will stick by such notions, the consequences we have collected from the very nature of the thing whether we will or no devolve upon them, though as to such as are practical Christians, their practice (as I have said) must contradict such notions, and agree with those very same I have laid down, wherein through Christ is their safety, though yet holding such notions from whence such consequences flow, I know from mine own experience, they must be attended with confusion, and act but in the dark, while yet they may think they have the greatest light, for whatsoever the notions of a true practical Holy Christian are, yet I am certain he dares not conclude his interest in or right unto Christ Pardon and Life purchased by him any further than he hath ground of hope that he is a true penitent, sincere obedient Believer. And sure I am when he pleads with God for Pardon, Grace, and Acceptation, he dares not plead, as the Merit of this, any Righteousness upon himself, or wherewith he is formally personally righteous with Christ's Righteousness, yet he dare not plead this, no, but only the Righteousness of the Mediator Jesus Christ without him, as the merit of Pardon, Grace, and acceptation, and this includes the whole that can come within a Christians practice upon this matter. I dare appeal to any practical Christian herein. And though this be that I hold in this point, yet saith this Man, if this opinion prevail, both Law and Gospel is overthrown, truth and saving light extinguished, and we lose our Crown, and that which we have laboured for: This as much as if he had said, that which must and will be found in every true and real Christian's practice, if this prevail, both Law and Gospel is overthrown, etc. And not having done enough he adds, and many Holy Men of God lose that they have laboured for, and lost their lives. What a Man is this, did he ever know or hear, or read of any of the Holy Men of God who lost their lives for the opposing such notions, the practice of which as Holy Men must unavoidably be found in their own practice. Let him give me an instance any where, at any time, of any one Holy Man of God indeed, or Woman, that lost their lives, and so suffered Martyrdom for opposing this Doctrine; i. e. That true Faith unites to Christ, gives interest in him, and so through and for him an actual right to Pardon and Life; and that no true Christian dare conclude, that he hath this union, interest, and right any further than he hath ground of hope that he is a true penitent sincere obedient Believer; and that he dare not plead any Righteousness that is in him, or upon him, as the merit of Pardon, Grace, and Acceptation, but only the Righteousness of Christ the Mediator without him. I say, let him give me but an instance of any one Holy Person indeed that suffered and lost his Life, because he would not comply with such Doctrine as this but opposed it, and I profess and promise I will then believe what h● saith, but I know he cannot, and yet he dare write this, and not only so but make it an Article of his Faith.  
23. I believe, saith he, that such an one, naming me, in this point is contrary to the 11th, 13th, and 17th Article of the Church of England, and to the Assemblies greater and lesser Catechism.  
As to this my reply is, If I did as much contradict in opinion the Articles he mentions, as he doth that in the 27th Article of the Church of England; i. e. the Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the Institution of Christ, I should account myself no better than perjured; look what he doth with it, seeing he either hath or should have subscribed it, I cannot tell. And as for those that he mentions which he saith I am contrary to, I challenge him or any Man else to show me in any thing I have writ or preached that I do contradict them. As for the point in hand, I affirm with this 11th Article and agree fully with it, That it is not for the merit of our own works we are accounted righteous before God, or for our own deservings but only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, which is the very same Doctrine I have been and am pleading for. I wonder what this same Man thought of when he writ after this sort, unless he thought himself that he had a dispensation to write what he pleased, and no Man must examine it, though concerned so to do.  
And then he saith further I am contrary to the Assemblies greater and lesser Catechism, If he intended the whole of what is contained therein, I must say it is as grand an untruth as ever was told, and if he intended their definition of Justification that I am contrary to, this taken in a sound sense sure I am he cannot prove; and seeing that particular Men have taken the liberty to put their own interpretation upon what the Assembly say Justification is, why may not I? If this than be meant, when they say that Justification is an act of God's free grace, whereby he pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●ight, only for the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received ●y Faith alone; i. e. That God of his free Grace fort●e Righteousness sake of Christ accounted by him to be the only satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness for us upon our sincere Faith accepts or reckons us righteous in the sense of the Gospel, and pardons all our Sins: In this I am not contrary to them, but one with them. And let him prove if he can that his Exposition is contradictory to the Scripture. And whereas he allegeth, I have expressed myself formerly in this matter otherwise than I do now, I acknowledge the truth hereof, and have occasion to lament, that as many others are, I was lead too much by an implicit Faith, forming notions according to the ordinary Phrase of such whose practice contradicted their notion in th●s matter, (as I have shown) without examining whether or no they were concordant to the Sacred Text.  
24. I believe, saith he, that God seethe no sin in his Children and People that by Faith and Regeneration are in Christ, from which they are not justified. And here he makes a challenge! Let those that hold the contrary tell me the meaning of these Scriptures, and he heaps up a great many, as Numb. 23. 21, etc. And yet, saith he, God's People have daily need to confess their sins, and pray for pardon.  
Now here I would ask, whether they are pardoned or unpardoned Sins they are to confess and seek pardon for? If he say pardoned Sins, than it must be God's People's daily practice to acknowledge themselves to be under the guilt of that Sin which they are not, and to make no other confession of Sin; and also to crave pardon for that Sin and no other which is already pardoned, and if any can make this good they may. If he say that it is Sin as unpardoned they are to confess and crave pardon for, then there must be unpardoned Sin in God's Children and People that by Faith and Regeneration, as he saith, are in Christ, and can there be unpardoned Sin, or the guilt of Sin in such: and God not see it? If so, then God must never pardon it; for God doth pardon only that which he sees and knows to be Sin; and if God never pardon it, than the guilt must remain, and if the guilt ever remain, the consequence must be they die bound over to Eternal punishment, and so must Eternally perish, though such as were by Faith and Regeneration in Christ.  
Touching that Text which is alleged by him, and others have urged before him; i. e. Numb. 23. 21. He hath not beheld Iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel: the Lord his God is with him, and the shout of a King is among them. The occasion was, Balak would have had Balaam to have cursed Israel in the name of God, or to have obtained God's curse upon them; saith Balaam implicitly this I cannot do, for though there be Sin in them and among them as well as in and among other People; yet God seethe not that Iniquity and perverseness in them, for which he will suffer such a curse to pass upon them as thou wouldst have. Now what an arguing is this of this Man which he hath from others, it is à particulari ad universale; i. e. because God beheld not that Iniquity in Jacob, no● perverseness in Israel for which he would suffer Balaam to curse them, therefore he beheld and see no Sin at all in them. It is just as if a Man should argue, God seethe no such Sin in this or the other Person, for which they should justly suffer, or be executed as Thiefs or Murderers, and therefore he seethe no Sin at all in them. There is this further I desire may be observed, this Text he allegeth either refers to the whole body of the People, or but to a part; If but to a part, than Balak would but have had a part of them cursed: If to the whole body, then according to this Doctrine this Man hath from others, they must every individual of them have been justified and been in Christ by Faith and Regeneration, and can we have ground for this, that there was not one Unbelieving, Unregenerate Soul then among the whole body of the People? This is not to be imagined by any.  
He further quotes Psalm 32 1, 2. Rom. 4. 5, 6, 7. but these I have explained already.  
Another he allegeth is Cant. 4. 7. Christ speaking of his Church saith, thou art all fair, my love; there is no spot in thee. The meaning is, she was so in an Evangelical, but not in a Legal sense, sincerity or true grace was the prevailing Principle; and in that respect he accounted her (for his Merits) all fair, and without spot. When Christ said concerning Nathaniel, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile, he intended no more but an upright sincere Soul; Christ, such is his love, he denominates his People from the better part. If therefore his meaning be that God seethe no Sin in his People, so far as they are sincerely conformed to the Gospel Law, this Conformity in itself being no Sin, but a Righteousness, or that God seethe no Sin which he hath fully pardoned to be unpardoned; or that God doth not so see Sin, as everlastingly to condemn a true Believer for it in denying him Repentance, Faith, Pardon through the merits of Christ, I am of his mind. But then if he intended which I suppose he doth, that God seethe no Sin in his People, as they are accounted personally righteous for their Justification with Christ's Righteousness, that there is any such thing as this, I deny; and therefore there cannot be the other upon that account, or, for that▪ The rest of his Texts are not to the purpose.  
25. I believe, saith he, that such an one, still naming me, aught to let Men state their own judgements, and give their own sense of what they say and hold, and not state the same for them, and draw his own absurd consequences, and fight with them against he knows not who.  
This is a pretty Article of a Man's Faith in the point of Justification; but I must say something unto it▪ Well than either this Man's judgement (if he know what he holds himself) doth upon the matter in question, contradict what I affirm, or it doth not; If it do not, why doth he oppose me? If it do, why doth he complain as though I did him wrong? And when he talks of drawing absurd consequences, ●tis well if he know what an absurdity is; although he himself be guilty enough in this kind in what he hath writ. But let him find me if he can that any of the consequences of which he speaks do contradict the Doctrine I draw them from; and if he disown the Doctrine, and hold the contrary, I charge not the consequences upon him. But then he must first retract that which he makes an Article of his Creed; i. e. that Christ's acts, works, do, and obedience in themselves, (for that he must mean or el●● he contradicts not me) are imputed and counted to the Elect for their personal justifying Righteousness.  
But he faith further, I sight with my consequences against I do not know who. If I do not, it is like he doth, or else why should he take himself concerned to oppose, unless he hath a mind to kick before he be pricked. But he goes on, and tells us, he believes that I am guilty of the breach of the 9th Command in bearing false witness. But let me tell him here, if he were no more guilty upon the matter in Question, of false Accusation against me than I am against him or others upon the point, I should have been ashamed to have said thus much by him. I desire him then to consider, if he be not very guilty of that which he chargeth me with; while he insinuates.  
1. That I hold that some of the Elect being Adult, shall live and die Insidels.  
2. That I in the point of Justification am one with the Papists, Arminians, Socinians and Quakers.  
3. That I contradict the 11th, 13th, and 17th Articles of the Church of England.  
4. That my consequences are absurd with relation to the Doctrine they are deduced from.  
5. That I am guilty of the breach of the 9th Command in applying that Doctrine to any, when plain it is it hath been held, and still is by many that Christ is one Legal Person with the Elect, and that Christ obeyed and suffered in the account of the violated Law not only as a Mediator, but as a common public Person representing all the Elect (and this he saith himself) in what he did and suffered, so as by the same Law what he did for us is reckoned or imputed to us, as if we ourselves had done it; and what was done to him tending to our Justification and Salvation is reckoned as done to us. And doth not this agree with the Doctrine I draw the consequences from.  
6. That I affirm Faith to justice as an act without relation to its object Christ, with others I might mention, none of which he can prove against me, and who is it that beareth false witness now, I or he? But he hath more yet, quoth he, speaking after a scornful sort concerning me, he matters not that (he means the breach of the Ninth Command) being now got under a new Law, which will be more favourable than the old. This new Law he scoffs at, I have shown is the Gospel or Covenant of Grace, and have proved above that there is such a thing, and that it is a Law, and that Christ hath purchased it, though the Socinians deny it, and so he with them. And therefore I must make bold to tell this Man, and that not without warrant from the Holy Scriptures, that he must either be brought under this new Law which he derides, or he perisheth for ever; for if he think to be justified and saved upon the terms of the Old Covenant he will find himself wretchedly mistaken. Galat. 3. 10. For as many as are of the works of the Law are under the curse: for it it written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to ●o them. 2 The●. 1. 7, 8. And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven, with his mighty Angels, in flaming Fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. And let him not think that the Gospel Law, or the Gospel which is a Law giveth liberty to Sin, or exempts from a due and sincere Obedience to all God's Holy Commands, for the contrary is plain. T●us 2. 11, 12. For the grace of God that bringeth Salvation hath appeared to all Men, Teaching us, that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly righteously, and godly in this present World. But if he look for no favour from God, but in the way and upon the terms of the Law of Innocency he never shall have any; nay, he never would have had any so much as common.  
26. I believe, saith he, that that Righteousness wherewith God justifies the Elect is a Righteousness which his Holy Law approves and accepts of.  
Though he make no distinction, yet by Righteousness, I take it for granted he intends the Righteousness of Christ, and by Law, the Law of Innocent Nature violated by Man's Sin. This then is that which he must intent, i. e. that the Law of Innocency approves and accepts of Christ's Righteousness. Grant I must, that Christ as Man was conformed to the Law of Innocency both in Nature and Life, and that his Sufferings were in the place and stead of those Sufferings which were due unto us in Law for our Violation thereof; and that both his active and passive Obedience was for us in a way of Mediation and Redemption. But then that either the active Obedience of Christ considered as our Mediator was approved and accepted by this Law for that Obedience which was due unto it from us in our own Persons, or his passive Obedience for those sufferings which were due unto us by this Law threat, this I deny; for this Law. knows nothing of a Mediator for us, for if so, provision should have been made for such an one ●y it and in it; but who will say this? It is then the great Lawgiver that approves and accepts of the Righteousness of Christ for us as satisfactory and meritorious, having left himself a liberty to dispense with his own Law as to the strict exaction and execution of it, upon valuable consideration given by a Mediator whose Obedience should be of infinite worth. For if the Law of Innocency violated by Man's Sin should approve and accept Christ's Righteousness for Sinners, as their Surety and Mediator instead of that Obedience they were bound to perform, than it must account them righteous in Christ's performance, and if it account them righteous than it must justify them, and if it justify them, it must account them such as are sinless and perfectly Holy in Nature and Life, for it will justify none else. Let me not be mistaken here, I deny not, but affirm that the Law of Innocency did both approve and accept of the Obedience of Christ, or else he had not been justified by it: But then that this Law did approve and accept of this Obedience of Christ as our Surety and Mediator, as to account it was so for us, as that we obeyed in him, this I deny: For if so, it cannot choose but discharge us, and we must need no Pardon; for he cannot be said to have a Pardon, that in the Laws own sense and acceptation pays the whole of what it requires either by himself or by another the Law allowing. And he adds that the exact justice and free Grace of God do not only agree and kiss each other, but that they are both exalted and glorified in the Justification of a Sinner. I grant him the whole of this, for it is of Faith that it might be by Grace; and it is by Faith in such a way as justice hath full satisfaction, yea, and all the glorious perfections of God shine forth, and must do for ever.  
Further, saith he, how any Man can find his consequence (I suppose, he either would or should have said his conscience) free from the accusation of the Law without such a ●●ghteousness, I cannot yet see.  
To this I shall say we have all transgressed the Law, it has concluded us all under Sin, and as such condemns us, and if we be convinced, our Consciences do and must accuse us as guilty, and bear witness for the Laws equity in this its process: so that there is no stopping the execution of the Laws sentence by the procuring of Pardon, or an act of Grace by any thing but by the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ; and this Righteousness shall not actually avail any for the purpose above, but the penitent Believer, for he that believeth not remains condemned, and he that reputes not continues unforgiven as to special Pardon, as the Scripture is plain for the purpose. Our Consciences then accusing us as Sinners, for nonconformity unto, and violation of this Holy Law of God (which we must acknowledge so long as we live we are justly accused of, or else we must deny ourselves to be Sinners, and affirm we are counted by this Law to be sinless and perfectly righteous) that which must quiet our Consciences here, and free us from fear and terror of having the Laws curse inflicted as to its full and eternal extent, must be only the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ by which we are delivered from the execution of its curse. But if our Consciences accuse us of Impenitency and Infidelity, and so to be such as have no actual interest in or right to Christ and his Righteousness for the purpose above spoken of; there is nothing can quiet our Consciences here, or remove our fear, but our having of true Repentance and Faith found in us. But again, faith he, nor can I see without such a Righteousness how the Doctrine of Faith establisheth the Law. I grant him that without the Righteousness of Christ, the Doctrine of Faith neither doth, nor can establish the Law; But then how, wants explication. I say then upon this, Although the Doctrine of Faith, or the Doctrine of Justification by Faith doth make void the Law (suppose we the Law injoining perfect sinless works) as a Covenant of Life, and so as an instrument of our Justification, not from any default in itself, but from our moral infirmity or weakness; yet the Doctrine of Faith doth not make it void as a Rule of Obedience; seeing the Gospel, which is the Law of Faith, besides its own proper precepts, hath also this proper unto itself to enjoin us sincere Obedience to the Moral Law, which shall for Christ be accepted instead of strict Legal perfection, and thus the Law is established by Faith. But if this may not content, I shall show him and others another way of Faiths establishing the Law, and that is thus, God accepting now the Obedience of Faith according to the Gospel Law (which includes sincere Obedience to the precepts of that which is ordinarily called Moral, as we consider Faith practical) and this for the alone satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ hath hereby manifested, that he could not so dispense with this his righteous and Holy Law, as to pardon the violation or transgression of it without full satisfaction given to his governing Justice, which satisfaction he hath had, so that now in his justifying of a Sinner through Christ by Faith, he keeps up the repute and credit of this his Law, and so hath established it as a righteous and holy Law according to the Scripture. Isa. 42 21. The Lord is well pleased for his Righteousness sake, he will magnify the Law, and make it honourable. Rom. 3. 25, 26. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood, to declare his Righteousness for the Remission of Sins that are past, through the forbearance of God, To declare, I say, at this time his Righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. He concludes this Article thus; yet are we not justified by the Law, though in a way of Law and Justice; but freely by grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus.  
That we are justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus, and also that we are not justified by the Law of Innocency, and yet in such a way wherein God keeps up the honour of his Law in receiving full satisfaction for our violation of that Law unto his governing justice from our Mediator, I firmly hold, but what his meaning is, I shall leave, and not trouble the Reader with conjectures about it.  
27. I believe, saith he, this Righteousness whereby God graciouly justifies his Elect, and which they receive by Faith without wavering or violating his Holy Law resides subjectively in the person of Christ, and yet may be ours by way of gift and Imputation without being subjectively in us, else how is God our God, Christ our Saviour, Redeemer, Prophet, Priest, and King, are these subjectively in us?  
I suppose by being subjectively in us, he intends that we are the Subjects; And proved I have above, that we must be the Subjects of Christ's Righteousness if God account it to be the very formal Righteousness of our Persons.  
And whereas he puts the Question, how is God our God, and Christ our Saviour, Redeemer, Prophet, Priest, and King, what are these subjectively ours? I Answer, If he will say, as he seems to intimate, that God and Christ as Saviour and Redeemer in all his Offices are ours after the same manner that he faith Christ's Righteousness is made ours; i. e. by God's Imputation, or his accounting it in its self to be the formal Righteousness of our Persons, he implicitly saith this; If he will say that God's infinite perfections which are his Essence, and so God himself are made by his Imputation, or are in his account the perfections of every Believers Person; and that Christ's Offices as Prophet, Priest, and King are made by God's Imputation, or are in God's account the Offices of every Believer's Person; then he must also say, that their Persons in God's account are the subjects of Divine perfections, and of Christ's Offices as Mediator, which would be Blasphemy to affirm. That God then is so in any Believer as to communicate unto, or make his Person a partaker of his Divine perfections, or give unto him his Divine perfections in themselves, so as that it may be affirmed of his Person it hath Divine properties, such as Omniscience, Omnipotency, etc. to say this would be horrid Blasphemy. And so that Christ as Saviour and Redeemer is so in any Believer as to communicate unto, or make his Person the subject of those Offices which he himself executes as Mediator, so as it may be affirmed of the Believer he executes those Offices in his own Person, is a like horrid Blasphemy. But now I will tell this Man for all this, that it is affirmed in Scripture, that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit do dwell in the Hearts of Believers, 2 Corinth. 6. 16. And what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols? for ye are the Temple of the living God: as God hath said; I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my People. Ephes. 3. 17. That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith. 1 Corinth. 3. 16. Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? Yea, and is their God hereupon, as it may be found in the abovesaid 2 Corinth. 6. 16. But than it is not by giving unto them after any sort what is proper to God and Christ, or that whereby God is God, and Christ is Christ, and so incommunicable: But by giving them that which may be communicated; i. e. the effects of God's gracious and merciful Power, and the fruits of Christ's Mediation, such as the quickening, healing, enlarging, teaching, sanctifying; Sin mortifying Grace of his Holy Spirit, which Grace is from the Father as the fountain through Christ as the Mediator, and by the Spirit as the proximate Author and worker, and as this Grace is wrought in them, and they after a spiritual sort are quickened, healed, enlarged, taught, sanctified, and have their Sin mortified hereby, they are the subjects of it. Now for any to talk of Christ's Righteousness being given to them in itself to be their personal Righteousness, or that Righteousness wherewith their Persons are made formally righteous for their Justification; and yet say he is the only subject of it, and that it is proper to him as Mediator, and cannot be communicated to any Creature, is a contradiction; for if it be given to any in itself to be the formal Righteousness of their Persons, it must be communicated to them in itself; for how should any Man's Person be formally righteous with that Righteousness, which after no so●t in itself can be communicated to his Person? In its blessed fruits and effects, I grant, Christ's Righteousness is communicated to every true penitent Believer, but in itself not, I wish it may be considered. Thus I have done with his Creed consisting of 27 Articles respecting Justification.   

PART II.  
BUT he hath 25 things yet behind which he calls Questions, which I question not he judgeth unanswerable. But I shall however since I am doing make an Essay and try what may be done by me through God's assistance in answer however to some of them, though the most of them are odd, and not worth a Man's while to take up time about them.  
Quest. 1. If the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and with all the Elect in him as his Seed, as the Assemblies Catechism saith. Then how is Christ the purchaser, doth he purchase a Covenant that was made with himself as the undertaker, and stands fast in him?  
I Answer, Nothing will serve this Man, but he will be a downright and barefaced Socinia●●; he will by no means hear that Christ hath purchased the Covenant of Grace: But I have already showed that it was no Covenant of Grace which was made with Christ, though it was of Grace to us as it had respect to our Redemption and Salvation. And that the Assembly could intent no such thing, though he allege their Authority, (as I have also cleared) unless he will show us that they contradicted themselves, therefore this Question is ungroundedly stated.  
Quest. 2. If Christ himself be the Covenant given by the Father as it is written Isa. 42. 6, 7. and 49. 8, 9 How then doth he purchase the Covenant, doth he purchase that which he is the subject matter of? then he purchased himself.  
Answ. Reader, What thinkest thou by such Questions as these? Well, he saith, thou seest, the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ. Now if Christ himself personally considered, as he intimates in his Question, be the Covenant itself; how then, say I● could this Covenant be made with him? I must answer according to the nature of the matter before me, Can a Covenant be made with itself, or is the Covenant of Grace a Person consisting of two natures? or did God make a Covenant of Grace with a Covenant of Grace? Christ indeed was given of the Father to reconcile God to Sinners by his Blood, and Sinners to God by the Holy Spirit given Ephes. 2. 13. But now in Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ. Coloss. 1. 21. And you that were sometimes alienated, and enemies in your minds by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled. And so he is the Efficient and meritorious cause of the Covenant of Grace, and the gift of the Covenant, so far as he makes over himself and the blessed fruits of his purchase thereby to his People, but to talk of Christ being the Covenant itself, and so to purchase himself if he purchase the Covenant of Grace, who could have thought that any Man should have offered such raw conceptions? for certainly the end of Christ's Death was to reconcile God and Sinners, and are God and Sinners reconciled so long as Sinners continue in actual rebellion against him? If not, then are not Sinners to cast away their weapons, their Sins whereby they have been warring against God? And are they not to come in upon his Proclamation of Grace, and humbly submit themselves to his sacred Majesty, promising through Grace to be his loyal Subjects for the time to come. And is not this an engagement on the returning Sinners part to be the Lords, when he saith implicitly herein (and so answers Gods call) as it is said Jerm. 3. 22. Return ye backsliding Children, and I will heal your backslidings: Behold, we come unto thee, for thou art the Lord our God. Isa. 26. 13. O Lord our God, other Lord besides thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. And hath not God promised to accept receive, pardon, etc. for Christ's sake such a Sinner? and is not this God's gracious engagement on his part? and is not here the form of a Covenant? But was there ever such a Covenant made betwixt God and Christ? True indeed it is in and through the merits of Christ that God thus condescends, but plain it is this Covenant which is a Covenant of Grace to Sinners is made betwixt God and them. Can these Persons understand the nature of Mercy and Grace as they should, who talk of a Covenant of Mercy and Grace made with Christ? Well, but say they, it was made with Christ for us, and with us in him.  
I Answer, If they speak of the Covenant of Redemption, I grant it was though made with Christ, yet so for us as that it was in order to our Redemption and Salvation by him: but if they speak of the Covenant of Grace, such a Covenant as I have described above, that this was made with Christ for us, this I deny; for if so, then Christ must be bound to perform that duty on his part, which God in the Gospel requires of Sinners, and will they say this? That he hath engaged himself in the Covenant of Redemption to give Grace to all the Father hath given him (I speak of the Adult) to enable them to perform the duty which the Gospel injoins, and if this be all they intent by the Covenant of Grace being made with Christ for Believers, they do not differ from me in the thing; though yet observe their notion confounds in the matter the Covenant of Redemption made with Christ, making it the same with that which is made with Sinners, which is strictly in its own nature, and in the very matter of it a Covenant of Grace and Mercy. And further when they say the Covenant of Grace as such in its own nature was made with us in Christ: If they mean with us in Christ as the purchaser (which this Man denies in scorn) or the great mean of conveyance of the blessings hereof; or with ●s in Christ, as we have interest in it (after a special sort) upon our Union with him by Faith, I am of the same mind. But if they mean it was made with us in Christ, as that he is the only Confederate for us, who obliged himself to perform what is required of us, and so to repent, believe, and obey the Gospel for us, this I deny, and so the Assembly as appears in their Answer to this Question; i. e. How is the Grace of God manifested in the second Covenant? A. In that he freely provideth and offereth to Sinners a Mediator, and Life and Salvation by him, and requiring Faith as the condition to interest them in him, promiseth and giveth his Holy Spirit to all his Elect, to work in them that Faith with all other saving Graces, and to enable them to all Holy Obedience, as the evidi●nce of the truth of their Faith and thankfulness to God, and as the way he hath appointed them to Salvation.  
Q. 3. If Faith be our formal justifying Righteousness, then how is Christ the Lord our Righteousness, or all the Seed of Israel justified in him?  
A. This I have fully answered above, and from thence he may know by Efficiency and Merit.  
Q. 4. If God justify the Elect by a Righteousness, which answereth not the Law of Innocency, then how doth he administer grace in a way of justice, or what doth he justify them from, or how is he just in justifying him that believeth in Jesus, and faithful and just to forgive us our Sins? seeing what he doth seems to interfere with Law and Justice.  
A. He supposeth first, That God justifieth the Elect, if he mean only as such before Faith, and so without Faith, it is not true. 2ly, He supposeth that God justifieth by a Righteousness that answereth the Law of Innocency. If he mean by such a Righteousness as is the Merit, I grant, but if he mean by such a Righteousness, a Righteousness which we are personally righteous with, this I deny: If God saith he doth not justify the Elect by a Righteousness which answereth the Law of Innocency, How then, saith he, doth he administer grace in a way of justice? I Answer, God doth justify by that Righteousness which answereth the Gospel, or God's Law of Grace, (if he mean by answering a conformity to the precepts of a Law) i. e. the Righteousness of Faith. And in this he administers Grace in the way of Justice,  
1. As he accepts Faith for Righteousness, and gives us an actual right thereupon to Pardon and Life for Christ's sake, whose active Righteousness was a conformity to the Law of Innocency, as it required sinless perfect rectitude both in Nature and Life, and his Sufferings which are called his Passive Righteousness, which were instead of the penalty due unto us for our violation of this Law, both which are meritorious and satisfactory on our behalf, and thus the Law is answered for us in the account of the Lawgiver, and justice fully satisfied. And thus, Readers, you must understand me when I speak of Christ's fulfilling the Law, and in what I have spoken of that.  
2. God administers Grace in a way of Justice as he is faithful to his promise he hath made of Pardon and Life through Jesus Christ upon our obedience to the Gospel. And if he would know what he justifies from, and for what, and upon what, God tells him, Acts 13. 38, 39 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins. And by him, all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses. And if he would know further how he is just in justifying him that believeth in Jesus. I Answer, Christ having yielded such a conformity as I have spoken of to the Law of Innocency for us in the account of the Lawgiver, and satisfied the justice of God; his glorious attributes are so much honoured and advanced, and the repute of his violated Law kept up, as that God can for and upon this meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness of Christ without any wrong to his Justice, or any other his Attributes, or injury to his Holy Law, justify the Sinner upon Faith in Christ, or give him an actual right according to the Law of Grace to Pardon and Life. And from what hath been said it is manifest he is faithful and just in forgiving of Sin, when and where he doth forgive it, and what God doth herein according to the explication I have given neither interferes with Law nor Justice.  
Q. 3. What is the Rule of this righteousness of Faith, which is the formal cause of our Justification (he should have added by God's imputation) for if it be a justifying righteousness, it must be by some Rule, not the Law of Innocency for it requires a perfect righteousness, but faith is an imperfect one. Then it is the new Law or Covenant that Christ hath purchased that must be the Rule: well than I ask, is an imperfect Rule, the Rule of our justifying righteousness? or doth the same justify by that which is imperfect? or doth this New Law justify us with the allowed brea● of the Old? how then is it a better Covenant, or how is the Law given honoured thereby?  
In this his 5th which he calls a Question he inquires first, what is the Rule of this Righteousness of Faith, which is the formal cause of our Justification? I Answer, the Gospel in which this Faith is commanded, John 20. 31. But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his Name. 1 John 3. 23. And this is his Commandment, that we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us Commandment. And Obedience to the Gospel is this Righteousness of Faith. But saith he, this Faith is an imperfect Righteousness; so it is, if the Law of Innocency which injoins sinless perfect works be made the measure of it; but not so, if we bring it to the Gospel, where it is commanded, that accepts of sincere Obedience, and such is the Obedience of Faith in all God's People, for in them strict legal perfection cannot be found. But to pass on, this Man accounts the Gospel an imperfect Rule: If compared with the Law of Innocent nature and what it requires, I grant it, but that it is so absolutely or in its own nature I deny, seeing it contains the whole of that which God wills and requires to give us interest in Christ, and a right to Eternal Salvation, by way of direction or instruction. Let him prove the Gospel to be insufficient here, and then let him scoff at it as the Papists, calling it an imperfect Rule. If he judge that what God commands in order to Salvation be imperfect, he must tell us what is wanting, and so see if his wisdom can make up the defect. In the mean time I shall hold that the Righteousness of Faith is perfect with relation to the Rule; i. e. the Gospel, which it is a conformity unto, our Divines have ever distinguished of a Legal, and Evangelical perfection, but of this I have spoken more above. And whereas he adds in scorn, doth this New Law, which I call the Gospel, justify us with an allowed breach of the Old? I Answer, God doth not allow of Sin so as to approve of it in any, he being an infinite Holy God, and Sin being so opposite to this his nature: But I would have him know, Christ having made satisfaction to justice, God is pleased for the sake of this Blessed Redeemer and Mediator in his abundant Grace and Mercy to Pardon the Sins of all sincere returners, and accept of their sincere Obedience of Faith to the Gospel instead of strict Legal perfection. God justifies not, pardons not upon sincere Repentance and Faith without a satisfaction given to him as Lawgiver, and when God insists upon satisfaction for the violation of his Holy Law; and will not pardon any Sinner, though a penitent Believer, without this, when then satisfaction is given and accepted, if God hereupon according to the Gospel justify and pardon a penitent and believing Sinner as such, doth he by this justify and pardon with the allowed breach of his Law? If so, this is as much as to say, God allows of Sin when for the sake of Christ he justifies and pardons any Sinner upon sincere Faith and Repentance. How the Lawgiver is honoured though he justify by ●he Covenant or Law of Grace upon a true Faith, I have elsewhere showed.  
Q 6. Seeing Faith must be our formal justifying Righteousness; then I ask (saith he) what degree, or how many acts of Faith are required to constitute this Righteousness that justifies us? Is it the faith of adherence, or the faith of assurance? Is it our first act of faith that justifies, or our whole life of faith, which consists of many acts? If by our first act, than all after acts are insignificant as as to Justification.  
Mark here, Reader, this Man by this last branch grants, that not only the first act, but all after acts of Faith are significant as to Justification; for he saith, if we are justified by the first act of Faith, than all after acts are insignificant as to our Justification, which plainly implies that he accounts not only the first act, but all after acts of Faith to be requisite to Justification, or else he understands not well what he hath writ. And thus he runs himself upon that which follows this with a design to ensnare Men; i. e. If by our whole Life of Faith (Mark, it is like the Life of Faith consists only in act according to this Man, so that there must be no Life of Faith in a Soul but so long as it is in exercise) which consists of many acts of Faith, than our Justification is suspended till our lives be finished; then (saith he) where is the Man that is justified, or sure that he shall be?  
I never (and I question whether any beside this Man, and such as are of his party) did before, see such long wound complicated and confused Questions.  
What a Faith it is which justifies, I have at large shown above; And shall further give him to understand again, that Faith as it is the Souls consent (inclusive of assent) to accept the Lord Jesus as offered in the Gospel gives the Soul interest in Christ, and an actual right to Pardon and Life; so perseverance in sincere Obedience, which is consent in practice (inclusive of affiance and reliance) is that which continues the interest and right. And so Justification is not a simulaneous act, but a continued act of God by his Law of Grace. Rom. 2. 7. To them who by patiented continuance in well doing seek for glory, and honour, and immorality, eternal life. He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved. Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life. And that it must not be a simultaneous, but a continued act, most of our Divines m●st grant, who assert Pardon to be a constitutive part of Justification, and yet say that future sins are not pardoned before they be committed.  
But it may be said, when a believer falls into Sin, and continueth for some time, as in the case of David, without Repentance, may he then be said to persevere? If not, than his justified state ceaseth.  
I Answer, as to the act and exercise of Grace he doth not persevere, but as to the habit of Grace he doth, which habitual Grace (as the first Grace gave him right) continues his right to the further exciting and quickening of the Spirit, whereby he shall actually repent; and thus he persevereth, and falls not totally and finally away, neither doth he cease to be in a justified state● Psalm. 37. 24. Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down: for the Lord upholdeth him with his hand. Jerem. 8. 4. Moreover, thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord, Shall they fall, and not arise? Shall he turn away, and not return? So that I affirm Justification is perfect as it is a right at the first; but not so as to the full possession of that right, if so be the Person justified live for some time after he hath given his first sincere consent; for if a Person should die immediately upon his first sincere consent given, he most certainly should be saved, but than if he live for some time after that, there is more required to continue his right to the the gift of further grace, and also of glory, and that is the performance of that which was included in his first consent, as it gives him a right for Christ to other Covenant of privileges, so also to this; i. e. the gift of persevering Grace. And though this may not (as it seldom is) be without some actual failure; yet it never doth nor never shall habitually fail. And the proof of this may be drawn first, from the nature of true and saving grace. 1 Peter 1. 23. Being born again not of corruptible seed but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 2dly, From the perpetuity of the Covenant of grace, which all are taken into (I speak of the Adult) who give a free and sincere consent. Jerem. 32. 40. And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not departed from me. 3dly, From Christ's constant and all prevailing intercession. Hebr. 7. 25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost, that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Luke 22. 31, 32. And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as Wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. Let not Persons from hence gather, that such may then take liberty to Sin, for this cannot be; seeing that such a liberty would be inconsistent with true and saving Grace, and so with a sincere consent.  
Q. 7. Seeing it is written the just shall live by Faith, what are they to trust and live by Faith in but that which is their justifying Righteousness? then not in Christ, for he is none such Righteousness.  
He intends that Christ is none such Righteousness in my account, and herein he is a false accuser, for when or where did I assert, that any Person is justified without the Righteousness of Christ; Have not I said the contrary in affirming, that Faith is accepted for our Gospel Righteousness for the alone meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness of Christ. And by the way, Reader, I would have thee take notice that the strongest Arguments the Men of this stamp have for what they hold are either first, an implicit Faith, or secondly, Accusing of those that oppose them, as deniers of that which yet they affirm, ●or this Man would insinuate in what he faith, that I wholly exclude the Righteousness of Christ from the Justification of a Sinner, than which I abhor nothing more. But it may be ●aid, do not you exclude it from the matter of Justification? I Answer, from being the qualifying matter, I do, but not from being the meriting matter; for it cannot be that the Righteousness of Christ should be communicated to me in itself, so as to become the qualification of my Person, or that which in itself must qualify me as a subject of right, or one that hath right hereby to Christ and his benefits.  
But now whereas this Man saith what are they to trust and live by Faith in but that which is their justifying Righteousness, he by this must make our justifying righteousness very extensive; i. e. God and all his glorious perfections, his promises, etc. for these we are to trust and live by Faith in; and if we are to trust and live by Faith in nothing but that which is the matter of our justifying Righteousness, than these must be the matter (according to him) of our justification, as well as Christ's Righteousness, true we are to trust and live by Faith in God's glorious perfections and his faithful promises through Christ; but though it be so, yet these are not the Righteousness of Christ which he accounts justifies us as our formal Righteousness, nor any part of it. The just then so live by Faith, as that they trust and depend upon God's glorious attributes and his gracious promises through Christ for strength, support, and comfort in their faithful Obedience to his commands, hoping only for their acceptation for Christ's all prevailing merits and satisfaction.  
Q. 8. If Faith as it is our act be our justifying Righteousness, what then mean those many places of Scripture, that speak of Justification, and Pardon by Christ, his Righteousness, knowledge, grace, freely by grace, through the Redemption that 〈◊〉 in him?  
This Question is built upon a false supposition, i. e. that I hold Faith justifies as an act, whereas I deny it, and therefore it is a wonder how Men da●e appear in writing to the world, charging a Man with that which he disowns, and which they cannot prove against him, and whereas this Man insinuates that I hold Justification by the simple act of Faith without relation to its object; He saith as much as that I hold Justification by that which is not Faith, for Faith without relation ●o its object is no Faith. How Faith justifies, I have shown, and also how we are justified by Christ, and his righteousness.  
Q. 9 What is that wedding garment, that best robe, that change of raiment, that garment of Salvation, and robe of righteousness, that fine linen that's white and clean? Are these our acts of Faith and Obedience, or Christ's Righteousness imputed?  
He ●till sings over the old Song, and if he would have an Answer, if he will take pains to look back thither where I treat of these matters he may find one.  
Q. 10. If Justification be an act of God's free grace, wherein he pardoneth all our Sins, and accepteth us as righteous, in his sight, only for the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by Faith alone, as saith the Assemblies: How then is Faith itself our justifying Righteousness, seeing it doth but only receive Christ's Righteousness which God imputes?  
This he hath pulme to answer before in speaking unto the 23d Article of his Faith.  
Q. 11. Whether was it not as possible and easy, nay, whether was it not more easy for Adam to have obeyed the Law of Innocency, being free from sin in his nature; as it is for fallen Man dead in Sin to believe and keep the conditions of the new purchased Covenant? If so, then (saith he) how doth the exceeding riches of God's grace appear thereby, according to such an one, that ●● me, whom he names.  
What a Man is this to bring such a thing into question. Have I any where or at any time affirmed, that it is as easy for a Man dead in Sin to believe, and keep the conditions of the Covenant of Grace, as it was for innocent Adam to have obeyed the Law of Innocency? Thus it is in the practice of such Men as this in the first place falsely to charge such as they know oppose them, and thus beget a prejudice in others against them, and so bring them over to their own party, and keep them fast to them. He supposes, nay takes it for granted, that I hold that which yet I deny; i. e. I deny that Sinners have any moral power to repent or believe without the renewing and quickening power of the Spirit of God: and seeing his supposition is false, his Question is ungrounded, and therefore is vain and frivilons, for whether he will know it or no, I affirm, that by grace they are saved, who are saved through faith, but yet not of themselves, it is the gift of God.  
Q● 12. Hath Christ purchased a Covenant which accepts of that which is imperfect, as such an one, still naming me, grants Faith to be, and so morally evil? Is this to honour the Law of God, or the death and obedience of the Son of God? or to set up the golden calf the fruit of our own brains drawn out of the forge of our imagination and dance about it, saying, this is thy God, O Israel, that justifies and saves thee?  
Though I have already said enough for the solution of this, yet there is in this which he calls a Question I would have taken notice of; i. e. He supposeth, seeing that the sincere grace and duties of God's People do not answer the Law of Innocency, nor are not a conformity in full to that Law, therefore they are morally evil; i. e. in plain terms they are no other but Sin; for he supposeth Faith to be so, and if Faith, than all other graces and duties. Now I grant, that although Persons have true Faith, and performs sincere Obedience, yet the Law of Innocency in itself, or as such a Law condemns them for all this (though through and for Christ they are delivered from a condemned state, so as that the Laws sentence shall not everlastingly be executed upon them, Rom. 8. 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit: And that because Faith in a Redeemer and sincere Obedience is not that conformity to this Law it calls for: But then that true Faith in a Redeemer, and sincere in Obedience as such, are morally evil in themselves, and so Sin, this I deny; for they are both commanded, where then or in whomsoever they are found they are a conformity to the will of that God who commands them. And can that which is a conformity to God's command be morally evil in itself, or in its own nature, and so Sin? If this were so then it would be all one for Persons to continue disobedient Infidels as to be obedient Believers, and this is uncouth Doctrine. Indeed neither Faith in a Redeemer or Mediator, nor yet sincere Obedience under that formality only are commanded by the Law of Innocency, seeing it is sinless perfect Obedience, or obedience in a Subject where is no Sin that it requires; seeing then that both the Faith and Obedience above spoken of are commanded, they must be commanded by some Law, and what Law can this be, but a Law of Mercy and Grace, which for Christ accepts of the sincere obedience of Faith, when God might have insisted upon perfect obedience in a sinless subject. Manifest it is that Man (as he gathers from others) confounds Law and Gospel, which sets him and keeps him sadly wrong and dark in the Doctrine of Salvation by Grace through Christ. And yet notwithstanding I have ground enough to think that he judgeth himself to be exceeding clear in the matter, and looks upon me to be a silly deceived Creature, and that there is no Salvation for me, if I die an opposer of his confused notions, seeing that by what he saith in this which he calls his Question, he accounts me no other than a gross Idolater, that forms and frames a God (intending hereby the Doctrine I own) out of the forge of my own brain and imagination, calling it a golden calf, which I dance about, and call upon others to worship: By such disdain as this, this poor M●n discovers what his Spirit is; And though I could retaliate, yet I do not think it my way, and therefore all I shall say to this (which is downright calumny, for he cannot prove what he hath said) is, I wish there may be the like convictions, and hopeful work upon his Soul, which sometime since were manifest; And that the Lord of his abundant Mercy in Jesus Christ, if there be the truth of grace in his heart, would take away all that which obstructs the exercise of spiritual light, life, and love, with relation to the truths of the Gospel, and if there be not, that God would work it: God in some measure I hope helps me to discharge that commanded duty of praying for and wishing well to the Souls of mine Enemies.  
Q. 13. Whether a Covenant with terms and conditions for fallen Man to perform to give him right to Justification and Life, be properly a Covenant of Grace, yea or nay?  
I have shown there is a conditional Covenant, or a Covenant that insists upon such or such conditions to be performed by Man through assisting grace purchased and given, before Man have any interest in Christ, or right to Pardon and Life after an actual sort. Texts of Scripture might be multiplied for the proof, which are very express both in the Old Testament and New. In the Old Testament such as Isa. 1. 16, 17, 18. and 55. 7. Ezech. 18. 21, 22 In the New Testament, Luke 13. 3. John 3. 16. Acts 3. 19 10. 43. and 13. 38, 39 God in these Scriptures through Christ offers and promiseth Pardon and Life to all penitent believing obedient Sinners, upon which then I put the Question, whether Sinners (I speak of the Adult) have actual pardon and right to Life after a special sort, while yet they remain in a state of impenitency and unbelief, and so in actual rebellion against God: or the grant of pardon and right to life is suspended until such time as they by grace become sincere penitent Believers. If any should say the former, than they must hold that an impenitent unbelieving Soul, one that is and continues an actual Rebel against God may yet have special pardon, and an actual right to Salvation which is plainly repugnant to Scripture. If it be said that these benefits as to the actual donation are suspended until Repentance and Faith, must they not then be the terms of conditions upon which these blessings are made over to Sinners? If they were not, than I ask why the actual donation or gift of them is suspended until Repentance and Faith?  
If it be said first, They are no such terms or conditions which Sinners as Efficient causes do work in themselves or perform without the special concurrence and assistance of the Holy Spirit, I grant it.  
If it be said 2dly, They are no such terms or conditions, (which though they be wrought by the Holy Spirit, and performed by the concurring assistance thereof) as are meritorious of or do purchase a grant and donation of the forementioned blessings, this I also grant.  
If it be said 3dly, That they are no such terms or conditions which in their own nature procure our acceptation with God, this I as the former grant, for they themselves are accepted of God only for the meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness of Christ.  
But now if Persons will grant that God hath so knit and joined the blessings of Pardon and Life with Repentance and Faith, as that none (I speak of the Adult) shall have through Christ any interest in or actual right unto these benefits, but such as are qualified by the Holy Spirit with this grace whereby they may turn from Sin, and give their consent sincerely to be the Lord's Servants, and own this to be the order or method in which God through Christ dispenseth us saving grace, they say the same I intent, for I intent no more when I speak of conditions and terms in the Covenant of grace.  
And this same Man after he hath made a great pother and stir in stating most of his remaining Questions with respect to the denial of the condionality of the Covenant, yet under his 24th Question, he grants, if he will stick to what he hath writ, that Faith is a condition of Connection and Order; so that if he grant thus much which I affirm with relation to the conditionality of the Covenant, which he must do or he understands not himself when he saith that faith is a condition of connection and order, he owns as much the conditionality of the Covenant as I. And if so be he own condition of the Covenant of this sort, than he must hold that Pardon and life, as connected to Faith do immediately according to God's appointed order in the Gospel devolve upon him that hath this Faith, or else he must eat his words and deny a connection. And if so be that these benefits according to God's appointed order in the Gospel immediately devolve upon him that hath this Faith, than they must be promised unto him as such an one, (and so they are as the Scriptures I have mentioned above are express) and if they be promised unto him as such an one, than he must have that right to these blessings promised which another that wants this condition of connection and order hath not. Now then to our purpose I ask, is it Christ that this condition of connection and order respects, or is it a Sinner? if Christ, than we must suppose him, antecedent to this Faith, which he calls a condition of connection and order, to have been an unbeliever; if the sinner, than this condition of connection and order must be on his part, and not on Christ's, and when he hath it, he must be a confederate and not Christ, according to this Man's own grant; and if the believing Sinner be one of the confederates hereupon, then God promising the blessings that are connected with this Faith must be the other, and that with relation to the believing Sinner, seeing the blessings of Pardon and Life connected with his Faith respects him, and not Christ; for Christ himself needed pardon, or a right to Life; for he never was that I can find in a guilty perishing condition as a Sinners So that now if there be no Covenant of grace (as this Man hath affirmed) made betwixt God and Sinners, but only betwixt God and Christ. And yet Christ can be no pa●ty in this Covenant, but believing Sinners, go we upon his own concession, how must these things be reconciled? or this Man be consistent with himself? I shall leave it, he may see what he can make of it, for he hath granted a condition of the Covenant on our part, and this there cannot be without a Covenant respecting us, which hath no relation to Christ as a party; i. e. in his sense.  
There have been many and great contests about this matter; i. e. some affirming the Covenant of grace to be absolute, others conditional. Now in my thoughts there might be a very fair accommodation, for under a different consideration the Covenant may be said to be both absolute and conditional: Absolute, as the whole of the grace and saving benefits of it are free of mere favour through Christ, without respect to any merit or procuring desert in us. Conditional, as God in his infinite wisdom hath stated in his order of dispensation by Christ, that there shall be such a connection or conjunction betwixt true Faith, Pardon and Life, as that none (I speak of the Adult) shall have any actual interest in or right to this Pardon and Life without Faith previous thereunto in order of nature, and whoever they are that will deny this, they must deny the plainest part of Scripture. But it may be said, do not you affirm that the performance of the condition is required of us? I Answer, true, and the Scripture is express, we are enjoined to repent, believe, and obey, and not Christ for us; doth not this suppose us then, it may be said, to have a moral power in ourselves to repent, believe, and obey antecedent to the disposing and assisting grace of the Spirit? I Answer, no, God indeed by his command makes it our duty to repent, believe and obey, his infinite wisdom having ordered this as the best way or means to our having Pardon and Life through Christ, and therefore for this purpose will have the commands of the Gospel pressed upon Sinners. But then his promise of the gift of this grace through and for Christ to enable us hereunto supposeth our want of moral power, and so our insufficiency and inability in ourselves to perform, which the Spirit convinceth of: so that God's commanding us that which we have not in or from ourselves to perform without the renewing and assisting grace of his Spirit doth not suppose us to have the moral power of ourselves, but it only speaks God's order of acting in his dispensations towards Man whom he works upon as a rational Creature, who after he is convinced of his Sin and Misery must be acquainted with what is his duty in this case; and for this God gives his command, as in the case of those at Peter's Sermon, and the Jailor, etc. But then after acquaintance with his duty, and conviction of his own inability to perform, God by his promise conveys the grace of his Holy Spirit to give him that ability; so that now Man repenting and giving his sincere consent to be obedient to God in Christ, the blessings of Pardon and Life according to the tenor of the Covenant of grace devolve upon him for Christ, as the subject of the right; i. e. as a penitent Believer. So that in what I have said, it is manifest, the terms and conditions of the Covenant performed by Man through assisting grace are no other but terms and conditions of connection and order, as hath been explained. And here observe, this is so far from destroying, as that it doth establish the Doctrine of Justification by Faith, or that Doctrine which teacheth Faith to be our formal personal Righteousness, or that upon which God doth account us by the Covenant of grace subjects that have right through Christ to Pardon and Life; seeing that God hath so connected true Faith and these saving benefits as that it is his fixed order by this his Covenant to dispense the latter to such and such only (I speak of the Adult) as are qualified with the former. And if so, than such must have a legal right; i. e. a right in Law, and what is a right in Law, but a Righteousness in the sense of that Law? and seeing we cannot have a right in the account of the Law of Innocency, we cannot have a Righteousness in the account of that Law. And if not, than we must have another Law, and this can be no other, if a Remedy as we are fallen Creatures be but a Law of Grace and Mercy; and if this must not be, than we must have no legal right at all, and if no legal right, than no Justification, there must be no such thing, and if there be no such thing, then let Persons contend no more about it. And though it be true these conditions which are conditions of connection and order have not the Causality of the Efficient or meritorious cause, yet they have the place of the matter disposing and qualifying together with the form, which is God's accounting them as qualifying matter, they constitute the Sinner a Subject that hath right according to the tenor of the Gospel to Pardon and Life through and for Christ, and this is the nature of Justification.  
But though this Man in his 24th Question hath granted Faith to be a condition of connection and order (which is all that I intent, as I have explained myself, when I speak of the condition of the Covenant) and so granted hereby a Covenant of grace made betwixt God and believers, (as I have shown), yet his 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th Questions, they all respect the same thing; i. e. his denial of the conditionality of the Covenant, so consistent is this Man with himself; but if he had not granted what he hath, yet what I have said upon the former Question; i. e. his 13th may be a sufficient solution to these I have mentioned, and therefore I shall not take up time, nor fill up Paper, nor trouble the Reader with them, only seeing I have answered him so many Questions, I will request the same favour from him, that he will answer me these few upon the matter.  
1. Whether he do Baptise (as he calls it) Persons Adult considered as so and so qualified: or hath he no regard to any qualification, but administers the Ordinance to any that offer themselves, suppose they be Turks?  
2. Whether there be any such a thing as any Persons being in Covenant with God? If there be; then●  
3. Whether are they taken into Covenant as Infidels or as Believers? If there be not; then  
4. What is that which Baptism is a sign and Seal of? And  
5. Who have right to this Seal, and that whereof it is a Seal? It is only these few I shall propound, I desire weight; let him glory in number.  
Q. 20. I pass on to his 29th Question, If there be no right to Justification and life but by Faith, how then or by what are dying Infants saved; or by virtue of what Covenant have Infants right to Baptism?  
I Answer, By the Covenant of Grace upon the Faith of their Parents. He needed not (but it is like he would have had the number) to have sought the solution of such a Question as this; seeing I have at large before answered it in a Manuscript sent to one of his fellow Labourers, which it is strange if he have not seen; but however to this I remit him, and pass on to his.  
Q. 21. Doth not such an one, naming me, herein render the Doctrine of the most of those accounted Orthodox both Ancient and Modern to be false, the prayers of the most sincere impertinent, made in Sin and Ignorance, and the sufferings of the Martyrs to be foolishness.  
The greatest part of this I have answered already in what I have said to the 22d Article of his Faith; only as to that wherein he chargeth me as one that renders the Prayers of the most sincere impertinent, made in Sin and Ignorance. My Answer is, I do most firmly hold, that a sincere Prayer (though much Sin and Ignorance do and will remain in the Person who put up such a Prayer so long as in this Life) is not impertinent as to the intentions and desires of his Soul: though yet he may have uttered many impertinent words and expressions in that Prayer.  
Q● 22. Then whether is it not time for Ministers to repent of their errors, and tell the People plainly their forme● mistakes, and for Christians to reform their impertinent P●●ers, and never more to pray for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness nor to be found in him?  
I Answer, If so be a Minister have further light from God by his word, to discover any thing that he hath formerly held and p●eached to have been an error, he is to be thankful to God for that light, and to tell the People plainly of his mistakes in that point, and thus to repent: The People likewise so far as they have light to discover the impertinencies of their Prayers, are to reform. Will any wise or good Man deny this? But now this Man supposeth in his Question, that a Minister is free from error if he preach but up the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in the sense he would have it; and the People clear of impertinencies in their Prayers, if they pray but in his sense for the Imputatition of this Righteousness, because he fixeth upon this, after he hath spoken of the errors of the one, and the impertinencies of the other. But grant at the best, that he intends no more but this, that if it be an error for a Minister to Preach up the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, and for People to pray for it: then Ministers should repent of this their error, and People reform in their Prayers in this particular. I Answer, He would bear People in hand by this that I absolutely deny the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, which is false; for I have showed that I hold it in six particulars grounded upon Scripture, that which I deny upon the point, I have again and again declared, sc. that Christ's Righteousness is not so accounted by God unto us as in itself to be our personal formal Righteousness, or that our Persons are righteous with it in itself, or that God in Law sense accounts what Christ did and suffered, we did and suffered in him, as he was a common Person, and our Representative. Therefore whoever they are that hold such an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as this, I look upon it as an error and mistake in the notion, though such may be right in their practice acting contradictory thereunto, as I have shown.  
And touching that which he adds, i. e. of being found in Christ, this is no other but by union with him, and this union (as the most of our Divines have acknowledged) is by Faith. But when he speaks of praying for the Imputation of this Righteousness, he either means till they have some ground of hope that it is imputed: or they are to pray for it in ordinary, after they have this ground of hope that it is imputed. If the former only, than it must beimpertinent to pray for it in ordinary after some ground of hope that it is imputed. And further if a Person is to pray only for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness till he have some ground of hope that it is imputed, then according to this, a Man is no longer to pray for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness than he accounts or fears himself to be in an unjustified state.  
But now if Persons are to pray for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in ordinary after they have ground of hope that it is imputed; then they either pray for it because they have lost it after this and the other Imputation of it; or they pray for a further and further Imputation of it, because all the former were imperfect, they having not so much of it imputed as they could desire at this or the other time, let them take what part they will, they may easily find what briers it runs them into, and if after fight hereof they will resolve to stick there, who can help them; for if they take the former part that runs them upon an holding that a Man may fall from a justified state, which yet they deny: if they take the latter, than they cannot avoid but implicitly affirm, that they are imperfectly justified, and also that there may be a further and further augmentation of Christ's Righteousness in itself, it being only imputed by degrees, both which they will deny; and further it implies that Christ's Righteousness is divisible in its own nature. If they say that Persons are not to pray for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness after ground of hope that it is imputed● then for any of these to pray for it, their Prayers must be impertinent. Lord! what a jumble is here! for my part when I pray, I hope both to have the sins pardoned that attend me in the duty, and to have the duty accepted on●● for the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of 〈◊〉 blessed Mediator, and this is the simple and plain truth in this matter, and satisfied I am this is it that is in the practice of every sincere Soul in this duty, and which agrees with Gospel simplicity; whereas the other notion (as is manifest) is strangely complicated and confused, and draws after it such consequences as the abettors themselves will not own but are ashamed of.  
Q. 23. Is the promulgation of the Covenant of grace in absolute or conditional promises? If in absolute then how is the Covenant conditional?  
I have said enough to this before under his 13th Question.  
Q. 24. Is not the Covenant of grace and that which some call the Covenant of Redemption one and the same in matter and substance? or hath God properly made any more Covenants than two for Salvation and Life, commonly called the Covenant of ●●orks, and Covenant of Grace?  
I have said that under the 6th Article of his Creed, which may be a sufficient Answer to this, to which I remit the Reader, and also in other places have made it manifest that the Covenant of grace through and for Christ the purchaser is made by God with Believers, who are under it as actual consenters. But if all this will not do, let it be further observed, that we find in Scripture the Father's designation or appointing his Son our Lord and Saviour to the office of Redeemer; where it is said, him hath God the Father sealed, John 6. 27. and that he was fore●ordained before the foundation of the World for to be our Redeemer, yea, and to redeem us with the price of his precious blood, 1 Peter 1. 18, 19, 20. and received a commandment from his Father for the laying down of his Life, John 10. 18. Christ agrees hereunto, is willing to undertake for Sinners, become their Mediator, pay the price of their Redemption, and thus he consented. And doth not this much include the fo●m of a Covenant? and such a Covenant as could not be made with us in Christ, but was peculiar to him as Redeemer and Mediator, and therefore by Divines hath been called the Covenant of Mediation or Redemption.  
Let this Man, or any for him that can, prove that Christ took upon himself the Office of Mediator and Redeemer, without the Father's designation and his own consent; I still grant, that his Covenant was made for us, i e. with a design to procure our Redemption and Salvation; yea, and the means whereby we might in time be actual partakers. But then to tell of such a Covenant being made with us in Christ, must bring us under the same obligation with Christ, and what the consequence of this would be, Persons may see if they will but open one of their eyes. And that there is a Covenant made betwixt God and those that are his People, distinct from this Covenant made with Christ, besides express Scripture, is evident from Christ's being the Mediator of the Covenant. Now was Christ a Mediator of a Covenant made with himself, or with Believers? did he not mediate for reconciliation, and was he to be the party reconciled, or that stood in need of reconciliation, or Sinners? Is there any Covenant or none s●aled in Baptism and the Lords Supper? if there be, it is a Covenant sealed to Christ, or to Believers? if to Believers, how then can Christ be a party in that Covenant which is not sealed to him, but others?  
They urge that Text as the main proof that the Covenant of grace was made with Christ; i. e. Galat. 3 16. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to his Seeds as of many: but as of one. And to thy Seed, which is Christ. Our Divines say, not Christ personally, but Christ mystical is to be understood in in this place: But however grant we that Christ personal be meant, let us see if it will afford them what they will needs have.  
God promiseth to Abraham and to his Seed, Genesis 12. 3. and 22. 18. that in them all the Families and Nations of the Earth should be blessed. How blessed in Abraham and his Seed? Well, as Christ according to the Flesh should proceed from him and his Seed, by 〈◊〉 through whom Abraham's blessing; i. e. of God's being a God to him and to his Seed, might come upon the Gentiles, and thus God would have a covenanted People among the Gentiles as well as among the Jews, which covenanted People both of Jews and Gentiles should be Christ's Seed, both as purchased by him for this purpose, and regenerated and converted by his word and Holy Spirit. Now saith the Apostle the promises of this sort were not made to Abraham and his natural Seed, such as should proceed from him, and his immediate Seed Isaac, as though for and in them as such all the families and nations of the Earth should be thus blessed no, but to Christ, the seed of the Woman, the principal promised seed, the Saviour of the World, that through and for him this blessing of Abraham, of having God to be his God, and the God of his seed might come upon the Gentiles, which Exposition of the Text fitly agrees with those promises made to Christ as Redeemer. Psalm 2. 7, 8. I will declare the decree, the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance: and the uttermost parts of earth for thy possession. And he shall see his seed, and he shall see of the travail of his Soul; and Isa. 55. 5. Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew thee shall run unto thee, because of the Lord thy God, and for the holy one of Israel; for he hath glorified thee. Let it now be considered whether it be rightly concluded from this Text that the Covenant of grace is made with Christ and not with Believers through and for him. And whereas he puts the Question further, Hath God properly made any more Covenants than two for 〈◊〉 and Life commonly called the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace? I Answer, I do not say that God made any more Covenants with Man but two; i e. the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace; the one respecting Man in his state of Integrity, the other in his lapsed or fallen condition: but from hence it doth not follow, that there was no Covenant made with Christ distinct from both these, peculiate him as Mediator, respecting his redeeming work. But now with this Man's good leave, if the Covenant of Grace be made with Christ, than God never made any more Covenants than one with Man; i. e. the Covenant of Works; and thus no believer must be in Covenant with God, unless he be under the Covenant of Works, which indeed his Doctrine if he understood it tends to, in that he would have a legal righteousness to be the justifying matter of his Person, I mean a Righteousness adequate to the Law of Innocency, so that in his account such a righteousness must be the formal righteousness of his Person, and if so he must be under the Law according to his own notion as a Covenant of Works. If Adam had performed the conditions of the Covenant of Works as he once had power, undoubtedly life would have been continued unto him hereupon; but now to say such a Covenant was made with him for Salvation sounds harsh; for Salvation properly supposeth a Person is, or hath been in misery, or in an actual danger of perishing. And was Adam's case such, when God struck this Covenant with him? But he hath yet one Question more which is this.  
Q. 25. But wherein, saith he, doth such an one (naming me) in his supposed large acknowledgement of free grace, and imputation exceed or ascribe more to the grace of God and merits of Christ than Bishop Gardiner doth in those ten positions which he endeavours to maintain against those worthy Martyrs of Jesus Christ, Barnes, Hierome, and Garret, who sealed the contrary Doctrine with their dearest blood.  
This same Man in this hath reference to those six particulars according to which I affirm the Righteousness of Christ is imputed. And therefore Reader, I here give thee th●se ten 〈◊〉 of gardiner's, of which he speaks; and then again the six particulars in which I acknowledge Christ's Righteousness to be imputed, and shall leave thee according to Scripture to consider both parts; nay, to consider the things themselves, so as to judge whether what I affirm in this matter, be the same 〈◊〉 what Gardiner saith.  
Winchester's Articles.  
1. THE effect ●f Christ's passion hath a condition; the fulfilling of the condition diminisheth nothing the effect of Christ's passion. If he meant, by the effect of Christ's passion Pardon and Life pu●chased thereby, and that these have a condition of connection and order, (as I have explained above) he saith no more but what this Man hath granted himself: But if he intent by condition, any thing that in its own nature is meritorious of such effects of Christ's passion, (as I suppose he doth) I utterly disclaim any condition on Man's part of this sort, and so cannot be one with him.  
2. They that will enjoy the effects of Christ's passion must fulfil the condition. If he meant they must fulfil it by the assistance of God's grace, as a condition of connection and order, it is true; but if he meant they must fulfil it so as that they may merit or deserve it from the very nature of the thing, (which I think he did) according to the Popish Doctrine, that Christ hath merited that we might merit, than it is false.  
3. The fulfilling of the condition requireth first knowledge of the condition, which knowledge we have by faith. Perhaps he meant by faith, a blind implicit faith, that which is so much in vogue and cried up at this day even among such as account themselves the greatest Anti-papists.  
4. Faith cometh of God, and this faith is a good gift, it is good and profitable to me, it is profitable to me to do well and exercise this faith. So it is I must confess if he spoke of that faith which according to the Scripture is true and saving for and through the merits of Christ, and not such a faith that doth deserve of itself, or in its own nature the reward, for I know no such faith) therefore, faith Gardiner further, By the gift of God, I may do well before I be justified. In the following Article he further explains himself.  
5. Therefore I may do well by the gift of God before I am justified towards the attainment of my J●●ification. If he meant by way of merit to procure Justification ex opere operato, from the very work done, it is false, and I disown it.  
6. There is ever as much charity towards God as faith, and as faith increaseth, so doth charity increase. If this be taken absolutely, every one may judge of it as they have light.  
7 Towards the attainment of Justification is required Faith and Charity. If he meant still as meriting procuring causes in their own nature, I disown it.  
8. Every thing is to be called freely done, whereof the righteousness is free, and at liberty without any cause of provocation. This is a jumble like some other things I have met with of late, and therefore I shall leave it to such as this Man, who account themselves much wiser than I to find out the true intent and meaning, and shall not trouble the Reader with conjectures.  
9 Faith must be to me the assurance of the promises of God made in Christ (if I fulfil the condition) and love must accomplish the condition, whereupon followeth the attainment of the promises according to God's truth. This doth not much differ from the Doctrine of such as place the very Essence of Faith in assurance, I speak as to the first branch of it, and for the rest I leave it as confused.  
10. A Man being in deadly Sin may have grace to do the work of penance, whereby he may attain to his Justification. If he meant that though a Man may be bound over to eternal death by Sin, and live in a state of impenitency, yet God may give him the grace of repentance, who can fairly deny this? but than that such an one by his repentance doth merit by it in its own nature that God should justify him, this is false, and I disown it. It was not my province to say any thing upon these Articles; but only barely to transcribe them, that the Reader might compare them and mine, and see whether they be all of a piece, as this Man insinuates. Hence mine follow, Touching Christ's Righteousness and the Imputation thereof, I affirm,  
1. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it was for ●ur Redemption and Salvation.  
2. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it to be the sole or only merit and purchase of the new Covenant, and the benefits thereof.  
3. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it to be the merit of the blessed Spirit to work grace.  
4. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it is for this that all the duties and graces of his People are accepted.  
5. God so far imputes it, as that he accounts it for this he pardons us, and receives us into favour, and justifies by his Covenant of Grace upon believing, and so accepts our Faith for Righteousness: It is not without Christ but for him.  
6. I do believe, that what Christ did and suffered, he did and suffered for us in the Person of a Mediator; and God doth account what he did and suffered as Mediator, doth and shall avail as much for the obtaining of Pardon and Life for us upon Faith, as though we had been able to have done and suffered the same in our own Persons.  
Now, Reader, compare, and be judge whether Winchester's Articles and mine in this point of Imputation do so agree as this Man hath the modesty to affirm; and if thou be such an one as Calumniations have weight with, thou mayst have enough in him.  
But further, saith he, the Martyrs before named sealed the contrary Doctrine with their dearest Blood; i. e. the Doctrine contrary to mine as well as that of Winchester's, for this he must chief intent in affirming Winchester's and mine; i. e. my six things before mentioned do so agree, that I in them do not exceed nor ascribe more to the grace of God and the merits of Christ than Winchester doth in his. Be it known then unto all Men, That if this Man, or any other for him, can find me any one either in the Scripture, or in that which hath been accounted the Church of Christ by the Reformed since the Apostles times, that was reckoned a faithful Servant of God, and yet sealed, as such, a Doctrine contradictory to what is contained in the six particulars with his 〈◊〉 her dearest Blood; and I profess I will retract them, if so, than such an one should have holden and this agreeable to the Scriptures, and the common suffrage of the Church of Christ, That Christ's satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness was not nor is not accounted by God to have been for our Redemption and Salvation, nor to have been the sole purchase and merit of the new Covenant and the benefits of it together with the Holy Spirit, nor to be that for which God accepts of the graces and duties of his People, nor to be that for which God pardons and receives penitent believing Souls into favour, etc. Let him prove now if he can that Barns, Hierome, and Garret, sealed such a Doctrine thus contradictory to mine with their dearest Blood. Hierome and Garret agreed with Barnes in the Doctrine of Faith, and we find Barnes affirming, that good works are to be done, and they that do them not shall not come into the Kingdom of God; and we find him only excluding them from Justification and Salvation in point of merit, making Christ and the death of Christ only meritorious of these. Wherein now do I contradict these Holy Martyrs in this. And whereas he saith that these Men sealed the Doctrine contrary to Winchester's (and so to mine which he would make to be of the same piece with his) with their dearest Blood, he insinuates the cause of their Death to have been known unto them, when yet they themselves enquired after the cause and could have no account as to any particular in this matter of which this Man speaks. But he hath not done yet, I must have another cast of his Office before he leave this his Question; and that is, that really and in truth he doubts whether I hold any Imputation of Christ's Righteousness at all in a Protestant sense. So that in his account he must be no Protestant that holds, that God reckons the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ to have been for our Redemption and Salvation; or to have been the merit of the Covenant of Grace and the promised benefits thereof to ●●evers; or to have been the merit of the acceptation ●●eir grace and duty, etc. And if he be no Protestant that holds these things, than those that hold things concontradictory unto them, must be the only Protestants for aut hoc aut ejus contradictorium, and who can these be but the Socinians. So that plain it is none are Protestant's with this Man but such, as to this point. Thus I have done with his Interrogatories.  
The next province he hath entered upon hath been to transcribe Mr. Troughton's Theses and Antitheses, to which there is enough said already in answer, so that to speak to these particularly will be but actum agere, to do that which is already done.  
But for all that Mr. Troughton hath said in his Book to render the Doctrine I have been insisting upon, and according to my weak ability vindicating, odious. Yet if I mistake not, Page 121, saith he, Faith is the means whereby the obedience and death of Christ is applied to us, not, saith he, by a physical, but a moral application giving us a right to all the benefits of them. Benefits of what? why, of Christ's obedience and death. So that plain it is Christ's Righteousness which he makes consist in his active and passive obedience is not made over to us, quoth he, by physical application; i. e. not in itself or in its own nature; but by a moral, Faith as a moral means giving us a right to all the benefits of them; i. e. of his obedience and death. And what can be more fully said to our purpose or on our part than this. And he adds, God having promised Salvation upon the account of his Son's satisfaction to all that come to him, and believe in him, Page 122 he saith, there being but these two ways by which Man can be saved, either by fulfilling the Law of God: or in case of Sin, by fleeing unto, and trusting in the mercy of God, if so, then Faith must give the interest, Pag. 23. Faith is not a proper condition, but a qualification capacitating the Soul to receive benefit of Christ appointed by God for that use, and having the promise of success, Man being a rational Creature cannot be taken into God's favour without his own consent, nor can he be made partaker of any promise without accepting of it, and 〈◊〉ing in it. An heir, saith he further, if he live not 〈◊〉 lack understanding, cannot inherit the estate though never so absolutely purchased, and yet life and discretion are not conditions of the purchase, (mark here he only denies Faith to be a meriting or purchasing condition, and he doth well) but qualifications of the subject necessary to enjoy it, it is well if he and some do not part for this; but he goes on, these qualifications are not in Men's power, as Faith is in Christ's power to give it, (very good still true) he having purchased faith and perseverance for all those he died for; which binder's not his purchase from being full and absolute, whereas to suspend it upon any condition doth not make it not full. We will not differ about a term, seeing he fairly grants the thing; i. e. that faith is a qualification capacitating the Soul to receive benefit by Christ, and is a moral means giving right to the benefits of Christ's obedience and death, which is only made ours in its benefits hereby, by which he must grant an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us only in its fruits and effects.  
Towards the Conclusion, saith he, I mean the Man I have had to deal with, you may as well seek to rend the skin from my flesh, as cause me to let go Christ's imputed Righteousness, I may not, I dare not, etc. If he mean in itself, he will find it neither is nor can be his so, neither doth God account it to us after a Physical sort; and therefore he need not fear that any should rob him of this, for no Man can take away that from another, that he neither hath nor is ever like to have. Christ's Righteousness is his own, proper to him, and it is for this we have the application of saving good upon repentance and faith; but it is not for us to be made righteous with, in our own persons; If it be in itself for impetration, it is not in itself or in its own nature for application; i. e. to be applied unto us, but only in its benefits upon Faith. Here he brings in one that respect and reverence forbids me to name, saying, Christ's Righteousness imputed is the sweetest word in all the Scriptures; yea, and saith this Man again, we find the Apostle expressing the same ten times in the 4th Chapter of the Romans, when yet there is no such expression in all the Bible; it is a wonder how Men dare say, that God in his word saith such a thing expressly, when yet no such expression is there to be found. I have made it evident that I deny not the thing in a sound sense; but so as some Men will have it, this I must deny for reasons already given.  
Thus I am brought nigh to the Conclusion of this work which I have endeavoured to perform according to the rule and line of the Holy Scripture. I impose nothing herein upon any, 〈◊〉 desire the Readers to lay aside prejudice, and judge ac●●●●ing as matters herein contained will bear weight in 〈◊〉 balance of the Sanctuary, imploring the conduct of the Holy Spirit which leads into all that is truth. And if any shall account it their concern to oppose judging me to be Heterodox, I desire they will produce argument, and this particular and distinct, and such as may be concordant to the Sacred Text, and carry in it convincing evidence: that hereby I having a discovery of my mistake (for I have not attained to a state of sinless unerring perfection, though at the present I am satisfied touching the substance of what is mine that it is truth) may learn more; for though I be by Office a teacher of others, yet I am but a disciple myself, and desire further and further instruction from my great Master, and if it appear that it is his, I hope I shall take it, let the Instrument be what it will that he is pleased to make use of.  
If any shall be offended because the work is not so accurate nor in such a fine dress as they think it should have been, I must tell them. I did not study to please such, but my aim was the information and edification of those who desire more sound knowledge for practice, than the subtlety of wit, or the sound of words to please the ●ar: And therefore if this of mine will not please, because it wants the dress they desire, they are at liberty to let it alone, and cook and dress something for themselves and their own guests of this nature; and serve it up in a dish in which it may be more grateful, and go better off.  
And whereas Readers, you may meet with the repetition of some things, know it was not with a design to fill up Paper, or make a great deal of a little; but because many things did occur which did require it, seeing that many Persons will scarce take the pains to look back to what they have had, though I have put them upon it in several parts of this work.  
And my request to you, Readers, whosoever you be, is that you will not content yourselves with the notion of truth, it is good in itself, yea, and it is necessary to have your judgements as clear and sound as may be; but know if this be all, you are but passing for all your light towards utter darkness. Christian practice according to knowledge, and the increase thereof is the life of the matter, he that knows his Master's will and doth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes. For a Man to have a head full of light, so that he can both discourse of, and defend the truths of God; and yet have an heart stuffed with pride, hypocrisy, formality, love of the World, desires after its profits, preferments and honours, and a life alienated from the life of God, living in 〈◊〉 formity to this vain World, a stranger to a Spiritual and 〈◊〉 venly conversation; alas, this light will but prove an ● 〈…〉 ● tion of his condemnation! whatever light of the truth any Man hath that makes him not more holy, humble, and heavenly in heart and life, unites him not more to God in Christ, makes not Christ more precious, and this world with all the fading enjoyments of it of a small value compared therewith, and is not improved by a close walking with God according to the rule of his word; this his knowledge, though good in itself, yet it is unprofitable for him. Such an acquaintance with God in Christ by the Holy Spirit from the word as enricheth a Soul with experience of God's favour which is life, and his loving kindness which is better than life, and so excites and quickens love to God, desire after him, delight in him through Christ, as that such a Soul resolves to follow God and adhere to him by faith in self-denial and crucifiction to this World for all the trials and matter of discouragement it meets with this, this is the Soul which hath that knowledge of God in Christ which is life eternal begun. John 17. 3. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.  
Sirs, Converse with God through Christ by the Holy Spirit in all his ordinances is that which I beseech you be concerned for; and though some deride this, yet know that all your devotion is to no purpose, if you live and die strangers to it, for why, well, it is but cold, formal, and customary without it: it is not a living, but a dead service in which persons are and continue unacquainted what converse with the living God means, that God who is the Infinite Ocean of good through Jesus Christ. And though it is true there is not the like sensible enjoyment of God's quickening presence at all times, yet it is that which a Child of God desires, and cannot content himself without; and therefore when he waits upon God and finds it not so as he desires, this is an affliction unto him: for this is that which he values before, and which glads his Soul above the best of Creature confluences, when it is enjoyed. Psalm 4. 6, 7. There be many that say, who will show us any good? Lord, life thou up the light of thy countenance upon us. Thou hast put gladness in my heart, more than in the time that their corn and their wine increased. These lower things are but insipid and unsavoury compared where this is enjoyed. Know therefore upon the matter, whoever they a●e that deny communion with God, they must at the same time deny that there is any such thing as a superlative love of God: for if they will grant this, than there must be communion, seeing that which any Man loves above and before all other things his heart cannot but be united unto, and 〈◊〉, his thoughts will with the greatest sweerness be exer●●spam●● upon it, and his desires work warmly after it; if absent; and his chief delight be in it if present and enjoyed, and is not here communion? and thus it must be where there is a superlative love to God, (which undoubtedly is in the heart of every true Christian) and so both union and communion.  
In a word Sirs, consider your all of good is from God through Christ by the Spirit, from the Father as the ●ountain, through the Son as the purchaser, by the Spirit as the principal applier and worker; nothing of good is from yourselves purchased and merited by yourselves, or by you wrought in yourselves. Keep humble then, admire and adore the love, grace, and mercy of the Trinity of Persons in the unity of the Godhead in all the good you receive and enjoy, and say of thine own we have received, and of thine own we give thee back again And in the work and way of sincere constant obedience to God's commands according to your vow and promise in Baptism, look by faith unto, and plead the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ, for the acceptation of all your duties, which retains and will do its mediating virtue, for which be you ever, ever, ever thankful, Coloss. 3. 17. And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. If this be your practice which the Doctrine I have delivered, and have been vindicating in these few sheets directs to, you will find the blessed fruit of it through and for our blessed Mediator. And though Men of a contrary mind set themselves to oppose, judging themselves hereby wise enough already, and not only so, but reproach such as will not make their measure their Rule, as proud, conceited, and self righteous Persons, who make light of Christ's Righteousness, and accounting themselves and such as are on their part, the only grave, serious, humble Christians, I mean these that do thus oppose; yet let not u● render evil for evil, but earnestly desire of God that these Me● may be found such as they account themselves to be; And tha● none of us through our abuse of light may be found such proud conceited, Pharisaical Persons, as these Men have passed the doom I am sure if we do, the Doctrine will not be in the fault for i● hath a contrary tendency, as hath been shown. Heb. 10 20, 21 Now the God of peace that brought again from the dead our Lor● Jesus, that great Shepherd of the Sheep, through the blood of th● everlasting Covenant, Make you perfect in every good work to 〈◊〉 will, working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.   
FINIS.