unbelievers No subjects of JUSTIFICATION, Nor of mystical Union to Christ, Being the sum of a Sermon preached at New-SARUM, with a Vindication of it from the objections, and calumniations cast upon it by Mr. William Eyre, in his Vindiciae Justificationis. Together with Animadversions upon the said Book, and a refutation of that Antifidian, and Anti-Evangelical error asserted therein: viz. The justification of Infidels, or the justification of a sinner before, and without Faith. Wherein also the conditional necessity, and instrumentality of Faith unto justification, together with the consistency of it, with the freeness of God's grace, is explained, confirmed, and vindicated from the exceptions of the said Mr. Eyre, his arguments answertd, his authorities examined, and brought in against himself. By T. WARREN Minister of the Gospel at Houghton in Hampshire. PROV. 17.15. He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord. Videmus ut priorem locum teneat Dei dilectio, tanquam summa causa & origo, & sequatur fides in Christum tanquam causa secunda, & propria. Calv. I●st. lib. 2. c. 17. n. 2. LONDON, Printed by E. T. for John Browne at the sign of the Acron in Paul's Churchyard, 1654. To the Right Worshipful, Mr. Mayor, The Court of Aldermen, and Common Council of the City of New-sarum, Grace and Peace from JESUS CHRIST. Right Worshipful, IT was an excellent speech of Luther's, Ego odi meos libros, et saepe opto eos interire, quod metuo, ne morentur lectores à lectione ipsius scripturae, quae sola omnis sapientiae fons est. I hate my own books, and wish them lost which yet were of excellent use and for which the Church stands much bound unto God in thankfulness, because I fear the reading of them will hinder the reading of the scriptures, which indeed is the fountain of all spiritual wisdom. And for this reason we have cause to wish that many books were burnt, especially such as tend to corrupt the sense of the scripture; And of all books, such as serve to cast the reader quite off from the foundation, and to turn them aside to another Gospel. This caused that holy Apostle to thunder out an anathema against such: if an Angel from heaven shall preach any other Gospel, let him be accursed. And the truth is, we can never err more dangerously then in the doctrine of justification; For which cause he is of small judgement, and less observation, that seethe not how needful it is to have this doctrine kept pure: And especially with you, where * Mr. William Eyre. one is risen up amongst yourselves, who hath sown tares in the Lord's field, whose opinion treads Antipodes to the gospel, which he hath published to the world in his book, which he calleth Vindiciae justifications gratuitae, which (that I may do him right) I judge the strongest shield and buckler, wherewith this Antinomian cause was ever protected: Yet as in Salem of old, God broke both sword and shield, so I doubt not but he hath done the like now in this ensuing treatise (though by a weak hand) making a few scripture arguments to pierce this shield, and to wound the Cause that he maintains, that it lies a bleeding at the feet of a scripture truth. And for the Author, I wish he had had more respect to truth, the church's peace, that he had carried meekness and love to the persons whose judgement he doth oppose, fight with his heart and pen, against their arguments, not their persons: but the want of this is obvious to every eye, his opinion is diametrically opposite to the letter of the Scriptures, to the unanimous Consent of all orthodox antiquity, and the learned of the present age, to the harmony of the Churches; and yet he boldly chargeth us, and all that descent from him, to be no better than Papists and Arminians. And I doubt not but all to whom we are known, have done justice upon this piece of his morality. And for his opinion itself, I question not but every believer that hath embraced the truth as it is in jesus, (as a sufficient professor in this controversy) hath condemned it for Novelisme, and a dangerous error, and do judge that Satan's design by him is to draw others, but you especially (if it be possible) from the simplicity, & sincerity of the gospel received: but I am persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation: Yet I think it meet to stir you up to a diligent examination of the Scriptures, that this Corner stone of justification in the building of your faith may be laid aright. And whereas Mr. Eyre hath in the hearing of some of you, condemned a Sermon of mine, preached amongst you, as anti-scriptural, and my arguments irrational, and now in his printed book hath decried it as wide from the orthodox faith as well as contrary to his doctrine, and contradictory to many plain Scripturrs, and dorogatory to the full atonement which Christ hath made by his death, and disconsolatory to the souls of men, in laying the whole weight of their salvation upon an uncertain condition of their own performing: * Where observe, that Mr. Eyre's name was not mentioned in the preaching of the sermon, though it be in this printed Copy, and such passages as relate to his book were added since the publishing of his. I have once again presented this to your eyes, which was delivered to some of your ears, with some small addition, and as little alteration as I could but in substance the same; and I willingly submit it to your examination by the word, and to the censure of my brethren, who I know are most able to award an upright judgement in this case; and I doubt not but I shall have public right done as your Reverend Pastor, Mr. Conant by name, of precious esteem now with Christ, did before in your hearing give a public, and seasonable acknowledgement to the soundness of this Sermon, in the Congregation, at the time of this Crimination. I have likewise sent forth together with it a polemical discourse, to vindicate this distressed truth, which this Sermon holds forth, and to break the staff of the oppressor. And as little David, I am come forth against this enemy to the truth of Christ, with a sling and a few stones, drawn out of the pure Crystal river of the scriptures, and doubt not, but God, whose cause I plead, will so fare assist me, as that these stones shall smite and sink into the forehead of this error, that it shall fall Goliah-like to the earth, and the weak hand that he useth shall only point at the mighty arm of God, which neither any error, nor they that do defend it, are able to resist, Hieron. Novit Veritas paucorum manu, et non de multis militum copiis triumphare. Truth is great, and will praevaile, though destitute of all weapons, except what is drawn out of the armoury of Scriptures, yea I doubt not, but you yourselves have done execution upon his error. And I was glad (though not so much in my own behalf, as in respect of you) of that letter, which was signed by some of you, bearing witness to the truth, and desiring me not to be discouraged for that uncivil affront, And although Mr. Eyre blame me for the like practice, and that of all men I had least reason to be offended with it, because I had done the same thing in another place, I must tell him, I took that liberty but once, and that out of constraint; for after I had privately borne witness against some Antinomian errors vented by one Mr. Symonds at Rumsey, the next time I heard him, he was advanced higher into familisticall blasphemy, asserting, A believer was as righteous as Christ, and that being one with him, according to the prayer of Christ in the 17 Chap. of john's Gospel, Lord make them one as we are one, and having the righteousness of Christ imputed, which is the righteousness of God himself, he propounded it to the people to consider, if a Christian were not a certain divine person as the son of God is: And to have been silent in this case, had been my sin, especially seeing the people were led captive by him into his former errors of Antinomianism, admirers of his person, and of a ductile spirit: But that I desired the people not to believe a word which Mr. Symonds taught, hath as much truth in it (though Mr. Eyre relate it) as that had which was spoken to Christ concerning the Kingdoms of the world, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them, for that is delivered to me, and to whomsoever I will, I give it. And he himself doubted of the truth of it, for he addeth, how justly I cannot tell, yet in his passion to render me odious he relates it, though he be commanded not to receive an accusation against an Elder, under two or three witnesses. But to return unto you, 1 Tim. 5.18. Right worshipful, to whom I have been bold to dedicate this little Tractate, I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, receive neither it nor me, but so far forth as it is agreeable to the word of truth, and if God hath not given me darkness for a vision, I apprehend a marvellous beauty in the truth here offered unto you, nay already embraced by you, which Mr. Eyre striving tanquam pro aris et focis, seeketh to undermine. I beseech you stand fast in the truth, and in the love of it. The rain fell as impetuously upon, the floods did swell with as great rage against, and the winds did storm with as great violence, the house built upon the rock, as that, which was built upon the sands: And the truth of Christ that is built upon the scriptures as an rock, is capable of as much opposition from men, (and especially this of the free justification of a sinner by faith) as any brainsick opinion of men that lie in wait to deceive, which hath no affinity, nor confederacy with the word of God. Having therefore such a sure word of prophecy, you shall do well if you take heed to it, 2 Pet. 2 9 as to a light that shineth in a dark place: Account it your great honour to honour God, and your honourable profession, by keeping the doctrine received, and as you have hitherto done, show yourselves to be men of understanding, and not Children, tossed up and down with every wind of doctrine; even so stand fast in the truth of Christ, And Copy out that grace and faith in your lives, 3 John. 1●. which you profess to have, and practise that great commandment of loving one another as Christ hath loved you, hereby shall it be known that ye are his disciples indeed, though the Antinomians judge it a dark sign that cannot give a sufficient evidence to the conscience of justification, and herein they contradict Christ and his Apostle, who said, By this we know that we are passed from death to life because we love the brethren; 1 john 3.15 Ephes. 4.3 Rom. 16.14 study to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace: Beware of dividing principles, and dividing practices, and mark those among you that cause divisions and offences, and avoid them; be thankful unto God for the light of his gospel that yet shines amongst you; be thankful to the Lord, that although error walk abroad without a vizard, there is so much liberty to profess, and defend the truth. Pray to the Lord, which is all you have to do in things which might be better in the public, and praise God that they are no worse. Prise the Church's peace next to the peace of a good conscience, and yet buy not peace with the loss of truth. And as God hath magnified his word above all his name, do you esteem it above your credit. Remember Obed Edom that was blessed for the arks sake; and though I know and believe some of you do not count gain to be godliness, yet you shall find godliness to be great gain: the gospel is not so poor a guest, but it is able to recompense those that lodge and entertain it. A Guest seldom bestows his bounty but at his departure, but there is no gain to be expected by this guest at his departure, but a loss that cannot be recovered. I commend it to your care to preserve the ark amongst you, fail in this, and the vital spirit of your corporation will be lost together with it. And I beseech you have not men's persons in admiration, affect not the word for the persons sake, but the person for the words sake. Let not knowledge be laid up for discourse, but for practice, not so much to enrich the head, Luke. 12.14. Math. 23.22. as to amend the heart. Beware of covetousness, lest the cares of the world choke the good seed of the word. Think not an hour more prrofitably spent in the Shop then in the church, in enquiring into your debts, then in searching of your consciences, cast up your accounts often with God, consider what religion will cost you, make sure your evidences for eternal life, have not a Christ to seek, when you shall have life to seek: Be sure to do good, or to receive good wheresoever you go, with whomsoever you deal, let your public trust make you men of public spirits, suffer nor your Taverns to be full, when your churches are empty, and whilst you complain of the badness of the times: let them not be the worse for you. what evil you cannot help to redress, bewail, let your sighs be more for your sins then your crosses, encourage them that teach the good knowledge of the Lord, and hid not your talents in a napkin, but trade with them for your Master, that at his coming he may say to you, Well done, good, and faithful servants, enter into the joy of your Lord. Which that you may not fail of, nor be led aside with the error of the wicked, & fall from your own steadfastness, (but may grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Christ, who is our hope) shall be the prayer of him, who is Your remembrancer at the throne of grace, and your soules-servant in the work of Christ, THOMAS WARREN. TO THE Christian Reader. Courteous Reader, IN this interval of church discipline, which is no small damage to the church, and a manifest injury to the Kingly office of jesus Christ, every bold adversary to the truth taketh liberty to question, and deny the fundamental articles of religion; and being equally infranchized with the Orthodox in the liberty of the press, and armed with this advantage, that the nature of man is more prone to embrace error, than truth, and the Athenian itch having infecting the minds of most men, that they spend their time in nothing else but to relate, or hear some new thing, hence the world is at once infected with dangerous heresies, and men's judgements are leavened with an antipathy against the known, and received truths of Christ; hinc illae lachrimae. But to see Mr. Eyre, and men of some name for learning, walking in the throng of seducers, and to list themselves among the common adversaries to religion, and to become Satan's decoys to ensnare the simple, and lead them from the simplicity of the gospel, to see such men ascend the chair, and turn professors, and defenders of error, yea even panders to the flesh, it is time for the lords servants to stand up as Champions for the truth. But alas that complaint of Hierome concerning the seducers of his time may well be taken up, Ardentius ab illis defenditur haeresis, quàm à nostris oppugnatur. Heresy is more zealously defended by them, then opposed by us. I confess I prise the unity of brethren, and next to the peace of a good conscience the Church's peace, provided that peace, and truth may live together; but where truth must be strangled to preserve peace, it is better to ransom the life of truth though it be with the loss of peace. For which cause I have appeared in this controversy, (not so much to vindicate myself defamed by Mr. Eyre as) to rescue the truth, which he doth under the show of defending the freeness of God's grace (& therefore t●e more dangerously) seek to destroy his error, being of such consequence, that it subverteth (if received) the whole order of the Gospel, it opposeth a main article of religion, & openeth a wide door to profaneness. And next to this, my respects to some to whom my ministry may be useful, hath drawn me forth to this vindication, to whom I may say as Augustin, Mihi sufficit conscientia mea, Aug: ad fratres in cremo. vobis autem necessaria est fama mea. The testimony of my own conscience that I have not in that Sermon which M. Eyre doth oppose, departed from the truth, had been sufficient to me, but to them a vindication of myself, and it may be necessary. What Mr. Eyre's intentions were to rend the Church's peace, and to trouble the world with the untimely birth of this error I cannot tell, sure I am, that if it were not finis opperantis, yet 'tis finis operis, the end of the work, if not of the author to unsettle christians in the doctrine of faith. It may be, because he reckons himself to be one of the manly sort of Divines he speaks of, and not being content to lie in obscurity, he is willing to raise an estate of reputation by letting the world see how able he is to defend an error. There are many who, as learned Vossius well observes, gloriosum putant toti antiquitati bellum indicere, nec fl●ccipendunt si haeretici, modo docti habeantur, think it a glorious thing to oppose all antiquity, nor do they care to be accounted heretics, so they may have the repute of being learned. And that his opinion, viz. the Antedency of justification unto faith, is repugnant to all orthodox antiquity, is above contradiction: Neither is there any one error against which Scripture light doth more rise up in arms then this, and I appeal to every intelligent reader whether it doth not run contrary to the very vein of the gospel, which teacheth justification to be the effect, not the cause of faith, as he in terminis doth assert, p. 78, 79. that he seethe no absurdity to say, that faith is from justification causally, and justification by faith evidentially. It was the complaint of Aug: in his time, sub laudibus naturae latent inimici gratiae, but we may invert and alter the proposition, and say, sub laudibus gratiae latent inimici fidei, enemies to faith shelter themselves under the praises of Gods free grace. And herein I wonder much at Mr. Eyre that he should oppose grace, and faith, when he knoweth that the adversaries he opposeth, hold not faith a condition of the Covenant, either in an Arminian, or Popish sense, and that the Scripture saith that it was the purpose of God to justify us by faith, that it might be of grace, Rom. 4.16. 2 Ephes. 8. as the reader may see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 4 to the Rom. 16 therefore it is of faith that it might be of grace, and in 2. Ephes. 8. by grace ye are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast. I can scarcely have so much faith, and charity to think that a man can live by faith, that sets himself to destroy that grace of faith by which we live; however, 1 Eph. 18.19. ● 1 Rom. 17. 2 H●b. 4. 3 Eph. 17. he is a small friend to this grace, which the Scripture doth so highly commend, as being wrought by the same almighty power that wrought in Christ when God raised him from the dead, by which the just shall live, and by which Christ dwelleth in our hearts, that shall deprive it of the most vital, and noble act of it, viz. of uniting us to Christ, and intitling us to the righteousness of Christ unto justification. I plead not for faith so as to set the crown upon her head which is due to Christ alone, she is content to be the friend of the bridegroom, neither seeketh she to share with Christ in the honour of Salvation. Faith is content, and all that have it, to whither in their reputation, it is fit that Christ should increase, and we decrease, we plead not then to have faith to be a corrival with Christ, to be a social, and coordinate cause in the justification of a sinner. And yet we cannot but give it that office which God hath assigned to it, to be an instrumental cause of justification, wherein it hath the praecedency above all other graces, as being the only instrument ordained of God to receive Christ's righteousness, and so not only to be a necessary antecedent of salvation as other graces are, which are necessary necessitate medii, and are causae dispositivae of salvation, but this is necessary by way of causality for the application of Christ's righteousness unto justification. And when we say, that we are justified by faith, we understand it not by faith as a work, or a grace, as an act, or as an habit, by virtue of any innate worth, excellency, and dignity in faith; we do not take it sensu proprio, in whole, or in part, as Arminians, Papists, and Socinians do, in making it the matter of our righteousness, but when that is spoken of we understand it metonimicè, tropically, by relation to its object, for what man that is not a professed Papist, and enemy to the free grace of God did ever dream of justification by faith without an object, you may as well dream of a man without a soul as to be justified without Christ. Yet when we take faith tropically, for the object of faith, we do not take faith exclusively, (although we so apprehend it when you speak of the matter of our righteousness) as if faith had no hand in justification, no not by way of application of Christ's righteousness, as if by the word faith, were understood Christ, surely this were not to keep our wit's company And if it were the Apostles meaning to exclude faith from having any hand in justification upon any terms whatsoever, surely he would not so darkly have expressed himself by a figurative expression, when he might have done it more clearly by putting in the name Christ for faith, as Mr. Eyre would teach us to do. We willingly grant that Christ is the meritorious cause of justification which he seemeth to me to deny, (making justification an * Christis not the meretorious cause of any immanent act in God. immanent and not a transient act, as we do) we also grant that Christ's active, and passive obedience is the matter of our righteousness, and the formal cause of justification is the imputation of this righteousness, without any works of ours. Yet this no way excludes faith from being an active instrument to apply this righteousness to us, (faith it is our act, although it be God's gift, it is our instrument wrought in us by God for our benefit, to apply by his ordination the righteousness of Christ unto justification.) For as the efficient cause excludeth not the meritorious, so neither doth the meritorious exclude the instrumental, which in suo genere, in its kind, is as necessary as the other; for bonum est ex integris causis: but I shall more fully open this in stating of the controversy, and will not therefore anticipate myself any further, but shall refer the reader thither for further satisfaction, where I intent to handle this controversy more largely, though I desire the reader to take notice that I shall chiefly meddle with that in Mr. Eyre's his book, which relates to myself, and purely belongs to this controversy, leaving that which belongeth to Mr. Woodbridge, that I may not falcem in alienam messem immittere, put a sickle into another man's harvest. And if any man desire further satisfaction why I publicly interpose in this controversy, seeing Mr. Woodbridge so eminently qualified, hath already undertaken this task, I take that of Hierom, Hierom. to be a sufficient apology. Nolo quenquam in suspicion haereseos esse patientem. I would have none to bear the suspicion of heresy: and Mr. Eyre hath both in the pulpit, and press rendered me to be heterodox in the point of justification, he hath declaimed against my Sermon, as anti-scriptural, my arguments as irrational, and in his book he saith I have delivered what was wide from the orthodox faith, Mr. Eyre's vindic: p. 5, and contrary to many plain scriptures, derogatory to the full atonement made by Christ's death, disconsolatory to the souls of men, in laying the whole weight of their salvation upon an uncertain condition of their own performing: And should I be silent in such a charge, the world would count me guilty, therefore to purge myself from these crimes, I have published my sermon, with a vindication of it, and a short refutation of the said book: and although I have a little in one place digressed from the controversy, speaking more largely than I needed in the doctrine of Christ's death, and passion, yet it is only to show that I have delivered, and hold nothing therein contrary to the orthodox faith, as Mr. Eyre affirmeth, which he is more able to say, then prove. And for as much as he hath wronged both me, and the truth, in relating what I said not, (viz. that I should say that the union between Christ and the Saints was a personal union, which I called a union of persons, but not a personal union) and hath represented our conference in as unhandsome a dress to render me contemptible, I am the less troubled (though I rejoice at no man's sin) knowing that he is a man of hard language, and morose carriage unto many of my brethren, of far more eminent worth, and esteem in the Church of Christ then myself. And for that slander, where he saith, that I compared him to Judas, and myself to Christ, I do solemnly beseech him to remember what God hath threatened to him that loveth and maketh a lie, Rev. 22.15. and to take heed how he beareth false witness against his neighbour, where he hath God, angels, and men, and his own conscience to contradict him, lest God impute that as sin to him, which he feareth not to commit, it may be upon this ground, because he judgeth it to be antecedently pardoned before it is committed. My expression for which he blameth me was this, I said to him, What? are you come out against me as against an heretic, before you know whether that which I hold be a heresy, or that I am obstinate in the defence of it? moreover, at the request of friends, that heard my Sermon, (with which Mr. Eyre hath dealt as Pharaoh with the male children of the Israelites) having given way to the publishing of it (not doubting but when it cometh under the censure of my brethren, but they will do the same office for it that the religious midwives did for the male children, to save it alive from the hand of the oppressor) I conceive, I was engaged to some further act towards the ending, & laying this controversy asleep, especially seeing Mr. Eyre saith, Mr. Woodbridg did but blow the coals that Mr. Warren had kindled, whereas this fire was kindled long before by himself, and the pulpit turned by him into a cockpit, to defend this error. And because some are infected, more are in danger, the truth is oppressed, the course of the Gospel like to be hindered, and profaneness, and Antinomianisme go hand in hand, and speak with one tongue, as Mr. Baxter hath well observed, I have put myself upon this task of confuting his conceit. Besides, his disingenuous description of our conference, by introducing interlocutours, as if I were ad incitas redactus, and that they did interpose to help me (for it seemeth to me to be his end in that relation) hath made me willing to wipe off that obloquy by entering the lists once more with him, whereas the true cause of that interruption was, his popular appeals, his usual artifice to evade the force of an argument, & to enthrone himself as victor, in the hearts of the in-judicious multitude. In a word, the ensuing reasons were no small motive to enforce me to this work, The bridge of justification by which men must pass over from death to life is very narrow, and one step awry may be the loss of many precious souls, and all gospel truth is a precious depositum concredited to us ministers of the gospel, and is a part of that * 2 Tim. 1.14. Judas. 3. good thing committed to us, and we are commanded earnestly to * contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints, Aug ad Lauren cap. 64. and this doctrine of justification is articulus stantis, vel cadentis Ecclesiae (as Luther saith) the Church standeth, or falleth according as this truth is believed, or violated, and what Augustine saith of remission of sins, that I may say of faith, by which remission of sins is received, per hanc stat Ecclesia, quae in terris est, per hanc non perit, quod perierat, et inventum est. And therefore there is a necessity of keeping this doctrine pure, and every minister is bound to preserve this truth, and to keep the Philistines from throwing dirt into this well. And if Shamma be recorded in Sacred writ for defending a field of lentils, against the Philistines, surely it cannot but be acceptable to God and man, to defend that doctrine which is the sum of the gospel, confirmed with the blood of Christ. And if it were Paul's Eulogium to preach that faith, which he did once destroy, it cannot be Mr. Eyre's encomium to destroy that faith he ought to preach. And seeing God himself taketh care of the very hairs of our head, and numbers them all, we have much more reason to make a precious esteem of that truth which is worth all our heads, and by which our very souls must be saved, And no less care ought we to have of the honour of Christ, and of his mystical body. For who is he that is a living member of Christ, that is not sensible of the dishonour done to Christ our head, and what dishonour is done to Christ by this doctrine, by making an unbeliever a subject of justification, and a member of Christ's body, let him that is least in the Church judge. The Apostle could not without an absit think of it that a member of Christ should be joined to a harlot: shall I take the members of Christ, and make them the member of a harlot? God forbidden: and is it not an anointed truth of the same authority, 1 Cor. 6.15. that I must not take a harlot (so remaining) and make it the member of Christ? If Mezentius was condemned for a wicked tyrant, for tying a dead man to a living person, can he be esteemed a good Christian, and friend to Christ (not to say a good minister) that shall join an unbeliever dead in sins and trespasses, as a member unto Christ? the Lord give him the sight of this evil, and God forbidden I should cease to pray for him, and I hereby beg a Collection of prayers for him from all that know him, for I believe his own principles will not suffer him to pray for the pardon of sin, which in his opinion is pardoned long before it is committed. And now that I might not trouble the Reader any further, I will but mention a passage or two in his Epistle dedicatory, and another in his book, and I will not hold him from the discourse itself. Mr. Eyre hath in his second page of that Epistle perfumed his brethren opposite to his errors, to render them acceptable to the magistrate: It is remarkable (saith he) that they, who ascribed unto magistrates a definitive, and coercive power in spirituals, have (when magistrates would not serve their turns) denied the power, which they have in temporals, refusing contrary to the rules of Christ, to own them, pray for them, or to yield obedience to their lawful commands, as if none must hold the sword, but such as will use it to fight their quarrel, and to effect that by force of arms, which they themselves cannot do by strength of argument. But is this an irrefragable argument to prove eternal justification? or a lively demonstration of a man parboiled in his passion? is this the effect of charity? or the foam of a passionate man? was he sick of a fever? or troubled with the scurvy when this passage fell from him? I am sure there is neither charity nor verity in it, if it be examined by the law of God, or the known laws of the land: if he be able, let him produce any proof of our disobedience to authority, lest the world say he hath linguam mentiri doctam. But nothing is more usual then for the nocent to accuse the innocent, * 1 K. 18.17. 4 Eph. 3. Ahab accused Elijah for troubling of Israel, when himself was the person that troubled Israel. * Athaliah crye's treason, treason, when herself was the traitor. 2 K. 11.14. * 4 Act. 5. Tertullus accused Paul that he was a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition, when himself was the ringleader of a notorious faction. And were I minded to recriminate, and did seek rather to d sparage his person, then to weaken his case, I might more justly retort the charge upon himself, for his bold attempt in endeavouring to affright the chief magistrate of the city of N. Sarum from, or for his proclaiming the Lord Protector, fearing it seems, (that I may use his own words) that he would not serve his turn, and therefore he would not have him hold the sword, because he would not use it to fight his quarrel. But in this suggillation of his, to make his brethren odious, and obnoxious to authority, the reader may observe how closely be followeth Lysander's Counsel, ubi leonina pellis non sufficit, assumenda est vulpina, that where the lions skin will not serve he will eke it out with a fox skin, he would stop our mouths, or pull out our tongues, because he cannot answer our arguments: as Herod dealt with john Baptist, cutting off his head, because he would not hold his peace, but reprove him for Herodias; so he would silence us by power, who he cannot overcome by reason, To whom I will say as Hieron in his Apol. 3. ad Ruff: talibus institutus es disciplinis, ut cui respondere non poteris, caput auferas? et linguam, quae tacere non potest secas? In his third page of the same epistle, he would have the magistrate punish nothing but what is contrary to the light of nature, and yet over the leaf desires the parliament to prohibit all names of obloquy under fitting penalties. But I fear Mr. Ey●e who is so liberal in calling his brethren Arminians, Socrat hist, lib. 6, 65. Papists, Socinians, would be the first that would come under the lash of such a law, if it were made, as Eutropius the Eunuch did of that Edict made by the Emperor at his request: But let him tell us, is it against the light of nature to call him an Antinomian who upholds the main pillar of Antinomianism, and layeth the foundation stone whereon it is built? is it lawful to be an Antinomian, and unlawful to call him so that is so? shall a man be covetous, and if his neighbour tell him of it, and speak the words of truth, and soberness in so doing, is this against the light of nature? is it a more insufferable injury to call Mr Eyre an Antinomian, then to be so? and is his credit more necessary than Christ's? shall a man call Christ a deceiver, and vilify the Scriptures, and worship a breaden god, a door, an altar, or a crucifix, praeferre Mahomet or the Pope before Christ? and must such an evil go unpunished? and would he have the magistrate bring himself by connivance at such evils under the guilt of these sins? then would England be a purgatory for the Orthodox, and a paradise for the heterodox; yet this is that he aims at▪ He would have a liberty for men to profess what errors they please, but a restraint laid upon those that shall endeavour to confute them: and if this should ever be established, which I hope never will be, I should not stick to say, O Mariana tempora, high sunt ultimi sing●ltus moribundae libertatis? Now for this good service, and telling the Libertines that if they be elected they are justified already; though they be of a dissolute life, the covenant is absolute; every one of them with a garland of laurel in his hand, is ready to salute him: Tu mihi patronus, tu mihi Christus eris. A third passage is his incivility to Master Good, who because Mr. Eyre had appealed to the people, (among many others that discovered their satisfaction for what he had said, and objected) propounded this question, whether God was well pleased with unregenerate men? to whom he saith (ironically enough) he did not reply as Bazil did to Demosthenes the clerk of the Emperor's Kitchen that he should meddle with his broth, and his sauce, having a little before with petulancy styled him an Inn Keeper, (though) he be as Demetrius was, a man well reported of all men, and the truth itself, and of M. Eyre in time passed) for which favour he is as much beholding to him as Amasa was to Joab when he took him by the beard, and said, Art thou in health my brother? And for his answer to the question, that God was well pleased with his elect in Christ whilst they be unregenerate, though he be not well pleased with their unregeneracy. I may say had he himself minded the kitchen less and studied the question more, he had either yielded the cause, or given a more satisfactory answer; for if all the sins of an unregenerate man be pardoned, what is there for God to be displeased with? nor will the nature of a holy God allow him to love an unregenerate person with that love which Divines call the love of complacency, though he may intent him good with a love of benevolence. And now I shall entreat the reader, if there be any acrimony, or sharpeness in this epistle to excuse me in it, having been in a manner forced to it, to heal the exulcerations in Mr. Eyre his book, and I shall endeavour in this following discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, laying aside all animosity. And I willingly profess with Augustine, Non pigebit me sicubi haesito quaerere, nec pudebit sicubi erro discere, proinde quisquis hoc letat, ubi pariter certus est, mecum pergat, ubi pariter haesigit quaerat mecum, ubi errorem suum cognoscit, redeat ad me, ubi meum revocet me, ita ingrediamur simul veritatis viam tendentes ad eum de quo dictum est, quaeramus faciem ejus semper. I shall not be unwilling where I doubt to inquire, nor shall I be ashamed where I err to learn, therefore whosoever read what I have written, where he is certain, let him go forward with me, where he doubteth with me, let him seek with me, where he seethe his error, let him return to me, where he discerneth mine, let him reclaim, and recall me, so let us walk together in the way of truth, making towards him, of whom it is said, Let us always seek his face. And I beseech the God of peace to tread down Satan under Rom. 16.2.8 our feet, to heal our divisions, to pour out upon all his people the Spirit of truth, of meekeness, of love, and of a sound mind, and to give us to avoid, all curious, and needless questions, which neither serve to beget, nor increase holiness, and to lay aside all contentions, that we may keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, that we may with united strength oppose the common adversary, 4. Eph. 3. and not sheathe our swords in one another's bowels, lest by intestine, and unseasonable differences, we rend the Church of Christ, and be justly blamed with that of the Poet, Quumque superba foret Babylon spolianda trophaeis, Bella geri placuit nullos habitura triumphos, Now the Lord Jesus, the great Apostle, and high priest of our profession, the great Prophet of his church, double the anointing of his Spirit upon thee, and lead thee into all truth, settle confirm, and establish thee in the love of it, and keep thee sound in the faith, and blameless in thy life, until the day of the Lord Jesus, which is the hearty prayer of Thy soul's friend, and servant in the Gospel of Christ THOMAS WARREN. REader, by reason of the great distance of the Author from the press many erratas have escaped, the most material are corrected to thy hand, the rest thou art entreated to amend as thou art here directed, what ever else thou findest, let thy intelligence cure and thy Charity cover. p. 8. l. last, for in, r. is. p. 9 l. 18. for our, r. my. item 2●. l. for you. r. he. p. 10. l. 13. blot out the second, so. p. 13. l. 4. for Consistence, r Coexsistence, l. 17. for purposes. 1. purposed. p. 19 l. 31 for mna, r man p. 11. l. 18. for have, r. hath. p. 22. l. 32 for dies, 1. die. p. 27. l. 2. after man, add [he] p. 36 l. 12. after were add not. p. 37. l. 5. for hath r. have. l. 21. blot out [so] l. 29. for once. r. one. p. 39 l. 29. for sin, r. sinned. p. 40. l. last, for Christ's, r. Christ. p. 49. l. 33. after that add (he) p. 67. l 16. blot out for. p. 71. l. 30. after being, blot out (that), p. 74. l. 13. for affirming, r. affirm p. 91. l 1. blot out (but) p. 99 l r. blot out the fi●st (as) p, 108. l. 14. for malem, r. mallem. p. 134. l. 27. blot out (for p. 145. l. 25. for there, read theirs p. 146. l 16. fo● no●, not, p. 150. l. 26. for the first. is, r. (as) p. 154. l. 11. for my, r. me. p. 158. l. 5. after unto add were elected. p. 159. l. 33. for these, r. thee. p. 176. l. 26. after but, add we. p. 180. l. 29. for at, r. as. p. 183. l. 2. after the first foresight, add (but) and for nor r. not. p. 195. l. 37. blot (and) p. 199. line 34. for soil, r. soul October 13. 1654. Imprimatur EDM. CALAMY. A Christless-estate A HOPELESSE-ESTATE. EPHESIANS. 2.12. That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. THe Scope of the Apostle in this Chapter, is the same with that in the former, to set the forth freeness of God's grace in Christ, proving sometimes in hypothesi, that the converted Ephesians, sometimes in thesi, that all the faithful are saved by grace. And he useth many Arguments Arg. 1 to this end, the first is drawn from their natural estate; O Ephesians, if ye consider yourselves in the common estate of nature, you will find that such was your condition, that you could not be delivered from it but by grace: which Argument he amplifies by a sixfold consideration of their natural condition. First, in the state of nature, they were not only defiled with sin, but were altogether dead in sins and trespasses, and were no more able to help themselves, than the dead is able to arise from the grave; and therefore unless the same Almighty power that raised Christ from the dead, had been exerted to quicken them, they could never have been saved. In the second place, verse 2. He telleth them that their whole life was a life of sin, though they were dead to grace, and spiritual life, yet they were alive to sin. Yea thirdly, that they lived after the custom of natural and unregenerate men, who did mind and savour only the things of this life. And fourthly, that they lived as those that had Satan, the God of this world for their guide, and were so fare from being led by the Spirit of God, that the same unclean spirit, and enemy to man's salvation did rule them, which now effectually worketh in the children of disobedience. Fifthly, in the third verse he showeth that they had their conversation in the lusts of the flesh, doing what their vain mind did dictate, & their corrupt appetite and sinful affections did desire Sixthly, The Apostle amplifies this by comparison, showing that the estate of himself, and the believing Jews, was no better than theirs, both in respect of sin, and punishment, being all by nature the children of wrath as well as others. In the fourth verse the Apostle layeth down a second Argument Argument 2, to prove the freeness of God's grace in our salvation, drawn from the Author of our salvation & the inward impulsive moving cause, prevailing with him to do this for us; the rich Author is God, the moving cause his free love: but God who is in mercy, for the great love wherewith he loved us did deliver us. In the fifth verse he shows the order of God's dispensing grace to us, and that is by the redemption of Christ, amplified from the time, that while we were yet dead in sins God quickened us with Christ, and therefore by grace we are saved, that is, while we were dead in sins and trespasses, a Covenant passed between God and Christ our Redeemer, and God gave us unto Christ, that by him we should be redeemed: and when he raised Christ, he gave us a pledge of our redemption and justification in him. In the sixth verse he telleth us that we are not only quickened and raised to life, begotten to a living hope of eternal life, but we were in a manner raised with him, and ascended with him as in our head, and set down together with him in heavenly ace, spl that is, in respect of our right purchased, we had it before faith, but in respect of actual possession and application of these mercies this is not conferred upon our persons until we do believe. In the seventh verse the Apostle showeth what end God had in all this, that in the ages to come be might show the exceeding riches of his grace, and kindness towards us in Jesus Christ. In the eighth ver. he concludes from his former discourse, that therefore we are saved by grace; And goeth on to prove it by a third Argument taken from the means whereby this grace is received and applied: we are saved by grace, because we are saved by faith; where faith is taken metonymically, for Christ apprehended by faith, yet not excluding faith as a means to apply Christ to us; and that which is due to Christ, is attributed to faith, because it alone is the only instrument to apply Christ's righteousness unto justification. Now the Apostle to prevent a mistake, lest any should think because faith is our act, that therefore we are saved by something in us; he answers, that though it be our Act, it is God's gift, and therefore we cannot challenge any thing in the work of Salvation, because we are passive in this work; it is a grace wrought in us by God, to apply Christ to us, and therefore in 9 verse he removes all works, whether performed by grace, or nature, from being the cause of our salvation, knowing how deeply this error is rooted in all men by nature, to seek righteousness in themselves: and he gives a reason why God will not have salvation by works, because as they cannot stand with grace, as faith may, so they are enemies to the glory of God, and will lift up the heart of man to glory in himself; therefore God will have it to be by grace, received by faith, that no man might boast. In the tenth verse, the Apostle having showed that our salvation is only of grace, and the means by which we are made capable of all saving good in Christ by faith, excluding all causes in man lest he should boast; he layeth down a new reason, why we cannot be saved by works, because in the work of regeneration we are wholly God's workmanship in Christ created to good works; and we are as merely passive in this work, as in the first work of creation; for as no creature contributed any thing to its own being; and as there was no disposition in man to make himself a man, so there is naturally no ability in us to contribute any thing to our new creation; therefore seeing all we have, and are enabled to do, is by grace, we are not saved by our own works; and to prevent an Objection concerning works, (for works being excluded from being a cause of salvatition,) then some might ask, What place have they? and why are they required? the Apostle answers, they are of necessary use, though not to purchase salvation, yet they are the way wherein salvation must be had; for God hath ordained before, that we should walk in them. In the 11th. & 12th. verses, The Apostle that he might the better affect their hearts with the greatness of God's mercy, and freeness of his grace to them; he puts them in mind of their former estate in Gentilism, as if he should say, Do but remember what once you were; cast but an eye upon your former estate, and compare it with your present; and your very change will evidence this truth, that ye are saved by grace. Now this wretched and deplorable estate, he setteth down in seven things: Two whereof are set down in the 10th. verse, the rest in the 11th. ver. which I have chosen for my Text. 1. First, remember that ye were Gentiles in the flesh, living according to the flesh, so that in that estate they could not please God. 2. They were uncircumcised, that is, they had not the seal of God's Covenant, and so were despised by the Jews, who rejoice in that Circumcision which is made with hands; you not only were uncircumcised in heart, but also you wanted the outward sign of it in the flesh, which is a seal of God's Covenant. And in the Text here are five evils more that he would have them remember: First, That at that time ye were without Christ; that is, as Diodat upon the place observeth, ye had neither union, nor communion with Christ, who is Head of the Church, the Foundation, and Mediator of the Covenant, and the Spring of all spiritual, and everlasting blessings. Secondly, They were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and so separate from Christ's body, which is the Church; they had no communion with the Church. Thirdly, They were strangers from the Covenants of Promise, that is, as Bains observes, they had no propriety in the Covenant, or promulgation of the Covenant; and as Diodat upon the place, having no interest nor portion in the goods promised by the Covenant of Grace, which was made with Abraham; and so often reiterated and confirmed, or as Dickson upon the place, having no right to application of the promises, or as Piscator upon the place, Haec promissio foederis gratiae quâ Deus promittebat remissionem peccatorum propter meritum Christi, & renovationem cordium per efficactam Christi, nihil ad eos pertinebat. Fourthly, They were without hope in that estate, in a hopeless condition without the thing hoped for; nor had they while they so continued any ground of hope, for salvation. Fifthly, they were without God, that is, without the knowledge, or worship of the true God; they were conscious of a divine power, but were ignorant of true God; and without all inward or outward worship of the true God; they knew not God, much less knew him in Christ. What a chaffy, crude, jejune, and ridiculous gloss, then is that of our new Rabbi, Mr. Eyre Vindic. just. gratuity p. 73. Mr. Eyre, in his Vindiciae justificationis gratuitae, who makes the sense & meaning of these words to be thus: The Elect before faith have no knowledge or comfort of God's gracious volitions towards them, or of Christ's undertake, and purchases in their behalf, in which respect they are said to be without Christ, and without God in the world; As if they were not so really, but to their apprehensions; they did apprehend themselves to be without Christ, and without God, and without hope in the world, but were not; as if he should say, They were mistaken, their estate was good enough, but they wanted faith to give them the knowledge, and comfort of it; which is to contradict the scope and end of this place, which is to show what a change God had wrought by place, as the next words declare. I wonder with what fate he can thus grossly corrupt the sense of the Holy Ghost, when as the plain scope, and meaning of the words, is to mind them of their former misery, before conversion, or actual faith; they were a Christlesse-people, without all actual communion with Christ, the Spirit of Christ had not yet drawn them to Christ, nor united them to him, nor did he yet dwell in their hearts by faith; but in respect of any real, actual communion with Christ in respect of Justification, or Sanctification; they were as if there were no Christ, and they were without communion with the Church, without the means of grace and salvation, in a very sad, hopelesse-estate, without any interest in God, or any true saving knowledge of him. My purpose is not to speak to all of these, but only to the first of them, which I shall take as it is in conjunction with that other expression in the Text, that they were without hope. Observe. The Observation than I shall insist upon is this, That a Christlesse-estate, is a Hopelesse-estate: And where there is no union to Christ, that soul is without hope; this is the head of all spiritual misery to be without Christ, this makes a soul to be without God, and without hope in the world; Rom. 8.32. let a man have Christ, and he shall with Christ have all things; but let him be without Christ, and then he hath nothing, he is under wrath, poor, wretched, miserable, blind and naked. In the opening of this Point, I will oserve this method. 1. I will inquire what it is to be without Christ. 2. I will confirm it by Scripture and Reason, that a Christless-estate is a Hopelesse-estate. 3. I will show you, that before actual faith, even the Elect of God are in a Christlesse-estate, in this hopelesse-condition; and then will apply it. First, What is it to be without Christ, and how could the Ephesians be said to be without Christ, when they were Elect persons, and redeemed by Christ? The Apostle speaketh not here of God's counsel, and purpose, for so he intended to give Christ to them, and them to Christ; yet for all that they were without Christ, for this is terminus diminuens, and did not put them into a state of actual union to Christ, nor doth he look upon the price of redemption paid for them; for they were notwithstanding this without Christ: but he speaks in regard of actual application, So Baines upon the place. and thus they were without Christ; they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, absque Christo, seorsum à Christo. Now this may be understood in two respects: First, They were without the means wherein God offers, and exhibits Christ; for, though God had given Christ for them, he had not yet given Christ to them, they had not the offers of Christ made to them in the Gospel, while they were Ethnics and strangers to the Commonwealth of Israel; thus they were without Christ, because without the saving knowledge of Christ; and so were in a hopelesse-estate, till God did reveal Christ to them; and thus as Paul tells the Corinthians, If the Gospel be hid, it is hid from them that are lost, they are a lost people to whom the Gospel is hid. Now it is hid two ways: 1. When it is not revealed, and thus where no vision a Prov. 2918. is, the people perish; And they that sit in b Isa. 9.2. Matth. 4.16. darkness, sit in the region and the shadow of death. 2. When it is c 2 Cor. 4.4. hid from a people in regard of the saving light, and efficacy of it; and in both these senses the Gospel was hid from them; for they had not Christ the d Col. 1.27. hope of glory preached to them, the e Eph. 3.8. unsearchable riches of Christ was not yet revealed to them, much less was Christ revealed f Gal 1.16. in them by the powerful illumination and effectual operation of the Spirit of Christ. Secondly, A man is said to be without Christ, when he was never united to Christ, and made one with him; when he never had any real communion with Christ; when Christ did never g Eph. 3 17. dwell in his heart by faith, and he was never united to Christ by his Spirit, when they were never implanted into Christ by faith: Thus the Ephesians were without Christ, they were not so much as in him by external profession, much less by mystical implantation; there was never any mutual act between Christ and them, Christ exhibiting himself to them, and they adhering, and dwelling in Christ by faith; they had not the Spirit of Christ working an unity of wills, a confederacy of affections, a participation of natures, a concurrence to the making up the same body; and this is here principally intended. And thus the greatest number of men and women that live under the sound of the Gospel are without Christ, and were never in him to this day. Now all that are thus in a Christlesse-estate, are in a hopelesse-estate; let no man flatter himself, & think that because Christ the Son of God died for sinners, they shall be saved by giving a general assent to this truth: I tell you, Christ himself shall not save you, unless you be united to him by faith; We preach, saith the Apostle, Christ in you, the hope of glory h Col. 1.27. not Christ among you, as some * As Mr. Eyre Epist. Flock. p. 2. interpret it, but in you. Christus per fidem receptus & habitans in vobis * Dickson in locum. Christus per fidem receptus & habiants in vo●is. Explicat quid revelavit in genere, vocat divitias, summam scilicet Evangelii. Deinde explicat clariùs quae sint illae divitiae, Christus non simpliciter, & extra nos, sed in nobis inhabitans per fidem. Ergo dum Christus est extra nos, divitiarum coelestium non possumus esse participes. * Z nch in loc. In vobis, quia nunc Christum possident, a quo nuper erant tam alieni. Calv. apud Marlo. And Diodat, In you, namely of which mystery Christ who is preached among you, is the whole subject; or inhabiting, reigning, operating in you by his Spirit, which in you is a certain pledge of glory. And seeing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the proper signification of it, signifieth in; and it is a truth agreeable to the scripture, that Christ dwelleth in us; and Christ so dwelling, is the hope of glory: It is a senseless cavil of Mr. Eyre in his Epistle to his People in his Vindiciae Justificationis, To call this Interpretation a delusion; that we call works, or inherent holiness by the Name of Christ, the success of this bait, saith he, we have seen of late in too many, who have dallied so long with the notion of a Christ within them, that they have quite forgotten; nay, some have utterly denied the Christ without them; that God-man, who is the only propitiation for our sins; Col. 1.27. which mistake, (he saith,) is grounded upon Col. 1.27. Christ in you, the hope of glory; whereas Christ in you, is no more than Christ preached among you; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendered among in the same ver. If this be granted, that hindereth not, but the word in the next acception of it, should be taken in its proper genuine signification, though in the first place there is necessity so to interpret it. And as for that dream of calling inherent works by the Name of Christ, if any so do, we abhor it with him; yet ought we not, because some abuse the Scripture, therefore to lose the benefit of any saving truth; and seeing Christ doth really dwell in us by faith, we fear not to assert this without the suspicion Familisme. Mistake me not, I do not say that Christ dwelleth in Believers by any personal inhabitation, so as to make an hypostalical union; but by the graces and operation of his Spirit; and unless he thus dwell in thy soul, and be united to thee, thou canst not be saved. As the could not be safe, if the avenger of blood found him out of the City of refuge; And as Lot was not safe till he was in Zoar: So Christ in our City of refuge, he is our Zoar, we must fly to for safety; and God hath promised only strong k Heb. 6.18. consolation to such as fly for refuge to this hope set before them in Christ. And as none were saved that did hang about the Ark when the flood came, but they that were got into the Ark, and shut up in it; so none that do hang upon Christ only by external profession, shall be saved, but such as get into Christ by mystical implantation. And hence in Scripture we read of a mutual indwelling of Christ in us, and we in Christ, to which the comfort of salvation is ascribed thus in Rom. 8.1. Rom. 8.1. 2 Cor. 13.5. Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith, prove yourselves. Know ye not your own selves that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? 2 Cor. 13.5. that is, seeing you question my Ministry, and seek a proof of Christ speaking in me; I pray, saith he, reflect upon yourselves, if you have any faith, and Christ dwelling in you by faith; and unless ye will judge yourselves to be reprobates, rejected and disallowed of God, for such as are not in Christ, and so none of his members, you must acknowledge our Ministry by whom ye were begotten to the faith. Now I put it to yourselves, you know it to be a plain truth that Christ is in you by faith; and if he be not, you can judge at present yourselves to be no better than reprobates: Now unless you acknowledge our Ministry, you must condemn yourselves; where you see that such as have not Christ dwelling in them, they are in the judgement of Paul, disallowed and rejected of God; and though he call them not reprobates, as opposed to the Elect; because as * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, rejectanci; sic eos vocat Apostolus hoc loco, non qui sunt divinitus ad vitam aeternam electis oppositi, nec enim censendi sunt statim irae vasa, quicunque vel in suis peccatis adhuc manent nondum efficaciter vocati. Bez. in locum. Beza observes, they are not presently to be judged vessels of wrath that yet abide in their sins; yet as to their present estate, they are such as God approves not of, nor are they in a capacity of salvation, Rom. 8.1. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ: Now in Scripture-sense it is all one to be in Christ, or Christ to be in us, and there is nothing but condemnation to them that are out of Christ; So the m John 15.5. 15th. of John, If any man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and withereth; that is, if any man be in Christ only by external profession, and outward Baptism, and is not truly united to him, and abide in him by faith, so as to partake of spiritual life from Christ, As the living branch liveth in the Vine, you shall be cut off as a dead branch, and cast into the fire: So in n Joh. 6.56, 57 John 6.56, 57 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, I live by the Father; So he that eateth me, shall live by me; that is, as the body is preserved by meat and drink, and our meat and drink turn into the substance of the body, and become one with it: So he that spiritually feeds upon my flesh and blood, upon my death and suffering by faith, he shall be inseparably united to me, and I will become one with him. And by this he shall live; as I who am Mediator, am sent by the Father to this end, to bring men to life; so that I might be able to give life, I have received life from the Father, and live by his Spirit communicated to me; And so, as sure as God lives, and as I live by influence of the life, and Spirit of God; so he that eateth me, and so becometh one with me by faith, as the meat with the body, he shall live by me. Ver. 53. And in Ver. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you; that is, unless you become one with Christ by faith, you have no life in you. So the o 1 John 3.24. Rom. 8.9. 1 John 3.24. and compared with Rom. 8.9. Hereby we know that he abideth in us, because of his Spirit which he hath given us. Where observe, 1. That Christ dwelleth in his people: Hereby we know that he abideth in us. This is not a fancy, or a conjectural ungrounded hope, but it is an infallible truth of eternal verity; Hereby we know he abideth in us. 2. Observe, the means by which he dwelleth in us, and how this may be known; It is by his Spirit: and this is a sure evidence of Christ dwelling in us, because he hath given us his Spirit: Now compare this with Rom. 8 ●. If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he it none of Christ's; He that hath not the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him, he hath no Christ dwelling in him, and so is none of Christ's, none of his members, and so can never be saved so long as he lives without Christ; so that you see the truth cleared, That to be without Christ, is to be without Hope. Now, the reasons why a Christlesse estate is a Hopeless estate: are, Reason. 1 Reason. 1. Because there is no p Act. 4.12. name given under heaven whereby we may be saved; God hath taken up an immutable purpose never to be reconciled unto man, but in and through Christ; so that there is not the least sounding of the bowels of God towards a sinner, but in Christ; Hence Christ is called our q 1 Tim. 1.1. Hope, that is, he is the object of our Hope, in whom alone we are begotten unto a lively hope of eternal life. Such is the distance and difference between God and the souls of men, that none is found worthy, or able in heaven or earth to umpire this difference, but Christ; and were he not a person of infinite worth, he could never make any satisfaction, nor work a reconciliation; We are dead in sins and trespasses, and none but Christ that is the Lord of Life can quicken us; we are spiritually blind, and were not Christ God, he could not cure our blindness; for it was never r John 9.32. known from the beginning of the world, that any but God could open the eyes of the blind. None but Christ who is the s Heb. 1.3. brightness of his Father's Glory, and the express Character of his Image, is able to restore God's Image in us; without which, we shall never see the face of God, nor can God take us for his children, nor delight in us, unless this were restored; such is the opposition made against our salvation by Satan, and all the powers of darkness, that none but Christ is able to deliver us from this strong man. So great is the mystery of godliness, that none but Christ who hath lain in the bosom of the Father, and knows all things, could reveal the Father to us, whom to t John 1. 18. John 17.3. know in Christ is eternal life; nor could he give us the Spirit u Eph. 1.17. of wisdom and revelation, to know God and the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the Saints, nor translate us out of darkness into marvellous light: Such is that perfect righteousness God requires to us, that we may be presented without x Eph. 5.26. spot or wrinkle in God's sight, that none but God in our nature is able to furnish us with such a righteousness. Reason. 2. As none but Christ can save, so none but such as Reason. 2 are united to Christ can have any communion with Christ; for union is the ground of communion. Now this will appear by induction, if you consider all the unions in the world; there is no communion between those, where there is not an antecedent union. In the marriage-union, there is no communion as man and wife, till the marriage-union be made; in the natural communion between the soul and body, the head and the members, the graft and the stock; dissolve the union, and the communion is destroyed. In the Politic communion between a people, unless united under one government. So in all others, and why not in the mystical union between Christ and us? Hence saith Paul, z 2 Cor. 6.15. What concord hath Christ with Belial? Thus in the a Eph. 1.3. Ephesians 1.3. God is said to have blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places; but how? in Christ; thus the believing Romans were first b Rom. 11.24. cut off from their old stock, the wild Olive they grew upon, and were graffed into the new Olive-tree before they could be partakers of the root and fatness of the Olive-tree, and their being graffed in did precede their being partakers of the root, and fatness of the Olive-tree. And he that hath but the first-fruits of reason must acknowledge this; and take one place for all, to show that all the benefits that come by Christ, follow upon our union to Christ. In the c 1 Cor. 1.30. 1 Cor. 1.30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. So that first we are in him before he is made of God unto us, wisdom, righteousness, etc. Now I come to the third particular, and that is to show you that before actual faith there is no actual union to Christ, and so no spiritual communion with him in his death, not actual hope of eternal life. Now for the fuller vindicating of this Proposition, and what I have hereafter laid down in the defence of it against Mr. Eyre's Exceptions or Cavils, rather I refer the Reader to the following discourse, where I will purposely undertake this task; because I intent here only to give the world a sight of that naked truth, as it was delivered without any variation from it, that the world may see what reason Mr. Eyre had to condemn it as Heterodox. To return then to the Proposition delivered, That before actual faith there can be no actual union with Christ. That which some imagine of an union with Christ from eternity, and an union with Christ upon the Cross when he stood as a common person; if they understand it of an actual union and implantation into Christ, and not of a relative respect and virtual union, which yet is an union improperly so called; that which they affirm is very irrational: for that union which is the mystical union between Christ and a Believer, by which we have spiritual communion with Christ in his death, is the formal effect of faith; by means of which Christ and we are made one d Eph. 5.23. 1 Cor. ●0. 7. body, and this union necessarily requireth the consistence of the persons united; for that union whereby Christ and we are united, is such an union, whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ, (I called it not a personal union, though it be an union of persons; and although I explained myself so, in my conference with him after the Sermon; yet he is not ashamed to tell the world, I hold our union with Christ to be a personal union: but of this hereafter.) Now this actual union whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ, necessarily requires the pre-existence of his person, and the antecedency of his faith. And therefore when it is said that God e Eph. 1.4. chose us in Christ, that is not to be understood as if we were then existentes in Christo, or actually united; but it showeth us God's order how he purposes to bring us unto holiness, that is, through Christ, or for Christ's sake; this being an immanent and eternal action, it could not leave any present effect upon us, who had no actual, but a mental existence only in God's mind, and therefore we could not be actually united: for neither Christ as yet had assumed our nature into the unity of his Person, which was to lay the foundation of the union of our persons unto Christ; although I deny not but the Patriarches before Christ, were really united by faith, before the assumption of the humane nature. Besides, union to Christ is a thing accidental as to the nature of man; now an accident is not, nor cannot be without its subject, (where let the Reader observe the forgery of Mr. Eyre; that which I spoke of union with Christ, he applies to imputation of righteousness): For * Where I take inesse or esse in alio quatenus opponitur substantiae quae per se subsistit latè, non strictè, sed pro omni accidentali informatione in ordine al substantiam, sive sit per modum inh●rentiae, adjacentiae, sive essendi, etc. Accidentis esse, est inesse; now the Believer being the person united, and so a subject of this union, how can union which is an accident subsist, without man that is the subject exist? And besides, it is a known rule: Non entis nulla sunt accidentia, nullae sunt affectiones; how can any thing be truly predicated of that which is not? Besides, it is against another Principle in reason; (and unless we will betray our reason to become beasts, we cannot submit to this new Creed;) Omnis actio fit per contactum: All action is by some contact; which holds good in this supernatural action; for by faith we touch Christ, not by any local contiguity, but by a spiritual contact and apprehension, whereby Christ is said to dwell in our hearts. Now having proved à priori, that the Elect before faith are not united to Christ, let us à posteriori see if the same truth will not be concluded from the proper effect of union with Christ, which is communion with him in his death unto justification, that the Elect are not united before faith. Such then as are actually united to Christ, are actually justified: But a man is not justified actually before faith: Therefore neither united to Christ. As for Infants, their case is of a peculiar consideration, God by his Spirit supplying what is wanting through the imbecility of their age; and hence the Spirit working semen fidei, and apprehending them, though they cannot apprehend Christ, I question not their union to Christ, and the imputation of his righteousness to their justification; but we speak now the adultis, that none that are of years sufficient, are justified without actual faith. Now that we are not justified by an immanent act of God from eternity, nor immediately from the time of Christ's death, without some act of ours intervening for the application of Christ's righteousness to justification; will appear, 1. From such Scriptures which require an act of faith to go before our justification, and the remission of sins, Acts 16.31. f Acts 16.31. Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved; the Jailor's question was not, What shall I do to be quieted in conscience, and assured that I am justified, and in a state of salvation? but, What shall I do to be saved? I see my lost damnable estate, how shall I do to be saved? With the heart g Rom. 10.10. man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made to salvation; where you see righteousness is obtained by faith, and made the end h 1 Pet 1.9. of believing, as the Apostle expressly elsewhere calleth salvation the end of our faith, for faith is the means to that end; for having said, that he that confesseh with his mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in his heart that God raised him from the dead, shall be saved; He subjoins this as a reason; for with the heart, man believeth unto righteousness, that is, he obtains by faith such a righteousness by which he shall be saved. John 20.31. These things are written that ye might believe, and that believing ye might have i John 20.31. life through his Name, where life is made an effect of believing, k Gal. 2.16. Gal. 2.16. We have believed, that we might be justified; where justification is made the final cause of believing; and so, l Rom. 3.25. Rom. 3.25 Whom God hath set forth as a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins; where setting down all the causes of justification, he doth not exclude faith: for, Subordinata inter se non pugnant. (1.) God is the efficient, whom he hath set forth as a propitiation. (2.) Christ's death is made the meritorious cause, in his blood; and faith, the instrumental. Now as the efficient excludes not the meritorious, no more must the meritorious exclude the efficient; for, Bonum est ex integris causis. The like may be proved from those places, which affirm that a man is in the state of damnation, till he do believe. The 16th. of Mark, He that m Ma●k 16. believeth, shall be saved: he that believeth not, shall be damned, Joh. 3.18. He that believeth not, is condemned already; and ver. 36. He that believeth not, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him. And as the Scripture owns it for an anointed truth, so reason confirms it with a high hand, which I prove thus: 1. As by the first Adam no man is guilty of eternal death, but he that is a member of him by natural generation; so Christ frees no man from condemnation, justifieth and reconcileth no man, till be a member of him by supernatural regeneration; but this is not before faith, John 1.12. To as many as n John 1.12. received him, to them he gave power to become the sons of God, even to as many as believed on his Name; Which were borne, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, but of God. 2. If a man be justified from the time of Christ's death antecedently, not only to a man's faith, but to a man's birth, than a justified person is not borne a child of wrath, which contradicts that of the Apostle, where he saith of himself and the converted Ephesians; Than they were by o Eph. 2.3. nature the children of wrath as well as others. 3. A sin is not remitted before it is committed; But if we be justified from the time of Christ's death, sin is remitted, before it is committed. The Major is evident, because it is not a sin before committed; and therefore seeing it is but potentially a sin, and not formally it cannot be actually and formally remitted; nor is it of any great moment, that our sins were imputed to Christ, before they were committed by us. For, 1. It will not easily be granted that our sins were imputed to Christ, but only the punishment due to sin was said upon Christ; but if it be granted, the reason is not alike: for Christ to whom our sin in the guilt of it was imputed, was a person existing. And, 2. Sin imputed to Christ, was not as the * Doctor C●isp. Ser. p. 108, 109. Antinomians judge so transferred upon Christ as to constitute him guilty by an inherent guilt, to whom sin, and the guilt of sin are all one; so that in their esteem Christ was the sinner, as really as he that did commit it; for this is impossible; for, Idem numero accidens non potest migrare à subjecto in subjectum; and therefore this imputation was an denomination, and Christ subjected himself to it without sin, which he could not have done if sin and the guilt of it be inseparable; and the same thing therefore it was only an external imputation of the guilt of it, which rendered him obnoxious unto punishment, and there was a necessity for this imputation, for otherwise he could not have suffered as a surety; but now we cannot be conceived sinners before we commit sin, because sin in us is an inherent blot; whereby we having broken the Law, deserved punishment for our offence against God, and this formally constitutes us sinners; and that guilt or obligation to punishment that arises from it, is a * Reatus est duplex, culpae & poenae, sive reatusredundans in personam. The first is inseparable, the second separable from sin; this was imputed to Christ, not the first. separable effect; nor can we thus be counted sinners by God in justice, till we be so actually by inherent guilt; therefore as a medicine that hath a sufficient virtue to cure all leprosies, yet it doth not cure till a man be actually leprous; so the blood of Christ that hath a healing virtue, doth not purge a man till he be defiled with sin. 4. The whole efficacy of the merit of Christ's death, in respect of the imputation and application of it, depends upon the will of God ordaining it, and accepting of it; for who dares take or apply the merit of Christ any other way, or upon any other condition than he hath ordained to communicate it, and to be accepted for men? And Christ as Mediator was the servant of God, submitting his will to Gods will in it; and Christ was constituted as a Head and Mediator out of mere grace, and favour, and his will was to be in every respect conformable to the will of God. Now then seeing it was not intended by God, nor accepted of God to procure immediate reconciliation, and remission of sins for any before repentance, and implantation into Christ by faith; so neither was it the intendment of Christ, and so no wrong is done to Christ, though the benefit of his death be suspended until actual faith; especially considering, that for Christ's sake grace shall be given effectually to draw them to faith for whom Christ died, therefore none are justified actually till faith. I might here add, that the Law being relaxed, to put in the name of a surety, whose payment was refusable; hereupon the solution being not in this respect the same in obligation, (for dum alius solvit, aliud solvitur) and so being not solutio ejusdem, but tantidem, the discharge doth not immediately follow; especially seeing it was neither the will of God, nor of Christ, that an immediate discharge should be given, which appears by Scripture strongly by a negative argument thus, There is no Scripture can be produced from whence, without manifest injury to the Holy Ghost, this can be drawn by any tolerable consequence, that by virtue of Christ's death all the Elect are ipso facto invested with Christ's righteousness, and are actually justified without the intervention of faith; nay, the Scriptures expressly threatening unbelievers with damnation, and limiting salvation to Believers, do evidently declare the contrary. Neither let any reject this argument drawn from the Scripture negatively; for although this argument be infirm in matters of less consequence, yet in fundamentals it is of great force; such as this is, by what means this righteousness of Christ shall be applied to justification; therefore in such truths as concern our salvation, this is of main importance, it is not written, therefore it is not to be believed. Indeed if Christ had merited this absolutely, that we should be justified whether we believe, or not believe, the matter had been otherwise. And when we make faith the condition necessary to justification, we do not with Arminians make it a potestative uncertain condition, depending upon the liberty of man's free will; but though it be contingent in respect of us, yet it comes to pass necessarily in respect of God, who hath ordained unto faith such as he hath chosen in Christ unto salvation. And it is an effect of the death of Christ, which shall be given in God's appointed time to such for whom Christ died. Nor do we make faith a condition of Christ's acquiring pardon, nor an instrument to make his merits satisfactory, nor an organical instrument of God's acception of it; Christ's merits have their worth, whether we believe or not; and God's will cannot be moved by any external cause; but it is a prerequisite condition by God's appointment, which is to be fulfilled by us through his grace working it, whereby Christ's righteousness shall be applied to us for justification. And as for those Scriptures that speak of Gods being reconciled by the death of Christ, they are to be restrained to actual Believers, to whom Paul wrote his Epistles; or if they be indefinitely understood of all the Elect, they hold forrh no more then that Christ hath by a sufficient price paid removed the cause of enmity meritoriously, but not by any formal application of it unto any until faith. And whereas they speak of God's reconciling us, while enemies, (from whence our Adversaries infer, that we are reconciled while enemies, antecedently to faith) this only shows what we were when Christ died for us, enemies to God as well as others; but that we are (while we remain so) reconciled, is atheologon, and not worthy of him that savours of the Spirit of grace; nor can any sober man that keeps his wit's company, imagine any such thing in God, who is of purer eyes then to behold iniquity. 5. Besides, in the fifth place, it is considerable among what sort of causes the death of Christ is to be ranked; it is a meritorious cause, which is to be numbered amongst moral causes. Christ in his death is not to be looked upon as a natural agent, that the effect of his sufferings should work immediately, but as a voluntary agent; and hence the effect doth not necessarily follow, but at the will of the agent moved thereby; yea, the effect of a moral cause, or voluntary agent, may sometimes precede the cause, as in this of the death of Christ, by which all that believed in Christ to come, were justified as well as we, though Christ had not as yet made an actual satisfaction by his death; for in this case the effect is wholly at the will of the Agent moved thereby, who together with Christ hath suspended the effect until faith. I add in the 6th. place, Bonum est ex integris causis, and therefore where many causes concur to the producing of one effect, the effect is not accomplished till every cause hath contributed his proper influence. Now there are three causes of man's justification, which may therefore be called social causes, but not ; but the two last subordinate to the first. The first is the efficient cause, that is God of his free mercy. The second is the meritorious cause, the death and obedience of Christ. The third is the instumentall cause, and that is saith. Now as the efficient justifies not without the meritorious, so neither doth the meritorious without the instrumental, and much less the instrumental without the other; but all three conjoined, constitute a person actually justified in the sight of God. And whereas they argue, that those Scriptures that speak of justification by faith, are to be understood in foro conscientiae, that they do but justify us declaratively, and serve to evidence justification, but not to confer justification upon us, neither are we justified by faith (say they) in the sight of God: I will therefore propound three arguments against this which is a chief cornerstone in the Antinomians building. 1. That that doth change and alter the state of a sinner, and put him into a new condition in refrence to God, that doth more than evidentially justify: But faith doth thus alter the state of a sinner; and the Major is above contradiction: the Minor is no less true, which I prove thus, If before faith a mna is in the state of damnation, and upon believing he be put into a state of salvation, and that before God, than faith doth really alter and change a man's estate before God: But before faith a man is under condemnation, and upon faith delivered from it: Ergo. Mr. Eyre his answer to this was, that the Law did condemn him, but God d●d not; To which I replied, If the Law be the Law of God, and receive all its power and authority from God, then when the Law condemneth, than God condemneth; But the Law is the Law of God, and hath all its force and efficacy from the will of God. (Now look what answer he hath given to Mr. Woodbridge, which you may see, Mr. Eyre, p. 112. Num 6. Vindiciae Justifica. p. 112. Sect. 6. the same he gave to me, which I shall answer in its proper place.) 2. What the Aposle denies to Works, he attributes to faith; therefore faith hath an influence into justification, which works have not. From whence I argue, If faith do only declaratively justify the sinner, than faith doth no more towards the justification of a sinner than works, because works may evidence my justification, as well as faith; but according to the Apostle, faith contributes more to justification then works: Ergo. The proof of the consequence, that works may evidence justification, will appear from p Rom. 8.1. Rom. 8.1. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit: By this we q 1 John 3.14. know that we are passed from death to life, because we love the Brethren. 3. Besides, the controversy between the Apostle and the Justiciaries of his time, was not, whether faith or works do evidence our justication; but by what we are justified in the sight of God. From whence I argue, That that makes the Apostle to assert an untruth, that interpretation cannot be true: But if the meaning of the Apostle had been, We are justified by faith, that is, faith doth evidence our justification, and works do not evidence it, this makes the Apostles words to be untrue, and he should uphold a needless strife, and they should be in the truth, and he in an error. But we shall rather suspect this gloss, than so fare question the credit of St. Paul, who was Amanuensis Spiritûs Sancti, the Penman of the Holy Ghost. Use. 1 The first Use then may be to show us the miserable estate of a Christlesse man, an unbeliever not united to Christ by faith. As the body without the soul is dead, so is a man without Christ dead in sins and trespasses. As a branch separated from the vine withers away, and shall surely be cast into the fire; so that soul that is without Christ, will whither in his profession, and make fuel for everlasting burn. What awretched condition doth this discover a multitude of persons to be in at this day, not only such as are without Christ, because without the means by which God offers and exhibites Christ, though their condition be very sad; but even of those to whom Christ is preached, and salvation by Christ offered; but yet (alas!) they are as great strangers to Christ as if they had never heard of him, they know not what union and communion with Christ means, they never were cut off from their old stock; but are members of the first Adam, who are yet in their sins, ready to perish everlastingly for want of union with Christ, to give them a right unto his righteousness; if God stop but their breath, which he can as easily do as a man would crush a moth, they are everlastingly undone; and we may say of them as Christ of judas, It had been good for them they had never been borne, Let such persons as these are know, that have lived under excellent means, and yet are not drawn to faith, It shall be more tolerable in the day of judgement for the Heathen that never heard of Christ, then for them; if they die in this estate, they shall not be damned for not believing in Christ, for Christ was never revealed unto them; but Christ have been revealed unto you, the unsearchable riches of Jesus Christ hath been laid open before your eyes; God hath made many sweet offers of Christ and all his benefits unto your souls, when God hath denied to Dives a drop of water to cool his tongue; the windows of heaven have been opened to you, and the fountains of the great deep of the bottomless mercy of God have been broken up, and the Seas and depths of God's mercies in Christ have been opened to you. One would think the most iron-hearted sinner would be alured with such bowels of mercy as have wept over you, and yet you have received all the grace of God in vain, you have not been brought over unto Christ by faith; how will this provoke the Lord to the sorest vengeance, that the hand of a jealous God can inflict? If the word spoken by Angels was steadfast, and every transgression and obedience received a just recompense of reward; how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation? This will be condemnation with a witness, That light is come into the world, and men love darkness rather than light. Thou that art not united to Christ, thou hast as yet no part nor portion in Christ, thou art yet in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. Indeed there is righteousness enough in Christ to justify thee; if all the sins of all the men in the world did lie upon thee, yet if thou be'st a member of Christ, none of all these should condemn thee; yea, with reverence be it spoken, God can no more condemn thee then he can condemn his Son that died for thee; thou art as safe from condemnation, as Christ; but thou that art yet out of Christ by unbelief, let me tell thee, the very blood of Christ cannot save thee in this estate; God must make a new Gospel, and deny himself, or else thou canst not come to heaven. What claim canst thou lay to Christ's righteousness, that hast no interest in Christ himself? will he give his blood to thee, that never gave himself to thee? Thou that art a Christlesse person, thou art a graceless person; for if God have not made Christ righteousness to thee, to justify thee, he is not made sanctification to thee, thou art a godless, a hopeless man in this estate. As it was said of Coniah, so may I say of thee, Ob earth, earth, earth, writ this man childless, a man that shall not prosper all his days! he was a broken vessel in whom the Lord had no pleasure; so thou art a broken vessel in whom the Lord hath no pleasure. Oh earth, earth, earth, writ this man graceless, hopeless, heavenlesse, a man that shall not prosper all his days! Oh, what a dreadful thing must death needs be to thee when thou diest, that hast no Christ to intercede for thee, nor righteousness to appear in! If all the hairs upon thy head were so many vipers in thy bosom, they will not sting thy body more deadly, than sin will sting thy soul unto death eternal. Know therefore that without union with Christ, it would be well with thee if thou couldst change conditions with the meanest beast, or creature God hath given to serve thee; yea, take the Sodomites that now suffer the vengeance of eternal fire, they shall have a Summer's parlour in hell over that soul that hath had such offers of Christ as you have had, and yet dies in a Christlesse estate, without union with him. I beseech you, lay it strongly to heart, before the wrath of the Lord break forth like fire against you, and burn down to the lowest hell, and there be none to quench it. Use. 2 2. See what a blessed thing it is for the Lord to give a people the means whereby they may become one with Christ; for God to give unto us his Word, which is the means to cut us off from the old stock, and to implant us into Christ; for God to give us his Gospel, and that his Spirit should attend upon the Word preached; without which the Word preached would be as useless as the Gardener's knife, which cannot cut off a branch, nor be helpful to the implantation of it, without the hand of the Gardener to act and improve it; and so the Word without the Spirit would implant none. Oh r●st! it is the Spirit in the Word that works faith, and so draws and unites the soul to Christ. Now that God should give a people his Word, and his Spirit to apply Christ to them, and them to Christ, that there may be a mutual application of them, as there is of the stock to the graft, and the graft to the stock; that the Believer may apprehend Christ, and be apprehended by him, and so grow up into union and blessed fellowship and communion with Christ in his death and resurrection▪ Oh what a blessed unspeakable mercy is this! without which Christ himself would not save us; and therefore though the world slight the Word preached, yet if we did rightly consider it as a means of union to Christ, we should think it a greater blessing than to be made heirs of the world; and should God take it away from a people, it would be a greater loss than the Sun out of the Firmament. But if it be such a blessing to have the Word preached, which is the means to beget faith, whereby this union is made; what a mercy is it to that soul to whom the Lord hath blessed it as a means of his insition into Christ, that the preaching of the law hath been in the hand of God, as the Gardener's knife by which he hath cut thee off from the old stock● the stock of nature; and that the preaching of the Gospel hath been the means to implant thee into Christ as into a new stock, by whom thou that wert dead in sins and trespasses, art now spiritually alive unto God in Christ; and thou that wert a child of wrath, a firebrand of hell, art now made a child of God, an heir of eternal life! If to be without Christ, be the fountain of all misery, then to be one with Christ is the spring, and fountain of all blessedness. If all the generations shall call the mother of Christ blessed, because she bore Christ in her womb; all the Angels of heaven shall call thee blessed, that hast Christ dwelling in thy heart by faith. Oh what a comfort was it to Noah when he was in the Ark, when he saw so many thousands sinking and drowning in the waters without any hope of escaping! and yet he sat secure in his Ark without any fear; and as the waters did arise, so his Ark did arise: So, what a comfort will it be to a soul in Christ, when he shall see so many roaring and damning, going to hell without mercy, and he himself that was united to Christ saved! Oh what a comfort was it to Lot when all Sodom was of a light fire, burning and flaming about the ears of the Inhabitants, and they crying out for anguish and extremity of pain; that he who was an Inhabitant in that place, and had no mind to go out, was by the hand of God mercifully snatched out of those flames, and had a Zoar to fly unto, where he might be safe from those burn! So, when the world shall at the great day be of a light fire about men's ears, and all the wicked that are without Christ in the world, shall be condemned to hell to dwell with devouring fire, and everlasting burnnings; that then thyself who wert a child of wrath by nature as well as others, and as unwilling to go out of thyself unto Christ for life, as ever Lot was to go out of Sodom; and yet by the merciful hand of God, he did pluck thee as a brand out of the fire, and by his Spirit did draw thee unto faith in Christ, that in him thy soul might find everlasting rest, and safety in Christ; Oh, what cause hast thou to be everlastingly thankful unto the Lord for this mercy! The 3d. Use shall be to put you upon the trial, whether or no you be united unto Christ; for otherwise, whosoever thou art, thy estate is wretched, thou art a hopeless man, without God, and without any well grounded hope in the world. Now this may be known by several signs. The first that I will give is this, There will be much fruitfulness in that soul that is united to Christ; for Christ is a very fruitful Vine, and every branch in him bringeth forth much fruit, John 15.5. Every branch that abideth in me, the same bringeth forth much fruit. Where observe, that Christ is compared to a Vine, and his Members that are really united, not by profession only, are compared to Branches that abide in the Vine; for a dead branch is cut off, and cast into the fire; and an abiding branch brings forth much fruit. And as a branch of a Vine, is worth nothing unless it be for fruit, a man cannot make a pin to fasten in a wall of the branch of a Vine; so that an unfruitful Christian is the most unprofitable person in the world, and there is nothing can be pleaded to keep a dead branch of a Vine from the fire, it is good for no other use; if it bring not forth fruit, it must serve for fuel: So then, all such as are in Christ, must be fruitful; it is the end why a Christian is ingraffed into Christ, to make him fruitful; wherefore doth a man put a graft into another stock, but for fructification? this is God's end in uniting a soul to Christ. God looks for much fruit, and better fruit, as a man would never be at pains to engraft a acion, unless he did expect better fruit, and more fruit than he had before. Eph. 2.10. Hence we are said to be God's workmanship in Christ, created unto good works; the Lord of the Vine-yard sent his servant to demand some fruit; Mark 12.2. and Christ is a very fruitful stock, there is much sap and fatness in this spiritual root; and it's a dishonour to Christ, the stock into which a Christian is planted, if he bring not forth fruit; but what is this fruit? why, Matth. 3 8. 'tis such as john the Baptist called for, fruits meet for repentance, such as may evidence and testify the truth of repentance, and its fruit unto holiness, as Paul tells the Romans; That being made free from sin, Rom. 6.22. and become servants of God, they had their fruit unto holiness. And in another place, this is called fruits of righteousness; Phi. 1.11. when a Christian is filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are to the praise and glory of God; when a man is fruitful in every good work, both in works of piety towards God, and charity towards men; when there is not only leaves of external profession, Col. 1.10. but real fruits of holiness, and sanctification; and observe it, it is fruitfulness in every good work; so that our fruit must be good for the quality, much for the quantity. Art thou such a fruitful Christian? dost thou bring forth fruits meet for repentance? may the change of thy heart be read in the change of thy life? is it such fruit as may evidence the truth and power of grace? art thou no longer a servant to sin, but a servant of righteousness? is thy affection to sin mortified? They that are Christ's, Gal. 5.24. have crucified the flesh with the affections, and the lusts thereof. Art thou like a tree planted by the rivers of water, bringing forth fruit in its season? dost thou bring forth fruit when God expects it? dost thou bring forth fruit not to thyself, but unto God? as a tree brings forth fruit for the Master, so dost thou live to God? not only caring for thy credit, that thy life be unblameable, but that God may be honoured? dost thou abound in the fruits of righteousness? art thou full of love, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, faith, humility, patience, temperance? He that is not thus fruitful, is not ingraffed into Christ; if thy faith be a dead faith, that doth not manifest itself by good works; if thou be'st barren, and unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ, and hast nothing but the outward leaves of profession, thou wert never truly ingraffed into Christ. A 2d. note is this, he that is united to Christ, lives the life of Christ; for it is not he, but Christ that liveth in him; nevertheless saith Paul, I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me. As a branch in the tree, if it be a living branch, partakes of the same life; it doth not only cleave by adherence, and continuation to the body of the tree, but it is in the tree by a real participation of life, partaking of the sap and influences of the root; thus it is between Christ and a Christian, united to him by a true faith, Acts 3.15. he partakes of spiritual life from Christ; hence Christ is called the Prince of Life, 1 Cor. 15.45. and a quickening Spirit, 1 Cor. 15.45. Now Christ is the Root, Author, and fruition of all spiritual life in us; and thus he lives in us by his Spirit, which is called the Spirit of life which is in Christ, and by this he freeth us from the law of sin and death; Rom. 8.2. The same Spirit that dwells in Christ, dwells in a Believer, and quickens him; as it raised Christ from the dead, so it doth raise up us to newness of life, and so to live a life in conformity to the life of Christ; which appears in two things, because it makes a Christian live by the same rule, and to the same end. 1. By the same rule, Christ as Mediator lived according to the written Word of God, P●al. 40.8. The Law of God was written in his heart; look what the Law did require, there was a disposition in his heart suitable to that Law; and hence Christ professed, He came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him; It was his meat and drink to do the will of his Father: John 4.34. And in the most difficult case, wherein he could be tried, though nature started and stood amazed at the greatness of the sufferings, and therefore as man could not but fear the wrath of God; and in this sense he feared, and declined the bitterness of the cup, and desired it might pass away; and unless he had put off the nature and affections of man, he could do no otherwise; yet knowing that immutable purpose of God, and for that end he came to this home, in that sense he voluntarily submitted; and so though here were a diversity of wills, yet not a contrariety of wills in Christ, and truly his will was wholly agreeable to the will of God; so in such as Christ lives by his Spirit, he makes them so live, as to make the will of God the rule of their life, and to this end he writes the Law in their heart, that they may both know, and have an inward suitableness of Spirit to yield obedience to the will of God: And hence he that hath had communion with Christ in his death, is said to cease to sin, for this end that he should no longer live to the lusts of men, but to the will of God. 2. Christ made the honour of God his end; thus Christ saith, He did honour the Father, and sought not his own glory; John 8.49, 50. Thus also a Christian that is united to Christ, seeks that glory of God, and makes that his last end, as Paul enjoins, Whatsoever ye do, 1 Cor. 10.31. do all to the glory of God. Now if thou art one that dost make the will of God the rule of thy life, and obey it from thy heart, making God thy last end in all thou dost; surely this is an infallible sign of a man in Christ, 3. That man that is united to Christ, cannot live to sin any longer; as a graft cut off the old stock, lives not in the stock any longer, but wholly lives in another; so that man that is united to Christ, being cut off from the old stock, lives not to corrupt nature any longer; Nay, there is nothing now so contrary to the life of a Christian as sin, nothing so hateful; nothing was more hateful to Christ; he came into the world to destroy the works of the devil, to destroy sin; 1 John 3.8. Rom. 6.6. 1 Pet. 4.1, 2. and they that are in Christ, their old man was crucified with him; and thus, he that hath suffered in the flesh, hath ceased from sin, i. e. he that hath been crucified with Christ, sin reigns no more in his heart; so than they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, Gal. 5.24. with the affections and lusts thereof; they cannot cleave in their affections unto sin, nay, they cannot but hate it, as being that that drew tears and blood from Christ's heart, who is now dearer to them then their own lives. Therefore such as can give up themselves to the love of any one sin, and suffer their affection to be ensnared with the love of it, were never united truly to Christ; for separation from sin, and union to Christ, are inseparable companions. Thus you see how we may know our union to Christ. The last Use shall be to persuade every man to labour after this union, seeing life and death stands in it. Christ himself will profit us nothing without this union. Wealth in the Mine doth not enrich any man till it be severed from its dross, and appropriated to a particular use; water in the Fountain profits not a man, till it be conveyed by some pipe into his cistern; light in the Sun doth me no good, unless I have an eye to behold it; Christ is a rich Mine, in which are hid unsearchable treasures, but what am I the better if he be not mine? Tolle meum & tolle Deum, saith Luther; Take away my propriety in Christ, and the knowledge of a Christ will torment, and not comfort my heart. He is a Fountain of living water, but unless faith be the conduit-pipe, and cock to convey this water, I may perish for all that; he is a Sun of righteousness, yet if he do not enlighten me, I may be cast into utter darkness; therefore till Christ by some bond or union become mine and I his, I may be as miserable as if this Mine had not been discovered, as if this Fountain had not been opened, as if this Sun had never risen. Now this union and communion with Christ on our part is by faith; Oh let us labour for faith. Consider how freely God hath given Christ for us, and how willing God is to give Christ to us; consider how lovingly Christ invites us to come, and how willingly he will embrace every soul that comes; John 6.38. For this is the will of the Father, that whosoever come, he should in no wise cast out, The Spirit saith, come, Rev. 22.17. and the Bride saith, come; Whosoever will let him come, and drink of the water of life freely. And to that end that faith may be wrought, attend upon the Word of God, for faith cometh by hearing, it is the power of God to salvation; and desire the Lord to draw thee unto Christ, tell him thou art undone without Christ, and there is nothing that thy heart is more set upon then Christ; and if he will give thee Christ, thou wilt be conntented whatever he do with thee; and when the Lord seethe thee hunger and thirst after Christ and his righteousness, and that nothing but a Christ will content thee; he will say, Be it unto thee according to thy desire; if nothing but a Christ will satisfy thee, why, take Christ, and let him everlastingly become thine, and with his Christ he will give his Spirit, if thou ask it, to seal up this gift to thy heart to thy everlasting comfort. Thus then being come to the end of this Sermon, as it was delivered, with as little variation as I could, I shall prosecute this argument no further; and if friends and enemies would have been so satisfied, I had not troubled the Press with this Sermon, but I and it had been yet buried in silence; but since it is the will of God, I here submit it to the judgement of my Brethren; and I doubt not but I shall receive from them a quietus est, to discharge me from Mr Eyre's Arrest, who hath in the Pulpit and Press condemned this Sermon, as wide from the Orthodox Faith; which if he will undertake to show, and convince me wherein, I promise him through the grace of Christ to be a thankful Proselyte. Now the God of peace tread down Satan under your feet, rebuke that spirit of Error and division that is among you, settle and confirm you in the truth as it is in Jesus, to whose grace I commend you, and rest in hope of your establishment. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH, OR UNBELIEVERS, NO SUBJECTS OF Justification. CHAP. I. Being a Vindication of my Sermon preached at N. Sarum, showing that Union to Christ, and Justification by Christ is not Antecedent to Faith. ABout April (which was Anno 1652.) according to my course in the Lecture at New Sarum, I preached the foregoing Sermon, grounded upon the second to the Ephesians the 12. verse. That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. From which words the Point observed was this, That a Christlesse estate is a Hopeless estate; for the explication and proof of the Point, I refer the Reader to the Sermon itself. That which I chief aimed at was to show, that the very Elect are said to be without Christ, or in a Christless estate until actual faith; because without union to Christ, there is no communion with him, but this union is the formal effect of faith, or is made by believing. After the Sermon, Mr. Eyre took liberty to remonstrate, and since in his Vindiciae Justify, he hath declared to the world, that I said, That the Elect themselves, (to whom Christ was peculiarly given by the Father before the foundations of the world, for whom Christ gave himself a sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour, whose sins he bore on his body on the tree, even to a full propitiation,) had no right or interest in Christ; nor any more benefit by his death then reprobates, till they did believe, and that they are but dreamers who conceit the contrary. To which I answer, that as he hath a faculty to speak of others what they never said, so he can hear what they never spoke; he hath innovated my terms, of which as in our conference, (so in his Printed relation, where he is no less peccant,) he was always wittingly, (as I conceive) guilty, which because I minded him of before the people; he styles in his Book a provocation of language which I gave him. But to the matter, because I intent not a strife of words, I shall first readily grant him, that the Elect were given to Christ by the Father before the foundations of the world, and Christ to them; if he understand it only of an immanent act terminated in God himself, and understand by it no more than an eternal purpose in God, to give Christ in the fullness of time to die for those whom in his eternal counsel he had fore-ordained to eternal life, and to give them faith whereby they may become his members; but if he judge this to be actually done, and that Christ and all the Elect were one mystical body, and so justified from eternity, I wholly descent from him; Predestination is only a love of purpose and intention, not of execution; it being an immanent act, leaveth no positive real effect upon the person predestinated. Hence when God is said to give Christ to the Elect from eternity, it signifies only the will and purpose of God, constituting and appointing Christ to die for the Elect, (but he was not actually given till in the fullness of time he sent him into the world; and although in his death he gave him to die for them, yet was he not actually given to them, that they should possess the benefits of his death until actual faith; and I shall further manifest this, when I shall prove that an immanent act of God purposing to justify us, is not our formal justification. Secondly, Whereas he saith, that Christ gave himself a sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour, and bore our sins in his body on the tree, even to a full propitiation: This I willingly acknowledge, and bless the Lord for; if he understand it only of the fullness of satisfaction, and not of an immediate discharge of the sinner for whom he died; Christ did not satisfy the justice of God by divine acceptation, but he satisfied the justice of God fully; the dignity and excellency of his person did no way dispense with any degree of the extremity of the punishment due to our sin, (which was consistent with his Godhead and holiness to suffer) but it was to make the sufferings of one available for many. And Scotus gives a considerable reason for it, quia poenâ ab unà eximere Christum si valuisset, valuisset etiam ex duabus, Scotus in quar. Sentent. dist. 46. Q. 4. Art. 4. atque ita ex omnibus eum emancipare. And I acknowledge there was not a deficiency, but a redundancy of merit in his sufferings; the justice of God cannot require any thing more at the hands of Christ our surety, or of the sinner by way of satisfaction, and in this sense he is well pleased with Christ as a public person; but if by a full propitiation he understand an immediate discharge of the sinner from condemnation before faith, to apply the benefits of Christ's death; this I deny, and will make manifest in its peculiar and proper place; Where I shall show it is no wrong either to Christ, or the Elect person, that the benefit of Christ's death is suspended till faith. And in this sense I acknowledge, that the Elect had no actual right, or interest in Christ, if you take it for jus in re, and not for jus adrem, because his death was intended for their benefit; not for the reprobate, though they have not actual benefit, and possession of the good things purchased until faith. In respect of Gods, and Christ's intention in his death, surely an Elect person hath more right to the benefits of Christ's death then the reprobate, it being intended effectually for Peter and not for Judas; and by virtue of this, faith shall be given to apply it to all for whom Christ died, and so they have a right to the thing; but in respect of any right in the thing itself, or actual discharge of the sinner, I acknowledge in this respect, there is no present difference between the Elect and reprobate; this is that which soundeth so harsh in Mr. Eyre's ear, which I shall sufficiently clear when I produce in its due place Scripture-authority, and Arguments to confirm it. I shall now only vindicate it from those monstrous absurdities, that he unjustly loads it with. First, he saith, Nothing could be spoken more contradictory to plain Scriptures; but produceth not one place to confirm it, but refers us to such Scriptures as he forceth to speak in defence of his own opinion, where we shall examine whether what we affirm or he maintains, be most agreeable to the truth; only I shall instance in two Scriptures to relieve this truth. The first is in Ephesians 2.1, 2, 3. where the Apostle telleth the Elect Ephesians, whom God had ordained to life, and for whom Christ died, that they were dead in sins and trespasses; Wherein they walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; into which number in the third ver. he puts himself and all believers before their conversion, and saith, that they were children of wrath by nature, as well as others; where the Apostles scope is to show the freeness of God's grace in saving them by faith in Christ, by an argument drawn from the change of their estate; he telleth them the time was they were children of wrath, as unable to help themselves, as the dead to raise themselves to life, therefore their deliverance was by grace. Where by children of wrath, the Apostle must mean an estate and condition opposite to their present estate of salvation, and justification, into which they are now brought by the grace of God, and merit of Christ by faith. Else first the Apostles Argument from the change of their estate were invalid. Now if they would know when they were children of wrath, seeing God loved them as elect from eternity, and they were redeemed by Christ; He answers, that it was when they were dead in sins and trespasses, and walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience, and then they were children of wrath; but thus they did walk and live before faith and regeneration were wrought. 2. Such an estate of condemnation is here meant, as others are in that are the men of this world, children of disobedience, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, children of unbelief, which notes a refractory contumacious disobedience of unbelief seated in the will, which is more than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is remissible, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is irremissible, being a note of final imperswasibility; 1 Tim. 1.13. Paul was sometime a child 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and therefore when the Apostle saith, their condition by nature was such as theirs, that are children of disobedience, a note of such that shall perish; surely they were such as were in an unjustified estate. 3. If it be such an estate wherein they were dead in sins and trespasses, did walk according to the prince of this world, and according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now effectually worketh in the children of disobedience, having their conversation in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh; surely this was inconsistent with salvation, and the estate of justification; God cannot justify a man with imputed righteousness, but at the same time he sanctifieth him by imparted, Prov. 17.15. and inherent righteousness: It is not agreeable to the purity and holiness of God's nature to justify a wicked man; for He that justifieth the wicked, & be that condemneth the just: even they both are abomination to the Lord; and what God condemns in others, he will not do himself, therefore they were not then justified. Nor doth the Apostle make a naked comparison between the two estates and conditions derived from the first and second Adam; but compares the same persons not barely in relation to these, but as being really in both these estates, at a different time; being under the first before conversion, and passing from it upon believing, where it is observable, that the Apostle doth not say, ye are by nature children of wrath, which is all Mr. Eyre will acknowledge, as you may see, pag. 111. but ye were children of wrath; he speaks of a condition they were in, and delivered from. The second Scripture is in the 1 Cor. 6.9, 10, 11. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicatours, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thiefs shall inherit the Kingdom of God; such were some of you, but you are washed, but you are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus. Where you see the Elect Corinthians were while unsanctified, such as could not inherit the Kingdom of God, and therefore were in the same estate with other persons till they were washed and justified; where he maketh an evident opposition between the time past and present, they were then such as could not inherit eternal life, and therefore were justified; for if they were then justified, what could hinder their salvation? And he saith, but you are justified; he doth not say, but you were justified, restraining their justification to the time present upon their faith, and sanctification being an evidence of the truth of that faith, that makes him put their sanctification before their justification; so that you see the Apostle affirms while they were unsanctified, they could not inherit the Kingdom of God; that is, they had no right to it by justification, and were uncapable of it; but upon the change of their estate by faith, they were justified by Christ, of which change in the judgement of charity he concludes, by their sanctification: Now what can be spoken more fully to clear this matter in controversy, that before faith and effectual vocation, they are no more freed from condemnation than others? 2. He saith, It is wide from the Orthodox Faith. To which I answer, first by retortion, that then he himself is wide from the Orthodox faith; because, pag. 66. he saith the same thing in different terms, Mr. Eyre vindic. pag. 66. Num. 2. [Though the state of the loved and hated are different in the mind of God, yet not in the persons themselves, till the different effects of love and hatred are put forth. Now an immanent act of God's mind puts no present difference; for, Praedestinatio nihil ponit in praedestinato, is a known rule. Secondly, It hath hitherto been the unanimous consent of the Orthodox, that there is no difference between the Elect and reprobate, as to present enjoyment, until actual faith; indeed they hold in this respect a difference, which I never questioned; that although they be equally in a state of sin and wrath, yet God hath a purpose to bring the Elect infallibly out of that misery; and to leave the reprobate, Rom. 9.13. in which respect God is said to love Jacob, and to hate Esau; and in this respect, Acts 13.48. all that God hath ordained to life, shall believe; and whosoever the Father giveth unto Christ, they shall come; for, 2 Tim. 2.19. The foundation of God standeth sure, the Lord knoweth who are his; but on the other hand, for the present there is no difference; both are children of wrath, both are without Christ, both aliens to the Covenant of Grace, having no promise of the pardon of sin, both without hope in the world, only God's purpose will in time make an actual difference between them; so Mr. Burgess of Justifica. p. 188. Burgess. of Justific. p. 188. but you are prejudicated against him; I will propound three others of unquestionable authority; Holy and Learned Mr. Baines in his Commentary upon Eph. 2.3. draws this observation from it. First, than (saith he) we have to consider how that the chosen of God before their conversion have nothing in them differing from other sinners; the Election of God standeth sure, Vide Calv. Institut. Lib. 3. Sect. 10. but before he call effectually, it doth put nothing in the party Elected; so where you may see more to this purpose: And he gives two reasons why God will have it so. 1. That the mercy of God may be magnified, and made manifest in the free grace of Justification. 2. That love may be engendered in us, being justified; Marry who had many sins forgiven, loved much; so that eminent servant of Christ, Dr. Tayl. in his Come. upon Titus, ch. 3. v. 3. Dr. Tayl. Tit. c. 3. v. 3. p. 591. pag. 591. Whosoever are called unto the faith, have experience of a double estate in themselves; once in time past, and another for the present; the one of nature, the other of grace. And a little after: And good reason there is, that he that is now beloved, should see that once he was not beloved; and that he who now is in the state of grace, should see that he was once in the state of wrath as well as others, which will cause him to love much: And indeed the Elect could not be Elect, nor justified, nor washed, if they were always the children of God; and were it not for this once, and time past, wherein there was no difference between them and the reprobate, but only in God's counsel and possibility of calling. Learned Camero setteth to his seal to this truth; Ad Petrum in peccatis mortuum non magis pertinet Christi mors quàm ad alium quemvis, sed postquam Petro datum est credere est discrimen sanè magnum. Camero, opusc. misc. p. 534. And that he was no Arminian, is evident by what he saith in another place: Rectiùs faciunt qui Christum pro impiis sufficienter (ut loquntur) satisfecisse docent, efficaciter autem pro solis piis. Cam. opusc. misc. p. 534. Sect. 6. Thirdly, he objecteth that it is derogatory to the full atonement made by Christ's death; If this could be proved, there needed no further argument to silence me; yea, it were better my tongue should cleave to the roof of my mouth, then that I should affirm any thing to abase the worth, or diminish the reputation of Christ's sufferings; he deserves not to open his mouth to God for mercy, that willingly opens his mouth to undervalue the merits and satisfaction made by the death of Christ. I therefore answer, that if Christ had died to purchase forgiveness of sins whether we believe or not, this argument would have some strength in it, then to suspend the benefit of Christ's death until faith, were to wrong the satisfaction of Christ; but Christ did not so die for the Elect, that whether they believe or not believe, they should be saved; therefore to suspend the benefit of Christ's death till actual faith, is no wrong to the atonement and satisfaction made by Christ's death. Now because this is the main argument to which Mr. Eyre trusts, and is the only pillar and support of his opinion, That it was the will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debt, Mr. EYRE, p. 138, 139. and a full satisfaction for all our iniquities; and therefore it was his will that our discharge procured hereby, should be immediate, because he saith its contrary to justice and equity, that a debt when it is paid, should be charged either upon the surety, or principal. I will here lay down sundry conclusions, which may serve to vindicate our doctrine, that the benefit of Christ's death is suspended until faith, as to a formal justification of the sinner, and show the insufficiency and weakness of his argument; from hence to conclude an immediate discharge of all the Elect from the time of Christ's death, antecedent to their faith. First, therefore I willingly acknowledge that Christ in his death was a common person, and a surety for the Elect, taking upon himself by God's eternal appointment this work of redemption and reconciliation. That the act of God's Ordination, together with a particular command from the Father to lay down his life, John 10.18. and his voluntary consent and submission to become a surety for the Elect, Heb. 10.7, 9 (for it was not imposed upon him by constraint, therefore when he is said to come to do his Father's will, his own will is included; John 10.18. And no man took away his life from him, but he did lay it down of himself;) this act of Ordination in God, and submission in Christ, together with his free dominion over his own life, (which dominion he had, both by virtue of the hypostatical union, and the command of the Father to lay it down,) accompanied with sufficient power to break through the sufferings he undertook, and to raise up himself again; all this constituted Christ God-man, being perfectly righteous, a fit person to become a surety; and now it was just and righteous, that Christ an innocent person should be charged with the sins of the Elect. Secondly, I grant that no creature that was only a creature, whether Angel or man could or ought to undertake this work. 1. No Angel ought, because God's justice required that satisfaction should be given by the same nature that had sin; Bernard de pass. Dom. 1. Cap. 46. nor was it meet he should be man only, that our redemption and salvation might be attributed to none but him from whom we had our creation, for that reason which Bernard allegeth, because our redemption would more oblige us to love, than our creation; if therefore we had been redeemed by any other than him by whom we were made, we should have loved him more than our Creator. Neither could any pure creature be fitly qualified for this work; for whatever the creature can do, is already debitum, a due debt, and therefore it cannot supper-erogate, or merit any thing for us. Thirdly, I grant therefore that Christ was God and Man, and that it was needful he should be both. 1. He must be God that must satisfy God; for God was offended; and therefore to make satisfaction, God in our nature satisfieth for our sin: So that here is God, satisfying God; that if the sin be infinite in the object, the satisfaction is infinite in respect of the subject suffering, God in our nature; and although his sufferings were not infinite in duration, (nor was there need they should be, because he satisfied for such sins as should be broken off by repentance; And his end was in suffering to satisfy, therefore his sufferings must have an end,) yet his sufferings were unmeasurably great; and what was wanting in the shortness, was made up in the sharpness of the sufferings, and it was impossible Christ should be held under the sorrows of death; the duration of the prisoner in the Jail is no part of the debt, but accidental to it, he lies there but till the debt be paid; Now Christ paid all, so as fully to satisfy the justice of God; and hence there was no need of his eternal suffering. Besides, it was needful he should be God, that his obedience might be perfect, and meritorious, to dignify his obedience, and make it of infinite value, that he might merit and support himself under his suffering, and raise up himself again, and perform the rest of the works of the Mediatorship. And it was needful he should be Man; for as he was God he could not suffer; and that he might, as justice requireth, satisfy in our nature, that our pardon might not be an act of dominion only, and forgiveness, but an act of justice and satisfaction. Fourthly, I willingly grant that Christ did suffer whatsoever appertains to the substance and essentials of the first death, or the death natural, consisting in the separation of soul and body; and though the curse doth not require any one particular death, yet that the Lord might show the heinousness of sin, which deserves the worst death of all, and that the love of Christ might be manifested, and God's justice declared; God the Father appointed it, and Christ undertook it, to die the death of the Cross, a shameful and base death, appropriated to the worst of malefactors, Phil. 2.6, 8. to show the hatefulness of sin, and the greatness of Christ's humiliation, and love in submitting to it; he humbled himself to the death of the Cross. 2. I willingly grant Christ's suffered and endured most grievous torments immediately in his soul, (not by sympathy with the body only, but peculiar to his soul; all that was due to the sins of the Elect, that was consistent with his Godhead and Holiness; Catechismus Romanus. 4. Art. Symb. Aquinas, Part. 3 q. 46. art. 5, 6. the Papists deny not that he suffered inward grief in his soul, and Aquinas that he suffered the greatest sorrow that could be; but I affirm for quantity Christ might, and did in this life endure the pains of hell, (he did not locally descend into the place of the damned,) he did endure the same that was due to us, for substance and kind, though not in all accidents that belong to it; he suffered and felt that heavy wrath of God due to man's sin; his soul was so struck with horror, that all faculties for a time left there proper fruction, and did concur to relieve nature in that extremity; he lay under the revenging strokes of God's justice due to man's sin; it put him into a bloody sweat in the forethought of it, and made him cry earnestly, If it be possible, let this cup pass; My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? God for a time withdrew the solace and comfort he was wont to find in him; that sensible refreshing of the light of God's countenance, which was wont to fill him with satisfactory sweetness, was for a time withdrawn, which is a part of the second death, and answers to the pain of loss; yet in all his time the union of the Manhood with the Godhead was untouched; though there was a withdrawing of the sense and sweetness of the favour of God, his righteousness and graces were no way diminished; he was most pure in his passion, free from all sin; Christ brought none of this upon himself by his own sin, but was called to this work; and in all this conflict his faith was unshaken, crying out, My God, even when to his present sense and feeling he was forsaken. Fifthly, I willingly grant that Christ's death and sufferings was a very valuable compensation for the sin of man; yea, he satisfied God's justice to the full, not by divine acceptation, God abated him nothing for the dignity of his person, but he fully satisfied for the substance, what the justice of God could fully inflict; yea, in respect of some circumstances, he suffered more than was due; indeed in respect of the substance of his sufferings, neither, as * Parker, lib. 3. the discon. li. 51. p. 97. Mr. Parker hath observed, the love of the Father, nor the justice of God could permit more to be imposed, than what was necessary for him to bear as a surety. Quoad substantiam poenae nihil plus perpessus est Christus, quàm quod per legem debebatur, neque enim vel amor Patris, vel etiam justitia, permittere potuit, plura Filio ut imponerentur, quàm quae illi necessariò, tanquam sponsori ferenda erant. Quoad circumstantias autem, patientis personam, patiendi causam, p●ssionis efficaciam, plus quàm sufficiens satisfactio Christi & à nobis dicitur. In respect of circumstances, as the person of the sufferer, the cause of suffering, and efficacy of the passion, it was more than the Law required, as he showeth; for * Lex non requirebat, ut Deus moreretur neque, ut sine peccato proprio quis moreretur; neque requirebat mort●m talem tantae efficaciae quae esset, ut non mortem abolere● solùm sed etiam vitam introduceret, eàmque illâ quam Adamus terresti perdedirat multis nominibus praecellentiorem. the Law did not require that God should die, nor that any should die that had not sinned, nor such a death of such efficacy, as not only to abolish death, but to bring in life, and that by many degrees more excellent than that which Adam had lost; so then Christ hath fully satisfied the justice of God for the sins of the Elect, so as that God neither will, nor can in justice require any thing more at the hand of the surety, nor of the sinner for whom he died by way of satisfaction. Sixthly, It will not be denied that God may be said to be reconciled in some sense by the death of Christ as a meritorious cause, by death removing the cause of enmity, and meriting the favour of God for us; for although God loved us from eternity, yet this was amor ordinativus, not collativus; God did bear them good will in time, to make them heirs of grace and glo●y by Jesus Christ; B●ll on the Covenant of Grace, p. 292. and this excludes not, but includes the necessity of Christ's satisfaction; but such as God did Elect, he did not love them as already made heirs of Grace, by the influence of his love. For the full understanding of this you must know, that although God d●d so love the Elect, as to foreordain them unto eternal salvation; yet it was never the will of God that his Elect should for no space of time be children of wrath, that is, subject unto death, and eternal damnation for their sins; but he did decree to permit them to fall in Adam, and to be equally guilty of, and liable to eternal death with others; for which cause the Apostle calls them children of wrath as well as others. Man being created after Gods own Image, free from sin before the fall, was intimately conjoined to God; God loving and delighting in man, and man loving and delighting in his God; but man lapsed by voluntary Apostasy from God, there is an avulsion of the creature from God, and an aversion of God from the creature; and by this sin, the Covenant of friendship between God and man is dissolved; so that God who loved man, created by him as his child, and from eternity willing him good, (for I speak only of the Elect) in justice cannot but hate him now, as corrupted by sin, as a rebel against him; not by any change of affection, but of his outward dispensation; and having included him under guilt as a son of Adam, he is equally involved in the wrath due to that sin, which God hath threatened with eternal death, and resolved by an immutable decree, never to pardon it to any without a satisfaction to his offended justice for the breach of his Law, that the truth of his threatening may be fulfilled, and the authority of his Law preserved, and the evil of sin discovered, and Gods exceeding love and mercy in a way mixed with mercy, and justice may be manifested in the salvation of his Elect: So that although there be a new relation in the Elect upon their fall in Adam unto God; yet the change is in the creature, and not in God; for as the Schoolmen well observe, these relations which are attributed unto God in time, as a Creator, Father or Lord, put not any new thing in God; but there is an denomination added to him; so that when the world is created, God who was not a Creator before, is now a Creator; thus when sin took hold of the Elect, he that once was a child of love, is now a child of wrath, not by any new accident in God, but by a new effect in the creature; so that in this estate, God cannot bestow upon him the good intended in election. For the better understanding of this, that of Aquinas is of great use; God may velle mutationem, where he cannot mutare voluntatem; God may will a change, though he doth not change his will: Thus in Adam, while he continued a man after God's Image, free from sin, God willed him to be the object of his love and delight; and when he was fallen, to be the subject of his displeasure and anger, in the effects of it, being liable unto his wrath, and eternal death; yet is not here a change in God, but in Adam: Thus God with the same will decreed from eternity, to make such a one a vessel of mercy, and yet to permit him to sin, and fall in Adam, and so to remain a child of wrath, deserving condemnation, wherein God cannot actually save him, (considering his decree,) without a satisfaction by Christ applied by faith. Here is a change, and a very great one in man, but not in God; a new relation, yet no new immanent act in God. Thus we may understand that of venerable Beda in the 5. Beda in Rom. 5. ad Rom. Deus miro modo quando nos oderat, diligebat; odit in unoquoque nostrûm quod feceramus, amavit quod fecerat: When God did hate us, he wonderfully loved us; he hated that in all of us that we had done, he loved what he had made; that is, as the Schoolmen say, Dilexit humanum genus quantum ad naturam quam ipse fecit, odit quantum ad culpam quam homines contraxerunt: He loved mankind in respect to the nature he had made, or as his creature, and hated him as a sinner. But now through the satisfaction of Christ, God is so fare reconciled, that the cause of enmity is removed; although it was agreed upon between the Father and Christ, as I shall show without any wrong to Christ's satisfaction, that the benefit shall not be enjoyed till faith; yet the cause of enmity is causally taken away by the death of Christ, as Aquinas speaks well in this case, Aquin. p. 3 qu. 49. Artic. 4. Non dicimur reconciliati, quasi Deus de novo nos amare inciperet, nam aeterno amore nos dilexit, sed quia per hanc reconciliationem sublata est omnis odi causa, tum per ablationem peccati, tum per recompensationem acceptabilioris boni. Aug. in Joh. Tract. 110. And before him Augustine. Quòd reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem Christi, non sic audiatur, non sic accipiatur, quasi ideò nos reconciliaverit illi Filius, ut jam amare inceperit quos oderat, sed jam nos Deo diligenti reconciliati sumus, cum quo propter peccatum inimicitias habebamus. Lombard. l. 3. distin. 19 pag. 596. Lombard also gives in his suffrage in the like manner: Reconciliati sumus Deo, ut dit Apostolus, quod non sic intelligendum est, quasi nos ei sic reconciliaverit Christus, ut inceperit amare quos oderat, sicut reconciliatur inimicus in●●ico, ut deinde sint amici qui ante se odorant, sed jam nos diligenti Deo reconciliati sumus, non enem ex quo illi reconciliati sumus per sanguinem Filii, nos coepit diligere, sed ante mundum, priusquam nos aliquid essemus; ergo nos diligenti Deo sumus reconciliati? propter peccatum cum eo habebamus inimicitias, & Paulò pòst, reconciliat autem cum offendioula hominum tollit ab oculis Dei. And Calvin concurreth in the same opinion, Calvin. instit. l. 2. c. 16. Num. 2.3. In hunc ferè modum Spiritus sanctus in Scriptures loquitur Deum fuisse hominibus inimicum, in gratiam Christi morte sunt restituti; hujus generis locutiones (inquit Calvinus) ad sensum nostrum sunt accomodatae, ut meliùs intelligamus quàm misera sit, & calamitosa extra Christum nostra conditio. Hence than we see, that there is a reconciliation wrought by the death of Christ, which imports not a change in God's will, as if God did then first begin to love, or will well unto us, as if he did hate, and will to damn us before; for than we must admit of a proper change in the will of God, proceeding from an external cause, which is contrary to Scripture, and sound reason: for as Rutherford hath well observed: Ruth. Apollexere. p 37. Actus reconciliandi nihil novi ponit in Deo, neque meritum Christi, vel divinam voluntatem movet, vel Deum ex nolente in volentem, ex odio nos habente, in diligentem, (ut fabulatur Grevinchovius,) transmature potest. Grevinch. pag. 109. 1. Quia Deus est immutabilis. 2. Quia divinae voluntatis causa non magis dari potest quàm ipsius Dei. But whereas we lay under wrath deserved by sin, Christ hath causatively removed by his death the guilt of sin, and so meritoriously reconciled us to God; so that God is not only now placabilis by the death of Christ, but placatus; for he was placabilis from eternity, or else he had never given Christ; but now in respect of the satisfaction given, he is placatus thus far, that we lie no more, (that are the Elect) under an indispensable necessity of perishing, which we did before till satisfaction given; and this is the formal effect of Christ's death, and this act of reconciliation, which is a transient act done in time, compleateth not the action of Election, as Wallaeus seems to affirm, Wallaerus Cont; Corvinum, c. 25. p. 155. and superadds no new thing in God's will, which was not there before; but it removes causatively, and meritoriously, that that was the cause of enmity, which hindered God from being able according to justice (supposing his Decree) to bestow the good things intended in Election, and this reconciliation (I grant) is plainly held forth in these Scriptures, Rom. 5.10. Isa. 53.10. Col. 1.21. Col. 2.14. 2 Cor. 5.19. 1 Pet. 2.24. John 1.29. but this reconciliation is not our formal justification, as I shall now prove, but virtual only. And therefore I add, Seventhly, That this reconciliation wrought by Christ, or removal of guilt, causatively by his death and satisfaction, is not properly, and formally our justification: I therefore affirm with Mr Rutherford, Ruther. Trial and Triumph of Faith, p. 162. that this was a paying of a ransom for us, and a legal translation of the punishment of our sins; but it is not justification, nor ever called justification; but rather, as he also judiciously hath observed, it is justificationis fundamentum, whose words are these: Ruther. Apol. exert. p. 42. Satisfactio ut à Christo praestita non est justificatio, quia est Dei justificantis fundamentum; And therefore, his death was ever looked upon by Divines, as the procatarctical, or outward moving cause of the transient act of God in justification, which is properly our justification, it is a transient act of God upon Believers, which he never did pass till then; so saith Mr. Rutherford, and therefore Mr. Eyre cannot shelter his opinion under Mr. rutherford's authority; Satisfaction, Ru her. Trial and Triumph of Faith. p. 62. (saith he) is given indeed by Christ on the Cross for all our sins before we do believe, and before any justified person, who lived these fifteen hundred years be borne; but alas, that is not justification, but only the meritorious cause of it; and a little after, Justification is a forensical sentence, in time pronounced in the Gospel, and applied unto me now; and never while this instant now, that I believe. Now for the further clearing and evidencing this truth, that we are not actually justified until faith: Joh. 3.15, 16. Mark 16.16. Acts 13.38, 39 Acts 16.31. Rom. 10.2. Phil. 3.9. I shall lay down sundry Propositions to make this manifest, and that it is no wrong either to Christ, or the Elect, that this benefit is suspended until faith, besides the clear light of the Scripture, as you may see in the Margin. First, Therefore there is a twofold payment of a debt, one of the thing altogether the same, which was in the Obligation; another of a thing not altogether the same. That payment which is of the same thing, either by ourselves, or our surety, is not refusable by the Creditor; so that if we had paid it, or Christ had been constituted a surety by us to pay it, than God could not have refused it. And therefore Christ being constituted a surety by God, and not by us, and paying not altogether the same, God might have refused the payment, and therefore may also appoint how, in what order and time it shall be accepted, whether to a present discharge, or upon a future condition of faith to be performed by us, by the help of his Spirit working this in us. 'Tis true, that Christ being admitted by the creditor, and taken into bond with us, God cannot refuse to accept of Christ's death as a satisfaction; yet he might appoint, as you shall see he did, how it shall be accepted, whether absolutely, or upon some condition afterward to be performed by us. Here are three things then to be explained and proved: 1. That the sufferings of Christ were not altogether the same in the Obligation. 2. That therefore 'tis in the power of the Creditor (at whose liberty and mercy it is to accept, or refuse it, antecedently before his acceptation,) to appoint or ordain it to be immediately available, or to be acceptable upon condition. 3. That it was agreed upon between the Father and Son, that it should not be available to discharge the sinner until actual faith. 1 Therefore I grant, which Mr Eyre allegeth out of Mr. Owen, that if he speak in respect of the substance of Christ's sufferings, there was a sameness with that in the Obligation in respect of Essence, and equivalency in respect of the adjuncts or attendencies; yea, a supereminency of satisfaction and redundancy of merit; yet was it not altogether the same in the Obligation. For first, the Law in the rigour of it doth not admit of a surety, but the delinquent himself is bound to suffer the penalty, that acknowledgeth no commutation of the person, or substitution of one for another; and therefore God by an act of Sovereignty did dispense, though not with the substance of the Laws demands; (for then we had had forgiveness without a satisfaction, and considering his decree, he could not do it,) but with the manner of execution, which in respect of the Law is called a relaxation; so then God relaxed his Law, to put in the name of a surety, therefore the satisfaction is not altogether the payment of the same debt; for Dum alius solvit, necessariò aliud solvitur; and therefore an act of grace must come in by the will and consent of the Lord to whom belonged the infliction of the punishment, that another persons sufferings may be valid to procure a discharge to the guilty person, and that the satisfaction was made by another, and not by the party to whom remission is granted, no Protestant will deny. 2. Christ did not bear the same punishment due to us in all accidents. 1. In respect of place, he did not locally descend into the place of the damned. Nor, 2. In respect of time and duration, his sufferings had an end; though they were infinite intensiuè, yet not extensiuè? in respect of duration, nor did he suffer the loss of God's Image, nor was he deprived of any measure of grace, nor was he really (but as to present sense and feeling) forsaken, nor did he lose his right to the creatures, nor did his body see corruption; all which are effects of man's sin, and penal effects of it, as I apprehend. Therefore Christ did not suffer altogether the same, though the sufferings of Christ so fare as were consistent with his Godhead and holiness, were of the same kind; and by the dignity of his person, raised to a more than equipollency with ours, so as to merit for us eternal life. Quid enim Majestas tanta, par ipsi Patri, poenis suis non commeribitur Cyrillus Alex. de fide ad Regin. , Cyrillus, Alexandrinus; and it conduced to a compensation in those sufferings, which were unworthy the dignity of his person. 3. Though Christ were obliged to the same punishment, yet not altogether with the same obligation; for his Obligation was arbitrary and voluntary; not arising from the guilt of inherent sin, but by way of vadimony, and suc●ption; our guilt or obligation was intrinsically from the desert of inherent sin; Christ's was only an obnoxiousness unto punishment from the imputation of sin, ours from a desert of sin, called reatus culpae; which guilt is inseparable from sin, which draweth reatus poetus along with it, Christ was reatus poenae, not culpae. 4. Christ's sufferings was to be a valuable compensation, not only for our breach of the Law, but for our non-suffering, and therefore is not altogether the same. The second thing to be cleared, is this, that it being not the same, therefore it requires some act of grace in the Creditor to accept it for a discharge unto the guilty person (and herein undoubtedly the sinner hath no wrong, for it is mercy in God to accept it; the Law requires his personal sufferings, and there is no promise made to any, that they shall have benefit by Christ's death, but only to Believers.) And this cannot be denied with any show of reason, for such a payment is refusable, which is not altogether the same; and therefore unless the will and consent of him to whom the infliction of the punishment belongeth, it cannot procure a discharge to the guilty person; for the offending sinner is the proper subject of suffering, and the Law threatneth the offender, and the surety is not the offender; and none but he that had power to make the Law, can dispense with any thing in the Law; therefore that the Law may be dispensed with, in respect of the manner of execution, by transferring the punishment upon another, and that this may be accepted as a full satisfaction for the offender, as if he had in person suffered, this must be an act of grace in the Lawgiver, receding from his own right; and therefore might constitute and ordain, how and in what manner it shall be accepted, and none that I know will deny it an act of special grace in God to accept of the sufferings of Christ for us, to free us from our personal sufferings; and therefore I pass from that unto the third thing. 3dly, That it was the will of Christ in making satisfaction, and of God in admitting of this satisfaction, that it should not procure pardon of sin presently from the time of Christ's passion; but when man is turned unto God by faith, seeking and humbly entreating for pardon. Now to manifest this, we must premise: 1. That it was an act of special grace, not only to us, but to Christ himself, that should be constituted a Mediator of a New Covenant between God and us, by virtue of whose mediation and sufferings we should be forgiven, and made heirs of eternal life; Christ as he is the second person in the Trinity, in respect of his Godhead, is equal with the Father, and so not subject to any preordination, or predestination as an act of grace; but Christ considered as God-man in respect of his Mediatorship, is a servant of God, and so subject to Predestination; and Gods singular grace in his Election to this office, is as much seen as in our Election unto life; for the manhood could never deserve to be united personally to the Son of God; and thus it was a great honour put upon Christ, Heb. 5 5. when he was put into the Priestly Office to make atonement for us. 2. It was at the commandment of grace he made satisfaction, it was an act of free grace to us, and Christ as Mediator was a servant of God, Isa. 42.1. John 10.18. and wholly at the will of the Lord in this work; at his commandment he laid down his life, and at his will and pleasure the benefit of his death is extended to particular persons, and denied to others; therefore Christ saith, Power is given him over all flesh, John 17.2. to give eternal life (but it is with restriction) only to as many as the Father had given him. Now the sufferings of Christ were of sufficient value to redeem the whole world; but yet it is available by Gods eternal will only for the Elect; and if it be no wrong to the sufferings of Christ to be limited by the will of God to the Elect only, and Christ submitteth to it, why should it be thought any injury to Christ's sufferings, that at the will and pleasure of God the very Elect should not partake of it until faith, in that order that he hath appointed? 3. It is an act of grace that the sufferings of Christ, though in themselves they be adequately proportionable to the justice of God, should be accepted for us; therefore God may at his pleasure appoint the manner how, whether absolutely and immediately, or upon a future condition? For, as Scotus saith well, Meritum Christi tantum bonum est nobis, Scotus, lib. 3. dist. 19 qu. vind. p. 74. pro quanto acceptabatur à Deo: The value of Christ's merits is to be accounted to us, only so fare as God accepteth it; and therefore to that which Mr. Eyre and his adherents urge, that satisfaction was given, and accepted. I answer, by distinguishing upon acceptance; This may be taken in a two fold sense, either in respect of the surety Christ, and the price paid; or in respect to the sinner, and the actual application of it. 1. In respect to Christ, and the value of his sufferings, it was a full satisfaction, that God neither can (having admitted Christ a surety) require more at the hands of Christ, nor any thing else of the sinner by way of satisfaction to his justice; but he never accepted it in respect of the sinner to effect his freedom and present discharge, without some act of his intervening to give him interest in this satisfaction. Nor do I judge faith to be a moving cause, or organical instrument either of Christ's satisfaction, or of God's acceptation of it for us; Faith doth not make Christ's satisfaction to be meritorious; Faith is not the condition of Christ's acquiring pardon, but of the application of pardon; the dignity and worth of Christ's merits and satisfaction, arise from the dignity of his person; nor is faith the moving cause of Gods will to accept of Christ's satisfaction for us, that ariseth from God's will of purpose ordaining it for us. And therefore Mr. Rutherford speaks appositely, Ruth. Ap●●. p. 42. Nos credendo non efficimus vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ut Deus Christi mortem pro peccatis n●stris acceptet, neque ulla causalitas externa movere potest Dei voluntatem. 4. It is of great consequence toward the clearing of this, that the death of Christ doth not procure an immediate discharge to the sinner, to consider that the death of Christ is not a natural and physical cause of removing and taking away sin; for then the effect must immediately follow; but it is a meritorious cause, which is in the number of moral causes; and here the rule is not true, Positâ causâ ponitur effectus; for here the effect is at the liberty of the persons moved thereby: and hence sometime the effects of moral causes precede the cause, as for the death of Christ God pardoned the sins of such as died in the faith long before Christ was borne; and sometime it follows a long time after, at the agreement and liberty of the persons that are persuaded thereby to do any thing. 5. Christ by his death did not absolutely purchase reconciliation, and an actual discharge from the guilt of sin for any, whether they believe or not believe; for then faith were not necessary to salvation; but at the most, to consolation; and final unbelief would condemn none of those for whom Christ died; but the Scripture saith, He that believeth not, shall be damned; and, Mark. 16.16. John 8.24. If you believe not, ye shall die in your sins; and it makes faith necessary to salvation; hence when the Jailor said, What must I do to be saved? Acts 16. 3●. 1 Pet. 1.9. Paul and Silas answered, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved. And salvation is expressly said to be the end of faith; when therefore we say, that Christ died absolutely, we must know that the word absolutely may be taken two ways. 1. As it is opposed to an antecedent condition to be brought by us by the power of our own freewill, so that upon this shall depend the fruits of Christ's death. Or, 2. Absolutely may be taken as opposed to any prerequisite condition ordained by God as a certain order and means to obtain the fruit of Christ's death, which condition is the fruit, and effect of Christ's death, and in this latter sense, the death of Christ was not an absolute purchase of reconciliation; 'tis true, the Arminians hold that Christ hath purchased pardon for us upon condition of believing, which believing they make not a fruit of Christ's death, but of their own freewill, and thus they make Christ to open a door of hope for us; but it's possible that no man may enter in and be saved, and thus by them we have only a salvability by Christ, but no certainty of salvation; but we affirm no such matter, and say, that Christ satisfied God's justice, so that God is not placabilis, but placatus, not appeasable, but appeased; and God is now reconciled, and will give pardon, but in that order and method himself hath appointed, which is faith; which faith God hath predestinated us unto that shall be saved, & Christ hath purchased it for us as well as remission of sins, and therefore it shall infallibly be wrought, that there may be an actual application of Christ's death unto justification; now in this sense the death of Christ is not absolute, so as to exclude any condition, and qualification wrought by the Spirit of Christ to apply his death. Johan. Cam. opus misc. p. 5.32 col. 2. And to this purpose learned Camero hath expressed himself; A Christo satisfactio exigi non potuit nî Deus eum considerâsset ut eorum caput pro quibus satisfecit, fructus ergo satisfactionis ad eos solos redire potuit, qui membra forent hujus corporis, two autem sunt soli fideles: credo igitur Christum pr● me satisfecisse, quia verè satisfecit, sed satisfactionem illam deo novi mihi esse salutiferam, quia mihi fidei meae sum consciu; Neque tamen fructum satisfactionis ab ipsa satisfactione divello, Christus enim pro te satisfecit, sed eâ lege si tu id factum credas, ut si captivum redimerem pretio numerato, ìta tamen ut nî ille se redemptum agnoscat meo beneficio habeatur pro non redempto. Et paulò post, pag. 534. col. 1. sect. 4. Illud nempe est quod dixi, pro nemine Christum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 satisfecisse, verùm hàc lege additâ, ut qui naturà sumus è mundo, mundo exempti verá fide Christo inseramur. That he was no Arminian, is evident to all that have read him. And a little after in the 2. Col. p. 534. he answereth an Objection. Sed ais in omni satisfactione tria tantùm requiri. 1. numeretur summa quae contractum aes exaequet. 2. numeretur creditori. 3. numeretur ejus nomine, qui eam debebat. Id quidem verum est quoties creditor non id praecipuè spectat in satisfactione, ut cujus nomine satisfactum est, is beneficium agnoscat. Caeterùm quando praecipuus satisfactionis finis hic est, ut debitor agnitâ sponsoris munificentiâ in illius amorem rapiatur, aio debitum quidem solutum esse debitoris nomine, sed solutionem tum demum ratam fore quum debitor beneficium agnoverit. And accordingly we find in Scripture how God hath limited the benefit of Christ's death unto Believers; John 3.16. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him, should not perish. And in Rom. 3.25. Rom. 3.25. John 6.40. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood. And, This is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seethe the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life. And, Mark. 16.16. Whosoever believeth not, shall be damned; nay, is condemned already, John 3.18, 36. and the wrath of God abideth upon him. Now that is a superficial, and senseless Cavil that Mr. Eyre maketh against this, Pag. 135. that such places as these are, do show only who have th● fruition and enjoyment of the benefits of Christ, to wit, they that believe; but the true scope of these places is to show, not only who shall be saved, and have the benefit of Christ's death, to whom this privilege belongs; but to show when, and how Christ's death became effectual, namely upon, and by believing; so that Christ's death itself is not available unto salvation, without faith to apply it. And out of his own Concessions I argue against him: If only Believers have the fruition and benefits of Christ's death, then while they remain unbelievers they have no fruition or enjoyment of them, or else Believers are not the only subjects of these privileges; But they are communicable, both to such as believe, and such as believe not, Mr. Eyre, ch. 9 pag. 90. which is contradictory to Mr, Eyre's answer to the letter of the Scripture; and against this gloss of Mr. Eyre's I may retort his own argument against Mr. Woodbridge, Chap. 9 That interpretation of Scripture which giveth no more to faith then to other works of sanctification is not true, and the reason he addeth is, because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our justification unto faith, and in a way of opposition to other works of sanctification; But Mr. Eyre's interpretation of those Scriptures that require faith as necessary to salvation, that they do not declare the persons that shall be saved, and have the fruition and enjoyment of the benefits of Christ, attributes no more to fairh then to other works of sanctification; for works of sanctification declare this. Thus the Apostle makes it an evidence of a person in Christ, to whom there is no condemnation, that He walks not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit; and in the same Chap. If ye by the help of the Spirit shall mortify the deeds of the body, Rom. 8.1, 13. 1 John 3.14. ye shall live. By this we know, that we are passed from death to life, because we love the Brethren. Mr. Eyre, Vind. p. 135. And in the same place he objecteth, that the Apostle doth not say, Without faith Christ shall profit us nothing. But I answer, Though this is no where expressly spoken, yet it is evidently implied, and is the intendment of the Holy Ghost: For when Christ saith, That unless they believe, that they shall die in their sins; and he that believeth not, shall be damned; is not this equivalent to this Proposition, That without faith Christ shall profit you nothing? 2 Cor. 13.5. And doth he not bid the Corinthians, Examine themselves, whether they be in the faith: Prove your own selves, know ye not that Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates? where though I think the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth not signify reprobates, as opposed to the Elect, yet at the least it implies as much as unjustified. And whereas he saith, that if we can show this agreement between the Father and the Son, that none should have actual reconciliation by the death of Christ till they do believe, he will yield the cause; let him but stand to his word, and the Controversy will soon be at an end. For the making good of this over and above what is written, I premise, 1. That I suppose Mr. Eyre denieth not that there was a Covenant passed between the Father and the Son, about reconciling the Elect believers by the death of Christ; for that is evident from many Scriptures, Isa. 42.6. Gal. 3.16. And by those places wherein the things promised to Christ our Head and Mediator, are expressly mentioned, Heb. 1.5, 6. Acts 10.38. Eph. 1.22. Isa. 11.12. Isa. 49.18. Isa. 53.10, 11. Acts 2.27. and all the types prefiguring Christ's death declare it; but the question is not, whether there were an agreement between the Father and the Son? but, whether they agreed that none should have actual reconciliation till they believe? 2. I suppose Mr. Eyre doth not mean that we should show him where the Scripture doth syllabically repeat these words; and I judge him so rational, that what can be proved by undeniable consequence from the Scriptures, he will acknowledge it as authentic as a literal expression. 3. I take it as a truth that will not be denied by Mr. Eyre, that the Father and the Son had both one and the same will, and that they fully and mutually agreed between themselves concerning the time and manner of our reconciliation with God; so that what the Father willed, the Son willed, and vice versâ. And so I join with him, and argue: 1. If God the Father in his promise to Christ, or his Covenant with him about his death, and the effects of it, did mention faith as the means by which the effects of his death should be applied; then there was such an agreement, that Christ's death should not purchase actual reconciliation without faith: But the Father in his Covenant with Christ about the effects of his death, made mention of faith for the application of it: Ergo. The consequence of the major cannot run the hazard of suspicion; for what God would do upon Christ's death he promised, and more than he promised Christ could not, nor did expect; for in all this work of dying, he was a servant of God, subject to his good pleasure; Now God promised to Christ what he did intent to do, and Christ could expect no more. And the assumption I prove from Isa. 53.10, 11. which Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth, a Covenant made with Christ, pag. 138. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands. He shall see of the travel of his soul, and be satisfied: By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many. These words are delivered as in the Person of God the Father, with whose words the Prophet began, as we may see from Chap. 52. v. 3. Vide our English Annotations, and they clearly hold forth the effect and fruit of Christ's passion; where observe a plain promise to Christ, or Covenant with him about dying, and making his soul an offering for sin, When thou shalt make his soul an offering, or as the Hebrew, if his soul, or when his soul shall make itself an offering; for the second Person Masculine, and the third Feminine are in letters, and sound the same; so I take it the speech of the Father (introduced by the Prophet,) speaking unto Christ, that when his soul shall make itself an offering for sin, than he promiseth he shall see his seed, that is, his issue and posterity that should be borne to him as an effect of this, which words do not import, that all his issue and posterity should be an immediate effect of it; but he should see it, he should live and survive to see it; after his resurrection he should die no more, but live for ever, and see the fruit of his death; The will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand, that is, he shall daily see souls brought to salvation as a fruit of his death: He shall see of the travel of his soul, and be satisfied. As a woman when her travel is past, is filled with joy to behold the fruit of her womb; so Christ should be satisfied to see a numerous issue of faithful souls begotten to God by his death. And what that satisfaction is in particular, he tells him it shall be the justification of many for whom he died, and then he tells him how they shall be justified; He saith, it shall be by * Notitiâ sui. his knowledge, or the knowledge of him; not his own knowledge taken subjectively, the knowledge that he hath of God, Vide English Annot. or of them; but his knowledge taken objectively, that is, the knowledge whereby they know him; and this is not a bare knowledge of Christ whereby we are justified, for the devils themselves both know and acknowledge him; but by knowledge is meant faith, the antecedent put for the consequent, because the knowledge of him is the ground of trust. I shall not need to prove that knowledge is put for faith. * John 17.3. John 4.42. And the words that follow are a reason, for he shall bear their iniquities; though in the Hebrew the word is copulative, yet it is often used as a cause. And if this be granted, it renders a reason why he should justify them, because he did bear their sins; where the persons are described, whom he should justify, not all promiscuously, but Believers, whose sins he undertook to discharge; for he did bear the sins of none but Believers. Now let Mr. Eyre tell us why God speaking to Christ of our justification by him, should say that Christ should justify us by his knowledge, or by faith in him. 1. His death alone antecedently to faith, did justify those whose iniquities he did bear; unless it were to declare his will that his death should be effectually applied only by faith, and that none should have immediate benefit, but expect it by faith. 2. That that was God's intention in giving Christ, was the intention of Christ in dying; But God in giving Christ, intended not the benefits of Christ's death unto any until faith; Therefore Christ died not to purchase immediate forgiveness unto any until faith, and by consequence there was a mutual agreement. The Major is beyond all contradict on, because of the unity of heart and will between Christ and God; therefore he intended not his death for any, nor in any other way than God intended it. The Minor is written as with a Sunbeam in Scripture, John 3.14, 15, 16. John 3.14, 15, 16. As Moses lifted up the Serpent in the wilderness: Even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 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. In which words you have a threefold cause of man's salvation. 1. The principal, God's love, ver. 16. 2. The meritorious, Christ death. 3. The instrumental, our faith. Secondly, You have a comparison between Christ and his Type, in two things, 1. That as the Serpent must be lifted up for a means of healing, or else it could not heal, and none would look to it; so there was a necessity of Christ's being lifted up upon the Cross, God must deliver him up to death, and he must be considered as dying; or else there is no salvation by him. 2. The end, that such as did look to it, might be healed of the stingings of the fiery Serpent; so this was the end of Christ dying, that whosoever believe, should not perish. Now, as the Scripture showeth, those stingings were deadly, and none were healed but such as looked to the brazen Serpent; so are the stingings of sin deadly, and none are healed by Christ, but such as believe. Now, as Mr. Woodbridge observes, they were not first healed, and then did look up to see what healed them; but they did first look, and then were healed: so we have nor first everlasting life given us, and then we believe; but first we believe, and then we have everlasting life. Now to this Mr. Eyre answers nothing, but denies it was the intent of the Holy Ghost to show in what order we are justified in the sight of God; but in so doing, he doth not only senselessely beg the question, but doth overthrow that wherein the truth and verity of the type consisted: for as the brazen Serpent, though endued with a healing virtue, yet it healed none till he did look; so, though Christ as dying be sufficiently able to save, yet saveth not any till he look to him by faith, and in so doing doth destroy that that was the main end of God in giving Christ, and of Christ in dying, that upon believing we should be saved. And therefore I come to the third thing considerable, and that is God's end in giving Christ, and Christ's end in dying, both these are expressed in the same words, the Son was lifted up, that whosoever believeth, etc. and God's end was, that whosoever believeth, etc. where the verity of the major is confirmed, that they had the same end. Now the Minor is no less evident; for if God's end in giving Christ to die for us, and Christ's in dying were to limit the benefit only to Believers, than it follows by undeniable consequence, that until faith none are actually justified by Christ's death, otherwise the benefit of Christ's death is equally extended to Believers, and unbelievers; and if he saith, faith is only a consequent condition, and not antecedent, than he must corrupt the Text, and alter the sense of the Holy Ghost, and say, that God gave Christ to give eternal life, and Christ was lifted up to purchase eternal life, that they for whom he was so given, and so died, might believe; and thus eternal life must be antecedent, and the cause of faith, and not faith antecedent or any cause of eternal life. And therefore as Gregory Nazianzen answered to one that affirmed, * Gregorius Nazianzenus, Epist. ad Cledon. Dialog. Deum potuisse sine ment hominem servare, potuit etiam utique sine carne, voluntate solà, sicut & alia omnia quae effecit, & effecit corporaliter: tolle ergo unà cum ment & carnem quoque, ut omni ex parte perfecta sit amentia tua: So may I say to Mr. Eyre, who affirmeth that we are justified without faith; God might have done it, and without the sufferings of Christ, had he so decreed it; take away therefore the death and satisfaction of Christ, with Socinus, (as your doctrine of eternal justification doth, as shall in its place be made evident) and thus you shall declare yourself to be perfectly mad. A third argument is taken from Rom. 3.25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood; whence I argue, The agreement between the Father and the Son, was suitable to God's eternal decree; for Christ cannot be a propitiation for sins otherwise then God hath ordained him: If God in his decree hath ordained Christ to be a propitiation through faith in his blood only, than it was their agreement Christ's death should not be available until faith; But God in his decree hath ordained Christ to be a propitiation through faith in his blood. The consequence of the major is evident, because their agreement must be suitable to this decree. I believe there is scarce a man of that face and forehead that will deny the Assumption, they are the words of the Apostle. Nor let Mr. Eyre here wilfully mistake, as if we affirmed that faith made Christ's death of a propitiatory nature, as if it received its value and worth from faith, this were ridiculous to make the instrumental cause a meritorious cause; but it makes Christ's death to be peculiarly appropriated by God, as a propitiation for him in particular that believeth, and never till then. A fourth Argement is this, If Christ himself cannot save an unbeliever so remaining, than it was the will of God the Father and of Christ, that his death should nor be available before fairh; But Christ himself cannot save an unbeliever so remaining; Therefore it was the will of the Father and the Son that his death should not actually save until faith. The consequence is as as the earth; for God the Father, and Christ the Mediator did not will that which was impossible for Christ to do, therefore they did not will that antecedently to faith, an unbebeliever should be justified, and by consequence that the benefit of Christ's death should not be enjoyed before faith. The Minor is proved from Rom. 11.23. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graft them in again. Where the Apostle speaking of the hope there is of calling the Jews again that were cast off for unbelief, from being any members of the visible Church, and so from being members of Christ's body, and from all present hope of salvation; showeth, that though their case be seemingly desperate, yet it is possible for them to be saved, by an argument drawn from the power of God, God is able to graft them in again; yet he limiteth this absolute power of God, that this is possible, If they abide not in unbelief, (where though it be true, God is able to remove their unbelief, & to give faith, yet so long as they abide in unbelief, they cannot be graffed in again, and so saved; yea, the very power of God is here limited from saving, (to wit, by his own immutable will) not to save an unbeliever, and an unbelievers wilful rejecting of the grace God offereth; Mark 6.5. compared with Matth. 13.48. and thus in Mark 6.5. Christ in his own country could do no mighty work there, because of their unbelief; their unbelief was so great, that Christ marvelled at it, and was in a manner hindered. Calvin upon the place saith, Marcus negans Christum potuisse, eorum culpam amplificat à quibus impedita fuit ejus bonitas. Nam certè increduli, quantum in se est, Dei manum suâ contumaciâ constringunt; non quòd Deus quasi inferior vincatur, sed quia illi non permittant virtutem suam exequi: Mark denying that Christ could do any mighty work there, amplifies their sin by whom his goodness was hindered. For certainly the unbelievers, as much as in them lieth, do bind the hands of God by their contumacy; not as if God being inferior in power is overcome, but because they will not permit his power to be executed. And truly God hath declared his immutable purpose in the Gospel, that whosoever believeth not shall be damned; hence Christ cannot save an unbeliever so remaining; therefore until faith this benefit of Christ's death is not obtained. ● The whole energy and efficacy of Christ's merit in respect of influx and derivation upon others, depends wholly upon the will of God ordaining and accepting it, which appears if you consider it in reference to the Elect and Reprobate; for why is it effectual unto one, and not the other? it is the will of God only that makes the difference, because God hath ordained it for the Elect, and accordingly will give faith to apply it, & not to the other. Now my fifth Argument shall be by retortion of Mr. Eyre's first argument against Mr. Woodbridge, There is no such Covenant doth appear; Ergo, there is no such thing. This hath been accounted a good argument amongst Christians. I may draw the like argument from Scripture negatively thus, It is not where written that God accepted the death of Christ for unbelievers, that they should be justified antecedently unto faith; Ergo there was no such will in God, and consequently not in Christ. As for those Scriptures which Mr. Eyre brings, and sets them upon the rack, to force them to give evidence to his cause; the Reader may expect their answer in the Aanaskevastical part of this discourse, where it properly belongs. 6. God the Father and the Son intended the benefit of Christ's death only for the members of Christ; and till they be the members of his mystical body, they cannot be partakers of the benefit of his death, and have communion with him in it; for as none partake in Adam's sin that were not in him by a natural union, so none but such as are in Christ by spiritual and supernatural union can be partakers of his sufferings and satisfaction; but none are members of Christ's mystical body until faith; therefore until faith it was the will of the Father and the Son, that none should partake in the benefits of his death. This argument shall be more fully vindicated ere long from the objection Mr. Eyre made against it in our discourse. 7. If Christ in his intercession, (which is the best Index and Interpreter of his mind, and intention in his death) limits and restrains the benefits of his intercession to Believers, than it was his mind and intention in his death to limit the benefits thereof unto Believers; because Christ's intention of the benefits of his death, and the fruit of his intercession are of equal latitude, and by consequence what was his mind, was the Father's mind; for Christ and his Father are one, and have the same will; but Christ limits the benefits of his intercession unto Believers, as we may see in John 17.20. Christ prays for them that shall believe in him; John 17.20. Heb. 7.25. nor do these places only declare who shall have the benefit of Christ's intercession; but how, and when it shall be obtained; by faith, by coming unto Christ; for if they did obtain it before faith immediately from his death, what need were there of Christ's intercession for that which they did already enjoy? From whence I argue, 8. That that destroys the end and use of Christ's intercession, cannot be agreeable to Scripture. But to make Christ's death to justify us actually and immediately, this destroys the end of his intercession; for Christ is now in heaven an Advocate for sin, that it might be pardoned to them that believe: so that Christ in his death took it away meritoriously, and now he is in heaven to intercede for all that by faith seek for the benefits of his death, that it may be formally applied. Yea, the children of God though they fall not from the state of justification by new sins, they lose not their right to heaven, yet they lose their aptitude for heaven, and by every new sin they contract a new guilt, and without a new remission of the sins committed they cannot be saved; and hence Christ is a daily Advocate to intercede for us, as St. John saith, My little children, 1 John 2.1. if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. I might add to these many more, but these are sufficient to demonstrate this truth, and will prove a burdensome stone to Mr. Eyre, if he endeavour to contradict them. And as for those Arguments which he, Chap. 14. useth to prove the actual and immediate reconciliation of the Elect before faith, they have all the same unhappiness to fall, like arrows, fare short of the mark intended, and have most of them the same common fate to be guilty of a miserable non sequitur, as shall in my reply to them in its proper place appear. Now the next thing to be superadded for a full vindication of this truth, is, that this suspending the benefits of Christ's death until faith, is no way derogatory to the atonement made by Christ's death, which may as easily be proved, as that Pilate was guilty of Christ's blood. And I prove it thus, 1. If there were such an agreement, as the arguments above declare, than what wrong is it to the atonement made by Christ's death, that the effect of it should not be enjoyed until faith, when as it was the mutual agreement between the Father and the Son to have it so? it was his will to have it so, and volenti non fit injuria, there is no injury to him that is willing. 2. If the death of Christ were in value a sufficient ransom for the whole world, the very Reprobates not excepted, and yet without injury and wrong to Christ's satisfaction, it is by the will of God ordaining, and so accepting it to be only effectual for the Elect, which comparatively in respect of the Reprohates is a small number; why shall it be judged a wrong to Christ's satisfaction, that the benefit of it for whom it is intended, should be for a time suspended, for gracious and good ends at the will of the Father, to make them see what they are, and deserve, and what need they have of Christ, and to raise up their desires after him, and to increase their love unto God for Christ, and also for the honour of the Lord and his Christ; that though he justify the ungodly, yet that he doth not justify them so remaining, that his enmity and hatred against sin may the more appear, and that wicked men might not think God a justifier of the wicked in their abominations, which is contrary to the purity of his nature and justice to do: why should this be thought more injurious to Christ's satisfaction, than a peremptory excluding of all the race of the Reprobates from salvation by his death? But, 3. If notwithstanding the suspending the benefits of Christ's death until faith, the death of Christ be no less satisfactory to divine justice, and the worth and value of his merits no whit lessened, and the efficacy, and certainty of the effects of Christ's death be no less established by our Doctrine, then if the effect did immediately follow, than this is no impairing of the atonement made by his death; but the premises are true, which I evidence thus: 1. We willingly grant that the death of Christ was a full and complete satisfaction to divine justice, and a valuable compensation for the sins of those that shall be saved; and God did not accept less at the hands of Christ, then was due to our sins; but he made satisfaction, ad ultimum quadrantem, to the last farthing; the justice of God can require no more, either at his hands, or at the hands of those for whom he suffered by way of satisfaction; and hence in his resurrection he gave him a public acquittance, and sent his Angel to roll away the stone from the Sepulchre, as a public Officer to testify his acquitting him from the debt of our sins, and so he sets him at liberty, and brings him out of prison. 2. The intrinsical value and worth of Christ's merits is no way diminished: Christ did not compound with the Father, as broken debtors with the creditor, making him to take less than was due; nay, as we have showed in some respect (if you consider the dignity of the person) there was more laid down then the Law required, though in regard of the substance of the punishment it was that which the Law required, and the justice of God, and the love of the Father could require no more; the prorogation or deferring the actual enjoyment of the thing purchased by that satisfaction, ariseth not from any impotency or defect in Christ's sufferings, but from the liberty of God's will, who in mercy accepts of that which a surety hath done for us, which in itself was refusable, till by an act of grace it was admitted as available for us; but in that time only that the Father should appoint, whose will Christ as a Mediator, and Servant was obliged to obey. 3. The death of Christ is no less efficacious, and certain in the effects of it, then if an immediate participation of it were granted; the efficaciousness of Christ's death is not to be valued by the time of application (it being a moral cause, and not a physical, or natural cause of justification, but by the powerfulness of the impetration, and the certainty of application,) now we grant that it hath by way of merit procured reconciliation; and hence our deliverance is called redemption, Rom. 3.24. which was made by the payment of a full price; now the price being paid for the Elect, the effect shall follow in the time appointed; Gal. 3.13. Eph. 1.7. Heb. 9.12. ● P●t. ●. 18.19. 1 Cor. 6. 2●. hence we grant, that there shall be a certain application o● the benefits of Christ's death to all the persons for whom it was intended, though they have not actual possession, and that leads me to the last particular, that Mr. Eyre lays to the charge of this Doctrine, that it is disconsolatory to the souls of men, in laying the weight of their salvation upon an uncertain condition of their own performing. To which calumny I might return no other answer then the Senate of Rome is reported to have given to a certain Oration made by Julian the Apostate to the dishonour of Constantine, and repeated before them, Ames. Coro. praefa ad eccles. belgicas. Modestiam majorem optamus Authori, we wish more modesty to the Author. But that I may for ever silence this objection, I reply that Mr. Eyre cannot but know, that the Orthodox that maintain Justification by Faith, do yet utterly disclaim faith as a condition, either in an Arminian or a Popish sense. 1. The Arminians hold that Christ died indefinitely for all without distinction, and that he died no more for Peter then for Judas; and that he paid a sufficient satisfaction for all, so that God may now freely remit the sins of all. 2. They maintain a potestative, or voluntary condition, which they borrow from the Jurists, whereby, it being left free to their own will, whether they will believe or not; the effect of Christ's death is rendered uncertain, whether they shall be saved or not, and so they affirm all to be redeemed; so as that it is possible none may be saved; they hold as it were a potential reconciliation, which is by the act of faith to be completed, which faith they affirm not to be the effect of Christ's death, but of their own free will. So the Remonstrants, Nihil ineptius, Rem. Apol c. 8. p. 95. nihil vanius, quàm fidem merito Christi tribuere; si enim Christus meritus est fidem, tum fides conditio esse non poterit: They say, Nothing is more foolish, nothing more vain then to ascribe faith to the merit of Christ; for if Christ hath merited faith, than it cannot be a condition; and they laugh at it as a ridiculous conceit, Rem. Apol. c. 9 p. 105. that God should work the condition which he prescribeth. Their words are, Anne conditionem quis seriò, & sapienter praescribet alteri sub promisso praemii, & poenae gravissimae comminatione, qui cam in eo cui praescribit efficere vult, haec actio tota ludicra, & vix scenâ digna est. And this Mr. Eyre takes notice of as the Remonstrants' opinion, pag. 145. where he reciteth the same passages. 2. The Papists make faith a meritorious condition, which justificeth us, per modum causae efficientis & meritoriae, as a proper efficient and meritorious cause; this is the Doctrine of the Papists, as Bellar. Bellar. Lib. pr. de justifica c. 17 setteth himself to prove in his 17. Chap. Libr. pr. de justificatione. Now we utterly disclaim faith to be a condition in either of these senses; we say, that Christ died only sufficienter for the Reprobate, but efficiently for the Elect; Christ did not die indefinitely, and indis criminatim alike for all, but he died effectually for Peter, and not for Judas; and whereas we make faith the condition of the Covenant, without which the benefits of the death of Christ is not applied to us, we mean not in an Arminian (much less in a Popish) sense, that faith is an uncertain condition left to the power or freedom of our will; but we constantly affirm, that God hath infallibly ordained such unto faith as shall be saved, Acts 13.48. John 6.37. Master Eyre, p. 144. sect. 9 and Christ hath merited this grace of Faith for us, which Mr. Eyre is pleased without all charity to affirm, that his adversaries cannot mean faith a condition in this sense, as that which God will bestow, and is the fruit of Christ's death. And he saith, Mr. Woodbridge denies it to be a fruit of the Covenant, and well he might, as it is a Covenant made with us; for it is an absolute promise made by God as a fruit of his Election, and Christ's redemption, that he will work this faith whereby we shall be brought into Covenant with him; for when God promiseth to write his Laws in their minds, in so promising he promiseth faith, Jer. 31.38. Heb. 8.10. and then addeth, And I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. And we affirm, as Christ hath merited this grace for us, so he is become a surety of the Covenant, to see all that God requires on our part be performed; and hence as a head he will by his Spirit in due time infallibly, and efficaciously work this faith, and so become a Saviour, not only by his merit, but by efficiency, actually applying the fruit of his death. And this he will irresistibly work, Eph. 1.18. putting forth the same Almighty power that was put forth in raising himself from the dead; so that we do not, as Mr. Eyre falsely affirmeth (which I believe he was not ignorant of) lay the whole weight of our salvation upon an uncertain condition of our own performing; we make faith to be God's gift, though it be our act. And we make the salvation of the Elect as sure as himself, and therefore our doctrine is no way disconsolatory to the souls of any; only we do not strengthen the hands of the wicked, making them to refuse to return, by promising them life as he doth, Ezek. 13.22, 23. by telling them of their eternal justification, and of their being actually reconciled from the time of Christ's death; Isa. 48.22. for we know of no comfort belonging to the wicked, while unregenerate; for, There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked; but so are all unregenerate persons Antecedently to their faith. And for a further clearing of my mind in this particular, I add, that if by uncertain Mr. Eyre mean, as oftentimes the word is so taken, for that which in its own nature is contingent, in respect of the second cause; because what is contingent usually among men, is uncertain, and not in respect of God to whom by his predeterminating will, even contingent things come to pass necessarily, though they come to pass contingently in respect to us; I deny not but in this sense it may be called uncertain, or contingent, and this is no more than what is unanimously acknowledged by the Orthodox, and that no way hinders the salvation of the Elect. And by this time I hope the Reader plainly seethe this truth of Christ, that the very Elect are without Christ, and without hope in the world, as the Apostle affirmeth, until faith; that they have no actual right or interest in the death of Christ until faith; and so as to their present estate, there is no difference between them and Reprobates, being children of wrath, as well as others; this is that which the tender ears of Mr. Eyre cannot bear; but I believe it sounds not so harsh in the ears of a judicious Reader, as being an undoubted truth of God; but let it be compared with that filthy and dirty opinion of Mr. Eyre, more beseeming the Gnostics of old, or the present Ranters of this age, than a sober Christian, which is this, Master Eyre, page 61. That the Elect while they are unregenerate, while they lie like swine wallowing in the mi●e of sin, antecedently to faith are justified; and so though Infidels, and wicked, yet divine justice cannot charge upon them any of their sins, nor inflict upon them the least of those punishments which their sins deserve; but contrarily he beholdeth them as perfectly righteous, and accordingly deals with them as such, who have no sin at all in his sight. And I doubt not but the naming of his will vindicate mine, and render his justly abhorred to an utter nauseating; saying, Durus est hic sermo, who can bear it? And those monstrous absurdities which he chargeth our Doctrine with, I doubt not but the intelligent Reader seethe, that they are as unjustly fathered upon us, as his deformed error is by himself styled (with the same likeness of truth) to have the complexion of a saving truth. CHAP. II. Containing a Vindication of my Argument drawn from the Parallel between the first and the second Adam, showing that as no man is liable to condemnation by the first Adam, but such as are in him by natural generation, descending from him; so no man is freed from condemnation, till they be in Christ by supernatural and spiritual regeneration. AGainst this Error of the Antecedency of Justification to Faith, I used in my Serm. at N. Sarum this Medium. As by the first Adam no man is guilty of eternal death, but he that is a member of him by natural generation; so Christ freeth no man from condemnation, justifieth, and reconcileth no man till he be a member of him by supernatural generation; But this is not before faith, John 1.12. To as many as received him, to them gave he power; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, liberty, right, power, privilege, or prerogative, to become the sons of God, even to as many as believed on his Name: Which were borne, not of blood, nor of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Therefore no man stands reconciled before God, though Elect persons, till by faith they are incorporated into Christ, and have this privilege to be the children of God. Now let us see what Mr. Eyre replieth to this, he saith that this maketh much against me: Mr. Eyre, p. 6. for, saith he," If the righteousness of Christ doth come upon all the Elect unto justification, in the same manner as Adam's sin came upon all men to condemnation, as the Apostle showeth, it doth, Rom. 5. than it must follow that the righteousness of Christ was reckoned, or imputed to the Elect before they had a being, and then much more before they do believe in him; for Adam's sin, it is evident that it came upon all men to condemnation before they had a being: For by the first transgression, (says the Apostle, ver. 12.) sin entered into the world, and more plainly, death passed upon all men. The reason follows, because in him, or in his loins all have sinned: so Mr. Eyre. For answer whereunto, I shall premise this, that I did not affirm that we are no way guilty of Adam's sin before we have a being: For I willingly grant that of Augustine, * Adam erat nos omnes, omnes eramus ille unus Adam; certum manif stùque est alia esse propria cuique peccata, in quibus hi tantum peccant, quorum peccata sunt, aliud hoc unum in quo omnes peccaverunt, quando omnes ille unus homo fuerunt, Aug. de peccat. merit. & Remist. l. 1. c. 10. Adam erat nos omnes, omnes eramus ille unus Adam, certum manifestúmque est alia esse propria, etc. Adam was as it were we all, we were all that one Adam; it is most certain and manifest, that some sins are proper to every one in which they only sinned, whose sins they were; this one sin is another in which all have sinned, seeing all were that one man; and it is a general received truth among the Orthodox, that there was an inexistence, or being of all men in Adam. And therefore I willingly grant that we did no less sin in Adam, than Levi paid tithes in Abraham, Heb. 7.6. because as he was in the loins of Abraham when Melchisedech met him, so were we all in the loins of Adam; and when I said that no man is guilty by the first Adam of eternal death, but he that is a member of him by natural generation; I intended nothing but to show, that we are not guilty of Adam's sin, so as to be actually and formally sinners, (though virtually we are until we be in him by natural generation, and so actually members;) and so I grant, we are virtually justified from the death of Christ, not formally. And, 2. I intended to show, that as Adam's sin is not ours, but as we are in him; so Christ's righteousness is not ours, unless united to him; this premised, I shall now reply to Mr. Eyre's Objection, That I apprehend in his answer a double Error: 1. He takes that for granted, which will not be yielded, that the Apostle saith, We were formally constituted sinners by the disobedience of Adam, as we are by his opinion formally, not only virtually justified at the death of Christ, Vide Mr. Eyre, page 68 so he expresseth his meaning, p. 68 and herein he is contrary to all Orthodox Antiquity; Learned Wotton doth deny it in express terms in his answer to Hemingius his Argument, whose words are these, Wotton de Recon. pecc. par. 2. l. 1. c. 9 p. 148. Primam propositionem nego, quia sumit pro concesso, Apostolum dicere nos Adami inobedientiâ formaliter factos esse peccatores, quod parùm liquet, certè alia fuit antiquorum Theologorum sententia; and reciteth for that end, Chrysost. Theophilact. Pacianus, Anselm, Haymo, Hugo Aeterianus, OEcumenius, Calvin. Who so please to read them, may find them in the forecited place of Wotton. We therefore affirm, that although Adam's sin was not altogether another man's, but in some sense ours, because we were seminally in him, that were virtually sinners in him; and that act of his in eating the forbidden fruit, was as truly ours, though not so completely, and perfectly as his, for we are not formally constituted sinners, till we are actually members of him by natural generation. 2. A second Error I conceive him guilty of, is, in that he saith, That the righteousness of Christ doth come upon all the Elect unto Justification, in the same manner as Adam's sin came upon all men to condemnation, (and it's so much the worse that he will father it upon the Apostle, which he no way intended in that place,) that as Adam's sin came upon men to condemnation before they had a being, that so the righteousness of Christ was imputed to the Elect before they had a being; To which I answer, that it is a manifest untruth, for the sin of Adam descends upon us, not only by imputation, but by propagation, so doth not the righteousness of Christ, that is ours only by imputation. The sin of Adam becomes ours by virtue of a natural union, in whom we are seminally antecedently to our birth; but Christ's righteousness becometh ours by spiritual and supernatural union, to whom we are strangers, and alienated from him by nature; we are virtually united to Adam, because we had existence in him as in our first Parent before we had a being; but we were actually sinners wh●n we had an actual being, because we had a compl a● being out of our cause: but we are not actually united to Christ before faith; Wotton de R●con pecc. par. 2. l. 2. c. 2● p. 210 Hence learned Wotton in answer to this Objection, saith, Nos unum fuisse cum Adamo, & credentes unum esse cum Christo, & si utrumque verè dici possit, tamen alio, atque alio modo haec vera ess● intelliguntur, unum suimus cum Adamo originaliter; & (liceat enim his verbis uti) seminaliter, ut arbor ejúsque omnes rami in gland, aut alio quovis semine inesse dicuntur, hác ratione fit ut non minùs verè in Adamo peccâsse, quàm Levi apud Apostolum, Heb. 7.9. decimatus esse in Abrahamo affirmatur; jam verò longè alio modo in Christo esse censemur, non naturâ, aut proprie, sed improprie, & per similitudinem quandam. Praeterea semper ex quo creatus est Adamus, unum cum illo, & in illo fuisse deprehendimur, ut cum illo etiam quodam modo peccare potuerimus. Quod de nostrâ cum Christo conjunctione, sive union affis mari non p●test; uniri enim nos Christo, & cum illo conjungi oportet, priusquam unum esse cum illo possimus existimari; wh ch for the Readers sake I will English: Although it may be truly said, that we were one with Adam, and believers are one with Christ; yet this is to be understood in a different manner; we were one with Adam, and in him naturally, originally, and (let it be lawful to use these words) seminally, as a tree and all his branches are said to be in the 〈◊〉, or in any other seed. By this reason it comes to pass, that we know that we sinned no less in Adam, than Levi by the Apostle is said, Heb. 7.9. to have paid tithes in Abraham: But now we are reputed to be in Christ in a fare different manner, not by nature, or properly, but improperly, and by a certain similitude. Moreover, from the time that Adam was created, we were always one with him, and in him, that with him we may be said after a sort to have sinned; which cannot be affirmed concerning our conjunction with, or union to Christ; for it behoveth us to be joined and united to Christ, before we can be esteemed to be one with him; and he adds, Quare tum primùm in Christo esse incipimus, quum in illum credimus; Wherefore we than first begin to be in Christ, when we believe in him. And let me add that, there are many different considerations, and circumstances between the bringing in of salvation by the one, and condemnation by the other; and the Apostle giveth instance in Rom. 5.15, 16. And besides these there are many other. I shall think fit to add but one, Vide John Goodwin, Treat. Justifica. part 2. pag. 17. taken nootice of by Master John Goodwin in his Treatise of Justification, and in h●s words: The sin of Adam by which he brought condemnation upon the world, was as well the act of all his posterity as his own; in which respect they may as truly be said to have brought condemnation upon themselves as Adam; but the obedience by which Christ brought salvation into the world, can with no propriety of speech, nor with any consistence with truth, be said to have been theirs, or performed by them who are saved by it; so that these cannot now be said with any more truth to have saved themselves, then if they had not been saved at all: It is said indeed, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, 2 Cor. 5.19. but it is not where said that the world was in Christ reconciling itself to God. Let no man blame me for his authority, fas est & ab hoste doceri. And the ground of Mr. Eyre's mistake (if it be not wilful) is, that he thinks the Apostle doth compare the disobedience of Adam, and the obedience of Christ, as causes of the same kind, which produce their effects after the same manner, which was not the intent of the Apostle; but to show that Christ's death is no less efficacious unto Justification to them that are his, one with him, than the sin of Adam was to condemnation, to them that were in him; but not to show that we were in Christ as we are in * C●nfertur autem A la nus cum Christo tum in re simili, cùm in contrariâ; siwiles enim sunt in eo quòd uterque quod suum est cum suis communicate, said in eo planè dissimiles quòd ille pecatum in suos naturâ derivat ad mortem, Christus verò suam justitiam cum suis communicat per gratiam ad vitam, Beza large Ann. on Rom. 5.12. Wotton de recon peccat. par. 2. l. 1. c. 9 p. 149 Adam, that as we were in Adam antecedently to our being, that so the Elect are in Christ antecedently to their birth and faith; for, as in the next Argument that I shall vindicate, I shall show that we are not united to Christ until faith. And the very same answer doth Wotton give to Hemingius, whose words are these: Quod ad assumptionem attinet, sumet ille pro concesso, Apostolum Adami inobedientiam tanquam ejusdem generis causas comparare, quae eodem plane modo effecta sua producant. At verò id potiùs agere videtur Apostolus, ut Christi obedientiam non minùs ad justificationem valere quàm Adami in obedientiam ad condemnationem, imò Christi justitiam majorem habere vim ad justificandas homines quàm Adami peccatum ad nos condemnandos; which because it is the same in effect with mine, I shall spare to English. The next words of Mr. Eyre relating to this business, are these, Now as in Adam the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, all that shall perish were constituted sinners before they had a being, by reason of the imputation of his disobedience to them: so in Christ the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that shall be saved were constituted righteous. Besides the former errors it is guilty of, I find a double violence offered to the sacred Text. First, in that he limiteth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the all that sinned in Adam, to them that shall perish; as if the Reprobates only sinned in Adam, and not the Elect, and as if they were not in the same sin and condemnation; which it may be he doth, because he is of his brethren's mind, the rest of the Antinomians, who affirming that they are justified from eternity, and so God seethe no sin in them; and he himself saith, pag. 61. That the Divine Justice cannot charge upon them any of their sins, nor inflict upon them the least punishment which their sins deserve: But contrarily he beholdeth them as persons perfectly righteous, and accordingly dealeth with them as such who have no sin at all in his sight. And yet this man is offended to be called an Antinomian, though he is not ashamed to be one; but against this gross conceit, because it is sufficiently confuted by others, I will say no more, but allege two Scripture-test●monies; 1 Joh. 1 last ver. The first is in the 1 John 1. the last verse. After the Apostle had said, that the blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin; ch. 2.1. yet he saith, If any man say, we have not sinned, he maketh God a liar, and his Word is not in us. And in the second Chap. ver. 1. for the sins of the justified he is an Advocate to procure pardon; 1 Cor. 11.30 My little children, if any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. The other is that of the believing Corinthians, For this cause many are sick etc. Nor will the Antithesis bear him out, for the Apostle doth not compare the Elect with the Reprobates, but all that sinned in Adam, (which is all mankind) with all that shall be saved by Christ. A second violence offered to the Scripture (such men are fit to make their own Creed) is, in that he saith that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all that shall be saved, were constituted righteous; the Text saith no such matter, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 that shall be made righteous, not were made righteou, which if Mr. Eyre might have done the office of a Gamaliel to the Apostle, he would have counselled him to say, were made righteous; & if Mr. Eyre's opinion of an actual justification, from the time of Christ's death be true, he ought to have said, were made righteous; but the Apostle saith they shall be made righteous: No wonder if he misrepresent what I said, when he makes so bold with the Apostle and sacred Text; and here let me return that most justly upon Mr. Eyre, which he saith to Mr Woodbridge, * Vide Mr Eyre, p. 10. This is not to interpret Scripture, but to deny it; such a liberty to alter tenses, and forms of speech at our pleasure, will but justify the se●uits blasphemy, that the Scriptures are but a leaden rule, and a nose of wax, which may be turned into any form; Turpe est doctori cùm culpa redurguet ipsum But now it is observable in this diversity, that the Apostle saith, not many were made righteous; Hosius lib 3. de Auth Scrip. etc. As in Adam many were made sinners, but many shall be made righteous; by this it is observable, that the Apostle doth contradict what Mr. Eyre hath affirmed, that the righteousness of Christ came upon the Elect in the same manner antecedently to their birth, as the sin of Adam came upon all to condemnation antecedently to their being. And the reason of this diversity is, because the Apostle had respect to all those Elect who have not yet believed, either because as yet they were not in being; and those that were in being, were not all as yet called. And truly this is a very great difference between the manner of communicating Christ's righteousness, and Adam's sin; for we being seminally in Adam, Vide Downh. Cou. of Grace, p. 296. and having a natural relation to him, sinned in him, as being in 〈◊〉 ●oynes; and hence we were as truly sinners in him, though not as completely, and formally sinful as he. And by generation the sin of Adam is actually communicated to all his posterity, and to all alike, (because we were all alike in him.) When they actually exist, and no sooner are they partakers of the human nature, but they are formally constituted sinners, and partake i●●is sin. But now it is a manifest error to think that we are all thus seminally in Christ, and have any such union with him antecedently to faith, as shall be made hereafter more evident, or that the community of his person is equivalent to such an un●on; and therefore the righteousness and obedience of Christ is not communicated to all from the time of their participation in the humane nature, (as for Infants their case is of a peculiar consideration, and the fuller answer to that I refer, till I shall speak to his Argument drawn from them.) We are not then in our generation, much less before, made partakers of Christ's righteousness, but in our regeneration, when faith is ingenerated by the Holy Ghost in our souls. Hence then, that we should not dream of being borne just, as we are borne sinners, which indeed were a contradiction to imagine, that we should be borne both just and sinful under the guilt of sin at the same time, and that we should not neglect the grace of justification, as though we had it already, and brought it into the world with us, as we brought sin in; The Apostle speaks of it in the future tense, to signify that we are not immediately constituted righteous, but must expect this benefit in our effectual vocation, when we are brought to faith; for, Whom he predestinated, them he calleth; and whom he calleth, them he justifieth, and no other, and properly never till then; and to this purpose, Dr. Downham, Cou. of Grace, p. 296. Reverend Dr. Downam expresseth himself in his Treatise of the Covenant of Grace. And hence we see there is not the same reason for the imputation of Christ's righteousness to all the Elect before their birth or faith, that there is for the imputation of Adam's sin unto his posterity before they have a being, because (as Mr. Burges hath observed) the issues of the first Covenant fell upon Adam's posterity in a natural and necessary way; Mr. Burg. of Justific. p. 180, 186. but the issues of Christ's death do come in a supernatural way. This I acknowledge for truth; let us see what Mr. Eyre answereth to it. Mr. Eyre, p. 7. [Mr. Eyre saith, This reason is of no validity to him, for the issues of Adam's disobedience came not upon his posterity by virtue of their natural propagation, for then his sin should be imputed to none till they are actually propagated. And the sins of other parents should be imputed to their posterity as much as Adam's, because they descend as naturally from their immediate parents, as they do from Adam: So that the issues of Adam's sin may be said to descend to his posterity in a supernatural way, i. e. by virtue of God's Covenant which was made with him, as a common person in behalf of all his posterity, and in the same manner do the issues of Christ's obedience descend unto God's Elect by virtue of that Covenant which was made with Christ, as a common person in their behalf; and therefore unless they can show a proviso, or restriction in the second Covenant, more than in the first, why life should not fl●w as immediately to the Elect from Christ's obedience, as death did from Adam's disobedience, the Arguments will stand in fore. But this answer is of far less validity, and implies much unsoundness, as I shall evidently demonstrate; for the right understanding of this, we must inquire what is meant by the issues of Adam's disobedience. 2. Whether this become ours by imputation, propagation, or by both. First, than I suppose Mr. Eyre must mean that single act of disobedience, which was Adam's sin, and is made ours, with the effects of it: Now if you look upon that barely as a simple act, it was more Gods than his act, in respect of the substance of the action; for, In him we live, and move, and have our being; and did not he uphold us, and concur with us by his natural concourse, we could put forth no action; and thus fare in genere entis it was good; but if you look upon the sinfulness of that act, as it was a transgression of the Law of God forbidding him to eat, so it was evil in generis moris, and from Adam as from the principal cause, by the abuse of his free will, and a double effect, or guilt attended this offence: 1. Reatus culpae, the inward guilt of sin, or desert of damnation, which is an inseparable adjunct, and consequent of sin. 2. There is Reatus redundans in personam, or reatus poenae, which is a guilt of punishment obliging the sinner to eternal wrath, which is separable from it. This is a consequent of sin, by virtue of God's Law adjudging punishment unto sin, in which repsect as it is from God as a punishment of sin, it is good, and God may separate this from sin. Now Adam when he committed this sin, did sustain a double person. 1. His own. 2. The person of all his posterity, whom he did as a common person represent, hence his sin had a double respect. 1. To himself, and so his sin was his personal and actual transgression, and so it was peccatum originans properly, and not peccatum originale; it was the first wellspring, and head, or fountain of sin, and of all the effects of it; not properly that which we call original sin, which is the hereditary corruption of our nature. 2. It had respect unto his whole posterity, which were in his loins, Heb. 7.8, 9 whereby all sinned in him, as Levi paid tithes in Abraham, and so it was the sin of the whole nature of mankind, actually by generation to be derived upon every person descending from him by natural and ordinary generation, in which respect Adam's sin was after a sort voluntary to the whole nature of mankind, considered in Adam. Now the question is, whether this sin of Adam (for if we inquire of original sin, it is without all controversy derived to us by generation, and natural propagation,) the question is, whether this sin, together with the demerit of it deserving and obliging Adam and all his posterity unto death, in whom they all sinned, whether this be ours by imputation, or by propagation? To which I answer, that it is not only ours by imputation, and by virtue of God's Covenant made with him as a common person, in the behalf of all his posterity; but it is partly ours by this imputation of God, by virtue of the Covenant made with Adam for us; and partly by propagation by virtue of that natural union between us and Adam. That relation we stood in unto him, being in him as the common root of all mankind; and without this union or relation, God neither did, nor could in justice impute this sin, (as fare as I yet can understand,) it being that which is the ground of Gods imputing that sin to us. Hence Augustine in answer to the Pelagian argument, That Nullâ ratione concedi potest, August. Tom. 7, de peccat. merit. & remiss. lib. 3. cap. 7. ut Deus qui propria peccata nobis remittit, imputet aliena, that is, that it can by no reason be granted, that God who forgiveth us our own sins, should impute another's to us: Saith, Deus quando parvulis imputat peccatum Adae, non imputat peccatum omnino alienum, sed suum ipsorum etiam peccatum, quia etiam ipsi in Adamo peccaverunt; Tunc enim Adamus totum humanum genus in se uno continebat: Apud Zanch. Tom. 4. lib. 1. de peccat. orig. p. 45 Ideò in illo omnes homines quot quot ex ipso futuri erant, per ipsius semen, erant unus homo; vita enim, & anima unius hominis tunc quicquid futurum erat in futurâ propagine continebat. God when he imputeth to little ones the sin of Adam, doth not impute that which is altogether another man's, but their own sin, because they sinned in Adam; for then Adam contained all mankind in himself alone: Therefore all men that were to descend from him by his seed, were one man; for then the life, and soul of that one man, contained whatsoever was to be in that future lineage. And Zanchy to the fifth Argument of Pighius, which was this, Zanch. Tom. 4. li●. de peccat. orig pag. 53. Pugnat cum Dei non solùm clementiâ, verùm etiam justitià, quòd peccatum unius omnibus in universum hominibus imputet ad peccatum, & condemnationem: That it cannot consist with the clemency and justice of God, that the sin of one should universally be imputed to all unto sin & condemnation. To which he answereth. Respondeo, pugnare si peccatum merè alienum imputaret, sed imputat illud quod & ipsorum est, hoc est, totius naturae; in ipso enim Adamo omne● peccaverunt. That is, It were inconsistent with his clemency and justice, if he should impute that that is purely another's sin; but he imputeth that which is their own, that is, the sin of the whole nature. Now I take this as an error of great consequence that Master Eyre saith, that we are not sinners by Adam, or that the issues of Adam's sin came not upon his posterity by propagation but by virtue of the Covenant made with him as a common person in the behalf of his posterity, for many reasons. 1. Because he maketh Adam's sin only to be ours by imputation, or an act of pure and absolute Sovereignty, and Prerogative, and no way an act of justice, when as it is a mixed act; not only an act of Prerogative and Sovereignty in ordaining Adam to be a common person, and so his sin to be the sin of the whole nature; for God could have ordered it so, had it been his pleasure, that this sin should only have been personal, as his other sins after the fall are. But it is an act of justice also, for death is inflicted as a punishment upon all, which is an act of justice. The reason follows in the fifth of the Romans, Because in him all have sinned, so that death is the wages of that sin, because it is our sin, all sinned in him; and it is not only Adam's sin, but their own sin by virtue of their relation to him, being in his loins. And to make the bare and strict imputation of another man's sin, (which is no way ours, but by imputation, the sole ground and foundation of that heavy judgement, and punishment of condemning all mankind to eternal death, which is one of the most weighty acts of God's judgement, that was ever executed in the world, is to represent God, not so much as a just Judge, as one that delighteth in the death of his creature, in the blood and ruin of his creature,) when as he professeth that as he doth live, he hath no delight in the death of a sinner, much less of a creature, that were not a sinner, if it were not for his imputation. And although I doubt not but God may as an act of Sovereignty, adjudge an innocent creature unto pain and misery, if it were his will; and that it would less reflect upon God to say he dit it, because it was his absolute pleasure, then to pretend or conceive that the bare imputation of the act of Adam's sin was the cause of it; yet I have no warrant to say that ever God did, or will do such an act to make the creature miserable, merely to show his Sovereignty. And what is there in the imputation of Adam's sin, if this imputation be grounded upon his will, and not that natural union and relation between Adam and his posterity, to free it from such an act of pure Sovereignty; therefore I look upon it as an act of justice, as well as prerogative, the equity of which act lieth much in the relation of Adam and his posterity to one another. 2. I urge, as before I hinted, If death entered by sin, than God's imputation is not the only cause of it; But it entered by sin, as the Apostle saith, Death passed upon all, inasmuch as all have sinned. 3. Then Adam was only the occasion of our sin, but God the Author; for if Adam had sinned, if God had not imputed it, we had not been sinners; But this is an insufferable blasphemy to make God the Author of sin; Therefore Gods imputing it, is an act of justice, and not of Sovereignty only. 4. This overthrows the community of his person, for if it be merely an act of his will, he might have done this though Adam had not been a public person. 5. This ascribeth to God a fallible judgement in esteeming him a sinner that is innocent, and is not a sinner but by his imputation. 6. This ascribeth injustice to God, to impute sin to him that is no sinner, but by his imputation, which the sinner would be delivered from, and consents not to it, as the regenerate that bewail it, and earnestly desire to be delivered from it. 7. The very necessity that there was for Christ to be borne of a Virgin, conceived of the Holy Ghost, to prevent his being a sinner, confutes this conceit; for if Adam's sin be ours only by imputation, let but God not impute Adam's sin to Christ, and he intended not so miraculously to be borne, for it behoved him to be like us in all things; and why not by the help of man to be borne, if Adam's sin be ours by imputation only, and not by propagation also? Thus you see how many errors Mr. Eyre is driven unto, to hold and maintain one. Nor are his reasons of any weight that he produceth to prove, that the issues of Adam's disobedience came not upon his posterity by virtue of their natural propagation, for then his sin should not be imputed until they are actually propagated; if he meant of an actual and formal imputation of sin, it is granted that sin is not so imputed till an actual being. For the understanding of this, we must know what imputation of sin is; it implieth either an estimation and judging of a sinner to be a sinner, or an adjudication of punishment for that sin, or the execution of that punishment; now look, in what manner we are sinners, in that manner is the imputation, for God's judgement must be according to truth; now as we are but seminally, potentially and virtually sinners, because we had but a virtual existence in Adam, (for it is a known rule, and of approved verity, Operatio rei consequitur esse rei, The acts and operations of things still follow the being of things, and are suitable and proportionable thereunto,) so we are reputed by God only virtually sinful in Adam, and so not actual sinners, nor so reputed by God, nor formally obliged to punishment; nor any punishment actually, or formally to be inflicted, till we have an actual existence; hence by virtue of that Covenant made with Adam, we are not actually and formally constituted sinners till we are actual members, and so his argument will return upon himself. For if the righteousness of Christ come upon us in the same manner to Justification, as Adam's sin to condemnation, then as we are not actually sinners, till we have an actual being; so neither are we actually justified, till we be actual members of Christ by faith. His second Reason halteth right down, and is pitifully inconsequent, for it doth no way follow, that if the sin of Adam be ours by propagation, that therefore the sins of other parents should be imputed to their posterity, as much as Adam's, because they descend as naturally from their immediate parents, as from Adam; but rather the consequence should be, Therefore our next parents do as truly transmit and propagate that sin, as Adam to their children; and this is true, and will advantage your cause nothing, nor hinder ours; but it follows not that their personal sins should be imputed, as was Adam's first sin: For if no more of Adam's sins be imputed then that first transgression, why should the sins of any other parents be imputed? And the reason is not alike, for none but Adam could be a public person representing all mankind; and that sin was not only personal, and proper to Adam, but common to the whole nature, and that by the will of God ordaining him a public person. For it is a mixed act in God, when he doth impute Adam's sin, partly arising from his Sovereignty, and partly from his Justice grounded upon that natural relation, although I deny not upon other considerations the sins of the immediate parents sometimes are, and may be imputed to the children. And whereas he saith, Unless they can show any proviso, or restriction in the second Covenant more than in the first, why life should not as immediately flow from Christ's obedience to the Elect, as death did from Adam's disobedience, the Argument will stand in force. I answer, here needs no other proviso, or restriction, but only to show that we are not in Christ in a natural way, as we are in Adam; and therefore the benefits of his death cannot immediately follow our birth, or be antecedent to it, but is limited to the time of our engraffing into Christ; and the parallel holds firm; for as in Adam we all virtually sinned, and so were virtually condemned; so we grant, Christ hath meritoriously redeemed us, and we are virtually justified in him; and as sin is not actually imputed unto any of Adam's posterity, till they have an actual being, and are actually members of Adam; so are not we actually justified, till we be actual members of Christ by faith. As for the Logical Axiom, Non entis nulla sunt accidentia, it was used in my next Argument, and therefore I shall consider it in its proper place. CHAP. III. Containing an answer to M. Eyre's exceptions against my Argument deduced from our union with Christ, showing that where there is no union, there can be no communion; his unjust charge refuted, and the nature of our union with Christ further declared. MY next Argument against which Mr. Eyre is risen up to offer violence, was drawn from our union to Christ. Where there is no union, there can be no communion, for union is the ground of all communion, which I made evident by an induction of the several unions in the world; and that there was no communion where there was not a preceding union; But we are not united unto Christ until faith; Therefore we had no communion with him in his death to an actual justification. And in the further prosecuting of the Argument, I shown that this union is such a union, whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ; therefore it did presuppose the pre-existence of the person before he could be united, and that this union was a thing accidental as to the nature of man, and it being attributed to us as the subjects of this union, it must require our existence; for an accident cannot subsist without its subject, because * Where I take accidens pro omni quod de pendenter habe esse ab alio qu● tenus opponit. sub stantiae, ne strictè pro om● quod inhaesive solùm existit in alio. Accidentis esse est in esse vel dependenter esse, and unless the subject exist nothing can be truly predicated of it; for, Non entis nullae sunt affectiones, and that this union was the formal effect of faith. Now let us see what Mr. Eyre saith to the Argument. First, he saith, that I called our union with Christ a personal union, which seems to fav ur that absurd notion, that a Believer loseth not only his own proper life, but his personality also, and is taken up into the nature and person of the Son of God. I am sorry that I must confute him as the fellow did Bellarmine in one word;— and his shameless dealing in this respect, is the more injuriously evident, in that I did not only tell him in our conference in public before a great multitude of witnesses, that I neither said nor did own any such thing; but did declare that I said and meant that it was such a union, whereby the person of Christ is united to the person of a Bell ever; yet is he a man of that face and forehead, to print and declare that to the world, which he hath God, Angels and men, if not his own conscience, to witness against him; but this he hath done to render me odious to the world; the Lord forgive him, and let him see the evil of these, and the like slanders against me and others of his brethren that differ from him. And let him now know, that I utterly abhor that Familistical notion, that there should be an hypostatical union between Christ and a Believer, for Christ is one person, and a Believer another, Apage Theologiam hanc erco relegandam. I forced myself publicly to oppose it, as you may see in the Epistle before my Sermon, and whether your Doctrine or mine do most favour that absurd notion that the Reverend Doctor doth condemn, Dr. Chambers. that a Believer, loseth not only his own proper life, but his personality also, and is taken up into the person, into the nature and person of the Son of God, I desire no better Umpire to determine. I affirm, that the union made between us and Christ by faith, is such a union whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ; What is here that savours of such a notion? yea, Mr. Hooker, Souls union. pag 7, 8. what is there which our Reverend Divines have not said before me? Reverend Mr. Hooker in a Treatise, called the Souls Exaltation, and in the Sermon called the Souls Union with Christ, expressing what this union is, and how it is made by faith, hath this passage; he saith, It is a total union, the whole nature of a Saviour, and the whole nature of a Believer are knit together; and page 8. Christ is the Head of the Church, not only according as he is God, but as he is God and man; and a Believer is a member, not only according to his body, but according to his body and soul; whole Christ being the Head, and the whole Believer being a Member; therefore a whole Christ, and a whole believer must be joined together. Perkins, 2. Vol. in Com. upon Gal. 2.20. p. 216. and so 1 Vol p. 36.78. The whole person of every faithful man is verily conjoined with the whole person of our Saviour Christ God and man. And the like testimony we have from Reverend Mr. Perkins; Of this conjunction, saith he, two things may be noted. The first, that it is a substantial union, in that the person of him that believeth, is united to the person of Christ; but Master Eyre makes all the Elect to be one person with Christ antecedent to their faith; Because, saith he, they are given to Christ, and Christ to them, and are said to be in him, that they are called his sheep, children, before they believe, which savours of this notion more than mine, making them one person in Christ before they had a being; sure then their personality by him is swallowed up in the person of the Son of God, if he can find them being, existing, and actually justified as one person with him, before they have either being or faith. He saith that this is called a mystical and spiritual union, because it is secret, and invisible, apprehended by faith, and not by sense and reason; surely this is not only apprehended by faith, but it is made, and is a formal effect of faith; the Spirit worketh this faith, by which we are united to Christ. And it hath hitherto been the unanimous Doctrine of all our Divines, that this mystical union is made by faith, which Mr. Eyre opposeth, and will have it to be antecedent to it. I will instance in a few. Mr. Reynolds in his Sermon upon the Life of Christ, pag. 450. saith, Consider further the formal effects of faith, which is to unite a man unto Christ; by means of which union, Christ and we are one body; and being thus united, the death and merit of Christ is ours. So, pag. 478 Consider faith in its inherent properties, so it is not more noble than the rest, (that is, than other graces) but consider it as an instrument appointed by God for the most noble offices; so it is the most superlative, and excellent grace. The first of these offices, (saith he) is to unite to Christ, and give possession of him; the Apostle prays for the Ephesians, Eph. 3.17. that Christ may dwell in their hearts by faith. And a little after, This union to, and communion with Christ, is on our part the work of faith, which is as it were the spiritual joint and ligament by which Christ and a Christian are coupled. John 14.19. In one place (saith he) We are said to live by Christ, Because I live, ye shall live also, in another by faith: How, by both? by Christ as the Fountain, by Faith as the Pipe, conveying water to us from the fountain; by Christ as the Foundation, by Faith as the Cement; and in answer to an Objection, pag. 479. Mr. Reynolds Life of Christ. do not other graces join a man to Christ as well as Faith? Union is the proper effect of love, therefore we are one as well by loving him, as by believing in him. To this (saith he) I answer, Love makes a moral union in affections, but Faith makes a mystical union; and a little after, pag. 480. Between God's love and ours comes faith to make us one with Christ. And then the second Office of Faith, (he saith) is to justify, in the same place. So Mr. Shepherd in his Sound Believer, pag. 111. Look as disunion is the disjunction or separation of divers things one from another; so union is the conjunction, or joining of them together that were before severed: Hence that act of the Spirit in uniting us to Christ, can be nothing else but the bringing back the soul unto Christ, or the conjunction of the soul unto Christ, and into Christ, by bringing it back to him, that before lay like a dry bone separated from him. Thus, 1 Cor 6. ●7. He that is joined to the Lord, is one Spirit with him; John 6.35. the Spirit therefore brings us to the Lord Christ, and so we are in him. Now the coming of the soul to Christ, Heb. 3.12. what is it but Faith? our union therefore is by Faith, not without it; for by it, we that were once separated from him by sin, John 6 37. and especially by unbelief, are now come, not only unto him, as unto the loadstone, but (which is most near) into him, and so grow one with him, etc. I speak not this as if we were united to Christ without the Spirit on his part, for the conjunction of things severed must be mutual, if it be firm; I only show that we are not united before faith by the Spirit unto Christ, but that we are by faith (wrought by the Spirit, whereby on our part we are first conjoined unto him; and then on his part he by the person of his Spirit, Perkins 1 Vol. Chap. 36 order and causes of damnation. pag. 78. is most wonderfully united to us: So Mr. Perkins after he had showed that the whole person of every faithful man is verily conjoined with the whole person of our Saviour Christ, God and man; he saith, the manner of their union is this, A faithful man first of all, and immediately, etc. The bond of this union is this; this union is made by the Spirit of God applying Christ unto us, and on our parts by faith receiving Christ Jesus offered to us. And for this cause it is termed a spiritual union; So page 299. in his Exposition of the Creed, showing that the mystical union makes us one with Christ, and this is by the Spirit; he saith, Hence the bond of this conjunction is one, and the same Spirit descending from Christ the Head to all his Members, creating also in them the instrument of faith, whereby they apprehend Christ, Perkins 2 Vol. in his Epist. Gal. 3.27. pag. 265. and make him their own. So Mr. Perkins in his second Vol. propounds this Question, How are all Believers made one with Christ? (Where he makes them only, and never till then subjects of this union.) Answ. By a Donation on God's part, whereby Christ is given unto us, and by a receiving on our part; and a little after addeth, that faith is our hand to receive Christ, and this receiving is done by a supernatural act of the mind, whereby we believe Christ with his benefits to be ours. And to this purpose Amesius in his Medulla Theolo. Receptio Christi est quà Christus oblatus homini conjungitur, Amesius in Medulla Theo. cap. 26. de voca. Num. 17.18. l. 1. p. 118. 2 Cor. 5.17. Gal 3.27. & homo Christo, Joh 6.56. In me manet, & ego in eo. Hujus conjunctionis respectu nos dicimur esse in Christo, & induisse Christum, & inhabitari à Christo, Ephes. 3.17, etc. & Num. 26 Receptio activa est elicitus actus fidei quâ vocatus jam totus in Christum recumbit, ut suum Servatorem, & per Christum in Deum. The receiving of Christ is that whereby Christ offered, is united to man, and man to Christ; He abideth in me, and I in him, John 6.56. Joh. 6.56. In respect of this conjunction we are said to be in Christ, to put on Christ, and Christ to dwell in our hearts; this active receiving of Christ is an elicit act of faith, whereby he that is called, doth now wholly rely on Christ as his Saviour, and by Christ on God. John 3.15, 16. I may spare pains of relating any more testimonies of such a known truth; and yet Mr. Eyre will have this mystical union to be apprehended, not made by faith. Secondly, Mr. Eyre excepteth against it as propounded universally, that there is no manner of union between Christ and the Elect before they do believe. 1. They are his own words, not mine, for there is a unity of natures in which they agree, and a certain relative respect or union, very improperly so called, between Christ and his Elect; but a mystical union I know none till faith; and were there any real union before, yet Mr. Eyre might have known that rule, Analogum quando per se positum stat pro famosiori Analogato, and so it ought to have been taken for this famous union, or implantation by faith. Thirdly, He acknowledgeth, that That conjugal union between them, which consists in the mutual consent of parties, is not before faith. And is not this to yield the cause? Eph. 5.23, 32. is not this the mystical union spoken of in Scripture, and so called in relation to the similitude it beareth to the marriage-union? and is there any more mystical unions than one? and that made by faith; hath the wife any right or property to the body, name, goods of the man till she be married to her husband? So till this conjugal marriage-union between Christ and a Believer, he hath no actual right, or property to the Body, Name, Goods and Purchases of Christ. Fourthly, And yet he addeth, There is a true and real union, that by means thereof their sins do become Christ's, and Christ's righteousness is made theirs. Shall we not need any more proof of this but your bare word? where is it written there is such a union before faith? by whom is it besides yourself so called? and by what name is that union distinguished from the mystical union by faith? But let us hear this proof; God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ to be as it were one heap or lump, one vine, one body or spiritual corporation, wherein Christ is the Head, and they the Members; Christ the Root, and they the Branches; Christ the first fruits, and they the residue of the heap; in respect of this union, it is that they are said to be given unto Christ, and Christ to them, to be in Christ, Ephes. 1. That they are called his sheep, his seed, his children, his brethren before they are Believers; and by virtue of this union it is, that the obedience and satisfaction of Christ descends particularly to them, and not the rest of mankind. Oh rare invention! Oh mysterious union hidden from all ages, but now revealed and discovered by Mr. William Eyre, a discovery as far excelling that of Columbus, as heaven exceeds earth! This is such a mystical union, as that it is not only not to be apprehended by sense and reason, (because against both) but not to be comprehended by faith neither, because it is not where written; but let us weigh the strength of his words, which carry this sense, Because God from everlasting constituted, and ordained Christ to be a Head, and Believers to be Members; therefore there was such a union from eternity. As good consequence as this, your Book is in print, therefore it is all true. But I take this to be a gross error, that the Elect and Christ were united from eternity: For, 1. God's decree ordaining Christ to be a Head, is terminus diminuens, and doth not signify that Christ was actually a Head, having members united to him; but it signifies God's purpose what he did decree to be done in time, and it is the continual panalogizing of Mr. Eyre, and the Antinomians, to confound the decree, and the execution of the decree; God decreed to send Christ into the world, was he therefore actually sent? No, not till the fullness of time came; Gods decree ordaining Christ to be a Head, and they to be Members, doth not actually constitute Christ a Head, and they his Members. 2. That that is not, cannot be united; for union requires necessarily the pre-existence of the persons or things united; But now Believers did not exist, much less exist as Believers from eternity, Christ had not a mystical body from eternity; Therefore he was not a Head from eternity. 3. This union to Christ is reciprocal, whereby Christ is united to a Believer, and a Believer to Christ, and requires ligaments, and bonds to make this union; the Sp●rit on Christ's part, Faith on ours: But they that exist not, are not subjects capable of receiving the Spirit, or of Faith, without which this union cannot be made. 4. The Scripture no where speaks of an eternal union, therefore there was no such union; and as he telleth us, We must pardon him if he believe not our unwritten verities * A●●d he must pardon us if we believe not his written vanities. . And therefore when it is said, that God chose us in Christ, Ephes. 1. This is not to be understood, as if we were then existing, and had a being in Christ; but it shows the way and order how God would save us; he ordained to save us in and through Christ, and for his sake; not that Christ's merits were the cause quoad actum eligentis, (in respect of the act of Election) but quoad terminum sive salutem ad quam eligimur; but in respect of the end, or salvation unto which we are elected or ordained. And so Dr. Twisse, a man of eminent worth and accurate judgement in his Vindiciae. * Interca non dicimus Christum in negotie Electionis habere rationem causae meritoriae respectu actûs eligentis, sed duntaxat respectutermini, salutis videlicet aut vitae aeternae ad quam eligimur. Nam Deum eligere nos in Christo ad vitam aeternam, nihil aliud est qu●m Deum constituisse nos ad obtinendam salutem per Jesum Christum. Doctor Twist. Vind. l. 2. digress. 10. sect 2. pag. 74. c. 1. Perinde est ac si dixisset, elegit nos ad salutem, etc. Ibid. In the mean while we do not say that Christ in the business of Election, hath the consideration of a meritorious cause in respect of the act of God choosing, but only in respect of the term or end, to wit, of the salvation or life eternal unto which we are chosen: for that God should choose us unto life eternal in Christ, is nothing else then that God hath ordained us to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ; and as he addeth, Perinde est, etc. Even as if he should have said, He hath chosen us to obtain salvation by Christ: Hither also appertaineth the next verse, wherein is taught that God predestinated us, that we should be his sons by Christ Jesus, implanted into Christ by faith; Hinc enim nos filios Dei fieri profitetur Apostolus, Gal. 3.26. Omnes est is filii Dei per fidem in Christo Jesus. For from hence the Apostle professeth, that we are made the Sons of God, Gal. 3.26. Ye are all the sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus, and therefore are not sons antecedently to faith, as Mr. Eyre would have it; for though we are so called, this is to be understood consequenter, and not antecedenter, because they shall be made such; and whereas the Scripture saith, he died for enemies, and the ungodly; therefore in these places, where they are called his sheep, children, his brethren, before faith, this is to limit, and restrain the death of Christ to such as shall be so made, not that they are so de facto already, but are so called in respect of certainty, and what they shall be. But to return to that of Master Eyre, that God hath chosen us in Christ, as if we then existed in him; Let the Reader observe how unhappily he joineth with Arminius, who seemeth such an enemy to him, Arminius * Exam. p. 3●. saith, Apostolus ait nos in Christo electos esse, The Apostle saith, we are elected in Christ; And as something is put out of the Text by Arminius, so something is put in; God chose us before the world in Christ our Head, this Arminius plainly asserts, Exam. p. 158. and accordingly Mr. Eyre saith, God constituted from everlasting Christ a Head, and (saith he) in this respect we are chosen in Christ, that is, as in a Head; the Text saith no such matter; and as Arminius leaves out those words, that we should be holy, by which means the sense of our being in Christ is made obscure, which if added, would make it plain in what sense these words [in Christ] should be taken, that is, these words show to what we were chosen, to wit, to obtain holiness; and how; to wit, in Christ, that is, for Christ's sake, like as it is said, vers. 3. God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesus, that is, for Christ's sake: So Dr. Twisse in his answer to Mr. Cotton upon these words of his, that he saith, God chose us before the world in Christ our Head, p. 9 where, because it's very material to this passage, I shall recite what he further saith: Mark (I pray you) saith he, speaking to Master Cotton of Arminius, how he works upon each; to be elect in Christ, is with him to be elect being in Christ, for nos in Christo with him, is nos existentes in Christo, and seeing we are not in Christ but by faith, (where let the Reader observe the Doctor's judgement, that we are not in Christ but by faith, which is contradictory to Mr. Eyre,) Hereupon he maketh the object of Election to be fideles, the faithful, or in Christum credentes, such as believe in Christ. We answer first, we may take as great liberty to interpret it for explication sake, by supplying a participle of the future tense thus, Elegit nos futuros in Christo, He chose us hereafter to be in Christ, (like as it follows) who hath predestinated us to be adopted. Now we are adopted by faith, Gal. 3.26.) as he takes liberty to supply a participle of the present tense; especially considering that when we were Elect, to wit before the foundation of the world, we were not at all, and consequently not fideles, Believers. Secondly, we answer, that the complete sentence considered at full, doth manifest in what sense this phrase [in Christ] is taken. He chose us in Christ, that we should be holy; this shows to what we were chosen, to wit, to obtain holiness; and how? to wit, [in Christ]; that is, for Christ's sake; like as ver. 3. 'tis laid, God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesus, that is, for Christ his sake; and like as 1 Thes. 5.9. 'tis said, God hath ordained us to obtain salvation through Jesus Christ; so here in conformable exposition, 1 Thess. 5 9, when it is said, God hath chosen us in Christ, that we should be holy, a fair meaning may be this, God hath ordained us to obtain holiness through Christ Jesus. To this I will superadd the testimony of Dr. Twisse, and the rather, because you allege him for your defence in the Doctrine of eternal Justification. Christus (fateor) caput est Electorum, & praedestinatorum, sed non formaliter consideratorum. Neque enim praedestinati quà praedestinati, sunt membra corporis Christi, sed potius futuri sunt membra ejus, nam quod est membrum Christi procul dubio existit. Neque enim membrum Christi, est terminus diminuens existentiam, at praedestinati quà praedestinati non existunt, nam predestinatio fuit ab aeterno, sed praedestinati non extiterunt simpliciter ab eterno, hodie multi sunt Electi, qui procul dubio adhuc non nascuntur. Rursus unio illa per quam fimus ejus membra fit per fidem, Ergo quotquot Christi membra sunt oportet esse fideles, at non omnes praedestinati ex qùo primùm praedestinati sunt èvestigio fideles evadunt. Adhaec, cùm caput non potiùs fiat aliquorum quàm illi aliqui fiant membra corporis ejus, sequitur Christum non ab aeterno fuisse caput, cùm non ab aeterno corpus habuerit mysticum, aut membra cujus ratione propriè dicitur caput Ecclesiae suae. Membra verò corporis cùm fiant per vocationem, unde dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ídque per vocationem efficacem; & consequenter per fidem, apparet Christum non priùs dici posse caput quàm sint aliqui, qui credant in ipsum; loquor de Christo Mediatore, & Redemptore. Dr. Twisse, Vind. li. b 2. digress. 10. page 74. Col. 2. I confess Christ is the Head of the Elect and predestinate, but not formally considered: For neither the predestinate as predestinate, are members of Christ's body, but rather shall be members of it; for, what is a member of Christ, without all doubt existeth: For neither is a member of Christ a term diminishing existence; But the predestinate as predestinate do not exist, for predestination was from eternity; but the predestinate do not simply exist from eternity. This day there are many that are Elect, which undoubtedly are not yet borne. Again, that union by which we are made his members, is made by faith; therefore it is needful, that all that are his members should be Believers; but all the predestinate do not prove Beli verse as soon as they are predestinate. Moreover, seeing a Head cannot sooner be a Head of any than they can be members of his body; it followeth that Christ was not a Head from eternity, because he was not a mystical body from eternity, or members, in which respect he may properly be called the Head of his Church. But seeing they are made members of his body by calling, from whence it is called the Chu ch, and that by effectual vocation, and consequently by faith; it appeareth that Christ cannot first be called a Head before there are some who believe in him, I speak of Christ the Mediator and Redeemer. Now, 1. That we were not united unto Christ at the time of his passion, when our sins were laid upon him as our surety. And, 2. That we are not united antecedently to our faith, I prove by these ensuing reasons. Although it be willingly acknowledged that Christ was a common person in his death, and a surety for all the Elect, and what he did was for them; yet this constitutes not the mystical union between Christ and us; this only rendered him capable of having our sins imputed to h●m, and served to lay a foundation for our partaking in his righteousness, when we should be implanted into him by mystical union through faith. 1. Christ is united to us, as he is a Head, and we his members; but the consideration of Christ as dying for us, Ratio capitis non est ratio causae meritoriae, Dr. Twiss. in answ. to Mr. Cotton. p. 10. and so becoming a meritorious cause of our salvation, is different from the consideration of Christ as a Head; for in his death as he is our Mediator, purchasing salvation by the merit of it; he is an efficient moral cause of salvation, and in this channel runs the meritorious cause; but Christ as he is a Head, is an efficient physical and natural cause of salvation, and thus only he is a Head by actual pouring out his Spirit upon the Elect in the appointed time for their conversion, whereby they are brought to faith, and so united to Christ. Now the moral cause may exist long before the effect follow, and therefore doth not necessarily require the existence of the subject, but the efficient natural cause hath its effect immediately following, a●d therefore when Christ will as a Head unite any to him, (the person must exist; for that that is not, cannot be united;) and then as the Head diffuseth nerves to the several members, and conveys animal spirits, by which the members are quickened, and live; so Christ conveigheth his Spirit into their hearts to work faith, by which they are united to Christ, and so partake of righteousness and spiritual life from Christ. 2. To make a mystical union between Christ and the Elect before their birth, or faith, be it when it will, whether from eternity or Christ's death, Mr. Eyre, p. 8. will necessarily establish that Familisticall notion, that Mr. Eyre fasteneth upon us, That the personality of a Believer, or Elect person, is taken up into the nature and person of the Son of God; for it makes them and Christ to be but one person; for as yet they have no being; therefore if they be, they must be in him, and subsist in his person, and so this child is fairly laid at his own door, that he would father upon us: but we say no such thing; for this union being by faith, and not till we exist, Christ is one person, Peter another, Paul a third, and so as many distinct persons as are mystically united. 3. If they were truly in Christ before their personal being and union to Christ by faith, than they and Christ being but one p●rson, all and the singular parts of Christ's obedience and sufferings, together with all, and singular the effect, thereof, and benefits may be attributed to them; because they being one with him personally, are said to do it in him, as we that were all one in Adam, united to him by a natural union, tanquam in radice humani generis, as in the root and common parent of all mankind are said to do what Adam did; but all and every part of Christ's obedience and sufferings, with all the singular effects and benefits cannot be attributed to any sinner believing in him; for of whom with any show of truth; and without horrible blasphemy may it be said that He gave himself for us an offering, and a sacrifice to God, for a sweet smelling savour unto God? Eph 5.2. That by the eternal Spirit of God he offered up himself without spot to God? that the chastisement of our peace was upon him, H●b 9 14. Isa. 53.5. and that by his stripes we are healed? For this can agree to none but Christ personally, Isa. 63.3. not mystically considered. And Christ is said to tread the Winepress of his Father's anger alone; but if they were then truly in him, than all the Elect of God did tread this Winepress with him, and mystical Christ was crucified, not Christ alone that was the Son of God. And therefore we see most absurdly, Mr. Eyre, p. 9 that Mr. Eyre applies that to Christ mystically considered, which is peculiar personally to Christ the Son of God, Matth 3.17. This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased; What if this were spoken to Christ as a public Person and Mediator for the Elect, doth it therefore follow it was meant of Christ mystical? certainly the consequence will never be granted upon his bare word. 4. If we were in Christ when he died and suffered for us antecedently to our birth, so as to be mystically united, having no subsistence but in the person of the Mediator, than we were punished in him, and gave satisfaction in him, and so no place is left for pardon of sin in our justification; for if we were punished in Christ, and suffered in him, than what place is left for pardon? for pardon and punishment are contrary; He that suffereth the full weight of punishment is not pardoned, and to this purpose Polanus in his Comment. upon the 9th. Dani. the 8th. Quest. Polanus in Dan. c. 9 ver. 24. quaest. 8. Neutiquam propriè loquendo sumus puniti in Christo, cùm Scriptura disertè doceat nos esse justificatos in Christo; quòd si sumus in Christo justificati, & absoluti, non igitur damnati, & puniti, Ephes. 1. v. 6. Ait Paulus de Deo nos gratìs sibi acceptos fecit in illo dilecto, nos ergò Deus non punivit, sed omnium nostrum poenam Christo imp●suit, Isa. 53 6. sicut dicitur, Isa. 53. v. 6. Jehova facit ut incurrat in eum iniquitas omniûm nostrûm. Christus torcular calcavit solus, nos non calcavimus. Neque vero idem est nos esse punitos in Christo, & Christum esse punitum pro nobis, seu nostro loco. Nam si Christus est punitus nostro loco, sequitur nos non esse punitos, sed poenam nobis esse remissam: & quid quaeso est aliud remissio peccatorum, quàm condonatio, & culpae, & poenae? Quomodo igitur haec consentient Deum nobis remisisse peccata, & tamen punivisse nos propter eadem? Proinde sic ex Scriptura statuendum, Deum Christo paenam nostrorum peccatorum imposuisse, ut nobis illam remitteret: proprio filio suo non pepercisse ut nobis parceret. If any man object that Polanus doth not absolutely deny that we were punished in Christ, but that we cannot properly be said to be punished in him. I answer, Nor do I absolutely deny it, if that Doctrine, that we were punished in Christ be understood in respect of imputation, (to wit) that God for the merit of Christ's passion forgiveth our sins upon believing, as if we had suffered and made satisfaction, I willingly grant it, but then we were not in him as one person making satisfaction; for the person of him that suffered for us, is distinguished from them for whom he suffered, and by Mr. Eyre's opinion that we were really one in him, and with him before our birth, and faith can be understood no other way, as I conceive. 5. That to make us to be one with Christ antecedently to our birth when he suffered for us, destroys the ground of imputation of Christ's righteousness; for those which were truly in Christ in all his obedience and sufferings, to them that obedience and sufferings cannot be made over by imputation; for what need is there of imputation, or what place is left for it, when those to whom it should be imputed, because of their union with Christ, did themselves perform it? wherefore, either there was no such union, or that imputation must be denied. But the obedience and sufferings of Christ are evidently by Scripture declared to be ours by imputation: Rom. 4.5. Hence our faith is said to be imputed to us for righteousness; And Christ was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; we are made righteousness, as he was made sin, that was by imputation, therefore we were made righteous by imputation; 2 Cor. 5.21. hence that union Mr. Eyre contends for, I cannot say, mole ruit suâ, but for want of weight falls to the ground. The next thing that we have undertaken to prove is, that there is not any mystical union between Christ and us intecedently to faith, which I demonstrate from Scripture-grounds thus: First, if Christ prayeth for those for whom he died that they may believe, and that (believing) they may be united to him, then before faith, such (for whom Christ died) are not united to him; But Christ prayeth for those for whom he died, that they might believe, and that (believing) they might be one with him. The consequence of the Major is as evident as reason can make it, unless we make Christ to pray in vain, to pray for that which was already done; if therefore they were not one in Christ, and the Father as the Father was in Christ, and Christ in the Father before, as this prayer intimates they were not, than this union was not antecedent to faith. The Minor are the words of Christ, John 17.20, 21. and need not a grain of allowance; Christ in this place prays for those for whom he was to die, that after his death they might believe; the instrumental cause of that faith, is set down to be the word of the Apostles; the final cause of that believing, is, that they might be one, that is, that they might be as members of the same body by faith, nearly united to one another; the manner how is declared by the near conjunction between the Father and Christ. Secondly, he prays not only that they may be one, or at unity among themselves, Diodat in Lecum. 171. John 21. but also that they may be one in us; that is, as Diodat upon the place, in the communion of the Holy Ghost, by which they may be mystically united to me, and by me to thee, (and truly this latter union to Christ is the ground of the former, of being united to one another;) now if they were mystically united before, this would make Christ either ignorant of this union, or his prayer to be in vain, to pray for that that was done long before from eternity, (as Mr. Eyre saith,) but either of these were fearful impiety to imagine, therefore this union is not till faith. A second Argument I frame from the same place is this: They that are not really united as members of the invisible Church to the rest of the members, and mystical body of Christ, are not united to Christ; But before faith, no man is a true member of the invisible Church, and so united to the rest of the members of the mystical body; Therefore not to Christ. The Major will not be denied by any, but such as are baptised into a spirit of error; the Reason is plain, because the union between the members is a fruit of our union to the same Head; but no man is united to the company of Believers to have a true fellowship and union with them, but a true Believer; For what communion hath a Believer with an Infide? and Christ prays that they might believe, that they might be one, that is, that they might be mutually united, as by one faith, as members one of another, and the same body: So Piscator upon the place, Pisca. in ●oc 17. Job. 21. in Anal. per unam fidem inter se devincti, tanquam membra unius corporis, cujus caput est Christus, mutuo amore sese complectantur, That being knit together by one faith, as members of one body, whereof Christ is Head, they may with a mutual love embrace each other; now a true communion of love cannot be between true Believers, and those that are yet unbelievers, therefore neither between them and Christ. And hence I argue, 3. Christ and Belial are not united: Every unbeliever is a son of Belial: Therefore they are not united. 2 Cor. 6.15. The word Belial is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an uncalled man, nequàm, a very wicked man, a man that will profit none, but is hurtful to all, in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; the Hebricians agree not from whence it is derived; but the signification given is either a man that will profit none, or good for nothing, or one that will be subject to no yoke; I deny not but Interpreters do think many of them, that Satan is in this place understood, and Beza saith, it very well agrees to him, though he take it for a wicked man; and Bullinger and Calvin take it for the Devil, the head of all wicked men: but I see not why it may not be taken here for a wicked man, and not for Satan; for it's ordinary in Scripture by this word to understand very wicked men; so in Deuteronomy it's taken for an Idolater, Deut. 13.13. and of such is the Apostles discoursing here, that Believers should have no communion with Idolaters; and so Elies sons being very wicked, 1 Sam. 2.12. are called sons of Belial. And it's very agreeable to the scope; for in the verse before, he exhorteth them not to be unequally yoked together with unbelievers; he blames them for having too much familiarity with Heathens, whether in marriages, or in their feasts, eating things sacrificed to Idols; he would not have them draw in the same yoke, by which Metaphor he would dissuade them from keeping company with them, and so partaking with them in their sins. His Argument is drawn à contrario, Your condition and profession is as contrary to theirs, as righteousness is to unrighteousness, as light and darkness; and therefore as there is no fellowship between righteousness and unrighteousness, between light and darkness, so neither should there be between you and them; yea, Christ hath no communion with Belial, and you should be like Christ; Christ and the devil can as well agree, as a Christian and a wicked man; a Christian is called by the same name, and should be as Christ in the world: Now as Christ hath no communion with Belial, whether you take it for the Devil, or a wicked man, is all one; Therefore neither should you. Now then, if Christ and a wicked man have no communion, then have they no union: But they have no communion; who will make such a swine the member of Christ? 1 Cor. 6.15. Shall I take the member of Christ, and make it the member of an harlot? God forbidden. And with the like abhorrency would Paul hear of making a member of an harlot a member of Christ, a son of Belial a member of Christ: 1 Cor. 6.11. But such is every unbeliever, (though elect;) the Apostle tells the Corinthians, they were Idolaters, Fornicators, such as could not inherit the Kingdom of God. 1 Cor. 6.17. 4. He that is joined to the Lord, is one Spirit; But an unbeliever and Christ, is not one Spirit: Therefore they are not joined. The Proposition is expressly written, and the Minor is evident, because an unbeliever is one that walketh according to the Prince of the power of the air, Eph. 2.2. the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience, or unbelief; for so it signifies rather than disobedience, it signifies imperswasibility, and contumacy in not believing. 5. He that is none of Christ's, is not joined to Christ; An unbeliever is none of Christ's, (in respect of incorporation.) The proposition shineth brighter than the Sun at noonday. The Assumption is proved from Rom. 8. He that hath not the Spirit of Christ, is none of Christ's: But an unbeliever hath not the Spirit of Christ; Surely the Spirit of Christ is a holy sanctifying Spirit, and will not dwell in such an unclean sty, as the heart of an unbeliever. 6. He that hath no fellowship with God, hath no union with Christ: But an unbeliever hath no fellowship with God. The Major will admit of no contradiction, the Assumption I prove from the first Epistle of John, ch. 1.6 He that saith he hath fellowship with God, and walketh in darkness, is a liar, and doth not the truth; an unbeliever walks in darkness, practising the unfruitful works of darkness; he will contradict common sense and experience that denieth this. 7. He that is in Christ, is a new creature: 2 Cor. 5.17. But an unbeliever is not a new creature: Therefore he is not in Christ. There is none but an Atheist can cast a stone at either of these Propositions. 8. Where there is perfect resistance, there is no union; But between Christ and the heart of an unbeliever there is perfect resistance; Therefore there is no union between Christ and him, Christ will not be united to an unbeliever; hence he brings all the Elect to faith; nay, it were dishonourable to Christ to be joined to an actual unbeliever; the mystical body of Christ would be a monstrous, haet erogeneous body, if it consisted of Believers, and Infidels; and an unbeliever resists the grace and Spirit of Christ, seeking to draw him to faith, as Stephen told the Jews, They were a stiffnecked people, they did always resist the Holy Ghost; so is it true of every unbeliever: Rom 8.7. The carnal mind is enmity against God, it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can it be. By this time I doubt not but the Reader seethe how I have more then enough confirmed this truth, That without faith there is no union to Christ, and that Mr. Eyre's opinion runs cross to the very vein of the Gospel. I will only add a testimony or two more. Beza setteth his seal to this truth, Sed hoe demùm sciendum, nos per fidem Christo ipso uniti, Spiritûs Sancti vinculo, Beza in his large An upon G●l. 4.28. ut bonorum ipsius fiamus participes, ut omnes fideles hàc ratione sint unus Christus mysticus, ut loquitur etiam Apostolus, 1 Cor. 12.12. Beza in his large Ann. upon Gal. 4.28. But this finally we must know that we through faith by the bond of the Spirit are united to Christ, that we may be partakers of all the good in him, that all Believers by this means may be one mystical Christ. So Learned Calvin, Calv. in Rom. 8.4. Suam justitiam nullis communnicat Christus, nisi quos Spiritûs sui vinculo sibi conjungit: Christ communicateth his righteousness to none, but such as he unites to himself by the bond of his Spirit. Davenant also consenteth with us. Absque fide, D●venant, De m rte Christi, pag 60. sive ante fidem nulla nobis actualis conjunctio cum Christo, ac proindè ex merito mortis ejus nulla remissio peccaetorum, nulla justificatio, nulla cum Deo Patre reconciliatio: Without faith, or before faith we have no actual conjunction with Christ, and therefore from the merit of his death there is no remission of sins, no justification, no reconciliation with God the Father. So Zanchy: Ait, & ponent sibi caput, non autem ponetur; Docet ergò etsi Pater ille, Zanch. Tom. 5. in Come. in Hoseam, cap. 1. pag. 28. est qui caput hoc dedit Ecclesiae, & singulis Ecclesiae membris, ut est, Ephes. 1. nemini tamen caput esse posse, nisi quis illud propriae voluntatis assensu (de adultis loquor) sibi ipse ponat. Sibi etiam quisque hoc caput verè & coram Deo ponit, cùm illud sibi à Patre in Evangelio oblatum, fide suâ, & propriae voluntatis assensu suscipit, amplectitur, etc. enim uniamur huic capiti Christo, spiritus propriae fidei per sese omnibus (etiam ipsis parvulis) pernecessarius est; Justus enim ex solâ suâ fide vivet, non alienâ, sicut nec quis doctus est alienâ, sed suâ, quae in ipso est Doctrinâ: He saith, and they shall appoint themselves one head, Ephes. 1.22. not shall be appointed; he teacheth therefore, that although the Father be he, who hath given this Head to the Church, and to the singular members of the Church, as it is, Ephesians the first; yet notwithstanding he can be a Head to none, unless to him who by the assent of his own will (I speak of them that are of age) appoint him a head to himself. Every man also doth appoint this Head to himself truly, and that before God, when he doth receive, and embrace by his own faith and proper assent that Head offered to him by the Father in the Gospel. For that we may be united to this Christ as a Head, the spirit of every man's own faith is very necessary to all, even to Infants; For the just shall live by his own faith, and not by another's; as neither any man is learned by another's learning, but by that learning which is in himself. So also I will add one Testimony more from Zanchy, because Mr. Eyre shelters his opinion of justification from the time of Christ's death under Zanchies authority. John 6.56. Zanch. De tribus Elo. l. 40. cap. 3. p. 106. Tom. 1. Qui edit meam carnem, & bibit meum sanguinem, in me manet, & ego in eo; Alludit ad illam incorporationem, quae fit inter edentem, & bibentem, & inter cibos comestos: cibus extra nos manens, minimè nos nutrit, cibus sumptus, dum in nobis manet, nutrit & vivificat, etc. Idem contingit nobis cum Christo, extra nos positus, non alit, à nobis sumptus, nutrit, & vitam adfert, atque conservat; He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleeh in me, and I in him. Up-which words Zanchy saith, He alludeth to that incorporation which is made between the eater and the drinker, and between the meat eaten, meat without us doth not nourish us, but inwardly taken; while it abideth in us, it nourisheth and quickeneth us. The same happeneth to us with Christ, Christ without us (that is, not united.) doth not nourish us; but taken by us, it nourisheth, and bringeth, and preserveth life. Where you see, Zanchy maketh Christ not to justify, and save us while we are disunited; but when applied and united by faith, than he saveth us. I will end all with CAMERO, Si quis ergo propriè loqui velit, dicet Christum pro solis credentibus satisfecisse, Johan. Camero in opus●. Miso. p. 531. col. 1. two enim soli membra illius sunt. Sicuti ergò Adam suos tantum peccato infecit, ita Christus peccatum in suis tantùm abolevit, Christi verò membrum non est ullus, qui in Christum non credit: Audi quid dicam, fides te facit Christi membrum, at fides illa te non seruàsset nisi Christus pro te satisfecisset: If any man therefore will speak properly, he will say, that Christ satisfied only for Believers, for they only are his members. Therefore even as Adam infected only his own with sin, so Christ hath abolished sin only in his; but no man is a member of Christ, but he that beleiveth. Hear thou what I shall say, faith maketh thee a member of Christ, but that faith would not save thee, unless Christ had satisfied for thee. To what hath been spoken, I shall superadd some considerations about this union to Christ, taken from the several similitudes, under which this union is set forth in Scripture. First, It is compared to the Marriage-union; Now as before marriage, the wife hath no right nor title to the name, body, goods of the husband; so before faith, the soul hath nor that right to Christ, his Body, Name, Goods, Purchases: Therefore this union is not made till faith, and in this Mr, Eyre yields the cause, that the conjugal union is not till faith. Secondly, It is expressed by a body consisting of divers members; Now, Rom. 12.4, 5. as no member is a true and living member of the body, but that which by nearness, and vital ligatures is united to the head, from whence every member receives strength, and sensation; 1 Cor. 12.12, 13. Eph. 1.22, 23. so no man is a living member of Christ's body, until by faith on his part, and by the Spirit as by vital ligatures he is bound and united to Christ, whereby he receives the life of justification and santificaction, and lives by a life derived from Christ as the Head; but no man but a Believer is thus united as an integral part of this body. Thirdly, It's compared to a building or house, whose stones are closely cemented together, and do all lie directly and perpendicularly upon the foundation: Eph. 2. 2●, 21. Now as a stone in the quarry is not united in the building, till it be hewn, and squared, and then by the hand of some Architect laid directly, and evenly upon the foundation; so a man in his natural estate, till he be drawn out of this condition by the Spirit of God, 1 Tim. 3.15. and hewed and squared out of the Spirit of bondage, and by the same hand of the Spirit, as the chief Masterbuilder brought to faith, 1 Pe●. 2.5. and built upon the foundation of the Apostles, and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone, he is not a lively stone in this building; this is done by the work of the Spirit, an unbeliever hath not the Spirit dwelling in him. Fourthly, it is compared to an ingrafture of a branch in a tree: Now a branch may be in a stock two ways. 1. By contiguity, or continuity, or corporal adherency to the stock, and so every branch that is dead may be in the tree, but these partake not of the juice, and nourishmnt of the stock, and such branches the husbandman will cut off, and cast into the fire. 2. A branch is in the tree by a real participation of the sap, and influences of the root; Thus a man may be in Christ two ways: 1. By external profession of faith, (for that which maketh us to be in Christ, any kind of way is faith;) now if our faith be a dead faith, such as makes us come to Christ to shelter us from the fire only, and it derive not spiritual life and sanctification from Christ; this man is a dead branch, which the Father will cut off, and cast into the fire, if it so abide; and until a true faith, such as is peculiar to the Elect, all are but dead branches; yea, the very Elect themselves, until effectual vocation, and were never truly in him. But, 2. There is a living, operative, precious, unfeigned faith, which so unites the soul to Christ, that now it partaketh of the power of his death; it is crucified with him, and dies to sin, and yet also it lives, and is partaker of the quickening Spirit and power of Christ's Resurrection, whereby it lives, and the life it lives in the flesh, it lives by the faith of the Son of God, Gal. 2. ●0. and it lives unto God as its end, as well as from God as the principle of its life; this is the true branch, that partaketh of the sap and influence of the Root Christ Jesus unto a heavenly life; and none are such branches, but such as are truly cut off from the stock of Nature, and ingraffed by faith into Christ. That which Mr. Eyre addeth in the Margin by way of Comment upon Heb. 2.11. He that sanctifieth, Mr. Eyre, vind. pag. 8. and they that are sanctified, are all of one, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whereunto saith he, some do make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the substantive, and refers his Reader to Junius his Parallels, lib. 3. This is brought to prove our union before faith, and therefore he (saith) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the substantive made so by some, but I believe none can be produced; as for Junius, he saith no such matter, but saith it must be taken either in the Masculine gender, and relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the substantive; they are of one father, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Neuter, and so it signifies they are of one common Lump, or Mass, agreeing in the community of nature; and indeed this is most agreeable to the Scope of the place; for as he had showed, ver. 10. that it was convenient for God's justice, that our Mediator should by his death satisfy God's justice; in the 11th. ver. he showeth how he could die, and how it could be accepted in our stead; he answereth, because he was one endued with the same nature; for He that sanctifieth, and they that are sanctified, are of one; that is, all of one common Father, as Adam, or are of one and the same nature and substance; and what is this to prove a mystical union before faith? and it is observable, that he maketh those that are the sons to be brought to glory, such as are sanctified, and Christ is not ashamed to call these Brethren; but as for unbelievers that are not sanctified, Christ will never call them Brethren; and such as he calleth sons, he doth not intent to call them so antecedently to their faith, but only to show who shall be brought to glory by his death, and that is only sons. And by Mr. Eyre's leave, it is wholly excentrical to this place to compare Christ to the first-fruits, and those for whom he died to the residue of the heap, as he doth in quoting that place. Mr. Eyre, p. 8. That which he presupposeth likewise, that by virtue of this eternal union, the sins of the Elect do become Christ's, and Christ's righteousness becomes theirs, will seem not only a Paradox, but little better than blasphemy if throughly examined, for the humane nature of Christ was not existent from eternity, and to what end should their sins be imputed to the Divine Nature? (who can bear the thought of it without trembling?) And surely at our union with Christ, our sins become Christ's, as well as his righteousness becomes ours; yea, before, when he was actually a surety for us, but not from eternity. He addeth, that by virtue of this union that they are said to be given to Christ, and Christ to them. Page 8. I answer, that when the Elect are said to be given to Christ, that is, that he should die in particular for them; this includes not any actual Donation of them to Christ by mystical implantantation, but it signifies God's ordination, and constitution whereby he did ordain, that the benefits of Christ's death should be for them, though not to be applied to them from the time of this ordination; and this may very well stand, and yet they not united until faith. In the next place, I shall take notice of Mr. Eyre's slight answer to the Reverend Mr. Conant since deceased, who as Moderator in our first Conference, proposed the Objection drawn from Rom. 16.7. Rom. 16.7. where Paul speaking of Andronicus and Junia, saith, they were in Christ before me; but if this union be eternal, or antecedent to our birth and faith, one cannot be in Christ before another. He saith, he returned no answer, and the truth is, he can return no solid answer. And though he now insult since the decease of this Reverend Servant of Christ, and saith, he passed it over, because there was little difficulty in it; yet when he was living, he was no more able to stand against him in an Argument, than Dagon before the Ark, than Stephen's adversaries who could not resist the Spirit by which he spoke. But let us consider the force of his Answer. It is evident (saith he) the Apostle speaketh not there of their spiritual union with Christ, which is invisible to man, for God only knoweth who are hi●; but of such a being in Christ as is by external profession, and Church-communion, in respect of which the whole visible Church is called Christ, 1 Cor. 12.12. And hypocrites as well as the Elect are said to be in Christ, and to be branches in him. And thus it is acknowledged, that one is in Christ before another, according as they are called and converted, whether really or in appearance: It doth not follow that union to Christ is successive, or that it is an act done in time depending upon conditions performed by men. His first Answer is, This is not meant of spiritual union with Christ; his reason is, because that is invisible to man. First, This is overboldly asserted, that he saith, it is evident that this is not meant of spiritual union with Christ, when there is nothing said but what may rather evidence the contrary. 1. Either this was a true union, or they were but hypocrites; but it is too much rashness to say they were hypocrites. 2. They were such as were of note among the Apostles, chief Evangelists; I think (at least in the judgement of charity,) they should be such as were truly in Christ. 3. The Apostle endued with a great Spirit of discerning, judged them so; he saith, they were in Christ, therefore we should judge it really. 4. 'Tis such an union and in-being in Christ, as Paul himself afterward had; but his union was real, he meant and understood a real union in respect of himself, and what he affirms of himself, he saith the same of them, and that they had this privilege to be in Christ before him. 5. This was no such great privilege, for the pen of an Apostle to commend them far above himself; if he thought only it was an union in profession, in show only, and not in truth. Secondly, That which leads him to judge it was not a real spiritual union with Christ, is, because this was invisible to man; because, saith he, God only knows who are his. But, 1. Might he not here well exempt the Apostles, who were by an extraordinary gift endued with a Spirit of discerning, and especially were they guided in their Epistles written for a rule of life, whereof this is a part. 2. Let it be granted for a truth, that no man can know infallibly the Election, or regeneration of another, but by special Revelation; then no man can absolutely say of such, who live holily in respect of conversation, whose actions are materially good, and nothing appearing to the contrary, but that they are in Christ really; none can say they are not in him really, therefore an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or suspense of judgement had been better, then for him to say rashly, it is evident the Apostle speaks not of spiritual union with Christ, when he saith, these that were of chief note among the Apostles, were in Christ, and nothing appearing to the contrary. Malem Corberum metueret quàm haec inconsideratè diceret. 3. Doth not the Apostle judge of Apelles as a real Christian a little after, when he saith, he was approved in Christ; and of Rusus, that he was chosen in the Lord? in the 12th. vers. and was he guided by Revelation there, and not here? did not he elsewhere say of the Thessalonians, that he knew their Election, 1 Thes. 1.4. speaking of them as of the better part, because it is more than probable; where God will have his Word preached, there he hath some people; and St. John writing to a religious Lady, styles her Elect, because he had seen her and her children walk in the truth; and if these persons were not known to be such by Revelation, yet had they strong ground for a judgement of charity; and why we should not look upon the union spoken of as real or spiritual between them and Christ, I am yet to seek for a Reason. But further he saith, this is meant of a being in Christ by external profession, and Church-communion: but can he or any other say it is meant of no more? 2. From hence I gather, faith gives a real implantation; for if an hypocritical faith will give a man an external denomination of being in Christ, it is in the resemblance it hath to true faith, and true faith must do more, or else an hypocrites faith were as good as the faith of an Elect person: Yea, 3. Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth that one is in Christ before another, as he is called and converted really, or in appearance; if really converted, then really in Christ, then let us take it for granted, that Andronicus and Junia were in Christ really before Paul, than Paul was not in Christ; for if he were really in Christ, this cannot be true that they were really in Christ before him, for he was in Christ, and that really (according to Master Eyre) from eternity. But I desire Mr. Eyre to let us see the Scriptures, and hear his grounds for a twofold union to Christ, and both real unions, one from eternity, the other at conversion or faith, and if he prove it, — Erit mihi magnus Apollo. In the last place I shall now take notice of what he saith to that Logical Axiom, Non entis nulla sunt accidentia, in his Book pag. 7. where I desire the Reader to observe his mistake, for I applied it to union with Christ, he to the imputed righteousness of Christ. I said that union with Christ, is a thing accidental to man, and that being an accident, requires that the subject united, of whom this is denominated that he is united to Christ, must be existent, because an accident cannot subsist without its subject; whether it be an accident by inhesion, or adhesion, both subsist dependently, and without the subject they subsist not; concerning union, he objecteth nothing from this Axiom, therefore I will hear what he saith concerning imputed righteousness. Object. He saith, It doth not follow that Christ's righteousness cannot be imputed to us, before we have an actual created being, because accidents cannot subsist without their subjects: For as much as imputed righteousness is not an accident inherent in us, and consequently doth not require our existence; Christ is the subject of this righteousness, and the imputation of it is an act of God. Answ. What if imputed righteousness be not an accident inherent, but an act of God; yet in relation to us, it is an accident by extrinsecall denomination; and when it is imputed to us, it is terminated upon us, and we are denominated, and constituted righteous by it, and therefore it requires as much our existence, as if it were an inherent accident; for can he be made righteous and truly denominated so, that is not a man, nor any thing in rerum naturâ? can any thing be predicated truly of that which is not? can Paul be said to be learned, before he had a being? Surely this Axiom, Non entis nullae sunt affectiones, will be an unshaken truth when you and I shall cease to speak for it, or against it. I have spoken to the Logic of it, and Mr. Baxter to the Divinity of it; and who ever read it, will find it to be (as he hath justly styled it) a very odd passage: only this I shall add; We are speaking of imputed righteousness, and he saith, Christ is the subject of it, if he mean of the righteousness imputed, he saith true; but if of the righteousness as imputed, it is a very odd passage indeed; for what need that to be imputed to Christ, which is subjectively inherent in him already; but take this righteousness as imputed, and so we are the subjects recipient of it, or the objects upon whom it is terminated, and therefore it necessarily requires our existence. Now to justify the imputation of Christ's righteousness to us before we have a being, he urgeth that of the Apostle, Rom. 4.17. that God calleth things that are not, as though they were: to this I shall give that answer which Davenant de morte Christi, Davenant de morte Christi. pag. 61. pag. 61. puts into my mouth: Quanquam Deo quidem tanquam jam facta sint, quae ille ut fiaent ab omni aeternitate disposuit, nobis tamen non aliter accipienda sunt, nisi secundùm modum illum dispensationis, quo ab aeterno decreta, & in tempore complenda nobis & in actum perducenda sunt: Although truly to God those things are as if they were now done, (because nothing is past, present, and to come with him,) which he hath decreed that they should be, and ordained them from all eternity; yet to us they are not otherwise to be taken, then according to that manner of dispensation, wherein they were decreed and in time to be fulfilled to us, and to be brought into act. Mr Eyre objecteth further that the righteousness of Christ was actually imputed to the Patriarches before it was wrought, and our sins were actually imputed to Christ before they were committed; so I see no inconvenience to say that Christ's righteousness is by God imputed to the Elect before they have a being. To which I answer, there is not the like reason; for both the righteousness of Christ, and the sins of the Elect are both moral causes of their effects, which work according to the will and pleasure of him that is moved thereby; hence God the Father is moved to give pardon to such as believe, as an effect of Christ's death, and it is at the will of God when to give it, therefore the effect sometimes goes before the cause; as if a man promise to give a man five shillings for going so fare upon his errand, the man may give it before he hath taken a step, though he give it only for that reason, here the effect goeth before the cause; and thus he gave pardon to such as did believe in Christ before his death. Sometimes it follows after it, and not immediately always; thus God pardoneth us that believe, since the death of Christ, and that not from the time of Christ's death, but it may be long after upon believing, and so our sins were a moral cause of punishment; God might impute this to Christ before they are committed by us; for a moral cause will admit of the effect to go before itself, that is the cause of it, and both the Patriarches to whom Christ's righteousness was imputed, and Christ to whom our sins were imputed, were existent; and the merit of the one, and demerit of the other may be communicated at the will of God moved thereby, because there are subjects capable of this imputation; but now Christ's righteousness which is imputed to us, cannot be imputed, for want of a subject to whom it may be imputed; for how can that which is not, be made righteous? and it is the will of God it should be imputed to none but Believers; hence then till faith, this benefit is not enjoyed. Thus have I vindicated my second argument, and for the third which he objecteth against, That God made a Covenant with Christ, that the Elect should have no benefit by his death, till they believe, I have defended and confirmed that already sufficiently. As for this Argument which he brought for the Negative, drawn from Matth. 3.17. This is my well beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; I hope I have given a satisfactory answer to it already, and it is answer enough to deny his Assumption, as I then did, that this voice, This is my well beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, was not terminated or spoken to Christ mystical, but to Christ personal, yet as a public person and Mediator. And to make Christ mystical, and Christ the Mediator the same, is unheard of Divinity; nor doth it speak him any great Gamaliel in Theology that affirmeth it. As for the scandal he raiseth upon me, that I compared myself to Christ, and him to Judas, and used him uncivilly in language; I deny it, and have many to bear witness of me to the contrary; and for the answer to it, I refer the Reader to the Epistle to the Reader: And I now shall address myself to some short answer to his Book, and as by the grace of Christ I have not hitherto (my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost) written any thing which I knew, or suspected as unsound, so I trust I shall not err, or handle this subject deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth, commend myself to every man's conscience, as in the sight of God, to whom I commend thee, Religious Reader, and to the Word of his grace, who is able to build thee up, and give thee an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Christ. CHAP. IU. Showing four material differences between us, and M. Eyre, wherein he hath departed from the Orthodox faith, concerning the Doctrine of free Justification of a sinner through Faith in Christ, reduced unto four several Questions, which are in this Chapter clearly stated. THE Doctrine of Justification through Faith in Christ, is deservedly styled Doctrina stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae, and therefore the differences amongst Christians in this point, are not of so small concernment, as Curcellaeus judgeth, that they ought not to breed a Controversy, for it is a fundamental Article of our Christian Religion; yea, all Religion lives, or dies with it, nothing concerns the glory of God more, the honour of Christ, or the comfort of a Christian, and such goats as shall soil with their feet these waters, Ezek. 34.18. or with the Philistines throw dirt into this well, do at once strike at the glory of God, the honour of Christ, the peace and safety of the world; and being commanded to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints, let not the world wonder, that I who am by Mr. Eyre represented as Heterodox in this point, stand up both to defend it, and myself against those errors, wherewith he hath darkened and obscured this blessed truth, and endeavoured to render me and his Brethren that descent from him, as those that have overthrown the freeness of God's grace, in making Justification the effect of Faith, and Faith the condition of the Covenant of Grace. The matters in controversy depending between us may be reduced to four Heads, or unto four several Questions. 1. Whether Justification be an immanent, or a transient act? whether it be from eternity, or a transient act of God done in time? 2. Whether all the Elect for whom Christ died, be actually justified, and reconciled to God antecedently, not only to their faith, but to their birth? 3. Whether a Believer be justified by faith instrumentally? and when the Scripture saith, we are justified by faith, whether this is understood only tropically, by taking faith for the object, Christ? or whether it be taken subjectively for the act with connotation to the object? 4. Whether faith be the condition of the Covenant of Grace, God hath made with us? For the first Question, Whether Justification be an immanent or transient act? whether we be justified from eternity, or whether it be a transient act of God done in time? Here are three terms to be explicated. 1. What Justification is? 2. What an immanent act is? 3. What is meant by a transient act? 1. Then by all the Orthodox it is unanimously affirmed, that the word justify, or justification, is not to be taken in this question, sensu Pontificio, as the Papists take it, that is, sensu Physico, in a physical sense, as if to justify signified to make just by infusion of an inherent righteousness, as Bellarmine and his confederates take it; for till Etymologies have gotten the supremacy above the Scriptures, as the Pope above the Kings of the Earth; and so long as the written Word is acknowledged the only Touchstone of divine Truth, and that Christ's righteousness, and our works cannot be admitted as corrivals, that sense must no way be acknowledged and received in this dispute; yet let this be observed against this new Doctrine of Infidel's Justification in the state of their unregeneracy; (though they remain adulterers, murderers, parricides; yet if Elect, say they, they are justified even then, when they are in the snare of the Devil, 2 Tim. 2.26. Eph. 2.2. led captive by him at his will and pleasure. Though they walk according to the course of the world, the Spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: for, Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth he is well pleased with the unregenerate, though not with their unregeneracy. That GOD when he justifieth a man through the righteousness of Christ imputed, doth at the same time begin to justify him physically, he doth infuse an habitual and an inherent righteousness of Sanctification; for God justifieth none, whom he doth not sanctify at the same time. Secondly, Justification may be taken sensu forensi, in a juridical or judiciary sense, as in Rom. 8 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? it is God that justifieth, Prov. 17.35. He that justifieth the wicked, and condemneth the just, they both are an abomination to the Lord. And so it is opposed to accusation, or condemnation, and thus it is an act of God judicially declaring a Believer to be innocent or righteous, and acquitting him from all blame and punishment. I need not spend time to open this, it is sufficiently done already by our * Justificatio est sententia Dei gratiosa, quam propter Christum fide apprehensum absolvit fidelem à peccato & morte, & justum reputat ad vitam. Ames. Medul. ch. 27. sect. 6. Divines against the Papists; Justification therefore is a gracious sentence of God the Father, whereby for Christ's sake apprehended by faith, he doth absolve a sinner from sin and death, and doth esteem him righteous unto eternal life. It is a sentence pronounced, as the use of the word declares, which makes not a natural, but a moral change in the person justified; for it is not as Aquinas and his followers imagine, a physical motion by a real transmutation from a state of unrighteousness to a state of righteousness; so as that the term from which this motion is, should be sin, the term unto which it tends, and ends in, should be inherent righteousness, as if it stood partly in remission, and partly in infusion of righteousness: What act this is, I will declare by and by; or let me describe it thus with Mr. Hooker, It is an act of God the Father upon the Believer, whereby the debt and sins of a Believer are charged upon the Lord Jesus, and by the merits and satisfaction of Christ imputed, he is accounted just, and so is acquitted before God as righteous. First, It is an act of God the Father, a judicial act acquitting and absolving the sinner, and an act of God the Father, (not to exclude the Son and Holy Ghost;) for Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa, The works of the Trinity terminated upon the creature, are communicable to all three persons. For the Son and Holy Ghost were offended by man's sin, as well as the Father, being one and the same God with the Father; but it is called an act of the Father, and rightly applied to him, because of that old and known rule among Divines, Wheresoever we find the Name of God put in opposition to Jesus Christ, it must not be understood essentially, but personally: Hence when it's said, God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their sins, and that God sent forth him, to wit Christ, a propitiation through faith in his blood, it must be understood of God the Father; and so, John 3.16. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, etc. And plainly Christ saith, Father, forgive them, etc. And Christ is an Advocate with the Father, 1 John 1.2. Now it is applied to the Father, because the sin of Adam was directly against the Father's work, for res se habent ad esse, ita ad operari, every thing doth work according to its being. Now the Father being the first person in the Trinity, he works in order first, and hence Creation is attributed to the Father, and Redemption attributed to the Son, and Sanctification to the Holy Spirit. Now Adam's sin was directly against the Father's work, for his work appeared in Adam's Creation after the Image of God; therefore the Father being principally offended, forgives. Secondly, It is an act of God the Father upon the Believer, therefore it was not an immanent, but is a transient act done in time; for a man is not a man, much less a Believer from eternity; and what this act is, I shall here a little explain. It is some act of God done upon believing, and never till then, for although we acknowledge no new imm●nent act in God, which cannot be admitted without a change in God, with whom there can be no variableness, nor the least shadow of turning; yet a transient act may be safely acknowledged, which leaves a change upon the creature, and not in God. And here I willingly acknowledge we are all much in the dark, not being able to understand how God doth act or work, and therefore would not over-confidently assert how he doth it, or what that transient act is; but when God worketh faith, I am sure there is a moral change wrought in the sinner; there is not only a new relation put upon the sinner, but a real righteousness is imputed; yea, a physical change is wrought at the same time, for all grace habitually is infused together with faith, And I willingly acknowledge this transient act of God doth presuppose an immanent act in God, for he worketh nothing upon the creature, but what he first purposed in himself to act; and God doth upon believing actually remit sins, and accept as righteous the person that believeth, which terms of remitting sin, not imputing it, or imputing righteousness, though they sound as immanent acts, yet are to be sensed as transient, because done in time, and leaving a real change upon the creature, and it is utterly impossible that any new act of understanding, or will should be in God, unless therefore with Vorstius we assert the mutability of God, which is horrible blasphemy to imagine, we cannot acknowledge any new immanent act in him. And the truth is; we must with sobriety sit down, and count it knowledge enough to know what is written, and be contented that an infinite God should do something▪ which our finite understandings cannot comprehend; for if he shall act or do nothing, but we must know how it is done, and why, this is to make God finite and not infinite. And to give in the utmost of my thoughts in this, I conceive the case is in this transient act of forgiveness, as in the creation of the world; God did do that which he did not do before, but he did not then begin to have a will to create; but he willed from eternity that the world should exist in time, as an effect of that will it was made, whether by an executive power distinct from that will, I dare not determine; but made it was, and was not from eternity, and here is a new relation unto God, he is a Creator that before was not, this is but a relative respect, and an denomination, and there is no intrinsical mutation in God, but a great change is wrought; for that that was not, now is. So when God forgiveth a sinner upon believing, God doth do that which he did not do before; he doth not begin upon believing to have a will to pardon him, but he willed from eternity to give him faith, and forgiveness of sins upon believing; now in time the sinner elected is brought to faith, and the sinner is actually and formally discharged, according to the tenor of the New Covenant, for the righteousness of Christ apprehended and applied by faith, not by any new act of Gods will; I dare not determine, but pardoned he is, and justified he is, his state is truly changed, and that coram Deo, in the sight of God, and a new relative relation there is in God to this person, as a Father; a great change wrought in the sinner, but none at all in God; and the Believer is the subject, upon whom this act of God passeth, Acts 13.39. Acts 16.31. Rom. 4.24. John 8.24. John 3.36, 16. John 17.20. he is the adequate subject of it; for all Believers are thus justified, and none but Believers. God did not will that our sins should be immediately forgiven, but mediately by faith, as in John 3.16. God's end in giving Christ, was that only. Believers should have benefit by his death; and John 17.20. Christ prayeth for them that believe on him; and surely he had the same intentions in his death that he had in his intercession. And I added that the sins of Believeres were laid upon Christ; thus Christ was made sin for us, 2 Cor. 5.21. Isa. 53.16. that knew no sin, and the Lord laid upon him the iniquities of us all, and by the merits and satisfaction of Christ imputed we are accounted just, and so are acquitted before God as righteous: Hence God is said to be in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their transgressions to them, 2 Cor. 5. and we are said to be justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus, Rom. 3.24, 25. 1 Cor. 1.30. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood: And, Christ is made to us righteousness, wisdom, sanctification, and redemption. I shall now come to inquire what is meant by an immanent act, and whether Justification were from eternity, and what is meant by a transient act. First, Then by an immanent act, I understand such an act, as is terminated in agente, in the agent, and not in any thing without it. There are some actions which do remain in God, and are terminated in himself, being confined in his own breast, within the compass of his own understanding and will; not but that they may have an external object, but nothing in these immanent acts hath any thing without them for the subject or term. As for example, a man may purpose and intent to do something in his mind and heart, as to relieve a poor man's wants; this thought and purpose of heart is an immanent action, and so long as it remains in his mind and breast, and he reveal it not, and do not yet act accordingly, this is yet an immanent action, and the poor man is not yet actually the better for it; but if he declare his mind, and doth practise what he intended, here is a transient act, for now he doth outwardly express and perform what he did inwardly purpose: Now the poor man is comforted, and his wants actually relieved; Let us refer this to God, there are some Cabinet, secret thoughts, and purposes in God from eternity, about justifying a sinner through the righteousness of Christ apprehended and applied by faith, which Christ God will prepare and give to procure a sufficient righteousness, and will also give faith to the sinner, to believe on Christ for salvation; Such thoughts as these are, were in the mind of God from eternity; these thoughts were immanent acts in God, and work no present change upon the sinner, who had no being from eternity; and until God do actually declare, and fulfil the thoughts of his heart, the sinner is not justified, but only God really intends it. Secondly, There are actions in God which pass from God upon the creature, and do work a change and alteration upon the creature, and these we call transient actions; when therefore God doth not only declare by his Gospel, what his thoughts were to his Elect in pardoning them through faith in Christ, but doth in time give Christ for them, and them to Christ, by drawing their hearts unto Christ's by faith; now God actually performs the thoughts of his heart, and as he intended upon believing to justify them for Christ's sake, so now as soon as he hath brought them to faith, he doth actually forgive them all their sins, justify their persons, and accept them as righteous in Christ. Now of this sort are all God's actions that relate to man, except Predestination, which is an immanent act of God; and all the rest; Justification, Sanctification, Adoption, are transient acts of God: for all these imply a positive change in the creature, and do put something, either physically, or morally into the justified, adopted, sanctified, etc. But concerning Predestination, Tritum est in Scholis, eam nihil ponere in Praedestinato; It is generally received by the Schoolmen, that Predestination puts nothing into the predestinate, or makes no present change (indeed virtually it is the cause of all those transient actions that are done in time). And * Aquin. p. 1. q. 13. artic. 2. c. Aquinas gives a reason of it; Quia Praedestinatio est pars Providentiae, Providentia verò non est in rebus provisis, sed est quaedam ratio in intellectu provisoris; Because Predestination is a part of Divine Providence: Now Providence is not in the things foreseen, or provided for; but is a certain purpose, or counsel in the understanding of the foreseer. And hence all our Divines are wont cautelously to distinguish between the decree and the execution of the decree; they grant the Decree hath no cause but the free will and wise prudence of God; but the Execution of the Decree depends upon faith, because Pardon, Reconciliation, is granted to none but Believers. Let me add in the third place, that an immanent action is from eternity, and is the same with God's Essence; for whatsoever is in God, is God, but a transient action is the same with the effect produced: Hence God's Decrees are, as Mr. Burgess * Mr. Burgess, Justifi. p. 168. rightly observes, the same with his nature; for an act of God's understanding or will, is not any thing distinct from his understanding or will, but the very same with it. * Scheib. Met, l. 2. ca 3. De Deo. p. 137. Actus vitales Dei, ut est ejus intellectio, & volitio, habent ibi realem identitatem ad essentiam divinam; All vital actions in God, as his understanding and will are, have a real identity, or sameness with his Divine Essence, for otherwise the simplicity of God's nature would be overthrown: therefore though we may conceive distinctly of them, yet they are not really distinguished in God. But now in transient actions it is otherwise, for they are the same with the effect produced; Mr. Eyre will have it to be an immanent action done from eternity, not a transient act done in timo. Gods transient act in creating, is Creation, and in justifying, is Justification. By this that hath been said, it appeareth that Justification is a transient, not an immanent action. For though I deny not that God did from eternity, with an absolute, fixed, and immutable will, purpose in time to justify his people through faith in Christ, which faith he will also give, and Christ did merit; and if this will satisfy Mr. Eyre, as he saith it will, if he be not a Reuben, as unstable as water, and fall from his word, the controversy is at an end.] Yet this is not Justification, no more than God's purpose to sanctify is Sanctification, as shall be made to appear in its place; Justification leaveth a positive change upon the person justified, He is thereby passed from death to life, from a state of hatred into a state of love and friendship; but an immanent act leaveth no such change, nor do I mean with Aquinas and the Papists, a physical change; as when the Lord makes a wicked man, a holy man; an unclean man, a chaste man; a passionate man, a meek man; this is a natural change, and is the work of Sanctification; but it is a relative and moral change. Take a man that is in prison for some capital offence, and also exceeding sick, a double change may be wrought upon this man: First, let his offence be forgiven, and he set at liberty, he is now a free man, acquitted, and set at liberty, that before was in bond, a dead man; here is a relative change, but he may be as sick still as he was, when in prison; let the Physician come and heal his distemper, here is a cure wrought, his health restored, this is a natural, physical change; so it is here upon Justification, there is a relative change wrought; We that were debtors to the Law, and liable to death and condemnation, our sin through faith in Christ is pardoned, now we are acquitted and set free from condemnation, here is a change of our estate; but then also by Sanctification the Lord heals our natures. Now Justification is a transient act of God in time upon the Believer, acquitting him for Christ's sake from the guilt of sin, and through his righteousness imputed, he is accepted unto life eternal. The second Question is, Whether all the Elect for whom Christ died, be actually reconciled, and justified from the time of Christ's death, antecedently not only to their faith, but their birth also? 1. It is not denied upon neither hand, that the Elect are the persons, and the only persons for whom Christ intentionally and effectually died. 2. It is not denied that the death of Christ is the meritorious cause of salvation, and that a full satisfaction was made thereby to the justice of God for the sins of the Elect. 3. It is acknowledged that Christ in his death was a common person, making satisfaction for the Elect, and such as shall believe; and by virtue of Christ's death they shall infallibly be brought to faith, and that God hath thus fare accepted of this satisfaction, as that he neither will, nor can require any thing more at the hand of the sinner by way of satisfaction, nor at the hands of Christ, and that in regard of the price paid we are redeemed. 4. It will not be denied but that by the death of Christ God may now freely give us the pardon of sins, which without the satisfaction of Christ, supposing his eternal decree not to pardon us without a satisfaction, he could not do. 5. We deny not but Christ's Resurrection from the dead, was a manifest sign, that the full price of redemption was paid, and that God gave him a public discharge from the guilt of our sins, and that he risen again as a public person for our justification, that we may be said virtually to die, and suffer, and rise with him, and virtually to be justified in his justification. But it is denied by us, and affirmed by Mr. Eyre, that we stand actually justified, and reconciled to God from the time of Christ's death antecedently to our faith and birth, and that it was the will of the Lord to give us a present discharge from the time of Christ's death, but God hath limited the benefit of this until faith: So that no person in the state of unbelief and unregeneracy, is a subject of Justification; this we affirm, and Mr. Eyre denies, who will have all the Elect, though Infidels, and in their unregenerate estate, under the power and dominion of sin to be actually justified. The third question is, Whether a believer be justified by faith instrumentally? and when the Scripture saith, we are justified by faith, whether this be understood tropically by taking faith for the object Christ, excluding the act, or whether it be taken properly for the act with connotation of the Object. Now here first it is agreed upon all hands, by protestants and Pàpists, Orthodox and Socinians, Antinomians, Remonstrants and Contraremonstrants, that it is plainly ass●rted in Scripture, that we are justified by faith. It cannot be denied, because it is syllabically written, the only contention is about the sense. I would there were more contending for the Grace, then for the right understanding of the Word. 1. Then to believe signifies an act of the understanding, yielding assent unto Divine Testimony; but because the will * Ames. Med. cap. 3. Num. 2● consequently is moved by that assent, to embrace the good assented unto, and offered in the Gospel, therefore faith that is truly saving and justifying, consisteth in both faculties; therefore we reject their opinion, that will have it to be only an act of the understanding, yielding a true * Wotton, De reconci. lib. 1. par. 1. c. 13. n. 1. p. 78. assent to Divine Testimony upon the authority of the Revealer; though this be necessary to salvation, this comprehendeth not the whole nature of justifying faith, which is seated in the heart; for with the heart man believeth unto salvation. Nor, 2. Can we rest in their opinion who define it by assurance, and say, it is an assurance grounded upon Divine Promises, that Christ died for us in particular, and that our sins are forgiven. For this assurance is a consequent of faith, and Justfication, and an * Proprium objectum fidei justificantis est Christus vel miscricordia De● in Christo, non propositio sive Axioma, Ames. Bell. Ener. Tom. 4. Lib. 5. Cap. 2. Sect. 22. Axiom or Proposition is not the object of faith, but Christ; and it is a relying upon Christ for pardon, not a believing that I am already pardoned; it is therefore a * Fider est acquiescentia cordis in Deo tanquam in authore vitae vel salutis aeternae, ut per illum ab omni malo liberemur & omne bonum consequamur. Ames. Medul. c. 3. num. 1. fiducial act or recumbency upon God in Christ for pardon. 3. It is questioned, Ames. Medulla. c 27. de justificat. n. 15, 16. whether Faith in the point of Justification of a sinner, be to be taken tropically, or properly? Master Eyre will have it to be taken tropically only, and in a figurative sense; for the obedience of Jesus Christ, and his righteousness, by excluding faith; so that by faith with him is as much as by Christ, or by the righteousness of Christ. To which I answer, that we deny not but faith is to be taken metonymicaly, when we speak of the matter of our righteousness, for which we are justified; and in this sense we are not justified by faith, that is, the grace of faith, as the matter of our righteousness, for it is not where said that we are justified for our faith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, though it be often said we are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by our faith, tanquam per organum, as an instrument, of which by and by. And therefore our Divines do acknowledge, we are justified by faith objectively taken; but to take faith altogether for Christ, and to deny it as an instrument of applying Christ's righteousness, was never the meaning of our Divines, and it were altogether irrational to imagine, as if by faith were meant Christ, excluding faith from Justification; for as it is an instrumental cause, which our Divines unanimously acknowledge, it is taken subjectively for the act and grace of faith itself; And thus * Ames. Med. Theol. cap. 27. sect. 14. Ames saith, Est autem haec justificatio propter Christum, non absolutè consideratum, quo sensu Christus est causa ipsius vocationis, sed propter Christum fide apprehensum: This Justification for Christ is not for Christ absolutely considered, in which sense Christ is the cause also of vocation, but for Christ apprehended by faith; so that Christ alone absolutely considered doth not justify. * Musc. Loc. Come v. Artic. in quo justifice mur. So Musculus expressly, Quaerendum est hoc loco quo medio justificemur, Deóque reconciliemur. Est autem duplex medium in hâc causâ, unum in quo justificamur, alterum per quod justificationis hujus gratiam apprehend●mus; utrumque necessarium est, neutrum enim sine altero justificat: We must seek in this place by what means we are justified and reconciled to God. But here is a double means in this cause, one in whom we are justified, another by which we receive this grace of Justification; both are necessary, neither justifieth without the other. Musc. in loc. Com. the justifis. Artic. in quo justificemur. And so * Calvin, Inst. l. 3. 11. num. 7. Calvin calls it the instrumental cause of Justification. Sciendum est esse causam instrumentalem duntaxat, instrumentum scilicet percipiendae justitiae quâ justificamur: We must know therefore it is only an instrumental cause, to wit, an instrument of receiving that righteousness by which we are justified. It were endless to reckon up all that give in their suffrage * Willet. in Synopsi, Art. 6. De fide, p. 982. for this instrumentality of faith for Justification; only I shall add one Author more, Mr. Rutherford in his Apologetical Exercitations, because Mr. Eyre allegeth him in defence of his opinion, that he saith, * Perkins Reformed Cath. Differ. 2. We say otherwise, faith justifieth, because it is a supernatural instrument, etc. p. 5 0 vol. 1. Chemnit. & Bucan. & Ursin. & Scheib. Met. de causa, c. 22. Titu. 784. that fides non est organica causa divinae satisfactionis, etc. which is true and rightly alleged; yet he saith to the act of justifying, Subordinatur fides tanquam organica causa, Ruth. Apol. Exe●. p. 37. and more to this purpose, pag. 51, 52. And faith is an instrument, because it hath the properties of an instrument, prima est, ut subsit alicui. And the first is, that it be subservient to the superior agent, by whom it is directed; thus it is an instrument wrought by God, the pcincipal efficient cause of Justification, and is subservient to his act of justifying us, and directed by him to this end. Secondly, That it hath an influx into the effect of the principal agent by a proper causality, and that is by receiving Christ offered. I see no danger in making it such an instrument; for we are not said to justify ourselves, because this grace is wrought of God. And what if man be causa secunda, Ep●es. 2.8. yet is he not therefore a second cause between God and the action, for God doth immediately work it, and man is purely passive in respect of the habit; and although we might answer, that the act of receiving is equivalent to a suffering, being a renouncing of all our own righteousness, and so acknowledge it as a passive instrument only, yet for my part I look upon it as a lively active instrument of Justification, as * Ball, Covenant of Grace. pag. 19 Mr. Ball doth, which is amongst the number of true causes, and that it is not only causa sine qua non, a cause without which the thing is not done, which indeed is no cause at all, for that is only present in the action, and doth nothing therein; but as the eye is, as Mr. Ball observeth, an active instrument for sight, and the ear for hearing, so is faith for justifying: If it be demanded, whose instrument it is; it is the instrument of the soul, wrought by the Holy Ghost, and is the free gift of God. Nor do I fear hereby to be made the Author of our Justification, or to be made injurious to God or Christ, seeing faith is wholly Gods work, though our act, and it hath this place and office of receiving Christ unto Justification by the appointment of God himself; Eph. 2, 8, and upon this account alone the Apostle acknowledgeth, though we be saved by faith, yet it is no less of free grace, because, it is the gift of God. The fourth and last Question is, Whether Faith be the condition of the Covenant of Grace? 1. Here we must inquire; what is the Covenant of Grace? 2. In what sense Faith is the condition of the Covenant? First, What is the Covenant of Grace? The Covenant of Grace, is that free gracious Covenant of reconciliation, which God of his mere mercy in Jesus Christ made with man fallen into sin and misery, wherein he hath promised pardon of sin, and eternal happiness by Christ, upon condition that he * Mark. 16.15, 16. John 3.16. Rom. 10.6, 9, 10. Gal. 3.11. believe in Christ, promising also to give unto all those that are * Acts 13.48. John 6.44. ordained unto life, his Holy Spirit to enable them to believe, and so He will be their God, and they shall be his people. The Covenant of grace under the Old and New Testament, is for substance one and the same under various dispensations. * Gal 3.16, 17. The distance between God and man is so great; that although the reasonable creature do owe obedience to his Creator, yet he could never have God obliged to him to give him fruition of himself, and eternal happiness, but by some voluntary act of condescension on God's part, which is expressed by way of Covenant; there is not therefore a mutual obligation of debt between God and man, for that is founded on equality; but there is no such equality between God and the creature, much less between God and the sinner; it is therefore a free Covenant that God maketh with man, and of his abundant rich grace in Christ. The Author of this Covenant is God, our merciful Father in Christ-Jesut; the impulsive moving cause from within, was his own free love; the outward moving cause was man's misery, and Christ's merits: Ezek. 16.6. When I passed by thee, I saw thee polluted in thy own blood, I said unto thee, live. The fall of man was the occasion of this Covenant; God permitted man to fall, that he might show the abundant riches of his mercy in our redemption. For mercy might have freed us from misery by preventing our fall; but the exceeding abundance of God's rich mercy, is more seen in recovering us out of the misery into which we were fallen. And the grace of God was much seen in the time of giving this Covenant at the very fall, before judgement was given upon the delinquents, that they might not be swallowed up with wrath, and before Satan had made too great a waste upon the creation, and especially upon man drawn by his temptation into condemnation with himself. This Covenant was made with Christ, * Vide The Assemb. larger Catechism. and in him with all that believe; for since God and man were separated by sin, there was no Covenant could pass between them, * With Christ personal, that is, considered as a public person; but not with Christ mystically considered. but in and through a Mediator reconciling both parties: The first Covenant was a Covenant of friendship, the friendship between God and man was broken off by sin, this is a Covenant of reconciliation: There is no reconciliation to God but by Christ, therefore this Covenant was made in Christ, and for the sake of Christ with us; so that there are three parties contracting. 1. God the party offended. 2. Man the party offending. 3. Christ the Mediator between both. The Scripture saith, Gal. 3.16. The promise (or Covenant) was made to Abraham and his seed. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. This Christ was not Christ mystical, as Beza, Piscator, and many expound it, as Mr. Rutherford hath well observed; but Christ personal. The reason which they allege is, because if it be meant of Christ personally considered, so it would not agree with the scope of Paul, who proveth that life eternal is promised to all Believers. 2. It would follow say, they, that life eternal is given to Christ only. But with their leave, saith * Ruth. Trial and Triumph of Faith, Serm. 7. pag 5●. Mr. Rutherford, this is not sure; for the truth is, the promise is not made to Christ's person singly considered, nor to Christ mystical: For, 1. The promise is made to Christ, in whom the Covenant was confirmed, vers. 17. 2. In whom the Nations were blessed, vers. 14.3. In whom we receive the Promise of the Spirit through faith, vers. 15. Who was made a curse for us, ver. 13. Now, not any of these can agree to Christ mystical; Christ mystical did not confirm the Covenant, nor give the Spirit, nor was he made a curse: but Christ Mediator is he to whom the promises are made, and in him to all his heirs and kindred, not simply in his person, but as a public person, and Mediator; and upon believing we are truly in him, and so Abraham's seed, and so heirs according to the promise. And here it will be good to consider the relations of Christ to this Covenant: 1. Heb. 8.6. As he is the middle person between contrary parties, he is the Mediator of the Covenant. 2. As he dealeth between both parties, Mal. 3.1. Heb. 7.22. he is internuncius, the Messenger of the Covenant. 3. As he undertaketh for the parties at variance, he is the surety of the Covenant. And, Heb. 9.16, 17, Isa. 55.4. Rev. 1.5. 4. As he signeth the Covenant, and confirmeth it with his blood, he is the testator of the Covenant. 5. As he saw, and heard, and testifieth all that the Father hath promised to believers, he is the witness of the Covenant. Now as the Covenant was made with Christ in the behalf of the Elect, yet it followeth not they were in Covenant before they believe, for God Covenanted with Christ to be their God that shall believe in him; hence until we believe, we are not actually in Covenant with God; and Christ contracted with the Father, not only to die for us, but to bring us to faith; he is a surety to see the condition of the Covenant performed on our part; and therefore we must be brought to faith before God is properly said to be in Covenant with us, and faith than is the condition of the Covenant in reference unto us. Now in what sense faith is the condition of the Covenant, I shall here explain. First, Faith is not the condition of the Covenant in a Popish sense, as if by the performing this condition of believing we did merit, and earn eternal life, and salvation were the wages of faith, and God ex debito bound to give it. Secondly, Faith is not an Antecedaneous condition, * Dicunt nostri fidem non esse conditionemmo ventem Dei voluntatem, & tamen salutem nostram esse conditionatam quod est verissimum; nam Deus non vult nobis aliam vitam quàm quae antecedanem habet fidem, & tamen nullo modo movetur Dei voluntas à fide nostrâ. Ruth. Apol. Exerc. p. 3●4. moving God to give Christ to redeem us, and to propound the Gospel to us, as if God did not, or could not propound the Covenant of Grace to us, nor offer the Covenant to us till we believe; the price of redemption was paid without any condition that it should be paid, though not without a condition for the application of it. Thirdly, We do not understand faith a condition in an Arminian sense; for such a condition by way of contract and bargain, by a free voluntary act of our own, performed by the power of freewill, without the predeterminating and assisting grace of Christ, by virtue of which God is obliged to save us, and give us the benefits of the Covenant. We take it not in such a juridical sense, as the Jurists do, for a condition in a strict proper sense, upon which the benefits of the Covenant depend; nor do we take it in that manner, as the first Covenant did, that as our works personally performed by us in obedience to the whole Law, were the condition of the Covenant, and the matter of our righteousness, that so the To credere, or act of believing performed by us, should stand instead of the righteousness of the Law, in whole as the Arminians, and in part as the Papists. But we take faith for a condition in this sense, for an Evangelicall qualification wrought in us by the grace of Christ, without which we are not justified nor saved, and shall not enjoy the benefits and blessings of the new Covenant, as a cause of life, not efficiently, as works in the old Covenant, but instrumentally by applying by God's order and constitution Christ and his benefits to the Believer: And thus the Scripture saith, He that believeth shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned, and that the wrath of God abideth on him * There it was, and there it shall rest, till by faith it be removed. ; works are required as conditions of those that shall be saved, but faith is a condition of Justification. And because this faith is freely given, salvation is no less of free grace, then if this condition were not required; nor is it absurd that the same thing should be freely promised of God, and yet required as a duty of us; 'tis we are bound to believe and repent, and yet faith is God's gift, and Christ is exalted as a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance unto his people for remission of sins. CHAP. V Containing a brief description of M. Eyre's opinion, showing wherein he departeth from the Orthodox faith, together with a brief Synopsis of the several errors, unsound opinions, and selfe-contradictions, that he hath entangled himself in, in the defending of his error of eternal Justification. HE is an unfit man to establish another in the truth, who himself is like a Reed shaken with the wind, inconstant to himself, Vide Mr. Eyre, pag 62. as well as disagreeing from the truth; such in this Chapter shall the Reader find Mr Eyre, (so fare as relates to his Book) I trust in Christ to manifest; and therefore let the judicious Reader observe and judge. Now for his opinion, as fare as I can gather from his Book, I conceive it to be this: First, He saith that Justification in Scripture is taken variously, pro volitione Divinâ, & pro re volità. 1. For the will of God not to punish, or impute sin unto his people: And, 2. For the effect of God's will, to wit, his not punishing, or his setting of them free from the curse of the Law; that is, Justification is taken by him actively, for God's eternal will not to punish, and passively for the effect of that will, as it is terminated upon the Elect, or Believer. And he saith, that he looks upon Dr Twisse 's judgement as most accurate, who placeth the very essence and quiddity of Justification in the will of God not to punish. Wherein first let the Reader observe his departing from the received judgement of all Orthodox Divines, except three or four, in making Gods eternal will to be that wherein the Essence of Justification consists; it is well known that unanimously they agree, that Justification is not an immanent, but a transient act done in time: And the Scripture no where calleth Gods eternal will Justification; and if the essence and quiddity of Justification consist in this, it is marvel the Scripture should never call it so; and so often as the Scripture speaks of Justification, should speak of it in an improper sense, passively taken, as terminated upon us. Besides, the will of God not to punish, is but terminus diminuens, a decree, or will not to punish in time. Besides, this is not the whole of Justification, for it is a will, not to punish according to the tenor of the Gospel and Covenant of Grace, which requireth faith. But I shall argue against this in a more proper place. Now if we take it thus, as Mr. Eyre will have it, his opinion is this: Justification is an eternal immanent act, or will in God not to punish, and impute sin unto his people, antecedently not only to their birth and faith, but to the death of Christ; nor is the death of Christ the cause of this Justification, (though with him Justification thus taken, is most accurate, and properly taken,) and so he maketh Christ no cause of the act of Justification, for he will acknowledge no other transient act, and immanent there is none. 1. And this act is not purely * Page 67. negative, as the non-imputation of sin to a stone, but privative, being the non-imputation of a sin realiter futuri inesse, which how Scholastically it is spoken? (being a privative act of a privation in a positive decree of God, when neither the subject nor the sin are in being; and as if sin were debitum inesse, that that ought to be in us, for privation is properly understood of these. 2. And this non-imputation is actual, though the sin not to be imputed be not in actual being; [a will not to impute it hereafter, may be actual, but to call that an actual non-imputation, is improperly spoken. 3. This act of justifying is complete in itself, for God by his eternal and unchangeable will not imputing sin to his Elect, none can impute it, etc. Here is a complete Justification then without a satisfaction, for which Socinus will give him the right hand of fellowship, and many thanks for a gratuity. And yet he addeth, that this renders not the death of Christ useless, surely as to this act it is useless * And Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth no other act of Justification. ; and if it be the meritorious cause of the effects of this Justification, how was that Justification complete, whose effects could not be obtained without the death of the Son of God? Where let the Reader observe also, that he maketh Christ no more the cause of Justification, then of Election, for he addeth by way of similitude, As the love of God is complete in itself, but yet Christ is the meritorious cause of all the effectt of it; Pag. 67. and so Pag. 66. As electing love precede, etc. so this act of justifying is complete in itself, but yet Christ is the meritorious cause of all the effects of it. Moreover he saith, That the Lord did not impute sin to his people, when he purposed in himself not to deal with them according to their sins, when the Father and the Son agreed upon that sure and everlasting Covenant, Page 64. that his Elect should not bear the punishment which their sins should deserve. Surely the Lord must then by Mr. Eyre impute it to Christ, and so Christ was man, and a sinner from eternity, and crucified from eternity, and all this in God's mind, and there Judas and Pilate, and those that murdered Christ did exist too, and what will not this bring in? And * Mr. Eyre, p. 8. the ground of this is, that he conceives God constituting, and ordaining Christ a Head, and the Elect his Members, they were by this mystically implanted before they were borne, even from eternity. And Justification thus taken, (saith he) makes no change in God, nor yet if it be acknowledged a transient act, Mr. Eyre, p. 65. would it make a change in him, it would add a relative respect, and an extrinsecall denomination; and so in making it an immanent act, there must be a new relation of the person justified to God; but he addeth, it maketh a great change, if you take it for the delivery of the sinner from the curse of the Law. Surely he that is not, is not capable of an actual change, which you must hold, or your justification is not complete, because the deliverance is not a present deliverance. Secondiy, Let us come to his passive Justification: If Justification (saith he) be taken as most commonly it is, for the thing willed by this immanent act of his, to wit, our discharge from the Law, and deliverance from punishment; so it hath for its adequate cause and principle the death and satisfaction of Christ. And thus by his death he obtained in behalf of the Elect, not a remote possible conditional reconciliation, but an actual and immediate reconciliation. Where he ascribeth a meritoriousness to the death of Christ in respect of the deliverance, but not in respect of any act of God's deliverance, as if we could be justified, and none to justify; for in the same place he denieth Christ's death to be the cause of Gods will not to punish, (and that justly) and yet he will not acknowledge another act, as we do, a transient act of God, whereof Christ's death is the cause, and yet some act he must find out, or we cannot be justified. Now his opinion from hence is this, That Christ at his death standing as a common person, and representing all the Elect who were mystically united to him, he by his death gave full satisfaction to divine justice, by which they satisfied in him, and in his Resurrection receiving a public discharge for himself and them, and they are now actually and formally reconciled and in favour with God, even while they remain unregenerate persons. Wherein in two things he differs from us, and departs from the truth. 1. In holding a mystical union between Christ and the Elect before faith. 2. In that he saith that from the time of Christ's death all the Elect are actually reconconciled, both these I have already disproved in the Vindication of my Sermon, but shall add some arguments in its place against the latter. Thirdly, When it's said we are justified by faith, he taketh it altogether objectively; He saith, Faith is taken objectively, for Christ and his righteousness justifieth in the sight of God; if taken for the act, it only evidenceth justification, page 76. as if by faith were meant Christ, excluding faith from any hand in Justification, which if it were the Apostles meaning, he might have put in the Name Christ, and left out Faith, and his meaning had been more plain, which in this weighty controversy of Justification, (though the Trope be more elegant) had been more needful: And in many places where he speaketh of Justification, he expressly setteth down Christ as the object of our faith, and yet addeth faith, as that grace by which this object is apprehended. Let us take that place in Gal. 2.15, 16. We who are Jew's by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ: even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the woe ks of the Law. Here the Apostles Scope is to show, that the believing Jews (into which number he puts himself, and Peter and Barnabas,) seeing that they could not be justified by the Law, did for this end that they might be justified, believe on Christ, that they might be justified by the faith of Christ, where he makes Christ and his righteousness the object of faith, and the matter of their Justification; and he expresseth how Christ's become theirs by faith, and it were a senseless interpretation to take Faith for Christ, and not for the Grace of Faith; as if the meaning should be, that they were justified by the Christ of Christ, where he must exclude Christ or Faith, for one is redundant; nor doth the Apostle mean this of a declarative Justification, for then there is no reason nor tru●h in it; for to say, that the works of the Law may not evidence our Justification, these being as able to declare it as faith, as it is said, Little children, let no man deceive y u: he that doth righteousness, 1 John 3.7. is righteous; that is, is declared thereby to be righteous. Besides, to make Paul to say, that they believed that they might be justified, that is, that they may know by believing that they had been justified before, had been to make the Apostle reason at a very low ebb, as if the doing a thing for a certain end, were a certain means to assure that the end hath been obtained already. Besides, it destroys the Scope of the Apostles Argument, in reproving Peter for his dissimulation; building up that in his Practice, which in his Doctrine he did destroy; the Jews thought the observation of the Law necessary to salvation, and hence made conscience of keeping company with Gentiles, and eating things forbidden by the Law; but Peter and the rest of the Apostles knew, that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, and therefore did renounce hopes of salvation by that, and believe in Christ for Justification, and this he taught; And when he came to Antioch, before certain Jews came down from James, he used his Christian liberty, and did eat with the Gentiles; but when they were come down, he withdrew himself; he separates from the Gentiles, by which practice he did as it were teach a neccessity of keeping the Law as necessary to salvation: Now Paul blames his practice, that when he knew a man is not justified by the Law, but by faith in Christ, he did yet in practice hold up the necessity of the observation of the Law; so that the Apostle is not speaking how a man may know his salvation, but how salvation is obtained. So the Apostle speaking of the righteousness by which we must be justified, in Rom 3.11. saith, Rom. 3.11. it is a righteousness witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even a righteousness that is of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ; where by Faith, is necessarily understood the grace of Faith, and not Christ, who is expressly set down in the next words, where the scope of the place is to show by what we must be justified, and he saith, not by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Christ; if Christ without Faith justify, why doth the Apostle mention Faith? for he is not speaking here what doth evidence our Justification, but by what we are justified. I shall pass to the fourth particular in Mr. Eyre, he saith, Mr. Eyre, p. 3. That in the New Covenant there is no condition required to entitle us to the blessings of it, and that Faith is not the condition of the New Covenant, because then men must be Believers before they are justified, for the condition must be performed before that benefit which is promised can be received: But men are not Believers before they are justified, the Scripture witnesseth that the subject of justification as a sinner, or ungodly person, Rom. 9.5. & 5.8, 10. Now the Holy Ghost never calls Believers ungodly, or wicked, but Saints, Faithful, holy Brethren, children of God, members of Christ, the Covenant with them ●s absolute made with Christ, and all the conditions in the Covenant are promised. Page 191. ] And he takes the condition as a part of the Covenant, because promised; so, that believing with him is a consequent of the Covenant, not antecedent to it; where he wholly departeth from the received truth of Christ, and speaketh that which is as contrary to the Scripture, as darkness is to light. For, 1. He destroys the nature of a Covenant which is, and necessarily requires a mutual stipulation, else it may be a promise, but no Covenant. 2. Salvation is undoubtedly a fruit of the Covenant, but without faith there is no salvation. 3. He destroys the order of the Gospel, which saith, believe and thou shalt be saved, he saith, thou art saved, believe, and thou shalt know it; and that faith is a fruit of this salvation, not a cause. 4. The Gospel saith no where that a sinner under the reigning power of sin, and remaining so is a subject of Justification; but the contrary; 1 John 1.6. If we say we have fellowshep with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth. The meaning then of this Scripture, that God justifieth the ungodly, is not as if the person to be justified, must needs be ungodly in the midst of his profaneness, delighting in it; but by ungodly is meant, a man that hath not a perfect legal righteousness, not an unsanctified man, as if he were a justified person; this is a profane Justification indeed, not agreeable to the nature of a Holy God; But the meaning is, 1. That God hath found out a way to justify the ungodly by faith in Christ, which the Law knoweth not, nor the wisdom of men and Angels could have contrived how God might do it, saluâ justitiâ, supposing his decree. And therefore when we say that God justifieth the ungodly, we understand it, 2. In sensudiviso, not in sensu composito; that is, not that he is so when justified, as the Scripture saith, The lame man shall leap, Isa. 35.6. Mark 11. the tongue of the dumb shall sing, and the blind see, and the deaf hear; but no man will say that the lame as lame can leap, and that the dumb remaining so, can sing, and that the blind as blind, see; and so no man should dream that the ungodly as ungodly are justified; for in order of nature, our Faith goes before Justification, though there be no priority of time between our ungodliness and Justification; for immediately before our saith, we are ungodly, and upon the creation of faith, we are justified, and sanctified at the same time, and our ungodliness done away. And what if Faith be promised, and freely given, it is a fruit of the Covenant as made with Christ, but not as the Covenant was made with us; God covenants with Christ to save all that he died for, and that shall believe; so that upon believing they shall have the fruit of Christ's death, and the fruit of the Covenant of Grace; Christ undertakes for them to make them believe; hence faith is wrought, and given, and then they are Christ's Members, and so in Covenant, not before; for God promised salvation to none, but such as believe; Hence Christ teleth the world. This is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seethe the Son, and believeth on him, John 6.40. may have everlasting life: Surely he willed nothing but agreeable to his Covenant with Christ, therefore he covenanted that Believers only should be saved; for where he saith, that it is the will of the Father, that they that believe should have everlasting life; the contrary also is meant, that he that believeth not, should not be saved. I shall not prosecute his opinion any further here, I will now lay down some animadversions upon several passages in his Book, wherein his manifold errors, unsound opinions, and self-contradictions shall be manifested, which he hath cast himself upon in defence of this one error, and hath verified that old saying, Dato uno absurdo, mille sequuntur. First, He blameth us, as if we did agree with Arminius, in holding a conditional reconciliation, (which we utterly disclaim) and yet he himself symbolizeth and agreeth with Armininius in that very thing which occasioned that error of Arminius, Armin. Exam. p. 31. & 158. in holding a temporal, suspensive and conditional decree, for Arminius because the Scripture saith, we were chosen in Christ, will have it to be nos existentes in Christo, that we had an existence, or being in Christ. And seeing we are not in Christ but by Faith, hereupon he maketh the object of Election to be fideles, and so this decree to be temporal, and suspensive upon the will of man, in whose power it is to believe; though herein Arminius was more in the truth then Mr. Eyre, in that he judgeth we are not in Christ, but by faith, which Mr. Eyre denieth. But for us we acknowledge no such temporal decree, nor do we hold this condition of faith to be an effect of our free will, but an absolute effect of God's free grace. And in two other things he joineth with Arminius, who seemingly is a mortal enemy to him. 1. They both stumble at the same stone, for the Arminians think it absurd, that the same thing should be donum promissum, and officium requisitum, a gift promised on God's part, and yet a duty required on our part. Rem Apol. c 9 pag. 105. Thus the Remonstrants, Anne conditionem quis seriò, & sapienter praescriberet alteri, sub promisso praemii, & poenae gravissimae comminatione, qui eam in eo cui praescribit efficere vult, haec actio tota ludicra, & vix scenà digna est, Nihil ineptius, nihil vanius quàm fidem merito Christi tribuere, si enim Christus meritus est fidem, tum fides conditio esse non poterit, c. 8. p. 95. They think it a ridiculous conceit, that any should prescribe that as a condition which he intendeth to work in them, or for them; and that faith, if it be merited by Christ, cannot be a condition. Vide Mr. Eyre, pag. 175. And saith not Mr. Eyre the same? page 175. But I appeal to the Reader, whether it doth not sound very harshly, that the same words should be formally both a Precept and a Promise; and that God should require a condition of us, and yet promise to work it in us, how shall we distinguish between Precepts and Promises? I am sorry to see such a manly Divine as Mr. Eyre to be at a nonplus, where there is no difficulty. I take it for granted, that any Member in Mr. Eyre's Church can show where faith is commanded, and therefore it lieth upon us as a duty, and yet also can show where it is said to be the gift of God; Surely, if the same thing may not be commanded and promised, either we have no duty to perform, or God hath not promised to give what he requireth or us: for it is said, he hath wrought all our works in us, ●●a. 16.12. and for us, and yet he calls it our work still, because our duty and act, though it be his grace enabling us; he commandeth us to repent, Mark 3.2. yet Christ is exalted as a Prince, to give repentance to Israel, Acts 5.31. We grant it cannot be a condition and a promise; if you take a condition in a strict proper sense, as the Jurists and Arminians take it for a condition performed by our own free will, but we take it in another sense, for a suspensive condition of the efficacy of Christ's death, (and this is essential to a condition) appointed by God to apply Christ's righteousness to us, which condition he hath purposed to work, and Christ hath merited, and therefore shall be infallibly given; and therefore the benefit of Christ's death is no less certain, then if it were actually enjoyed. 2. The Arminians hold that no man's will is predetermined by God, for fear they should destroy the liberty of his will; and Mr. Eyre saith in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Parliament, Though God doth move effectually, and persuades men's hearts, yet he doth not necessitate them to believe. If he mean it of a necessity of coaction only, we grant it; but if of necessity of infallibility and event, we deny it; and he agreeth with Arminius, for God doth so effectually move, as to necessitate them, and irresistibly worketh upon their wills, overpowering them, and of unwilling making them willing, that they necessarily do believe, though they freely do it at the same time. Secondly, He chargeth us that dissent from him, in making Faith the condition of the Covenant, as if we did agree with Arminians, Socinians and Papists, when he is not ignorant that we manifestly differ from them, and own not faith as a condition in any of their senses; we make it not any meritorious condition, as the Papists; nor any act performed by our own free will, as Arminians; nor the matter of our righteousness, as Socinians, and Arminians, and Papists do, neither in whole, nor in part. And somewhere he saith in his Book, that Mr, Calvin hath observed, That if we were accorded with the Church of Rome in all other points, save in this, (to wit, of Justification) it were impossible to be reconciled; and I must needs say, I see no material difference between them, meaning between us that differ from him and the Papists; and yet, pag. 50. he saith that Bellarmine saith, Bellar. de justific. l. 1. c. 17. Faith itself is our righteousness, and that it doth justify us impetrando, promerendo, in choando justificationem, that it doth obtain, merit, and begin our Justification; which of the Orthodox saith so, or with the Arminians that in the Covenant of Grace, God requireth faith, which in his gracious acceptation standeth instead of the obedience to the Moral Law? But to this wilful slander, I shall tell him what in this case is the judgement of learned VOSSIUS, Vossius, Praefatione, to his defence of Grot. against, Herm. Ravensp. In confesso est apud omnes, haereticis cum meliùs quàm Catholicis consulere, qui callidum fidei Christianae hostem ità in tabellà populo spectandum offered, quasi dogmati faveat Catholico, cui bellum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indixit, strenuum autem veritatis defensorem ità depingit, quasi cum haeretico colludat, quem fortiter oppugnat. He is a better friend to Papists then Protestants, who shall describe the Papists that err fundamentally, as favourably as the Protestants who hold the foundation, and strenously defend it, as if they did agree with Papists, with whom they are at an irreconcilable difference. Mr. Eyre, p. 10. Thirdly, Mr. Eyre maketh a sinner (if he be an Elect person) remaining under the reigning power of sin, a subject of Justification: For he saith, God is well pleased with his Elect in Christ, whilst they are unregenerate, though he be not well pleased with their unregeneracy, or any of their actions in their unregenerate estate.] But how can this be agreeable to the Holy Nature of God, to justify a sinner so remaining? For he that in this sense justifieth the wicked, is an abomination to the Lord; and what God condemneth in us, he will not do himself. The Papists object against us that hold Justification by imputed, and not inherent righteousness, that it is contrary to the holiness, justice, and purity of God's Nature to justify us that are ungodly, without an inherent rightsousnesse. To which the Protestants answer, that God at the same time doth begin to sanctify whom he doth justify, and he doth bestow a righteousness of Sanctification, as well as of Justification; but Mr. Eyre's opinion lieth justly liable to their exception, God cannot justify any person, or be well pleased with him that is not a member of Christ, and to make an unregenerate man a member of Christ's body, what a monstrous deformity would this be, and wrong to Christ, to make a limb of the Devil, a member of Christ? Let a man be the greatest sinner imaginable, practising and delighting in sin; yet he is a justified person, and a member of Christ. If Elect, why doth Mr. Eyre require the members of his Church to be Saints, not only by profession, but by inward sanctification, as that that shall make him a Church-member and yet holds an uregenerate person is a member of Christ's body? will he require more holiness in a Church-member, then in a Christ-member? And what an unreasonable assertion is it for him to say, God is pleased with the Elect whilst they are unregenerate, though he be not well pleased with their unregeneracy, or any of their actions in their unregenerate estate? Is it possible God can be well pleased with their persons, and yet none of all their actions please him? is that tree a good tree that never did, nor can bring forth good fruit? As the Scripture maketh no man's actions accepted, when their persons are not accepted, so neither doth it make their persons acceptable, but their actions (some of them at least) must be acceptable. And if their persons be justified, all their sins are pardoned, and many of their actions are for the matter good, and commanded; and when all the sin in their best actions is done away, how can they displease God, seeing nothing displeaseth God but sin? Fourthly, He saith, that the state of the loved and hated, Mr. Eyre, p. 66. compared with pag. 5. are different in the mind of God, yet not in the persons themselves, till the different effects of love and hatred are put forth; and yet findeth fault with me for asserting the same, that there was no difference between the Elect and Reprobate, as to their present condition, whilst the Elect are unregenerate, but only in the purpose of God intending to make a difference, by bringing the Elect unto faith in Christ, that they may be justified, which was all I said or intended. Fifthly, He saith, God's eternal decree to justify, Mr. Eyre, p. 64. compared with pag 140. is Justification, because it secures men from wrath, and by this immanent act of God they are discharged and acquitted from their sins; Then what need Christ to die? here is forgiveness without a satisfaction, Christ's death was not the c●use of this immanent act, or will in God. And yet he contradicteth himself, for pag. 140. he saith, that sin lay as a block in the way, that God could not saluâ justititiâ bestow upon them those good things intended towards them in his eternal Election. Surely Justification is one of the good things intended in Election, and therefore God could not bestow this saluâ justitiâ, till their sin was satisfied for; but with him they were according to the first place discharged from sin by this immanent act, yet Christ's death was not a cause of this act; and if they were actually discharged from sin, how did that lie as a block in the way to hinder any of the good things intended? And he citeth a place which he owneth out of Mr. Rutherford, pag. 140. God might will unto us that which he cannot actually bestow upon us without wrong to his Justice, and this he understands of Gods saving and pardoning us; but if we were actually discharged, we were actually pardoned, and that without the merit of Christ's death, and satisfaction to his justice. Sixthly, He interpreteth, pag. 60. what is meant by God's sight, when it is said, We are justified in his sight; this phrase he saith, is variously used. 1. Sometimes it relates unto the thoughts and knowledge of God, etc. 2. Sometimes it relates more peculiarly unto his legal justice, and although in articulo providentiae, in the Doctrine of Divine Providence, seeing and knowing are all one; yet in articulo justificationis, in the article of Justification they are constantly distinguished throughout the Scripture, and God is never said to blot our sins out of his knowledge, but out of his sight: Now saith he, pag. 62. If we take it for the knowledge of God, we were justified in his sight when he willed and determined in himself not to impute to us our sins, etc. and this was from eternity. And with him the 63. pag. the essence and quiddity of Justification stands in this will of God not to punish, this is properly Justification in his judgement, and then God knew them to be righteous; yet he saith, in the article of Justification, knowledge is constantly distinguished from sight, throughout the whole Scripture, and God is never said to blot sins out of his knowledge, as much as if he should say, If you take this phrase as it is never to be taken, than we were justified from eternity. And the Scripture doth not acknowledge this eternal Justification; for when it speaks of the Doctrine of Justification, it speaketh of blotting out sins out of his sight, and this is to be referred to his legal Justice, (and this is the most proper and genuine use of it, saith he,) and so we were justified in the sight of God when he exhibited, and God accepted the full satisfaction in his blood for all our sins; and yet this Justification is not the most proper acceptation of Justification, for that was from eternity, and yet we were then most properly justified in his sight; how well this agrees, let the Reader judge. Seventhly, He taketh Faith objectively, Mr. Eyre, p. 47. Pag. 58, 76. (not for the act with connotation of the object,) but for the object excluding the act, as if the word Faith signified Christ; and yet when we urge him with such places where it is said, We are justified by Faith, and the like, he understands it of a declarative Justification, and so taketh Faith subjectively, not objectively: So he taketh it, p. 73. In this sense men are said to be justified by the act of Faith, in regard Faith is the Medium, or instrument whereby the sentence of forgiveness is terminated on their conscience. Eightly, Pag. 63. He affirmeth that the judgement of Dr. Twisse is most accurate in placing the essence and quiddity of Justification in the will of God not to punish, pag. 63. yet he saith, (and that truly in respect of this immanent and eternal act of God) that the merits of Christ do not move Gods will not to punish, or impute sin to us; yet he acknowledgeth no other act, that Christ's death is the meritorious cause of; he saith, it is the meritorious cause of the effects of this eternal Justification; Pag. 67, but the Scripture maketh Christ's death the meritorious cause of some act of God justifying us; can Christ cause the effect, and not the act? Merit is an outward procatarctical cause, moving the principal agent extrinsecally ad agendum; and hence God is said, for Christ's sake to forgive us; Christ's death doth morally work upon him by way of motive and objective moving, and is a remote cause of the effect, and God as the principal efficient, is the immediate cause; and what influence then can this remote cause have to produce the effects of Justification, and no way by any causal influx to cause the act? Though I still willingly acknowledge, that the internal moving cause, is Gods own will, for nothing out of God can be the cause of his will, unless we make God beholding to another for his being. 9thly, He giveth a very superficial slight answer to those Scriptures that speak of receiving remission of sins by believing, Acts 10.43. Acts 26.18. Though it be said, whosoever believeth shall receive remission of sin; it is not said, (saith he,) by believing we obtain remission of sins; true, who would make an instrumental cause the meritorious cause of remission of sins? but if by obtaining be meant no more than a receiving, and possessing what we never had before, so we do by Faith obtain remission of sins; he distinguisheth between the giving of remission, and the receiving it, as if one were long before the other; To which I answer, If you take giving for the will of God ordaining to give remission, so it is long before receiving, but that is not an actual bestowing of the thing purposed; but if you take it for an actual collation of the thing given, it implies the receiving of it; for Relata se mutuo ponunt, & tollunt; thus giving and receiving are together, and so forgiveness of sins was not given till received; Mr. Eyre means, by our receiving remission, nothing but the comfort and knowledge of it, but that interpretation will not agree with the Apostles mind; for he doth not say, Whosoever believe shall have the knowledge, or comfort of the remission of sins, but shall have remission of sins; and that place, Acts 26.18. most expressly makes it manifest, for before their receiving this forgiveness, they were under the power of Satan; surely they that are under Satan's power, are not yet pardoned; what hath Satan to do with a pardoned sinner? This were a wrong to Christ's satisfaction, if it were accepted for a present discharge, and yet they left under Satan's power; but Christ himself saith, those that he sent Paul unto, namely, the Gentiles, were under the power of Satan, because they were yet under spiritual blindness, and he is sent to turn them from darkness to light, from the power of Satan unto God, that they might receive remission of sins; not that they might receive the knowledge of a deliverance from the power of Satan they had already, or the knowledge of the remission of sins, but remission itself; now Justification standeth in remission of sins, therefore if they received it not before, they were not justified. Tenthly, He giveth a worse answer to that place, Ephes. 2.12. where it is said, that the Elect before Faith or spiritual Regeneration in their natural estate, were without Christ, without God, and without hope in the world, that is, saith he, pag. 73. before faith, they had no knowledge or comfort, either of God's gracious volitions towards them, or of Christ's undertake in their behalf; it is such a chaffy, illiterate exposition, that it more befits a Green-apron-Preacher, than such a Gamaliel, it needs not a grain of salt; but all the salt in the world will not make a savoury interpretation of it, to keep it from the dunghill, What were these Ephesians when dead in sins and trespasses, dead in conceit only, and truly alive to God, and dead in their apprehensions only? were they children of wrath in their apprehensions? why then, they were more afraid than hurt; what needed they then the work of Creation, the Almighty power of God that was put forth to raise Christ from the dead, to raise them from this estate; could not body cure this conceit with another? that if they did but think all was well, that thought would be to them as the Resurrection from the dead; What, were they without Christ in the world, because they knew not Christ was there? Why then let some frenzy take them, and bereave them of their reason, as Mr. Eyre was in this interpretation, and they are un-Christed again; or let them fall asleep, and they are again without Christ, without God, without hope in the world. And so they and their Christ will bid good-morrow, and good-night, so often as they rise, or go to bed: But the true scope and sense of the place is this, the Apostle setteth himself to prove the freeness of God's grace in Christ to the Ephesians, which he doth, by calling upon them to remember what their former deplorable estate was in Ehtnicism, when they were Gentiles in the flesh, by comparing it with their happy estate since their conversion to the faith; and therefore that wonderful change, sheweth that their salvation is wholly of grace; in their former condition they were then in the flesh, that is, in their natural and sinful estate, as they descended from their parents in a state of sin, living after the flesh, in which estate they could not please God. 2. They were without inward and outward circumcision, they had none of the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace, of that righteousness that is by faith, but were despised by the Jews, who gloried in their circumcision; but they had not so much as this outward circumcision in the flesh, much less the circumcision of the heart: Now uncircumcision was a sign of a people that were wholly strangers to God and the Covenant of Grace. 3. They were without Christ, without any knowledge of Christ; Christ was not so much as preached to them, and they had no faith in him, and so 〈◊〉, as Diodat upon the place saith, they neither had union nor communion with Christ, nor, no knowledge of their union or communion with Christ, as if they were mystically united, as Mr. Eyre ignorantly, or wilfully affirmeth; but without union or communion; they were not yet members of Christ, and so they lived as it were without Christ in the world, strangers to Christ, at a distance from Christ. Such as were sometimes afar off from Christ, and God, as ver. 13. declareth, Calvin in Locum: and as Calvine upon the place, procul à Deo & saluie, even as fare as heaven and hell asunder, and were strangers from the Commonwealth of Israel; that is, they were without the Pale of the Church, out of which ordinarily there is no salvation, and were strangers from the Covenant of Promise; that is, as Piscator saith, Piscator in Locum. the Promise of the Covenant of Grace, wherein God promised remission of sins through the merit of Christ, and the renewing of their hearts by the efficacy of Christ, did not belong to them; Dickson in Locum. and as Dickson upon the words saith, alieni à jure ad applicandum sibi pacta, & promissiones Dei, they were destitute of all right to apply the Covenants or Promises of God to themselves: And they were without hope in the world, that is, they had no hope of eternal life; so Piscator; haec enim nascitur ex fide; for this is begotten by saith; they could have no good well grounded hope for heaven, Spem merit ò conjungit promissionibus de Christo, nam absque his quic quid sperant homines frustrà speraent: He deservedly joined hope to the promises concerning Christ; for without these, whatsoever men hope for, they hope in vain. Truly, (as he saith) there can nothing be hoped for, that is not promised; and without the Covenant there is no Promise. And without God in the world, they acknowledged many gods; nay, knew the true God as Creator of heaven and earth; but knew him not in Christ, and did not worship him according to the light of Scripture, and so were without all true knowledge, and spiritual worship of God. And from all this it followeth that they were unjustified in this estate, and it destroyeth the scope of the Apostles argument, to take it as Mr. Eyre taketh it, only for the want of knowledge of their happy estate, whereas the Apostles scope is to show how miserable they were when in this estate, how happy in the change, or deliverance from it; but here is no change signified by Mr. Eyre's interpretation, but only their condition was the same, and as good then as now, only they did not know it; Is it possible a man of reason should be so fare blinded, or hardened to shut his eyes against the clear light of the Scripture? Dreadful are God's judgements in delivering men up to error, that will not receive the truth in the love of it. Eleventhly, Page 66, 67. He maketh the merits of Christ no more the cause of Justification, then of Election; he maketh the merits of Christ only the meritorious cause of the effects of Gods eternal will to justify, as may appear, pag. 66, & 67. Although (saith he) Gods will not to punish, be antecedent to the death of Christ; yet (saith he) we are justified in him, (but he doth not say for him,) though the Scriptures speak it plain enough, because the whole effect of that will, is by and for the sake of Christ, as though electing love precedeth the consideration of Christ, yet we are said to be chosen in him, because all the effects of that love are given by, and through, and for him, and to the like purpose he speaketh in the 67. pag. etc. Col. 2.14. Heb. 9.12. But the Scriptures do plainly ascribe a meritoriousness to the death of Christ, that we have redemption through his blood, he hath obtained eternal redemption for us, Eph. 4.32. Eph. 2.16. and that God for Christ's sake had forgiven the Ephesians. And that he hath reconciled both (that is, Jew and Gentle) unto God by the Cross; and therefore Christ is not only the cause of the effects of Justification, but of the act of Justification, God being moved thereto by the death of Christ; but where saith the Scripture, that God elected us for the sake of Christ? it is true, it saith, we were chosen in him, and he accepted us in the beloved; but this doth not imply that we had a being in Christ, when elected, and that God elected us for Christ's sake, as if Christ were the cause of our Election, Vide Dr. Twiss, Vind. Lib. 2. Digress. p. 74. Interca non dicimus Christum in negotio electionis habere rationem causae meritoriae respectu actûs cligentis sed duntaxat respectu termini, etc. Ib. quoad actum eligentis, which Arminius mightily contendeth for, that he might bring in faith; if not as a cause, yet as a prerequisite of our Election. And none of ours except Rolloc maintain it; and yet though he calleth Christ the foundation of our Election, all that he saith ends in this, that Christ is therefore the foundation of our Election, because he is the meritorious cause Bonorum Electione praeparatorum, of good things which are prepared by Election; but Christ is not only the cause of the effects of Justification, but of the act of Justification, for God doth forgive us for Christ's sake, and then see what a good friend Mr. Eyre is to the merits and satisfaction of Christ, when he seemingly pleads for it, as if we wronged the merits of Christ by suspending the benefit until faith, wrought by himself, as the effect of his death, and he wholly denieth it as to the act of Justification. Twelfthly, He saith, that Justification is by Faith evidentially, and Faith is from Justification causally, Mr. Eyre, p. 79. and he seethe no absurdity in it, p. 79. which is to place the Cart before the Horse, and as preposterous as to wear his Shoes upon his head, and his Hat upon his feet. That Faith may in a sense evidence Justification, I deny not, but that it is the effect of Justification, is as good sense as that the daughter brought forth the mother; Justification may be an effect of Faith, and so the Scripture maketh it, but not a cause of Faith: For it is neither the efficient, nor material, nor formal, nor final, therefore it is no cause; for all causes are reducible to these four Heads. 1. It is not the efficient principal cause of Faith; I hope he will not rob Gods free grace, and the Holy Spirit of his Honour (as he doth Christ of his merit,) of being the sole efficient cause of faith; Faith, it is the gift of God, and the effect of the Spirit, which worketh faith by the hearing of the Word: it is a known rule, Positâ causâ proximâ ponitur effectus, and if the act of Justification should be the cause of Faith, then according to him being justified from eternity, we must be Believers from eternity, but how contrary this is to sense, reason, and experience, I need not speak; and no man did ever yet dream, much less speak of Justification being the efficient cause of Faith. 2. It is not the formal cause of Faith, for the formal cause doth ingredi compositum, it is part of the substance of the thing, or effect produced; the formal cause is always to the effect, and concurreth to the substance and essence of it, but Justification is a thing wholly and adventitious to the nature of Faith; the formality of Faith lieth in an adherency to Christ, or a recumbency upon Christ for righteousness, not in the act of Justification. 3. Justification is not the material cause of Faith, for the same reason above named; the material cause is that which in union with the form, maketh up a substantial compounded body, but Faith is no such thing, it is not a substance, but a quality, and hath no matter properly so called; and as for the matter improperly so called, it is either materia in quâ, or circa quam, it is either the subject, or the object; but Justification is not the subject, or object of Faith; not the subject, for the subject of Faith is a Believer; nor is Justification the object of Faith, for in things that have matter improperly so called, the subject and the object are the same; the object of Justification than is a Believer, the person of a Believer, not his Faith. 4. And lastly, Justification is not the final cause of Faith, for I am not justified that I might believe, but rather I believe that I might be justified; and salvation is made the end of faith, Gal. 2.16. 1 Pet. 1.9. and not faith the end of my salvation; and thus it appeareth, that Faith is not from Justification causally. Thirteenthly, He saith, pag. 83. that he doth not press every man to believe that he is justified, Mr Eyre p. 83. but to believe there is a sufficiency in Christ for his Justification, and to rely upon him, and him alone for this benefit; but how contrary this is to his own principles, let the Reader judge: for he constantly affirmeth, that the Elect are justified from eternity, and from the death of Christ antecedently to Faith, and faith doth not instrumentally apply Christ's righteousness unto Justification, but Faith doth only evidence Justification to the conscience: Surely, when you press men to believe, you press them to believe they are already justified, and not to rely on him for this benefit; for if they be justified already, what need have they to rely upon him by faith for it? they may according to you rely upon him for the evidencing of this to their consciences, but not for the benefit which they had in Christ before they were borne. And what diminution is it of the grace of Christ, if they were justified from the time of Christ's death, to tell them there is a sufficiency in the death of Christ for Justification? when according to you there is an efficiency in the death of Christ; forasmuch as they were not virtually only, but actually and formally, as you affirm, p. 63. justified at his death: Nor will it help you to say, you speak there of the non-elect, for we are bound to press all men to believe, as you there acknowledge; and it is not known who are Elect, neither to the Minister nor to the people; therefore in pressing the Elect to believe a sufficiency, you extenuate the merit of Christ's death, if they were actually justified, as you affirm: And there is the same ground of Faith to all, the ability of Christ to save, and Gods indefinite offer of salvation to whomsoever the Gospel is preached. Fourteen, He affirmeth Faith, if it evidences our Justification, is a sign, is a dark and unsatisfying evidence, as other works of Sanctification are, 1 John 3.14. where he contradicteth the Apostle, who saith, By this we know that we are passed from death to life, because we love the Brethren; not we hope, not we conjecture, but we know, it is a sure and steadfast sign. Little children, let no man deceive you, 1 John 3.7. saith John, he that doth righteousness, is righteous; is thereby, viz. by his doing righteousness declared to be a righteous person; Rom. 8.1. and in Rom. 8.1. he saith, There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus; and he givesh this as a sign, Rom. 8.13. Who are in Christ, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit; doth the Holy Ghost, by Paul, give us a dark unsatisfying evidence of our being in Christ. What is more frequent than this; he that is in Christ, is a new Creature, they that mortify the deeds of the body shall live: Gal 5.24. They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts thereof? are all these dark and unsatisfying evidences? then the Apostle did not well to propound them as satisfying evidences of the persons that are in Christ, and shall be saved; but we had rather suspect Mr. Eyre's opinion, then question the Apostles judgement or unfaithfulness to propound dark, and unsatisfying evidences of Justification. 2. He saith, that nothing that follows Faith, is so apt to evidence or prove Justification as Faith, because it is the first of all inherent graces; but I take this for an error, and that works are every way as declarative of Justification, if not more, is an apparent truth: For first, if we speak of evidencing Justification to others, it is more; for saith the Apostle, Thou hast faith, show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works, James 2.18. And Abraham was in this sense justified by his works, If any man shall say he is a justified person, Vers. 2●. 1 John 1.6. James 2.20. and yet liveth in the practice of any known sin, I shall be bold to tell him he is a liar, and the truth is not in him; and works of Sanctification are no less declarative of Justification in evidencing it to the conscience, than Faith: For how shall I know my saith is a true faith, an unfeigned faith, and peculiar to the Elect; but by the effect of a true Faith, the works of Sanctification, therefore if the truth of my faith be evidenced by my works, than the truth of my justification is no less evidenced to my conscience by works then by faith; nor is his reason of any worth, because it is the first of all inherent graces; this may prove it to have an excellency in that respect above other graces, but that it hath for this reason an eminency above other graces in evidencing Justification, is a lame consequence, of which Master Eyre's Book is too full. Fifteenthly, He affirmerh that we should not be justified freely by grace, if any condition were required of us in order to our Justification; I take this also for a manifest error, if it be understood aright, of an Evangelical condition ordained and wrought by God for the applying of Christ's righteousness to Justification. Indeed, if you take a condition in a strict sense; for a condition performed by us without the help of grace, meriting, and obliging God to give us the righteousness of Christ; in such a sense it is true, it is inconsistent with grace: but such an Evangelical condition wrought by the grace of Christ, without which we are not justified, salvation is no less of grace, though it be by faith, as the Apostle speaketh: Ye are saved by grace through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; where the Apostle speaketh of the grace of faith, Eph. 2.8. and saith, we are saved by it; and yet he saith, We are saved by grace, because it is God's gift. Sixteenthly, He saith, pag. 99 that all the blessings of the Covenant of Grace are given us freely, Pag 99 and not upon conditions performed by us, (viz. by our own strength,) yet God hath his order & method in the bestowing of them, etc. If all the blessings of the Covenant be alike absolutely, and freely given, and alike merited by Christ, and yet God may for order and methods sake, defer some blessings of the Covenant without wrong to Christ's merits and satisfaction, why is it any wrong to Christ's death, if Justification merited by Christ, be suspended until it be fitly applied by faith, (that God may not justify a person under the reign and power of sin, which is not agreeable to his Holiness and Justice?) Seventeenthly, In his 103. pag. he is guilty of a double error: First, ●ag. 103. in making God to impute sin to men before there was any Law to offend, or any breach of that Law committed by man: And secondly, in * Sin is apparently the cause only of condemnation, but not of God's purpose. Dr. Twisse, Exam. Mr. Cot. p. 54. confounding God's hatred of Justice, with his negative act of nonelection, or preterition, which ought to be distinguished. He saith, Though men will not impute sin, or charge it where there is no Law to convince them of it; yet it follows not but God did impute sin to men before there was any Law promulged or before the sin was actually committed; for what is Gods hating of a person, but his imputing of sin, or his will to punish him for his sin? Now the Lord hated all that perish, before the Law was given. To which I answer, that God's preterition, or nonelection, though it be justly called a hatred negatively, yet this was an act of Sovereignty, and not of Justice: nor is this hatred an imputing of their sin, nor was their sin foreseen the cause * Reprobatio neque damnationis neque peccati quod incretur damnationem est propriè causa, sed antecedens tantum. Ames. Medul. c. 25. s. 40. 1 John 3.4. Rom. 5.13. of this act; And they that were not, could not have any sin imputed, yea, it chargeth God with untruth, and with unjustice, to impute sin before committed; for the very formality of a sin consisteth in the privation of that rectitude the Law requireth, or in the transgression of the Law: Now, where there is no Law, there is no transgression; therefore the Apostle proveth, That before the Law was promulged, there was some Law given, and transgressed, by which sin entered into the world, and death by sin, which was that * Not the Moral Law existing in the mind of God, before it was declared, as Master Eyre seems to intimate in the same place. positive Law forbidding Adam, and in him us to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil; and had there been no Law; there had been no trangression; but now from eternity there was no Law given, nor any person to whom it should be given, and therefore from eternity there was no transgression; and therefore to make God impute that which was not, is to ascribe unto God a fallible judgement, and to make God to esteem them sinners before they were men; yea, and in justice too will it charge upon God, to make him impute sin to them which they ●●ver committed, and for this to hate them, and pass them by, and not Elect them; Here is a complication of errors in this passage, God doth not esteem any person a sinner till by 〈◊〉 act that he is guilty of, his Law be violated, nor adjudge any man to punishment, nor execute, or inflict any punishment until sin be committed: So that God's imputation of sin followeth that act of sin, and doth not precede it; and is a transient, not an immanent act. And a little after he contradicteth himself, A man is not a sinner before he do commit sin, either by himself, or representative, which necessarily supposeth a Law, for sin is the transgression of the Law; Why then it necessarily follows, no man was a sinner from eternity, and so God did not impute it; but let it go for one of his Paradoxes, the Law and sin had a coeternal existence in the mind of God, together with his own eternal Essence. Eighteenthly, When we urge Mr. Eyre with those Scriptures, He that believeth not, is condemned already, and the wrath of God abideth on him, and that the Elect are children of wrath, as well as others; and tell him, a man cannot be a child of wrath, and a justified person at the same time, than the argument will not hold, and is invalid, as you may see in his slight Answers to Mr. Woodbridges Arguments from these Scriptures, Pag. 110, 111, 112. compared with pag. 138. pag. 110, 111, 112. and yet when he cometh to prove that we are justified immediately from the time of Christ's death, he can use the same Argument, and then it is a divine Oracle; his words are these, p. 138. It was the will of God (saith he) that his death should be available for their immediate reconciliation, for they could not be children of Christ, and children of Wrath at the same time; and because this deserves a more full examination, and it was an Argument used by my against Mr. Eyre in our conference, I will reserve what I have to say further to it, to another place. Ninteenthly, He saith, That the Elect Corinthians had no more right to salvation after believing, than they had before.] Unhappy man, Mr. Eyre, pag. 122. that he should be the father of so many foul errors, what had the Elect Corinthians when they were Idolaters, Fornicators, Adulterers, effeminate, and abusers of themselves with mankind? had they then as much right to the Kingdom of Heaven, as after? What will this man make the Kingdom of Heaven to be, that admits of such Sodomites, and Whoremongers, to be the actual heirs of it? If they had a right to the Kingdom of Heaven, they were a blessed people; Oh blessed Sodomites! Oh blessed Whoremongers! if this Doctrine be true; here was all the unhappiness of these Sodomitical Saints, they knew not their happiness before, they had as much right to salvation as before, only they had more knowledge of it after believing; but if they had as much right, why doth the Apostle say as such, they could not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived, no such shall inherit the Kingdom of God; why then, what a wrong is this to them, when they have a right to the Kingdom of God? Do any persons more deserve the same stile of the Gnostics of old, to be called the dirty Sect, than such panders for the flesh as these? But I hope, such as fear the Lord will take the Apostles caveat, and not be seduced by such filthy dreamers, to believe that when they lie in Dalilahs' lap, they are as dear to God, and have at much right to the Kingdom of Heaven, as when they lie in Abraham's bosom. Twentith, He saith in pag. 129. That the best actions of the unregenerate are impure, and sinful, which though they are all pardoned unto all the Elect for the sake of Christ, yet they are not acceptable to God; but in themselves most abominable, and loathsome in his sight. But are their persons acceptable and justified, so as to have as much right as ever they shall have to the Kingdom of God? And are their best actions, such as are their praying, hearing, for the matter good, and duties commanded? and are all the sins pardoned, which make them only evil in God's sight, and yet are they abominable and loathsome in his sight? who will believe you? can the want of faith (which is by you pardoned) hinder the acceptance of their works, and not the acceptance of their persons? Nay, what do you affirm of the actions of the Regenerate more, then may be said of the actions of the Elect unregenerate? if they be justified persons, as you say they are; for the best works of unregenerat, justified Infidels, as you will have it, are (as you say) of the regenerate, pleasing to God, not only comparatively, because better than the works of Reprobates, or then the sins of unregenerate persons, but absolutely, 1. Abstractly, as you affirm of the others, and in themselves, for they are such things as are lawful, and commanded; and if they fail in the manner of doing it, in faith, hope, and love, this is but a fail in the manner; and Gradus non variat speciem, and the Regenerate Elect, fail in the measure of faith, hope, and love; neither in them doth their faith, hope, or love, merit the acceptance of their duties And, 2. Concretely, as they are acted by justified persons, and so pass through the hands of pardoned persons, and the sins are washed away in Christ's blood; this want of faith, hope, and love, is pardoned: I pray tell me now, what real difference you make between the duties of an Elect unregenerate person, and of a Regenerate person. Let not the ignorant Reader mistake me here, I affirm not that any duties of an unregenerate person are acceptable to God, or that the want of faith, hope, and love, maketh but a failing only in the manner and circumstances of the duty; but I have only presented the Reader with a glass, to let him see that Mr. Eyre for all the seeming difference he maketh between the actions of the Elect Regenerate, and unregenerate; yet indeed maketh none, and according to him it cannot be found. Pag. 18. Thus the Reader may see, that one truth of Mr. Eyre verified, where he saith, We may no more judge of Books by their Title, then of strumpets by their foreheads; and although his Tittle-Page hold forth the Gospel-language of free Justification, yet if thou read the Book, thou shalt find Esau's hands, though thou sometimes hearest jacob's voice; And therefore the Reader that is judicious, will not be like a silly fish taken with the bait, though it swallow the hook. I have given thee a few Animadversions, but a judicious Reader will observe more. This is enough to give the Reader warning to preserve him from the infection of this air: And I hope sufficient to reduce them that are led captive by him into the same Error. CHAP. VI Proving that we are not justified from Eternity. HERE I shall premise these few things. First, That as we hold Justification to be a transient act, done in time, so there is no transient act, but it presupposeth necessarily an immanent act in God. And therefore secondly, I acknowledge there was an eternal, and an immutable act of Gods will, decreeing to justify his Elect in time, through faith in Christ. Thirdly, As for that conditionate decree, which Arminians make in God, making the condition antecedent to the act of Gods will, I no way acknowledge, and judge it absolutely inconsistent with God's Nature and Essence; but such a conditional decree, as is so called subsequently, not in respect of God willing, but in respect of the thing willed, sive objecti voliti, is not repugnant to him especially in such contingent effects as come to pass by virtue of his decree ordaining them; Thus God willeth salvation to the Elect, which salvation they shall be brought unto by faith in Christ; not that faith is the cause of the act of Election, or God willing their salvation; yet it may be the cause of the thing willed, a subsequent condition wrought by God for the execution of his decree: And therefore when the Orthodox acknowledge Election to be absolute, they understand it not exclusively to the means which God hath ordained for the obtaining of salvation; for God in the same eternal act did ordain the end and the means; hence Paul telleth the Thessalonians, that God hath from the beginning chosen them to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, 2 Thess. 2.13. 1 Pet. 1.2. and belief of the truth; and Peter saith, The strangers he wrote unto, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. And as I acknowledge this to be an eternal decree, (Because he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy,) so I willingly grant it to be immutable; for he that changeth his purpose, doth it for want of wisdom in deliberating, or for want of power to execute it, neither of which can be ascribed to God without blasphemy. And hence the Scripture saith, The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth who are his. Fourthly, I grant that Christ was elected, and constituted to be a Head, and all the Elect were predestinated to be his members, and in this sense we were chosen in him, (not existing) but only we were preordained unto salvation by him. And that this act was one in God, in respect of whole Christ mystical: although I deny, that the Elect were by this act of God mystically united unto Christ, which is done upon believing; yet I grant a certain relative respect, and mutual relation between them. In which sense the Elect are called his people, before he saved them from their sins, and while they were not yet converted, and his sheep for which he laid down his life, although not yet brought home to him; yet was not Christ the meritorious cause of their Election (much less their foreseen faith, or good works,) although he be the cause of the effects of their Election; as therefore this salvation unto which we are predestinated, is the act of God, so Christ is the effect of God's love of Election, and the means of salvation, and our salvation is the end, in respect of us; but as this salvation is our good, so Christ is the cause of it. Fifthly, Though Christ were thus predestinated to be a Head, and the Elect his Members, yet was not he a Head actually from eternity, nor the Elect actual members, because he had not a mystical body from eternity; and although God decreed from eternity to justify the Elect through faith in Christ, yet were not they actually justified: For * Praedestinatio enim an●e applicationemgratiae nihil ponit in praedestinatis, sed latet solùm in praedestinante. Aims Medul. Theol. cap. 25. sect. 2. Predestination maketh no internal difference between the Elect and Reprobate, until actual grace be given for applying the things intended in Election; nor doth Predestination necessarily presuppose the existence of its term * Praedestinatio enim nec terminum nec objectum suum necessariò praesupponit ut existens, sed ponit ut existat ità ut vi praedestinationis ordinetur ut sit. Amesii Medul. c. 25. s. 8. , nor object, but the futurity of both. Having premised these things, (which I have the rather more fully done, because he representeth me and such as differ from him, as Arminians and Papists,) I shall now prove that we were not justified from eternity. 1. God's decree to justify, is terminus diminuens, is a term of diminution, and therefore is not actual Justification; 'tis amor ordinativus, but it is not amor collativus; it is a love ordaining, and preparing good things for us, but not an actual bestowing them; Justification is an actual bestowing of some special mercy, a discharge from the guilt of sin and death, a passing us from an estate of death into an estate of life; this may be intended, but is not actually performed by Predestination, for it's a known rule, Praedestinatio nihil ponit in Praedestinato: but I will not strangle the question so by the prejudice of a word or two, therefore I argue, 2. The Scripture no where speaketh of an eternal Justification; Therefore we were not justified from eternity. The Antecedent is acknowledged and made use of by Mr. Eyre, and a negative argument in matters of great concernment, is of necessary consequence, 'tis not written, therefore there is no such thing: now let Mr. Eyre produce one Scripture, wherein the decree of God to justify is called Justification, and I yield the cause, 3. That that is an act of God done in time, was not done from eternity; But Justification is an act of God done in time; Therefore it was not from eternity. The Major needs no proof, the Minor is no less evident, Gal. 3.8. Gal. 3.8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the Heathen through fainh, preached the Gospel before unto Abraham, saying, in these shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, where the Apostle maketh it a work to be done in time, that God would justify the Gentiles through faith, not that he had justified them; whereas if he had meant Justification was eternal, it had been senseless for him to say, that God would do that which was done already; nor is this meant of a declarative justification in foro conscientiae, for it is such a justification as Abraham had, but Abraham was not only justified in his conscience, but before God; So, 2 Cor. 5.18, 19 God hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ. And God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their transgressions to them; But Christ did reconcile us in time, and not from eternity; Therefore God did not justify from eternity. Christ reconciles us to God, not only as God, but as God-man, by his death, but Christ was not God-man, and died not from eternity; Therefore, etc. 4. That action of God which maketh a real change in the creature, is a transient action done in time, because it passeth from God to the creature, and some way worketh a change; But Justification is such an action of God that maketh a present change; Therefore it is a transient, not an immanent act. The Major is clear, for what action soever is terminated in patient, or upon the creature, is certainly transient, because it doth not remain in God; and if transient, it must be temporary, for no creature did exist from eternity. The Minor will invincibly remain a truth, for it is most certain, that by Justification the state of a sinner is changed; he that was in the state of condemnation, is now in the state of salvation; Justification is opposed to condemnation, He that is under condemnation, is not justified, and he that is justified, is freed from condemnation. Now let us see what he answereth to this, pag. 65. where he answereth this Objection, that Justification imports a change, which cannot be attributed to the simple decrees of God. He answereth, That if Justification be taken for the thing willed, the delivery of a sinner from the curse of the Law, than there is a great change made, etc. but if we take it for the will of God not to punish, than we say Justification doth not suppose a change, as if God had a will to punish his Elect, but afterwards he altered his will to a will not to punish. Where let the Reader observe the vanity of his distinction, in separating the thing willed from the act of Gods will; for the whole nature of Justification doth not consist in the thing willed, to wit, a delivery of the sinner from the curse of the Law, but in some act of God as a Judge declaring his will to deliver. Take a man condemned to die by a Judge, this prisoner may by power be rescued from the sentence for the present, but is he therefore justified, and acquitted in Law by the Judge? Justification is an act of God delivering the sinner, or acquitting him from the crime, or accusation laid to his charge, and so from condemnation; and where this is, there is necessarily a change. 2. Observe his equivocation, and fallacy in the second member of his distinction; if we take it for the will of God not to punish, and then Justification doth not import a change, as if God had a will to punish his Elect, but afterwards he altered his will not to punish them; we are speaking of a change made by Justification upon the sinner, he saith, there is none made in God's will, quid hoc ad rhombum? and who said that God did first will, and then cease to will, and then take up a new volition? truly, Arminians feign such a mutability in God, but the Orthodox abhor it: Nor doth Mr. Eyre rightly understand, at leastwise represent the Orthodox Doctrine; we say, and that truly, that God by one act of his will, willed that he that is a sinner, and remaineth so in unbelief, should be liable to condemnation, and that upon believing he shall be freed from condemnation, that before faith he should be in a state of sin, and consequently of damnation, and upon faith that he should be justified, and delivered from it. Here is no change in God's will, but in the object; a great change in man, but not in God; God may velle mutationem, when he doth not, as Aquinas saith, mutare voluntatem: God may will a change in the creature, when he doth not change his own will; as a Father may will at his death, and accordingly bequeatheth an estate to a prodigal child, and in case he will become a new man, he shall possess and enjoy it; but if he will not, he shall go without it; here he wills a change, but doth not change his will: So it is in the present case. I will here also take notice what he addeth, The change of a persons state ariseth from the Law, and the consideration of man thereunto, by whose sentence the transgressor is unjust: but considered at the tribunal of Grace, he is righteous, which is not properly a different estate before God, but a different consideration of the same person: God may be said to look upon him as sinful, and righteous; as sinful in reference to his state by nature, as righteous to his estate by Grace.] I answer, The change of a man's state ariseth not from the Law, (for that condemneth him) but from an act of God acquitting him from the Law; if God did not acquit him, the Law would not; 'Tis true, the Law pronounceth him guilty, because a transgressor, and so doth God, whose Law it is; for it was the will of God, so long as he remaineth a transgressor, without a righteousness to deliver him, that he should be in a damnable estate, and upon such a righteousness as God hath provided in Christ, if he believe, and be clothed with this righteousness, he shall be saved: Now 'tis true, this man's state is really changed, but God is not changed; for he willed according to his righteous Law, his condemnation, he willeth upon believing his salvation, and this with one eternal unchangeable act of his will, and whom he hath elected, he giveth faith, hence they are justified; here is a new effect of God's love, but not any new immanent act. Nor is there any truth in that, that God looks upon a man at the same time as sinful, and righteous; if you mean by it an estate of sin, and a righteous or justified estate, for this would ascribe to God a fallible judgement, to judge them otherwise then they are; but if your meaning be he may see at the same time what they were by nature, and what they are by grace, 'tis not denied; but to look upon them as being in their natural estate, and in a state of grace at the same time, implies an error in his judgement, which is blasphemy to imagine, and is a contradiction in adjecto. 5. Christ's death is the meritorious cause of our Justification; But Christ's death was not the meritorious cause of God's eternal purpose; Therefore that immanent act, or eternal purpose of God to justify us, is not our justification. The Major is expressly delivered in the Scripture; Eph. 4.32. 2 Cor. 5.19. Rom. 3.25. Heb. 9.12. God for Christ's sake had forgiven the Ephesians, God was in Christ reconciling the world, etc. and, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith, etc. He hath obtained eternal redemption for us, etc. And to deny it, were with Socinus that cursed Heretic, to deny the satisfaction of Christ. The Minor is acknowledged by himself, page 67. It may be he will answer, as he saith in pag. 66, & 67. If Justification be taken for the will of God, so Christ's death is not the * Nihil movet voluntatem Dei nisi bonitas sua, Aquin. p. 1. q. 19 art. 2. cause, etc. but if you take it for the thing willed, or effect of this will by this immanent act of his, to wit, our discharge from the Law, etc. so it hath Christ's death for the adequate cause, but the vanity of this distinction is discovered in the foregoing Argument; and here the Reader may see, he maketh Christ's death the cause of Justification passively taken, but of no act of God in justifying. Besides, our deliverance from the Law, is an effect of Justification, not Justification itself, which is an act of God for Christ's sake forgiving us, upon which followeth our delivery from the Law. 6. If we were actually and formally justified from eternity, than Christ died in vain, or his death was not to purchase forgiveness, but to apply forgiveness, or to manifest God's love, not to satisfy God's justice: But Christ's death was not in vain; he died, not only to apply, but to purchase forgiveness; not to manifest Gods love only, but to satisfy God's justice; Therefore the first consequence is evident, because his death was in vain, as to the act of Justification: for as in the former Argument, Christ's death was not the cause of that act, and Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth no other, and yet he will have Christ's death to be the cause of the effect of that will; how can it cause the effect, and be no cause of any act of Gods will? for we acknowledge it the cause of the transient act of Gods will, which is properly our justification, which act he will not acknowledge. The second inference is evident; for if we were justified from eternity, than we were forgiven from eternity, and then either Christ doth but apply it at the most, for he did not purchase it, or only he doth but manifest God's love to the world; but the Scripture is evident, That he hath purchased forgiveness, In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our sins; and he died to satisfy God's justice; hence, he is a propitiation for our sins. 7. This overthroweth the merit of Christ's death, because, if we were justified from eternity, than Justification is a due debt to the Elect, and then what place is left for Christ's merit? for it must be bonum indebitum: that that is properly merited, was not due before; but if we were justified, than it was due, and so no room is left for Christ's merits. 8. That which will not secure the sinner from wrath, is not Justification: But this decree will not secure the sinner from wrath. The Major is evident, for how can he be justified that is not secured from condemnation? The Minor I prove, because notwithstanding God's decree Christ must die, there was a necessity of Christ's death, (supposing Gods decree not to pardon sin without a satisfaction;) I grant that God's decree doth eventualy secure the Elect, but not actually; it is true, because a man is Elect, he shall not as to the event be damned, but God will give faith to apply Christ's righteousness; but this is not an actual acquittance, or discharge from sin, when the Apostle saith, Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? that is, to such as are declared, or evidenced to be Elect by believing, or effectual vocation. And that the Apostle must mean so, is evident; the Apostle is comforting in that Chapter Believers that are in Christ against condemnation: Now this he proveth, because they are Elect, The Elect shall not be condemned, but you are Elect; Now how shall this be known? by faith and our effectual vocation: Hence in the 30. ver. he speaketh of effectual vocation, as that that precedeth and is a sign of Election; and hence we are commanded to make our Calling and Election sure. Why is Calling put before Election? because our Election is unknown to any, till it be evidenced by their effectual Calling. Now surely the Apostle did not barely propound Election as a sign of Justification, without some means to know it: for, how can a thing so secret be a comfort till it be manifested? and how shall it be manifested, but by Faith and Sanctification? therefore surely they being the subjects of his discourse, must be understood by the Elect; Now if you take the Proposition, as an universal Negative, or universal Affirmative, No Elect Believer can be justly charged with sin, or All Elect Believers are freed from the charge of sin, both are true; but to take it for the Elect antecedently to Faith, the Proposition is not true: for the Word may, and doth charge him with sin, for it threateneth damnation to him, but it threateneth damnation for nothing but sin, and God doth look upon him as a sinner, and he ought to charge himself with sin; therefore though all Elect Believers shall be freed from sin, yet all the Elect are not formally discharged from sin. As for your weak and feeble endeavour to cast an Odium of simplicity upon so learned a man as Master Burges, who is well known to be an Aristotle to Mr. Eyre, that he should speak as weakly as if he said, Omne animal is rationale, and to excuse it should say, that by omne animal he meant omnis homo, and to prove the expression legitimate, should allege that homo is often called animal, which is true; but very impertinent to prove, that omne animal may be put for omnis homo; but it may be very justly retorted upon Mr. Eyre thus, His opinion is, as if one should say, All the unregenerate whoremongers in the act of their uncleanness, if they be Elect persons, are Saints; and to excuse it, should say by Saints, he meaneth justified persons; and to prove the expression legitimate, should say, the justified persons are often called Saints, which is true; but very impertinent to prove that unregenerate Elect persons wallowing in uncleanness are Saints. 9 That which maketh an Elect person never to be a sinner, not to be borne a sinner, under the guilt of sin, so as to be a child of wrath, is contrary to the Scriptures; But to assert with Mr. Eyre, that the Elect are justified from eternity, is to make them never to be sinners, under the guilt of sin, and children of wrath; Therefore it is inconsistent with the Scriptures to affirm eternal Justification. For the Major, it is evident, that the Scriptures call even the Elect sinners, children of wrath, Ephes. 2.1, 2, 3. thus the Apostle putteth himself into the number, and saith he, And they were children of disobedience, under the power of Satan, Eph. 2.1, 2, 3. dead in sins and trespasses, workers of iniquity, and children of wrath as well as others. And they could not be at the same time children of wrath, and in the favour of God, and so he argueth in his 138. page, in his second Argument, to prove we are immediately and actually reconciled from the time of Christ's death, he saith, They for whom Christ died, could not be the children of Christ at the same time, and children of wrath, and yet will not acknowledge the truth of it, when we urge it against his eternal Justification; but let us see what he answereth to it in his 111. pag. in answer to this Scripture, he saith, it speaks most fully to the cause, but he answereth two things. First, That the Text doth not say, God did condemn them, or that they were under condemnation before conversion. 2dly. That the Emphasis of the Text lieth in this clause, [That they were by nature] children of wrath, that is, in reference to their state in the first Adam; but this hinders not, but that by grace they might be children of love. [1. He saith, the Text doth not say that God did condemn them,] I answer, it saith that that is equivalent to it; for it saith, they were children of wrath; by the wrath there, all Expositors agree is meant the wrath of God; and when they are called children of wrath, it is an Hebraisme, signifying that they were borne such, and surely subject to it, and obnoxious to divine wrath, and guilty of eternal death; and to call a man a child of wrath, is to aggravate the misery; as a son of perdition, is a hopeless, wretched, lost person; the son of disobedience, a very graceless, disobedient wretch; so a child of wrath, he is one to whom wrath is eminently due, as an inheritance is to a child, and this is utterly inconsistent with the grace of Justification; for no justified person can be truly said after his Justification to be a child of wrath, liable to damnation, and guilty of it. For the clear understanding of this, we must know what is meant by the wrath of God, to which the Elect are subject. First, By the wrath of God we must not understand any immanent affection in God opposite to his eternal love of benevolence, or good will that he did bear to his Elect; For, 1. There is not properly any affection in God that is a passion, to which God is not subject. 2. God cannot hate, or be angry with his Elect, so as to cease bearing the same good will towards them that he did from eternity. James 1.17. This were no less than Vorstian blasphemy, for with him there is not the least shadow of turning. This wrath than must be something that leaves them liable to the same condemnation with the Reprobates, though with this difference, that God bearing them this love of goodwill, will not leave them in it, as he will the others; for which cause he is said to love the Elect, and to hate the Reprobate. I answer therefore, the wrath of God may be taken for that just and holy immutable will of God to punish, and revenge the sins committed against him; hence the Lord having created man, from whom as his creature he might justly expect obedience, he therefore gives him a Law, and commandeth his obedience, threatening his sin, or disobedience with eternal death or damnation; this Law is given to all, both Elect and Reprobates, and all alike are bound to yield obedience, and alike threatened in case of disobedience; now Adam in whom we all were, as in our common Parent, being entrusted as a common person with sufficient grace to yield obedience for himself and us, God maketh a Covenant with him, and in him with us, to give us eternal life in case of obedience, and to punish him and us with eternal death in case of disobedience; he sinned, and we all in him, and thus become liable to condemnation threatened; this is the wrath here meant, when we are said to be children of wrath, that is, liable to condemnation, and eternal death: Now the Elect are involved in this estate as well as others; but now God from all eternity, bearing goodwill to his Elect, and purposing to save them, and to leave the others under the condemnation into which they are fallen, purposed to give Christ to take the punishment due to their sins, and the wrath due to their persons, willing that Christ should suffer what was due to them, and promising to give them deliverance from this condemnation through Christ upon believing. Now Christ being made a second Adam, ordained to be head of the Elect, the Elect must be in him before they can be partakers of the benefit of his death, to give them an actual deliverance from the wrath threatened; for we were not sinners in Adam only by imputation, as an act of Sovereignty, but were in him in a natural way, from whom we are descended; this natural union being the ground of God's imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity, together with Gods ordaining him a public person; now all sinned in him virtually, and were virtually guilty of eternal death, and actually become subject to it at their birth; and hence the Elect being borne of Adam, they become as yet members of him, and so are subject unto death as well as others, and so remain till God cut them off from the first Adam, and implant them into the second, this is done by faith; for faith is not our righteousness, by and for which we are justified, but answereth to that which is the ground of our being partakers with Adam's sin; for we being one with Adam, in respect of original and nature, were in him, and one with him, and were so involved in his guilt; even so by faith we are implanted into Christ by a work of the Spirit, cutting us off by the Law from the old stock upon which we grew, and by faith which he worketh in the Gospel, he implanteth us into Christ, hereby we are only united, and now being one, hence his death and sufferings in the merit of it is imputed to us, and hereby are we actually acquitted and justified, and delivered from that wrath we were subject to by nature. Hence than it is evident that we are children of wrath, liable to condemnation at our birth, and then were not justified from eternity; for if we were justified from eternity, than we never were borne sinners, under the guilt of sin, liable to condemnation, for Justification is a removal of this guilt; therefore the Scripture saying we are children of wrath by nature, denieth this eternal Justification, and so the Minor is also made evident. 2. I answer therefore to the second part of Mr. Eyre's answer, where he saith, that the Emphasis of this Scripture lieth in these words, [by nature] where he saith, that in reference to their estate in Adam, they were children of wrath, they could expect nothing but fiery indignation, yet this hindereth not but that by grace they might be children of his love, etc. Where observe, That the Apostle doth not speak of their natural estate, what it is as they are descended from Adam, but he speaketh of it what it was, as that which they were actually delivered from, and are now not in the same state they were. And that was a state inconsistent with the state of Justification, for it implies a contradiction, that they should be in both at the same time, and that in reference to God; 'tis true, they may be considered jointly in the mind of a man, but no man can actually be in both these estates; sure, they are two different estates, the Apostle is speaking of one in Adam, another in Christ by faith, and at their birth they were in the first, in which they could expect nothing but wrath, and God in that estate could not pardon them, keeping to his own order of salvation, therefore than they were not justified; therefore when he saith, that this first estate hindered not, but that by grace they might be the children of love, if he mean only that they might be the object of God's love of benevolence, and as an effect of it be brought out of that estate, it is not denied; but if he mean that they were not then guilty of, and subject to the wrath of God, and so were objects of God's love of complacency, and justified, and that they had as much freedom and deliverance from hell, and actual right to salvation, it is denied, and he apparently contradicteth the Holy Ghost, who saith, they are children of wrath, John 3.36. and that while they remain in unbelief, the wrath of God abideth on them; there it was, and will remain till removed by faith; and it is not we that suborn the Spirit to serve our turn, but he is found to bear false witness against the Holy Ghost. He addeth, that God calleth them his Sons and Children before conversion; be it granted, yet this is not because they actually are so, but certainly shall be made so; and to distinguish them for whom Christ died, from them that shall perish, and to show that it was not for any thing in them, that he first set his love upon them, therefore he calleth them so, not because they were such antecedently to their conversion, but consequently should be made such. He addeth likewise, that it is not any inherent qualification, but the good pleasure of God that makes them his children; if he mean it is not any inherent qualification that is the impulsive moving cause, inward, or outward, that moveth God to make, and take them for his children, it is readily granted; but if he deny any inherent qualification, to be the means of bringing as into the state of Sonship, that he hath predestinated us unto; he contradicteth the Holy Ghost, which saith, John 1.12. John 1. 1●. To as many as received him, to them gave he power, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, right and authority, privilege to become the Sons of God nor were we Sons from eternity, but predestinated to the Adoption of Sons, Eph. 1.5. And ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. He further answereth, pag. 112, by concession, Mr. Eyre, pag. 112, 113. that the Elect in some sense are under wrath, because the Law doth terrify their consciences; but surely the Law doth not only terrify their conscience●, but threateneth death and damnation to their persons; and God by the Law, so long as they remain unregenerate, and not only their consciences, as he affirms, but their persons are under wrath, and the Law showeth what their estate is towards God, and how God doth account of them, till they are delivered from that estate by grace, and not only what he is by nature. For the Law is the Law of God, and what power it hath to threaten and condemn, it hath it from God, and therefore when that condemneth, God condemneth; if the person be not already delivered from the damning power of it by Christ through believing, so that it is not a mere scarecrow, or bugbear to affright the consciences of the Elect, when it cannot reach their persons; for it holdeth their persons under condemnation, till by faith laying hold upon Christ, they are delivered from the sentence of the Law; for Paul speaketh of himself, and the believing Romans, Rom. 7.5. that While they were in the flesh, that is, in their unregenerate estate, wherein they could not please God, the motions of sins which were by the Law, did work in our Members, to bring forth fruit unto death, the corruptions of nature took occasion by the Law, forbidding sin, to commit sin more greedily, & so to bring forth fruit unto death; i. e. death eternal, which is the wages of all sin; and thus they did but heap up, and treasure up wrath for themselves in that estate, till they were married to Christ, and so delivered from this servitude and bondage of the Law, and of their corrupt nature. The Apostle in that Chapter speaketh not of being under the Law as a rule of life only, but he speaketh of being under the reign and dominion of it unto death, so as that a man while under it is dead to Christ, and that he and the Elect Romans were thus while they were in the flesh. I will here add a word or two about his threefold distinction of the wrath of God. First, he saith, It signifies the most just, and immutable will of God to deal with persons according to the tenor of the Law, and to inflict upon them the punishment which their sins deserve. Secondly, It noteth the threatening and comminations of the Law. Thirdly, It notes the executions of those threaten. In the first and third sense, the Elect never were, nor shall be under wrath; but in the second sense, they are under the threatening of the Law, till they are able to plead their discharge.] Let us apply this to the Redemption wrought by Christ, and let us see how great a friend he is to the Doctrine of Redemption; If you take the wrath of God in the first sense, for the will of God to punish, according to the tenor of the law, so they were not under wrath; if you take it in the third sense, for the execution of wrath, they were never under it; for how could they be under it, when God never intended it? what then did Christ redeem them from, only the bare threaten of the Law? why, so long as it was only a threatening, and God intended not to execute it, what need Christ have died according to him? surely Christ hath delivered us from the execution of the wrath, and there was a will in God to punish thei● sins, as well as the sins of the Reprobate; though he would punish their sins in Christ, the sins of the Reprobates in their own persons, and therefore Christ delivered us meritoriously from the real effects of God's wrath, not the bare verbal threaten of the Law. I shall now show what effects of God's wrath an Elect person still lieth under, till he be delivered through faith in Christ, and will cast it into a distinct Argument thus: 10. If the Elect lie under the effects of God's wrath till their actual calling, than were not they justified from eternity; But the Elect lie under the effects of God's wrath. The consequence of the Major is evident, because a man cannot lie under the effects of wrath, and yet be delivered from that wrath. The Minor I prove thus, by an enumeration of those effects according to the Scripture, which are many. 1. To be in a state of alienation from God, so as to have none of their persons, nor services accepted; Thus God is * Psal. 7.11. angry with the wicked every day, yet so are the unregenerate, though Elect, they are under the power of sin. And their prayers are rejected, The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord. Prov. 15.8. And so are all the services of unregenerate men, though Elect persons, which Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth, and they are truly called wicked persons, because they are under the reigning power of sin. 2. They are under the sentence of damnation at their birth, for so saith the Apostle, Rom. 3.19. Rom. 3.19. where he showeth all persons in their natural estate are under the Law; that is, the damning power of it, and become guilty before God; there was a time that this was true: but if they be justified from eternity, than they never were under this damning power, nor were guilty before God; for if they were freed from eternity, when were they guilty? if there were any moment of time wherein they were not free, than they were not justified from eternity. 3. They are subject to the curse of the Law, Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, therefore there was a time the Elect were under it; and if under it, they were not justified from eternity. Acts 26.18. Heb. 2.14. Tit. 1.15. 4. Yea, they are under the power of Satan; but he was not from eternity that they should be under his power, they are in bondage to death, they have no outward enjoyment sanctified, these and the like are sad effects of God's wrath; and how can they be justified, where these effects remain? and these all remain till faith. Acts 13. 11. The Reprobates were not condemned from eternity, therefore were not the Elect justified. The consequence appeareth, Judas 4. because contrariorum eadem est ratio, by Election the Elect are ordained to life, by reprobation men are ordained to condemnation, these are contrary, and among contraries there is the same reason: Now, if the Elect be justified, because of God's decree, then are the Reprobate condemned; but the Reprobates are not condemned actually, therefore neither are the Elect actually justified. Now this assumption is evident; for though Gods will be the cause of reprobation, yet sin is the cause of the Reprobates condemnation; but God cannot in justice condemn them for that which they never were yet guilty of; it's true, God loved Jacob, and hated Esau before they had done good or evil, they had not then according to Scripture done evil, and then God could not condemn them, though he might pass them by, and not Elect them, which is negatively or privatively called hatred. 12. If Gods decree to create the World, was not Creation, nor his will to call Calling, nor to glorify Glorification, than his will to justify was not Justification. To this Mr. Eyre answereth, There is not the same reason, for Creating, Calling, Glorifying, all which do import an inherent change in the person Created, Called, Glorified, which forgiveness doth not, it being complete in the mind of God; To which I answer, that his reason is of no force; for to be the subject of a moral change, doth as necessarily require the existence of the person, as to be the subject of a physical and natural change; for, though the act may be perfect in God's mind, yet the person cannot be perfectly justified by that act, because he hath not existence; can he be pardoned, and acquitted, and declared just, that is so fare from being an offender, that he never yet was a man? The act of Gods will is perfect concerning the sanctifying of a person before he have a being; but he is not a subject capable, because as yet he is not; so God may will Justification, but he cannot justify (deliver him from a state of damnation into a state of salvation) till the person exist, who may be the subject of this change. CHAP. VI Showing that a man is not justified actually from the time of Christ's death. I Shall here first premise a few things, that it may be known what we affirm, and what we oppose. First, Than it is willingly granted, that Christ in his death was a Mediator, and surety, and public person, and that what he did and suffered, was intended for the benefit of the Elect. Secondly, That Christ in his death made a full satisfaction to Divine justice for all the sins of the Elect, so that the whole satisfaction is made, and the price paid, and quoad meritum, the work is done; and in this respect he hath made an end of sin, because he hath fully satisfied for it, so that there need no more sacrifice for sin, Heb. 1.3. Dan. 9.24. but he hath purged our sins away meritoriously by his blood. Thirdly, God is thus far well-pleased with this satisfaction of Christ, that in respect of Christ our surety, God requires no more at his hands, nor at the hands of those for whom he died by way of satisfaction, it being the full value that his justice did require. Fourthly, By his death he obtained in the behalf of the Elect, not a remote, possible, conditional reconciliation, in an Arminian sense, as if our redemption were to be completed by an act of our Faith, performed by the power and liberty of our own freewill, so that upon this condition to be fulfilled by us, without the assistance of grace, the fruits of Christ's death shall depend, for this had been to purchase for us only a salvability, not salvation, and to make us our own Saviour's; but Christ died absolutely to purchase salvation, as absolutely is opposed to an Arminian sense of a condition already explained; but if absolutely be taken to oppose Faith, as a condition to apply Christ's righteousness, by the order which God hath appointed in his Gospel, which Faith God hath ordained as a means to bring us into possession of Christ and his righteousness, which faith God hath ordained his Elect unto, and Christ hath merited, and shall be infallibly given for this end; In this sense I deny, that Christ's death was absolutely a discharge from sin. And therefore affirm, that an Elect person is not actually reconciled, so as to be immediately justified, and discharged from the guilt of sin from the time of Christ's death antecedently unto faith, nor did God accept of the satisfaction of Christ for a present discharge to the sinner; but Christ having laid down the price, the Father and Son did agree upon a way and order, when this benefit shall become theirs, and that not to be till actual faith, according to the tenor of the Gospel, which promiseth salvation only to him that doth believe. Having thus explained myself, I now shall prove it by these following arguments. First, If Christ did not die absolutely for the Elect, that their sins should be pardoned, whether they believe, or not believe, then are they not actually discharged until Faith: But Christ did not die absolutely for the Elect, that their sins should be pardoned whether they believe or not believe: Therefore, etc. As for the assumption, it is such a sacred truth, that none that have a spark of modesty or grace left will deny; for if Christ have died absolutely, that they shall have pardon though they die in unbelief, let them show this, and I will yield the cause; for if Christ had died to have the sins of the Elect pardoned, whether they have faith or not, than an argument drawn from Christ's satisfaction, and Gods accepting it so, would be nervous and strong to prove an immediate reconciliation: but this can never be proved; for, Without faith it is impossibe to * Heb. 11.9. John 3.26. Acts 13.48. please God: And, He that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on him; And, As many as were ordained to life, believe●. And the Consequence of the Major is proved thus; if Christ did not die absolutely to discharge them from sin without faith, than he died for them conditionally, that they believe, and the benefit of his death is limited until faith. Nor will it avail, to say that faith is a subsequent condition, not antecedent, which I disprove by these following Arguments. 1. If an unbeliever remaining so, cannot be the subject of Justification, than Faith is not a subsequent, but antecedent condition of Justification: But an unbeliever cannot be the subject of Justification; Therefore, etc. The Major will not be denied where Reason dwells: the Minor I prove thus, because the Scripture no where maketh an unbeliever the subject of Justification. 2. Because than Justification is a privilege common to Believers, and unbelievers; but the Scripture peculiarly, and solely applieth it to them that believe. 3. Because no man out of Christ, or disunited can be saved by Christ, for Christ saveth none but his Members; Christ is called the Saviour of his Body, Eph. 5.23. and no unbeliever is a member of Christ; for as much as the mystical union is made by Faith, for which I refer the Reader to my Sermon, and the Vindication of it. Secondly, Justification and Sanctification are inseparably joined: But were not sanctified from the time of Christ's death, and antecedently to faith: Therefore we were not justified. It is evident to experience, that Sanctification is not in the least moment of time separated from Justification; indeed we grant a priority of nature, and order, but not of time; Hence the Apostle maketh all that are in Christ new creatures, 2 Cor. 5.17. 1 John 1.6. And if any man, saith St. John, hath fellowship with God or Christ, and walketh in darkness, he is a liar, and doth not the truth; for then a man might be the member of Christ, and the limb of the Devil at the same time; if justified, he is a member of Christ; if unsanctified, a child of the Devil; 1 John 3.8. He that committeth sin, is of the Devil; nor can it be agreeable to the purity of Christ's Nature, and Holiness to have an unsanctified member of his body, nor will the purity and holiness of God the Father bear it, that any should be his child that is not holy; nor can he that is a holy God, justify a wicked wretch so remaining; Institu. Calvin lib. 3. c. 11. whence Calvin in answer to Osiander, when he objected, Contumeliosum hoc fore Deo, & naturae ejus contrarium, si justificet, qui reipsâ impii manent. Atqui tenendum est memoriâ, quod jam dixi, non separari justificandi gratiam à regeneratione, licèt res sint distinctae; It is contumelious and contrary to God's nature to justify those that remain wicked. To which he answereth, But we must remember that which I now said, the grace of Justification is not separated from Regeneration, although they be several things. Thirdly, If we were justified antecedently to our birth from the time of Christ's death, Eph. 2.1, 2, 3. 1 Cor. 6.9. John 3. than we were never borne sinners under the guilt of sin; But this is contrary to many plain Scriptures, that say, we were children of wrath, and such as were unrighteous, and could not in our unregeneration inherit the Kingdom of God; and for further proof, I refer the Reader to the ninth Argument against eternal Justification. Fourthly, If the state and condition of a man be truly altered, and changed, and that before God upon believing, than was he not justified from the time of Christ's death; But his estate is truly altered in the sight of God upon believing; Hence it is said, that they are his people, which once they were not, 1 Pet. 2.10. 1 Peter 2.10. Which in times past were not a people, but are now the people of God; which in times past were not under mercy, but have now obtained mercy; Hosea 1.10. Hosea 2.23. which words are taken from the Prophet Hosea, upon which words Zanchy observeth, that a people are called God's people three ways. 1. According to Predestination, thus it's said, God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. 2. In respect of the Covenant under the Law, and so the Sons of Abraham were God's people, and they that were excluded from that Covenant, were none of his. 3. In respect to their exclusion, or admittance to the Covenant in the Gospel, and thus the Elect Gentiles were once not a people, and then made a people to the Covenant of Grace.] And in this sense I add, all unregenerate, though Elect, are not God's people, until faith: And hence Zanchy saith thus, that whereas the words should have run thus, that in the place where it is said, ye are not my people, there it shall be said, ye are my people, instead thereof he saith it is said, ye are the Sons of God, and he assigneth three reasons, the third is, meliùs hâc locutione indicaret rationem quâ justificamur, & salvamur, nempe per fidem, verbum Dei apprehensantem, (si enim filii Dei sumus, ergò nati ex Deo, si nati ex Deo, ergò per semen Dei in nos illapsum, & à nobis apprehensum, & in nobis retentum; semen Dei est verbum Evangelii in nos illabitur, per virtutem Spiritûs sancti, à nobis verò fide, quae it idem opus est Spiritûs sancti, solâ recipitur, ergò solâ fide fimus filii Dei. He speaketh thus, that he may the better declare the manner of our Justification, or Salvation, ta wit, by faith, apprehending the Word of God, (where he taketh faith not objectively, but subjectively with connotation to the object;) for if we be the sons of God, we are therefore borne of God; if borne of God, therefore by the seed of God falling into us, and received, and retained by us. The seed of God is the Word of the Gospel, it falleth into us by the power of the Holy Ghost, but of us it is only received by faith, which again is the work of the Holy Ghost, therefore by faith alone we are made the sons of God; where you see that Zanchy maketh this great change to be by faith, and that such a change is made, is evident; for before faith they are * Eph. 2.1, 2, 3. 2 Tim. 2.26. Acts 26, 18. Ezek. 44.7. Heb. 2.15. Mark 16.16. dead in sins and trespasses, are children of disobedience, in whom Satan acts and rules, by whom they are led captive at his will and pleasure; they are under his power, they are unrenewed, uncircumcised, slaves, in bondage to death, subject to damnation, children of wrath; but upon believing, are new * 2 Cor. 5, 17, 2 Pet. 1.4. John 1.12. Eph. 1.5. 1 Pet. 1.3, 23. creatures, partakers of the Divine Nature, they are actually instated into the number of children, to which they were predestinated, are begotten again to a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, are borne again not of corruptible seed, but incorruptible, the Word of God which liveth and abideth for ever; But could this be affirmed of them ever since Christ's death? surely no; therefore here is a change, and that before God, wrought in their estate by effectual vocation, and therefore they were not justified before. Fifthly, If we are exhorted to believe in God for pardon and remission of sins, than were not we pardoned from the time of Christ's death before faith; But we are thus exhorted to believe in God for the pardon of sins, Believe, and thou shalt be saved, Acts 16.31. and the Scripture was written for this end that we might believe, and that believing, we might have life through his Name. John 20.21. The consequence is confirmed, because, if we were justified already before faith, it were a needless exhortation to call upon us to believe for pardon, when we are pardoned already, and therefore we might be called upon to believe to get assurance of our pardon, but not to obtain pardon itself; it were an exhorting us to seek for that by faith, which according to Mr. Eyre, is to be evidenced, not to be obtained through faith, and so were a needless and a groundless exhortation. Sixthly, Such as were not mystically united to Christ at his death, could not be justified actually by his death; But Believets that now live, were not then mystically united; Therefore. The Major Proposition will need no shield and buckler to defend it, for Christ justifieth none but such as are in him; as the first Adam brings condemnation to none but such as are in him, so the second Adam gives life and salvation to none but such as are in him. The Minor is proved, because that that is not, cannot be united; Believers were not then existing. Besides, 2. This union is made by faith; They that were not existing, were not then believers. 3. Christ's being a common person, is not sufficient to make the mystical union. 4. Christ as a public person, is a surety; but Christ as united to us, is a Head, which are different considerations; in the one he is a meritorious, moral cause of salvation, in the other a physical cause, or efficient natural cause. 5. The mystical union is by a work of the Spirit, 1 Cor. 6.17. He that is joined to the Lord, is one Spirit; but if the mystical union be made by Christ's being a public person, that needeth not any new work of the Spirit to join Christ and Believers together. 6. Those places, where it is said, Ephes. 2.5. & 6.13. Ephes. 2.5.6.13. Col. 2.13, 14. & Col. 2.13, 14. That we were quickened with Christ, and are made to sit together in heavenly places: And in Christ Jesus, we who were sometimes afar off, are now made nigh; and that the handwriting of Ordinances was blotted out, signify no more than that in, and through him, as a meritorious cause we obtain such mercies, but they hold not forth Believers to be existing in him before they had a being; and our sitting in heavenly places, is spoken only in regard of the certain right we have thereunto, jus ad rem, though not jus in re, and in a qualified sense, in Christ our Head who is already ascended. Seventhly, Christ in his death was not mystically, but personally considered: For, though he were a public person, and Mediator, yet as so, he was personally, not mystically, considered in his death and resurrection, and the Justification that he received from God; Therefore we were not justified actually from the time of Christ's death. The Antecedent is thus made good, because it was not Christ mystical that was crucified, but Christ the Son of God; and, He trod the * Isay 63.3. Winepress of his Father's wrath alone; Christ mystical is not the Saviout of the world, than the work of Redemption is to be attributed to every Believer, and they are as truly Saviour's of the world as Christ; but this is blasphemy to imagine; and therefore if he were not mystically considered in his death, than not in his Resurrection; nor in that Justification he received, and so by consequence we were not justified by his death, nor were in him antecedently to faith. Eightly, If we were pardoned from the time of Christ's death, then as Bellarmine objecteth against our Divines that make faith an assurance, than it is as absurd to pray for pardon of sin, as for the incarnation of Christ, and I may add at for an immanent act in God, as to pray for predestination; because, if it be a thing done already, than it is in vain to pray for that that is done; Jame● 5.15, 16. but we are commanded to pray for pardon, as Peter taught Simon to pray for pardon, Pray, that if it be possible, etc. And though the Elders of the Church must pray for the sick, and if they have sinned, it shall be forgiven them; And Christ teacheth us to pray, Burgess Justifi. page 199. forgive us our sins: Now in that prayer we do not pray, for assurance only, but for pardon itself. For as Mr. Burgess hath well observed to my hand, that we must not departed from the literal sense of the words without an evident necessity; But the plain sense is, that God would forgive our sin; our Saviour minding brevity, would speak his sense in the most perspicuous and clear manner, that may be. And it is not as he observeth so taken in other places, when the Prophet Isaiah speaking of the Israelites, How their land was full of Idols, Isaiah 2 94. and both great men and mean men did humble themselves before them, prayeth, Isa. 2.9. that therefore God would not forgive them; can any imagine that he meant that God would not give them assurance of their forgiveness? And so, Matth. 12.32. the Evangelist saith, All other sins may be forgiven but that against the Holy Ghost: Now in that sense other sins are said to be forgiven, in which sense that is denied to be forgiven, and that is denied to be forgiven, not in respect of assurance, but really. And so as he saith, when it is applied to men, it is not meant of assurance; For we are commanded to pray that God would forgive us as we forgive others, and this last forgiveness it not meant of assurance; therefore neither is the former. Ninthly, Such as are under the power of Satan are not justified; But all unbelievers are under the power of Satan; Therefore we were not justified from the death of Christ antecedently to faith. The Major is not liable to contradiction, because if a man be justified, he is accquitted by the Judge, than what power hath the Jailer to keep him in prison? neither will God nor Christ permit a soul under Satan's power, that is discharged from guilt; that very act of Gods, is his deliverance from the power of Satan. The Minor is evident from Scripture, which saith of the Gentiles, to whom Paul was sent by special commission from Christ to open their eyes; It is said, that he was sent to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, Acts 26.83. from the power of Satan unto God, that they might receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Christ. Where it is evident that these Gentiles were Elect, for whom Christ died, that when he was in heaven, yet appeared in a vision to Paul, as he was going to Damascus to persecute the Saints; And converts him, and then sends him as a special Ambassador and Apostle to the Gentiles to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, from the power of Satan to God, etc. If they were from the time of Christ's death justified, and pardoned, than they were not under Satan's power, for that is inconsistent with Justification; and if they were pardoned already, what need he send him to open their eyes, to turn them from Satan to God, that they might receive forgiveness? this was the end why he was sent, nor can it be meant of receiving the knowledge of their pardon, assurance of their forgiveness; but that they might receive forgiveness itself. And to this end also the Apostle Paul saith of the Ephesians, That they walked according to the Prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience, intimating they were no less ruled and acted by Satan, than other worldly men in whom he now effectually worketh. Tenthly, If we were justified from the time of Christ's death, than the Elect Jews are already justified, whom God will call in this latter age of the world: But the Elect Jews are not yet justified: Therefore Justification is not from the time of Christ's death. The consequence of the Major will not be denied. The assumption I prove. 1. Such as are notingraffed as members into Christ's body, are not justified: The Elect Jews yet uncaled, are not yet ingraffed into Christ's body. The major is expressly confirmed, because Christ is the Saviour of his body, Eph. 5.23. that is, only of his body; that the Elect Jews are not members of his body, Eph. 1.23. I prove, because they are not members of his Church, which is the body of Christ. 2. They that are not called, are not justified: But the Elect Jews are not called. The Major is proved from Rom. 8.30. Whom he praedestinated, Rom. 8.30. them he called,, and whom he called, them he justified, and none else; and why Mr. Eyre should deny that the Apostle doth here set down the order of the causes of salvation, contrary to all reason and authority, I cannot imagine, but that he is not able to answer the Argument: and the contrary may be proved out of the Text; for if in every thing else that relates to the salvation of man in this place, the Apostle hath observed the due order; why should we think he hath not assigned the right order of Vocation, and Justification? For here the Apostle setteth down the golden chain of salvation. For the first cause is God's foreknowledge, not a simple prescience or foresight, a foresight of approbation, nor a foresight of men's faith or works; but * Pet. Martyr-Bullinger. Pareus. Erasmus. whom he thus foreknew, or acknowledged, loved, and approved, without all cause in them, moving thereunto, whom he thus foreknew with the knowledge of approbation, so as to choose unto himself by that foreknowledge, so the Learned render the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Secondly, whom God thus forknew he pedestinated, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he predestinated, that is, certainly appointed and ordained unto the end by certain means, he did infallibly ordain them unto glory as the end, and appoint the means conducing to that end, namely Christ and Fa●th, and whatsoever is needful to salvation. Now when the Apostle speaketh thus, who can judge but he means a special order in this place? Thirdly, in the next place he setteth down the means, and that is effectual Vocation, Whom he predestinated, them he also called, that is, called them unto faith. Fourthly, Whom he called, them he justified, that is, pardoned for Christ's sake, apprehended by Faith. And lastly, Whom he justified, them he glorified; under which is comprehended Sanctification, which will end in glory, which is the last link in this golden chain, and it's against all reason to think the Apostle did not intent a direct Series, and order of the causes of salvation in this place, from whence then it may be concluded, those that are uncalled, are unjustified, so are the Elect Jews. Therefore. A third reason is, because they who are alienated from God, they are not reconciled, and by consequence not justified; So are the Elect Jews yet uncalled; Therefore, etc. As concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sakes; but as touching the Election, they are beloved for the Father's sake, that is, as * De Judaeorum gente in genere disserit, qui quòd Evangelium, idest, quatenus Evangelium non admittunc, nempe in praesenti conditi●ne sunt De● exosi, etc. Beza saith upon the place, Quatenus Evangelium non admittunt, sunt Deo exosi: quod ad Electionem attinet, etc. That is, as they refuse the Gospel, they are enemies or hateful to God in the present condition for your sakes, which is to be understood that God so ordered it for the Gentiles good, that upon their rejection they might be called; but as concerning the Election, they are beloved for the promises God made to their forefathers; but as to their present condition they are hateful to God, therefore unjustified. Eleventhly, That that maketh the witness of the Spirit to be false, cannot be true: But to make unbelievers, (though Elect persons) the subjects of Justification doth this: Therefore, etc. The assumption only needeth proof, Rom. 8.15. yet it is evident, because the Spirit doth witness to the Elect unregenerate, that they are in a state of bondage; whence that Spirit is called the Spirit of bondage; but in this witness the Spirit is a Spirit of truth; therefore the Elect unregenerated are not justified. CHAP. VIII. Showing that we are justified by faith, and that when the Scriptures speak of Justification by Faith, it doth not understand it only declaratively, but really in the sight of God, nor objectively excluding the act, and the instrumentality of Faith is proved. HEre also for a right understanding of the matter in hand, I shall premise, First, That we are not justified by faith in the sense of the Papists, as if it did justify us per modum causae efficiently & mor●●oriae as a proper efficient and meritoriour c●●●e, which by its own worth or dignity deserves to obtain Justification; so Bellarmine saith, Bellar, De Justific. l. 1. c. 17. it doth justify, impetrando, promorendo, & inchoando justificationem. Nor, Secondly, Do we say that faith justifies in an Arminian sense, as if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere, the act of believing were imputed to us for righteousness, or that Faith in the Covenant of Grace standeth instead of that obedience we own to the Moral Law; so as that our imperfect faith is for Christ's sake accepted for perfect righteousness. Thirdly, Faith doth not justify us as the matter of our righteousness, as a grace, or a work, or an act, or a habit; but the matter of our Justification, is Christ's righteousness and obedience. Fourthly, Faith is not to be taken objectively only, that is, for Christ, as Mr. Eyre interprets it, though it be willingly acknowledged, that we are justified by no other righteousness, than the righteousnese of Christ. But, Fifthly, I take Faith subjectively and properly for the grace of Faith, and that act of it whereby as a hand it layeth hold upon Christ for Justification, and so it is to be taken with connotation to its object; That if you ask for what I am justified, I say, the only righteousness of Christ imputed; if you ask by what I am justified, I answer, by Faith, as an hand to put on Christ, as an instrument appointed by God to apply Christ, so that Faith is not the matter of my righteousness; but answereth in my participation of the righteousness in Christ, to that which is the ground of my being partaker in Adam's sin. Sixthly, This grace of Faith is the free gift of God, not the birth or spawn of free will, but the effect of Election, and a fruit of Christ's death. Seventhly, When the Scripture saith, We are justified by faith, it is to be taken for this grace of Faith relatively considered as to its object; and by applying Christ's righteousness, a Believer is justified really in the sight of God by a change of his estate, from death to life; so that it doth not only declaratively evidence Justification to the conscience, but instrumentally it justifieth us, so as that I must be justified by it, though I am not justified for it. These things premised, I shall now prove it. It were needless to mention the Scriptures that expressly say we are justified by faith, it being acknowledged that the Scripture clearly speaketh so; but only the difference is, how this is to be taken, whether properly, metonymically, or both? to which last I incline in the sense explained: So that neither Christ alone, nor Faith alone do justify; but that they are social causes, though not , and ejusdem generis, of the same kind or worth; but Christ is a moral meritorious cause, Faith the instrumental working only virtute agentis principalis, by the power, order, constitution of the principal agent, to the production of an effect far above its own native-worth, or power. Argument the first, against declarative Justification; The matter in controversy between Paul and the Justiciaries in his time was not by what we come to the knowledge of our Justification, but by what means we are justified; it is of fare greater concernment to be justified, then to know his Justification; he said, we were justified by faith, they by the Law; whence I reason, If faith (taken subjectively) for the grace of faith do only evidence Justification, than we are no more justified by faith then by works; But the Apostle ascribeth more to faith then to works; Therefore faith doth more than evidence Justification. The consequence is evident, because works may evidence Justification; nay, works are of a more declarative evidencing nature then faith; Hence the truth of faith is evidenced by works, not only to others, but to ourselves; and that works evidence this Justification of a sinner, is apparent, Rom. 8.1. Rom. 8.1. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit; By this we know that we are passed, etc. 1 John 3.14. Now the Assumption I confirm thus, that the Apostle attributes more to faith then to works, because the Scripture no where saith we are justified by works in his blood, but it saith we are justified by faith in his blood; And when the Apostle speaketh of Justification by faith, he meaneth of a Justification before God, as in that third to the Romans, he concludeth by a sound argument, that we are justified in the sight of God, and not before conscience: Thus, if all have sinned, and are come short of the glory of God, and so are inherently wicked, than we are not justified by what we can do; but we are all thus guilty before God, therefore in his sight shall no flesh living be justified; He speaketh there a Justification in foro Dei, in the sight of God. 2. If faith do only declare that we are justified, than Paul did not say true, in denying that by the works of the Law, or holiness, we are justified; for if he spoke of a declarative Justification, he had no reason to deny that we are justified by the works of obedience done to the Law, for works of Sanctification do evidence this, 1 John 2.3, 4. 2 Cor. 5.17. 1 John. 3.14. 1 John 3.24. Rom. 8.13, 14. 3. If when the Scripture saith, we are justified by faith, be meant only we are declaratively justified by faith, than we may as well say we are elected by faith, as justified by faith; because faith will as truly evidence Election, as Justification; hence we are commanded to make our Calling and Election sure; 2 Pet. 1.10. but the Scripture saith not we are Elected by faith, or through faith, but chosen unto saith; therefore faith hath an influence into Justification, though not into Election, and something more is intended then a declarative Justification. 4. Then Faith is not a believing on Christ for pardon, but a believing on Christ because I am pardoned; and if so, than an Axiom or Proposition, according to Mr. Eyre, is the object of justifying faith, contrary to all the * Actus credentis non terminatur ad axioma, sed ad rem, fatentibus Scholasticorum clarissimis. Amesii Medul. Theol. l. 2. c. 5 24. Orthodox, who make Christ, or the mercy of God in Christ, the object of Faith. 5. Then Faith may be necessary to Consolation, but it is not necessary to Salvation, contrary to the Scripture which saith that salvation is the end of Faith, and we believe unto the saving of our souls. 6. This inverteth the order of the Gospel, for that commandeth us to believe that we may be justified; this saith, we are already justified, therefore we must believe; The Scripture saith, We are justified by faith, This opinion, as Mr. Woodbridge observeth, maketh us to be faithed by Justification. 7. Then it is not lawful to pray for pardon of sin, but for assurance, the vanity of this is before discovered. But Mr. Eyre will object, that when the Scripture saith, We are justified by faith; the meaning is by Christ, taking faith objectively, and exclusively. To which I answer, that we deny not faith to be taken objectively, if you speak of the matter of our righteousness; but that therefore faith is excluded, and that the object justify without the act; I deny, and prove thus: First, It conduceth much to the belief of this truth, that faith is to be taken subjectively with connotation to its object; or that faith subjectively taken, is not excluded from Justification, because the letter of the Scripture expressly in many places, affirmeth that we are justified by faith. Secondly, I conceive the matter in controversy between Paul and the Justiciaries, was not only precisely, and abstractively considered, what is the matter of our righteousness that God requires for our Justification, for then his direct answer had been the right eousnesse of Christ, excluding faith, for faith is in no sense the matter of our righteousness, for which we are justified, for then faith and works had not been opposed, and we were then justified by works; but I conceive the question was, what was the matter of this righteousness, and how is this ours, as apeareth by his answer: Now if the righteousness of Christ be the matter of Justification, and is made ours by imputation antecedently to faith, the Apostle did impertinently add faith in the answer to the questions, that we are justified by faith in Christ, if that be excluded from applying Christ's righteousness; for he is not speaking here of a declarative Justification, what shall evidence it to my conscience, and give me knowledge of it, but what justifieth me? and seeing it is something without, done for me, and imputed, how is it mine? not, how is it known to be mine? Therefore faith is not exclusively taken. Thirdly, If when it is said we are justified by faith in Christ, the object is understood by the act, excluding the act, then why is it that in most places where Justification is spoken of, that the object and the act are both expressed, if by the object and act the same thing be intended? Fourthly, It is not probable that the Apostle in such a weighty controversy, wherein he did desire to speak clearly (and had most reason to speak clearly, rather than elegantly, and obscurely) should take the act for the object, if the act had no influence into Justification, (neither as the matter of Justification, nor the instrument to apply it,) for danger might arise, and is given by such an expression, to ascribe something to faith in the point of Justification, if his intent were to exclude it, therefore he intended not to exclude it; hence we justly ascribe instrumentality unto faith, in applying Christ's righteousness to Justification. Fifthly, If Abraham's faith by which he was justified, was subjectively taken for the grace of faith, yet relatively considered to its object, than our faith that are the children of Abraham, is so taken in the point of Justification, this inference shineth clearly like the Sun at noonday; But Abraham's faith was subjectively taken, with relation to its object; Therefore. The assumption is proved from Rom. 4.3. Rom. 4.3. For first, besides the letter, where it is said, that it was imputed to him for righteousness, that is, his faith, believing on God, so that faith is described, vers. 17. in many excellent acts of that faith, ne there of which can in propriety of speech be applied to Christ's righteousness, and why the Apostle should impertinently break out into many expressions in the commendation of his faith as a grace, when he is treating of the point of Justification, and stir up us to the imitation of the like faith, telling us that it was written for our sakes, that it was imputed to him for righteousness, and that our faith (believing on God that raised our Lord Jesus from the dead) shall be imputed to us for righteousness, if we so believe; if faith hath no hand in Justification, to apply Christ's righteousness to that end, I can no way rationally imagine. Sixthly, Nor can I see any supereminent excellency in that grace above all other, as the Scripture expresseth, and Divines acknowledge, if its noblest effect of Justification be denied, but as works of Sanctification do as evidently declare Justification as Faith, as I have showed; so the grace of love fare excelleth it in other respects; Therefore is it not exclusively taken in the point of Justification. Seventhly, Besides in Rom. 4.5. it is said, That to him that believeth, his faith is imputed for righteousness; where something belonging to the Believer is called his, to wit, the act of faith, which is his before the imputation of it is made to him, and that is imputed for righteousness; that is, that act of Faith relatively considered, is that that gives him a title to Christ's righteousness, and so that that is due to Christ, is attributed to the act; and hence that is said to be imputed for righteousness: Now that Christ without faith justifies not, I prove by these follow arguments. 1. If Christ's righteousness will not profit a man without faith, the● Christ alone separated from faith, doth not justify; But Christ's righteousness will not profit any man without faith; Therefore, etc. The Major carries sufficient light. The assumption is proved, because Christ saith to the Jews; John 8.24. John 6. If ye believe not, ye shall die in your sins; and, Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life; where though there be righteousness in Christ to justify, he saith, If they believe not, they shall die in their sins; and, He that believeth not, shall be damned; there was life in Christ, but for want of coming, or believing, they did not partake of it. I am not ignorant what Mr. Eyre will answer (as I conceive) to this, That Christ's righteousness will not profit him that is a final unbeliever, and that Faith is a consequent condition of Salvation, but not an antecedent means to apply Christ's righteousness. To this I answer, that the Scripture speaketh of unbelievers indefinitely, He that believeth not, shall be damned; and therefore it is understood of all unbelievers, so long as they abide such, they are under condemnation. Let Mr. Eyre produce one Scripture that holds forth an unbeliever the subject of Justification, or one instance of a justified unbeliever; and if final unbelief will hinder salvation, then temporal unbelief may hinder the application of it for the time present; and so long as he continueth an unbeliever, it is of the same nature with final unbelief, because it keepeth the soul from coming unto Christ for life. To the second exception, that it is a subsequent, not antecedent condition of Justification, I answer by a second Argument thus: 2. If Christ's righteousness be the end of faith, and is obtained by faith, than it is antecedent unto the Application of it; But it is the end of faith, and obtained by it. The Assumption only needeth proof, and yet the Apostle expressly affirmeth it; Rom. 20.10. With the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. And, To him that believeth, it shall be imputed to him for righteousness; that is, Christ apprehended by faith, shall be imputed to him for righteousness; It is not said, man believeth with the heart to the manifestation of righteousness, but unto righteousness, righteousness being that which he attaineth by believing; and hence salvation is called the end of faith, 1 Pet. 1.9. receiving the end of your faith the salvation of your souls, and life is made the end of believing, John 20.31. John 20. 3●. These things are written, that ye might believe, and that believing, ye might have life through his Name; not that ye might know ye had life before ye believed, but that believing ye might have life, and Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth, God did therefore cause the Law to be delivered, that by the knowledge of men's sinfulness manifested by the Law, they might fly to Christ for righteousness. 3. If no man have eternal life, but such as eat Christ's flesh, and drink his blood, than no man antecedently to faith hath eternal life, and by consequence Christ justifieth not without faith; But no man hath eternal life, but he that eats his flesh, and drinks his blood; Therefore. The Assumption are the words of Christ, John 6.53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you; where Christ compareth himself to food. Now as food, though never so good nourisheth not, unless we eat and drink it, and it be incorporated into our body, and become one with us; so unless we thus eat Christ, etc. that is, unless we feed upon his death and sufferings by faith, and apply them by faith, so as to be one with him, we cannot live by Christ; where observe, Christ is the Food, Faith is the Hand to take this Food, and the Mouth to eat it, without which this food will do us no good; so here, therefore he hath no life, and an unbeliever hath not yet eaten. 4. Such whose minds and consciences are defiled, are not justified; but the minds and consciences of all unbelievers, are defiled. The Major appeareth, because when Christ justifieth, he * Heb. 10.22 purgeth from an evil conscience. The Minor is expressed, * Tit. 1.15▪ where he speaketh indefinitely of unbelievers, and therefore it is understood of all. 5. Such whose persons are abominable, who are Reprobates to good works are unjustified; such are unbelievers, for he speaketh there indefinitely of all unbelievers. Having then proved Justification not to be before faith, I shall now prove the instrumentality of Faith unto Justification, and the consistency of it with the free grace of God. For the right understanding whereof we must know, what an instrumental cause is, and wherein the nature of it consists, and whether an instrumental cause be in the number of true causes, and to what it is reducible, and then apply it to faith. Now we must know that an instrument hath divers significations, I will not trouble the Reader with all, sometimes it is taken for any thing which is moved, and directed by a superior agent, thus the Platonists take it, and according to this acceptation every agent but God is an instrument, and God alone in this sense is the principal efficient cause of all things; and thus Isaiah the Prophet seemeth to take it, Isaiah ●0. 15. when he calleth the King of Assyria God's Axe, and his Saw, in respect of God that used him for the destruction of the Nations; and in this sense all causes as they depend upon GOD in their working, are instruments: but we take it not in this sense. 2. To omit the rest, an instrument according to the vulgar, and usual acceptation of it, is any thing that is used by the superior agent, moving, and directing it to the production of an effect superior to itself; for if it be proportionated to the effect, it is not an instrument, but an efficient principal cause. And I conceive five things are required to an instrumental cause. First, That it be a necessary antecedent to the effect, not a consequent of it; and I say a necessary antecedent, to distinguish it from a contingent antecedent; not that the whole nature of an instrumental cause consists in this; for a thing may be a necessary antecedent, and yet not a cause of the thing, as the opening of a man's eyes is a necessary antecedent to sight, but not a cause of sight, that is the eye, or the visive faculty. Secondly, It must be moved, acted, and directed by the superior agent to its end, as a Carpenter useth his artificial instruments to the building of a House. Thirdly, That it be used to produce an effect exceeding the efficacy, and activity of the instrument, so that the effect is more noble than the instrumental cause of it; As a Minister is God's instrument by whom men are converted, and brought to faith; but is not called an instrument in respect of the natural birth of a child begotten by him, because in the first the effect transcends the efficacy of the instrument; but it is not so in respect of the natural birth, because there is a proportion between the cause and the effect. Fourthly, It must be subservient to the action of the principal agent; hence the action of the principal agent and the instrument is the same. Fifthly, That it have an influence into the effect by a proper causality. I will apply this to faith, only I will here add whether it be in the nature of true causes, and to what cause it must be reduced, because there are but four Heads of causes: The Material, Formal, Efficient, and Final. * Scalig. Exer. 297. s. 3. Some except that an instrument is not in the number of true causes, because it doth not move, nisi moveatur, unless it be moved: but this is not essential to a cause to move, and not to be moved; for so the Efficient should not be a cause, because it is moved by the end, and so all adjuvant social causes should be excluded; Therefore it is a true cause, yet not a first cause, as * Plato & Galenus, ut refert. Scheib. Met. l. 1. c. 22. p. 308. some imagine, but is reducible to one of those four Heads of causes, which are generally acknowledged to be as above recited; Therefore I take it to be reduced to the Efficient, and so it is an instrumental efficient cause, not the external impulsive efficient cause of it, that is peculiar to the merits of Christ. Now that faith is such an instrumental cause I prove, because all those properties of an instrumental cause above cited belong to it. First, It is a necessary antecedent unto Justification, as I have already proved, for without Faith no man is justified; it is not barely antecedent, as causa sine qua non, as a cause without which a thing is not done, which is only present in the action, but doth nothing therein, and therefore is an equivocal cause, and that is indeed none, having nothing but the name of it, but is that by which it is done. Secondly, Faith is moved, acted, directed by GOD the superior Agent unto this end, GOD is the principal Agent in Justification; Acts 13.48. Faith is wrought by GOD in the soul, for it is his gift, and directed by God to this end, to bring us to Justification; He hath ordained us not only to life, but to Faith, as a means to obtain it: As many as were ordained unto life believed. * And whom ●e predestinated, them he also called, and whom he called, he also justified. And if God had not appointed Faith as a means to apply Christ's righteousness unto Justification, Faith could not produce such an effect; and God hath expressed his will, That he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth should not perish, but have eternal life. These two Propositions have been sufficiently confirmed already. Thirdly, That the effect, to wit, Justification doth exceed the efficacy, and act vity of Faith, I think none will deny; so if we consider the excellency of the privileges of Justification, how thereby our sins are pardoned, we reconciled, adopted into the number of God's children, and so are made coheir●s with Christ of eternal life; How could Faith merit or effect this? There is no proportion between this grace, and the great things received by it. Fourthly, It is subservient to the action of the principal Agent; not that it is needful to God, as if he could not produce the effect without it, had it been his will and pleasure, as a Carpenter dependeth upon his instruments in working, without which he cannot build: But God judged it the fittest means to apply Christ's righteousness to Justification, and hath given to Faith this peculiar office to apply it; so as that God hath concluded with himself to justify none unless they believe. Hence, though Justification be God's act, yet Faith which he worketh, and freely giveth, is the means by which Gods eternal will and purpose to justify, is executed, not by working any new will in God, but being that condition upon which God hath purposed, promised, and by Covenant obliged himself to perform it; and thus it concurreth with God, and God with it to the act of Justification. Fifthly and lastly, Mr. Ball, p. 19 It hath an influence by a peculiar causality into Justification, as Master Ball saith on the Covenant of Grace, [As the eye is an active instrument for seeing, and the ear for hearing, so is Faith for justifying] Hence the Scripture frequently saith, we are justified by and through Faith, which indemonstrably showeth the instrumentality of this grace; And although this act be nothing but a receiving, and so equivalent only to a passive instrument; God effecteth Justification, and passeth the sentence, forgiveth the sinner; Faith receiveth the mercy offered, receiveth Christ, and in him forgiveness, and so believeth unto Justification. Nor do we in so saying Deify Faith, nor commit sacrilege against Christ; the power of life and death is Gods, and he forgiveth, not Faith; Christ is our righteousness for which we are justified, Faith is not our righteousness, but an active lively instrument of the soul, wrought by God to apply this righteousness; and it is more properly called in reference to God, his work, than his instrument; yet as it is subservient to his end or work of Justification, I see not any reason why it may not as fitly be called his instrument to our Justification, as any thing else he useth to produce an effect by, may be called his instrument, not because he needs it, but because he will not do it without it: And hence there is a twofold action in Faith, as in other instrumental causes; one instrumental, the other proper and peculiar to itself. The instrumental action of Faith is, that it helpeth the action of God in justifying, because now God according to his own constitution in the Gospel may justify; which observing his own order, he cannot do, until Faith, that which is proper to it, is as it relates to the subject, and so it is an instrument of the soul to receive, and apply Christ's righteousness unto Justification. Nor have I asserted any thing in this that is inconsistent with the freeness of God's grace. For, First, I make not Faith an uncertain effect depending upon man's freewill, upon which the act of Justification should depend; Acts 13.48. but a certain effect of God's eternal purpose, and a fruit of Christ's death, which shall infallibly in Gods due time be wrought: Now all God's purposes of grace are free. Secondly, I make not Faith the matter of our righteousness for which we are justified, but ascribe that to the active and passive obedience of Christ. Thirdly, Though Faith be our act, yet is it God's gift; and therefore salvation is no less of grace, though by Faith, then if it were without it; and if it be an instrument helping the principal Agent, yet being wholly wrought by God, and all the efficacy, and activity that Faith hath, it hath it not by any thing to it, but extrinsical; and by G●d● 〈…〉 the Covenant of Grace, and merciful acceptance o● it, this ●o way obscureth the grace of God; and therefore Paul ●●●th ●he inheritance is therefore by faith, that it might be of grace; and, Rom. 4.16. Ephes. 2.8. By grace ye are saved through faith, it is the gift of God,; Faith, it is an emptying, soul-humbling, and a Christ-exalting grace; it renounceth all its own righteousness, it goeth out of itself into another, relieth wholly upon Christ for righteousness, and receives heaven as an alms, and all from God as a free gift; and the more faith there is in any, the less pride, and resting upon any thing in ourselves; Therefore hereby the grace of God is no way the less free, though that be the instrument to apply Christ's righteousness unto Justification. Fourthly, we do not make Faith an antecedent condition, moving and inclining Gods will to receive us into Covenant with himself, but we make it antecedent to our being admitted to partake of the benefits of the Covenant. CHAP. IX. Showing how weakly he hath defended himself against the charge of Antinomianism, and likewise manifesting that the Authors brought by him in defence of his Error, do some in the same place, and most of them jointly bring in evidence against his cause. MAster Eyre, Page the 19th. complaineth that his Doctrine is called an Antinomian Error, pag. 19 (which is somewhat like the temper of such evil men, pag 27. which the world is too full of, that are more ashamed to be thought to be evil, then to do it.) And he saith, if it be an Error, it is an Anti-evangelical Error; Is not this a good * Incidit in Scyllam, etc. choice, to choose rather to be accounted a corrupter of the Gospel, than an enemy to the Law, which is by so much the greater sin, as the Gospel excelleth the Law? and although I willingly grant, and judge his Error to be diametrically opposite to the Gospel; yet if the Antinomist be cast into his right tribe, he will derive his pedigree from this Anti-evangelical principle, and therefore this child will lie at his door still; but he purgeth himself from this crime, by saying that it hath been an old design of Satan to blast the truths of God with odious nicknames: This I acknowledge, and he verifieth it himself, by styling the Doctrine of Justification by Faith, to be a joining in confederacy with Papists, Socinians, and Arminians; for such he maketh all that dister from him, and enemies to the free grace of God; yet he will not see this beam in his own eye, when he can see a mote in his brothers. 2. He saith, that by all the Diagnosticks, which Divines have given us to discern between Truth and Error, it hath the complexion of a saving Truth, by which I am contented to try it; and let me bear the blame of it, if the beauty of that complexion vanish not at the warm breath of the nex● Argument, as much as Jezabels' painted colour faded, when the heat did transform her again into her first deformity. I admit of the rule that he giveth to try it by. That Doctrine which gives most glory unto God in Christ, is certainly true, and the contrary is as certainly false. Now let such, as he saith, that are least in the Church judge, which opinion giveth most glory unto God, his or ours; Either his which asserteth, That an Infidel, and an ungodly person * Mr. Eyre, p. 10. so remaining under the reigning power of sin, even while he lieth like a swine wallowing in the mire of sin, committing uncleanness, and that with greediness; yea, in the very act of it, if an Elect person, he was justified from * Page 64. eternity in the decree of God, and from the time of * Page 67, 68 Christ's death being united to him, because they were then in him as a * Page 7. common person; and so while they are thus in their * Pag 60, 61. unregenerate estate, being thus considered, God beholds them as righteous persons, perfectly righteous, and accordingly dealeth with them, and Divine Justice cannot charge them with the least sin, nor inflict upon them the least of those punishments which their sins deserve: so that while they are thus, they have as much * Master Eyre, page 122. right to salvation as ever they shall have, though they may by faith have more knowledge and comfort of their happiness, yet they have no more right, nor is their estate changed before God upon believing as to Justification, but only their former blessedness is made * Page 66, evident to their consciences. This is the soil of that brutish opinion, and although in so many words together, Master Eyre * Page 76. hath not expressed his mind; yet it is fairly without any wrong to his opinion, without wire-drawing per fidiculas consequentiaru●, by threads of consequences, which he disclaims, collected, as may appear by comparing it with the places quoted in the Margin. Now we hold, and maintain, God purposed in his eternal decree to justify his Elect in time, to that end he sent Christ in the fullness of time to die for their sins, that a full satisfaction might be given to his Divine Justice, as a foundation of God's gracious act of Justification, which is not immanent, but transient; and now by Christ's death the price is paid, and we are meritoriously redeemed; but it was the will of the Father and the Son, that none should have actual benefit, as to a present discharge from the guilt of sin until faith, which faith is not the effect of freewill, but a certain effect of God's decree, and fruit of Christ's death, which shall be given to all the Elect for application of the righteousness of Christ, and his satisfaction unto their actual Justification: By which faith we are united to Christ, and so partake of the saving benefits of his death. Now let the Reader judge which giveth most glory to God in Christ, his or ours. First, Doth he ascribe the whole work of salvation to the grace of God, and the meritorious purchase of Jesus Christ? so do we. Nor, Secondly, Do we, as he falsely accuseth us, make men moral causes of their salvation, let him prove it if he can. Thirdly, Nor do we say that Christ purchased only a new way of Salvation, whereby we may be saved, if we perform the conditions required of us; we acknowledge no condition to be performed by us by the power of freewill, but a condition as freely purchased and given, and as certainly bestowed as the Salvation itself; so that Christ's death is no way rendered uncertain, or less sure. Fourthly, Doth he say that God justifieth the ungodly? so do we; but we dare not say with him, that he justifieth the ungodly so remaining under the reigning power of sin; but whom he justifieth, he also sanctifieth at the same time; for we think it dishonourable to God, to the purity and holiness of his nature to justify a man while he is a servant of sin; The Lord is of purer eyes then to delight in an unsanctified wretch, and it is a wrong to God, to make him a Father of such an unclean beast, and such a profane ungodly person his adopted child; though he did purpose to adopt him, yet he did not, he could not adopt him without changing his nature: We judge it a wrong to Christ, that a limb of the devil should so remaining, be made a member of Christ; For he that committeth sin is of the Devil; or, 1 John 3.8. if he that hath the Devil for his father, should have at the same time Christ for his head; but all sinners that are under the reign of sin, have the Devil for their father, John 8.44. Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do, And thus you may see which Doctrine ascribeth most glory to God in Christ. Thirdly, He purgeth himself from this crime by describing Antinomists in Augustine's time, from Eunomeus their leader, of whom St. Austin saith, Fertur usquè ad eo, etc. August. de Haeresibus, c. 54. It is reported that he was such an enemy to goodness, that he affirmed, though a man did commit, or lie in any kind of sin, it should never hurt him if he had but that faith that he taught; and of the same strain were the Gnostics, who for their filthy lives were called Coenosi, the dirty sect.] And what saith Mr. Eyre less, doth he not say that the unregenerate while they so remain, (that is, let them commit, or lie in any kind of sin,) yet if Elect, they are justified, that is, secured from wrath, and so it shall not hurt them; yea, though they have no faith? if those were the dirty Sect, I am sure this is no better. And he further saith of the Corinthians whom the Apostle called unrighteous, fornicators, adulterers, abusers of themselves with mankind, etc. such as could not inherit the Kingdom of God,] That they had no more right unto salvation after faith, then before; 1 Cor. 6.9, 10, 11. Mr. Eyre, pag, 122. so then by him they had right unto salvation, and these sins could not keep them out of Heaven, when the Apostle saith, as such they could not inherit the Kingdom of God; Is not this as bad as the opinion of Eunomius? nay, of the two, the first borne of abominations, because he will make God the justifier of these, while they so remain. Fourthly, He vindicates himself from Antinomianism, by the authority of some godly men that have asserted Justification in foro Dei, before faith, who were never accounted Antinomians. 1. From the authority of Mr. Pemble in his Vindiciae Grat. to which I answer, That if Mr. Pemble saw reason to alter his judgement, as it seemeth he did in his Treatise of Justification; Mr. Eyre upon deliberate thoughts, may find as much reason, if he hath as much ingenuity to change his mind, although he hath doted upon an erroneous opinion, as many persons do upon a vain fashion when it is new; yet let him have but a little more time, and serious thoughts about it, and he will see cause to lay it aside, as men do when their fashions grow stolen. And that Mr. Pemble dissents from him. I shall make to appear by a testimony or two of Mr. Pembles, in his Book of Justification, which is directly contrary to what he formerly asserted; in his first Sect. Cap. 3. pag. 22. of his Treatise of Justification, he hath these words: The condition required in such as shall be partakers of this grace of Justification, is true faith, whereunto God hath ordinarily annexed this great privilege, that by faith, and faith only a sinner shall be justified; and, pag 23. speaking of the Covenant of Grace, The other Covenant is the Covenant of Grace, the tenor whereof is, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved; the condition of this Covenant is faith; And, pag. 24. A sinner is justified in the sight of God from all sin and punishment by faith, that is, by the obedience of Christ Jesus believed on, and embraced by a true faith, (where he taketh faith subjectively and objectively,) which act of Justification of a sinner, although it be properly the onl woe k of God, for the only merit of Christ; yet it is rightly ascribed unto faith, and it alone; for as much as faith is that main condition of the New Covenant, which as we must perform if we will be justified: so by the performance thereof, we are said to obtain Justification and life; for when God by grace hath enabled us to perform the condition of believing, then do we begin to enjoy the benefit of the Covenant, then is the sentence pronounced in our consciences, which shall be after confirmed in our death, and published in the last judgement. So in pag. 57 We confess faith is a work, and in doing of it, we obey the Law, etc. but now we deny that faith justifieth as a work, which we perform in obedience to this Law; it justifieth us only as a condition required of us, and an instrument embracing Christ's righteousness; Thus his first authority is found to bear witness against him. His second witness is Mr. Rutherford, whom he scoffingly derided, when in our conference he told me with contempt, as appeared to them that heard him, that it was Mr. rutherford's judgement, which he hoped I did like well enough; and here he suborneth Mr. Rutherford to serve his turn; and had he had the honesty to quote his Author, and recite his whole mind, he had found but little shelter for his opinion on his words, the place cited is this, Sanè prius quam Electus credit cessat ira Dei adversus ipsum, Rutherford Apol. Exercit. pag 45. omnésque effectus irae erga ipsius personam, ídque propter Christi meritum. Sed non virtute illius palmaris promissi Evagelici, Qui credit in Christum non venit in condemnationem, nunquam enim removentur effecta irae Dei adversus peccatum Electi virtute illius promissi, donec quis actu credit: Verily (saith he) before an Elect person do believe, the wrath of God ceaseth against him, and all the effects of God's wrath towards his person are removed for the merit of Christ, (but than you fraudulently withhold the latter part of the sentence which makes against you, as he did that cited Scripture to Christ;) but not by virtue of that signal promise of the Gospel, He that believeth shall be saved; for the effects of God's anger against the sins of the Elect, are not removed by virtue of that promise, till he actually believe; for hence the Elect have no consolation till faith. Now if you say he meant our Justification was not evidenced to our consciences till faith, and that is all he means; Ruth. Apol. Exercit. p. 44. Hear what he saith, Pag. 44. Dicent ergo Arminiani, nos hîc Justificationem sumere pro sensu, & notitia Justificationis, & remissionis, ideòque (homines fide Justificantur) idem valet ac homines tum demum Justificantur, quandò credunt, hoc est sentiunt se justificari, cum anted essent justificati. Nugae, & tricae Siculae: Nam justificari plus est quàm sentire se justificari: Nam, 1. Est actus Dei absolventis terminati in conscientiam hominis, citati, & tracti ad tribunale tremendi Judicis, qui actus, ante hoc instans non terminabatur in conscientiam. 2. Deus hoc actu, certum facit conscientiae citati, innitenti fiducialiter in Christum, jam etiam in Christo plenam expiationem omnium peccatorum factam. Ipse peccator actu fiduciali recumbit in Christum sufficientem Salvatorem credentium, at verò actus Dei terminatus in nos, non potest esse nudus sensus illius actûs, quis sanus ità argumenta retur cui paulò magis sobrium est sinciput?] The Arminians will say, (for against them he principally dealeth in that Book, and therefore opposeth an Arminian condition of faith, and not ours) that we take Justification for the sense, and knowledge of Justification and pardon; and therefore to say men are justified by faith, it is as if we should say, that men are then justified by faith when they believe, that is, when they perceive they are justified, when as they were justified before. These are but fables and trifles; for to be justified, is more than to know we are justified: For, First, It is the act of God absolving, terminated in the conscience of a sinner, cited, and drawn to the tribunal of a dreadful Judge, which act before this instant was not terminated upon the conscience. Secondly, In this act God assureth the conscience of a sinner cited to his bar, fiducially trusting upon Christ, that now a full expiation is made of all his sins. Thirdly, The sinner by a fiducial act, relying upon Christ as a sufficient Saviour of Believers. But the act of God terminated upon us, cannot be a bare sense, or knowledge of that act; what sound man that hath a sober brain, would so reason? And immediately followeth, Quamvis itaque in ment Dei peccata, etc. Although therefore sins were remitted in the mind of God from eternity, (where let the Reader observe, he is speaking against the temporal and conditional decrees of Arminius, making God to elect upon foreseen faith;) yet is not a man justified from eternity, that is, declared to be just in Christ, in his conscience, when he is cited to God's tribunal, (where he taketh declared to be just, for a transient act of God terminated upon the conscience, fotgiving, and declaring this forgiveness, and not for a bare knowledge of this by a reflex act of faith;) for although that act of justifying in God, note an immanent and an eternal act of God; yet notwithstanding that act is not the whole integral and formal reason of the Justification of a sinner, of which Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians, and the Scripture speaketh, Formaliter enim justificare, etc. For, for God formally to justify, is to declare actually, to wit, in a judicial act, that the guilty sinner trembling before his Judge, now hath the benefit of eternal absolution; and now first of all, and never till now, that the effects of his divine displacency against their sins, do now cease, by virtue of that divine promise, wherein Christ and all his benefits, and an actual right to the Kingdom of God, and the dignity of Adoption, or Sonship are promised to the Believer. Indeed he saith, Pag. 43. N. 20. that faith is not the instrument of Justification actively taken, as an immanent eternal act of God; for no man, saith he, by believing, doth make God to have a will not to punish sin, or to have a will to love us, (which the Arminians plainly make) and therein he saith true; yet he maketh faith the instrumental cause of Justification passively taken, as a declared act of God terminated upon us, as that place declareth; and in express words in pag. 37. Ruther. Apol. Exer. p. 37. which Mr. Eyre in his 32. pag. of his Book, when he boasted that Master Rutherford made the opinion he did oppose the chief of the Arminians, and Socinians, and Papists Errors, could not be ignorant of, for he there maketh faith the organical cause of Justification. In that place he saith, the Arminians would desire nothing more than this, that remission of sin is not before actual faith: And that the Remonstrants in their Apology do say that nothing is more false, Socinus part 4. de Salu. c. 10. than that men have sins remitted before they believe, in which they make Socinus more plausible, who saith that sins cannot be forgiven by an act of believing, if they are remitted before they believe; and Bellarmine who hath these words, how is that faith true whereby I believe my sins are forgiven? if while I therefore believe they are not forgiven, but are to be remitted by the act of faith, because every object is before his act; so the Remonstrants urge, to which he saith, I would have these three acts distinguished. 1. The act of satisfying for our sins performed by Christ, and of reconciling us to God. 2. The act of God the Father accepting it, wherein he doth acknowledge that he is abundantly satisfied for all the sins of the Elect. 3. The act of Justification, cui fides subordinatur tanquam organica causa, to which faith is subordinate as an organical cause, in all which Mr. Rutherford meaneth nothing but this, that God did not take up a new volition, but sins were intentionally pardoned from eternity, Ruth. Apol. page 4. which yet in his judgement is not justification: for, pag. 43. Homo non est justificatus ab aeterno, quia homo non est ab aeterno; homini credenti non sunt remissa peccata ab aeterno, qumiam non estab aeterno; nam justificatio, & remissio hoc sensu-non sunt termini diminuentes: A man is not justified from eternity, because a man is not from eternity; sins are not remitted to a Believer from eternity, because he is not from eternity, and Justification and Remission passively taken, are not termini diminuentes, are not terms of diminution; where he plainly taketh Gods eternal Justification, for terminus diminuens, and so it is not Justification properly; and we are reconciled meritoriously, and so causatively, and virtually our sins are remitted; but they are not formally temitted in his judgement until faith, and to this act of Justification faith is an organical cause, and so a condition in the sense we take it of Justification, though not as the Arminians take it; and another place most fully expresseth his mind, Dicunt nostri fidem non esse conditionem moventem Dei voluntatem, & tamen salutem nostram, esse conditionatam, quod est verissimum: Nam Deus non vult nobis aliam vitam, quàm quae antecedaneam habet fidem, & tamen nullo modo movetur voluntas à fide nostra: Ours do say, that faith is not a condition moving the will of God, and yet notwithstanding our salvation is conditional, which is most true; for God willeth us no other life, then that which hath faith antecedaneous to it, and yet notwithstanding the will of God is not moved with our faith. I hope by this time the Reader seethe what cause Mr. Eyre hath to be ashamed thus to abuse the sense of an Author against his own mind, declared in significant terms to the contrary; but no wonder when he dares misinterpret Scripture, if he misrepresent an Author. And for a further satisfaction, that Mr. Rutherford dissenteth wholly from him, I refer the Reader to his Treatise of the Trial and Triumph of Faith, pag. 162, 163. p. 59, 60, 61, 62. p. 55. And to his Survey to the Spiritual Antichrist, and in the second part of his Survey of the Secrets of Antinomianism, pag. 63. where he maketh faith a condition of Justification. And expressly he saith, It is a new heresy of Antinomians to deny a conditional Gospel; it is all one as to belie the Holy Ghost, who saith, He that believeth shall be saved, he that believeth not is condemned already. And, pag. 107, 108, 109. & pag. 115. Salt-marsh dresseth up a man of straw to come to Christ, 1. In all his dealing with God (saith he) and so before ever he come to Christ, or at his first believing, he believeth his Sonship, that is, being a hog, or limb of the Devil, he believeth himself to be an heir of heaven, etc. which his judgement is sufficiently known in both these Books, that I wonder Mr. Eyre could with any modesty allege Mr. Rutherford in defence of his Error. His third Author is Reverend Doctor Twisse, and in all the Writings of this Learned man, this is the only naevus which adhereth to him; but certainly he did understand, and hold a necessity of personal Justification by faith, as far as I can understand by any thing I have seen of his; in his examination of a Treatise written by Mr. Cotton, pag. 55. Dr. Twisse, Exam. Mr. Co●. page 55. he maketh faith the condition of salvation, Certainly God will save any upon condition he believes, and reputes; and on the other side, neither is there any unwillingness in God, but a willingness rather; yea, and that a resolute will to damn any man in case he dieth in infidelity, and impenitency; for we have the clear Word for it, Whosoever believeth shall be saved, whosoever believeth not shall be damned; and in pag. 95. page 95. he saith that Piscator a precise Divine spareth not to profess, that fides est causa salutis, which he no way contradicteth; and in the same place saith, that works are causae dispositivae of salvation, according to the Apostles phrase, who hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance with the Saints in light, and he saith undoubtedly, Col. 1 12. God's purpose is not to give the Elect life, but upon condition of their obedience and repentance; page 96. so, pag. 96. As for the harmony you speak of between God's purpose and Cournant, herein is your Error twofold. 1. In that you apply this to the world, wholly to reprobates, whereas it concerneth the Elect, as I have showed, as well as the Reprobate; the reason whereof is, because it respects only the collating of salvation, and inflicting of condemnation which have their course upon condition. And therefore he maketh another distinct decree in God concerning the giving, and denying grace, for the performance of the condition of life, and this is absolute without all condition. And so likewise in his Vindiciae Grat. he hath these words; Rursus videamus quae sit praecepti vis, Doctor Twiss Vindic. great. sect. 25. p. 196. quo jubemur in Christum credere; itaque quemadmodum summa praecepti legalis haec est, Si vis vitam ingredi serva mandata: ità praecepti, viz. Evangelici summa est, Si vis consequi remissionem peccatorum, & vitam aeternam, omnis tibi fiducia in Christo collocanda est, quod nihil aliud significat, quàm nullam aliam patere peccatoribus ad salutem viam, quàm credendo in Christum: Let us again see what is the force of the Precept, whereby we are commanded to believe in Christ; Therefore, as the sum of the legal Precept is this, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the Commandments: So the force of the Evangelical Precept is, If thou wilt obtain remission of sins and life eternal, you must place all your trust in Christ, which signifieth nothing else, but that no way is open to sinners unto salvation, but by believing in Christ; where you see expressly that he maketh faith to have the same order of antecedency to salvation in the Covenant of Grace, that Works had in the first Covenant, and that it is a necessary antecedent, and condition of salvation, not of the manifestation of this only to the conscience. I shall add but one testimony more, because he chief builds his opinion upon this Reverend Doctor's authority, who yet differs as much in opinion from him, as the East is from the West. Christus (fateor) est caput electorum, & praedestinatorum, sed non formaliter consideratorum Nequeenim praedestinati quà praedestinati sunt membra corporis Christi, sed potius futuri sunt membra ejus, nam quod est membrum Christi proculdubio existit. Neque enim membrum Christi est terminus diminuens existentiam; at praedestinati quà praedestinati non existunt, nam praedestinatio fuit ab aeterno: hodie multi sunt Electi qui proculdubio adhuc non nascuntur. Rursus, unio illa per quam fimus ejus membra, fit per fidem, ergo quot quot Christi membra sunt opportet esse fideles; at non omnes praedestinati, ex quo primùm praedestinati sunt è vestigio fideles evadunt. Adhaec cùm non potiùs fiat caput aliquorum quàm illi aliqui siant membra corporis ejus, sequitur Christum non ab aeterno caput fuisse, cùm non ab aeterno corpus habuerit mysticum, aut membra cujus ratione propriè dicitur caput Ecclesiae suae. Membra verò corporis cùm fiant per vocationem, unde dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ídque per vocationem efficacem, & consequenter per fidem, apparet ergo Christum non prius posse dici caput quàm sint aliqui qui credunt in ipsum, loquor de Christo Mediatore, & Redemptore. I confess (saith he) Christ is the Head of the Elect, and of those that are predestinated, but not formally of the predestinated: For neither are the predestinated as predestinated members of his body, (wherein he differeth from Mr. Eyre toto coelo, Vide Mr. Eyre. page 8. ) but they shall be his members, for whosoever is a member of Christ, without doubt existeth: Nor is a member of Christ a term of diminution lessening his existence, but the predestinate as predestinate do not exist, for predestination was from eternity; but the predestinate did not simply exist from eternity; This day there are many Elect (without doubt) which are not yet borne. Again, That union by which we are made the members of Christ, is made by faith; Therefore, as many as are Christ's members, it is needful that they be Believers: but not all the predestinate, as soon as they are predestinate, do presently prove Believers. Moreover, seeing a head cannot be a head in respect of others, before they are made members of his body, it followeth that Christ was not a head from eternity; seeing he had not a mystical body from eternity, or members, in which respect he is properly called the head of his Church; seeing therefore, men are made members of his body by calling, whence the Church is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (a company of persons called out from the rest of the world by the ministry of the word,) and that is by effectual vocation, and consequently by faith; it appeareth that Christ cannot first be called a head, before there are some that believe in him; I speak of Christ as Mediator and Redeemer. Where let the Reader observe that he plainly affirmeth a predestinate person is not a member of Christ's body, and that the mystical union is made by faith, and surely none are properly justified or saved before they are members, and therefore before faith there is no Justification, nor Salvation. His next Author is, Learned and Holy Mr. Parker, who saith in his Book, de descensu Christi ad inferos, that Christ was justified in his Resurrection, and we in him, etc. I acknowledge the testimony rightly cited, but he understandeth no more than that we were meritoriously, causally justified in the Justification of Christ, but this is also a term of diminution, in respect to a formal and actual Justification, till it be extra causas, it doth not exist. And that this Reverend man means not otherwise then we, that until faith we are not justified or saved, Parker de descens. Christ. ad inferos lib. 3. sect. 49. may appear from another passage in the same Book: Nullâ siquidem ratione aliâ salutem ad suos derivare poterat, quàm quâ ipsam damnationem transfudit Adam, nempe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illâ, quâ omnes homines qui ei per fidem coadunantur, in eo satisfecisse, quemadmodum per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similem, omnes Adami successores in eo peccâsse reputantur: Christ could no other way derive salvation to his, then that wherein Adam transmitted damnation, to wit, that communion wherein all men who are united to him by faith, are said to satisfy in him, as by the like communion all Adam's successors are reputed to have sinned in him. Where you may observe, 1. That as Adam derived condemnation to none but such as were in him; so Christ communicateth salvation to none but such as are in him. And, 2. That this union to Christ is made by Faith, hence by necessary consequence none are saved and justified until faith; and he showeth plainly that we are not in Christ in a natural way, as we were in Adam, therefore he setteth down faith as the means, and none satisfied in Christ but Believers, therefore none are justified but such; for Christ cannot derive salvation to any but such as are in him, and before faith they are not in him. His next Author is judicious Mr. Calvin, * Fides porro ita justificationem praecedit ut tamen dei respectu sequatur Calvin Antid. conc. tried. sess. 6, p. 282. who saith, that our Justification in respect of God doth precede our faith; to which I add, you might have had the ingenuity to let your Reader know that he saith immediately, fides ipsa nos in possessionem justitiae mittit, that faith sends us into the possession of righteousness: And he meaneth nothing but this, that seeing God doth offer forgiveness in Christ, and we receive and accept it by faith, that in this respect Justification precede faith, but we are not actually justified until faith, where I will by the way mind you of a passage of learned Rivet, Rivet. Advers. Baily, Jesuit. Tom. 2. p 245. against Baily the Jesu●t. Ne quidem dicimus Christi justitiam esse causam formalem justificationis, diximus, eam consistere in relatione inter dantem, & accipientem, sive inter condonantem, & eum cui condonatur, uno verbo imputatione à parte dei, & receptione ex parte nostri. Truly we do not say that Christ's righteousness is the formal cause of Justification, we have said that it consists in the relation between the giver and the receiver, or between him that pardoneth, and him that is pardoned; in one word in imputation on God's part, and receiving it on our part, so that now it is true, God offering pardon, his act precede our part of receiving, but yet we are not in the judgement of this Learned man, justified formally till we receive it. And this is calvin's mind, and many passages in the same discourse make against you; I will take but one, which Mr. Baxter hath observed to my hand, Nos autem meminerimus fidei notuum à Christo estimandam esse, quia quod nobis offert Deus in Christo non nisi fide recipimus, proinde quicquid nobis est Christus id ad fidem transfertur, quae nos compotes, est Christi, & omnium ejus bonorum facit, neque aliter verum esset illud Johannis, fidem nostrum esse victoriam, quâ mandus vincitur, nisi nos in Christum inserereret, qui solus est mundi victor. But we have remembered before, that the nature of Faith is to be estimated from Christ; because what God offers us in Christ, we receive it not but by faith; whatsoever therefore Christ is to us, that is imputed to faith, which maketh us partakers of Christ, and of all his good things. Neither otherwise can that of John be true, that faith is our victory whereby we overcome the world, unless it did ingraf us into Christ, who is the Victor of the world. And the truth is, Calvin is in express terms for us against you, and I will manifest in a few passages: Calvin ad Concil. Triden. Sess. 6. ad Can. 9 Calvin Insti. l. 3. c. 11. N. 7. Hominem solâ fide justificari quum dicimus, fidem non fingimus charitate vacuam, sed ipsam solam justificationis causam esse intelligimus, and so he saith: We gather, we do not take from Christ the power of justifying, when we teach that he is first received by faith; but yet I do not admit of the crooked figures of this Sophistor, (meaning Osiander, when he saith that Faith is Christ, (where let the Reader observe, that Mr. Eyre agreeth with Osiander in interpreting faith to be Christ, and it is the high way to Familisme, and to think with Osiander, that the essential righteousness of Christ is ours; and withal, how Calvin disliketh this interpretation, As if, saith he, an earthen pot were a treasure, because Gold is hidden in it. For the reason is not unlike, but that faith although it be by itself of no worthiness or price, may justify us in bringing in Christ, as a pot full of money maketh a man rich; therefore I say that faith, which is only the instrument to receive righteousness, is unfitly mingled with Christ which is the material cause, and both Author and Minister of so great a benefit. And again, Quo enim modo vera fides justificat, Calvins Inst l. 3. c. 17. N. 11. nisi dum nos Christo conglutinate, ut unum cum illo facti participatione ejus fruamur. So again, However we be redeemed of Christ, yet till we be by the calling of the Father graffed into the communion of him, we are both heirs of darkness and death, and the enemies of God; 1 Cor. 6.11. for Paul teacheth that we are not cleansed by the blood of Christ, until the Holy Ghost worketh that cleansing in us, 1 Pet. 1.2. which same thing Peter minding to teach, declareth that the sanctifying of the Spirit availeth unto obedience, and be sprinkling of the blood of Christ; if we be by the Spirit sprinkled unto cleansing by the blood of Christ, let us not think that before such watering we be any other than a sinner is, without Christ. Let this therefore remain certain, that the beginning of our salvation is as it were a certain resurrection from death te life, because when for Christ's sake it is given to us to believe in him, than we first begin to pass from death to life. Under this sort are comprehended they which have in the division above been noted for the second and third sort of men, for the uncleanness of conscience proveth that both of them are not yet regenerate by the Spirit of God. And again, where there is no regeneration in them, Calvin's ● Inst. 3. Book 14. c. N. 6, 7. this proveth the want of Faith, whereby appeareth that they are not yet reconciled to God, nor yet justified in his sight: for as much as these things are not attained to but by faith. The length of the Testimony hath made me omit the Latin, it is endless to repeat more, I conceive Calvine sufficiently vindicated by what is already cited. Your next Author is * Zanchy, lib. 50. de Natura Dei, c. 2. p. 539 Zanchy, who though in the words cited something favoureth your opinion, yet he meaneth only that we were virtually justified in Christ, and in other places is most expressly against you. And to avoid prolixity, I will give his Testimony only in English. The fourth benefit, saith he, is Justification, that is, the forgiveness of our sins, and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, for this followeth faith: So also he saith, in a twofold sense it may be said, and understood that a man is justified by faith, instrumentally and formally, and in both senses we are justified by faith alone; in the first sense, because by this as an instrument fitted for this matter, we receive the grace of God and righteousness of Christ; in the latter sense, as by the only obedience and righteousness of Christ apprehended by faith, we are formally justified, as the faith apprehending is taken for the thing apprehended. So again, * Zanch. Loc. Com. Theol. Epist. ad Eph. Loc. 2. p. 83. there are three things required to this that we be partakers of salvation, and without which we cannot be saved. First, As the fountain of all benefits, the grace of God, his eternal favour, love, and mercy to us. Secondly, The other is the compliment or fulfilling of the promises and figures of the Old Testament, concerning our redemption by blood, and the offering up of a Lamb without spot, whereby sins might be expiated. The third benefit necessary to salvation, and sine * Zanch. de tribus El●. lib. 5. pag. 195, 196. quo reliqua duo nobis inania, & inutilia sunt, est vera Dei cognitio sive fides, nam sine fide est impossibile placere Deo: Without which the other two are vain, and unprofitable, is the true knowledge of God, or faith, without which it is impossible to please God. * Zanch. Tom. 8. de justisi. fidei loc. undecim. p. 781. Once more; the wrath of God (saith he) resteth upon all sinners so long as they continue to be sinners, (that is, unsanctified persons, that is his meaning,) therefore sin is a division between God and man, it is a turning of the face of God from the sinner; nor can it otherwise be, seeing it is repugnant to his righteousness to have any fellowship with sin; whence the Apostle teacheth, that a man is an enemy to God, until he return into favour through Christ, whom therefore the Lord receiveth into conjunction; He is said to justify, because he cannot receive into favour, nor unite any man to himself, but of a sinner he maketh him righteous. The next Author is Chamier; and it cannot be denied but he hath the words you have cited, but it is no hard matter to prove that he contradicteth you and himself in other places. I will instance in one, Itaque semel habeto, nos Legis, & Evangeli● discrimen cùm quaerimus, * Itaque semel habeto, nos Legis, & Evangelii discrimen cùm quaerimus, utrumqu● nominare c●ntractâ illâ significatione secundùm quam Paulus opponit leg●●●perum legi fidei. Deigned proprium, verum, certum discrimen conditionem operum & fidei, hoc ●st. legem operam proponere salutem sub conditione legis perficiendae, at legem fidei e●●dem proponere sub conditione tantùm credendi, in ●hristum, nimirum ut utrinque sumatur con●ttio eodem sensu. Cham. Panstrat Tom. 3. Lib. 15. Cap, 3. Sect. 26. etc. Therefore take it for once, that we when we seek a difference between the Law and the Gospel, do name both in that short signification, according to which Paul opposeth the Law of Works to the Law of Faith, therefore the condition of Works and Faith do constitute a proper, certain, and true difference, that is to say, the Law propoundeth salvation upon condition of fulfilling the Law, but the Law of faith propoundeth the same salvation under the condition of believing only in Christ, to wit, that on both sides a condition be taken in the same sense, that is, that they have the same order to their respective Covenants, otherwise faith is not a condition, so as to be the matter of our righteousness as the fulfilling of the Law is.] Thus you see how he maketh Faith the condition of the Covenant antecedent to salvation thereby expected. As for Maccorius we yield you his Testimony, but could produce if need were a hundred for one of greater name and note. Your last is Dr. Ames, whose testimony you might have left out, because he speaks far more against you then for you in the same place, for he saith that it was quasi concepta, as it were conceived in the mind of God, and so the like phrase is to be given to the death of Christ, as it were, or virtually pronounced; but he doth not say it was so really and formally, as if we were so justified from eternity, or from the time of Christ's death; yea, a little after, which you could not be ignorant of, he saith, Est autem haec justificatio propter Christum non absolute consideratum, Ames. Medul. l. 1. c. 27. s. 14. quo sensu Christu● est causa ipsius vocationis, sed propter Christum fide apprehensum, quae fides vocationem sequitur tanquam effectum, & justitiam Christi, ex quâ apprehensâ justificatio sequitur, unde & justitia dicitur esse ex fide, Rom. 9.30.10.6. & justificatio per fidem, Rom. 3.28. This Justification is for Christ's sake, not absolutely considered in the sense wherein Christ is the cause of effectual vocation, but for Christ's sake apprehended by faith, which faith followeth effectual vocation, as the effect, and the righteousness of Christ being apprehended, Justification followeth; hence it is said that righteousness is of faith, Rom. 9.30.10.6. and Justification by faith, Rom. 3.28. And in the sixteenth Section thus: Neque est propriè loquendo, specialis siducia, Nor is it to speak properly a special trust or assurance, (speaking of justifying faith,) whereby we apptehend or know the remission of our sins, and our justification: Fides enim justificans praecedit justificationem ipsam, ut causa suum effectum, sed fides justficationem apprehendens necessariò praesupponit, ac sequitur justificationem, ut actus objectum suum circa quod versatur: For justifying faith goeth before Justification, as the cause before its effect, but Faith comprehending Justification, necessarily presupposeth it to go before, as the act its object about which it is conversant; so that faith as it is assurance, followeth Justification; but as it is a resting on Christ for pardon in its justifying act, so it goeth before Justification, as the cause goeth before the effect. Thus having examined his authorities, we see that if they may be impartially examined, and permitted to speak their own mind, they all give in evidence against the cause that he maintains. CHAP. X. Containing a vindication of such Scriptures as are brought by Mr. Woodbridge for Justification by faith, and misinterpreted by Mr. Eyre, together with an answer to such Scriptures as he hath brought to defend his Error of Justification antecedent unto faith. THE first Scripture is, Rom. 5.1. Therefore being justified by faith we have peace with God. 1. He will have the Comma to be placed after justified, as thus, being justified, by faith we have peace with God. But first, This is a reading contrary to the common acceptation of the place by all men. Secondly, It offereth violence to the Text; for the scope of the place is to show the efficacy of faith unto Justification, as may appear by the illative particle therefore, which hath not relation only to the words immediately foregoing, but to the sum and substance of the whole Chapter; for the fourth Chapter containeth an Argument to prove Justification by Faith, and not by the works of the Law, drawn from the example of Abraham the Father of the faithful after this manner: By what means Abraham the Father of Believers was justified, By the same it behoveth his children to be justified, that is, all Believers; but Abraham was not justified by any works, neither preceding nor following his faith, but by faith: Therefore we must look for Justification by faith only. In the third verse he confirmeth the Assumption, because Abraham believed, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, that is, his faith was imputed, not in an Arminian sense, but his faith properly taken, in relation to the object, and hereupon he commendeth exceedingly the faith of Abraham, the grace of faith, and sets it forth in many excellent properties, which can no way agree to the object, and then stirreth up us to an imitation of this faith, telling us that it was not written for his sake only, but for ours also; and assureth us that our faith also shall be imputed for righteousness if we believe; then he describeth the object of this faith, God in Christ, as raising Christ from the dead; where he setteth forth the two main pillars of Faith, Christ's Death and Resurrection; and this is illustrated by God's end in both these, 1. He delivered him to death for our offences, that is, to satisfy for our sins. 2. He raised him again for our Justification, to declare he was absolved from our sins, and so had made full satisfaction: hence than he draws down this conclusion, and shows a new effect of faith, and so a new argument, Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God; as if he should say, By what we have peace, we are justified: But by faith we have peace, therefore we are justified. Thirdly, Neither can faith be taken here for the object excluding the act, but for the grace and act of faith, with relation to its object; for than we shall make the Text admit of a Tautology, for the meritorious cause is expressed; Therefore, here by faith the act must be understood, for it is said, Being justified by faith, we have peace through our Lord Jesus, there Christ the meritorious cause of Justification is expressed, therefore the same thing is not understood by faith; yea, here, saith Beza, Beza in Loc. three causes are enumerated of our salvation: Tres hîc enumerat causas nostrae pacis Apostolus, fidem, Deum & Jesum Christum, non coordinatas, & ejusdem generis, sed subordinatas, incipiente Apostolo à causa nobis per Dei gratiam datâ intrinsecâ, & instrumentali, nempe fide, cujus scopus, & objectum est Deus Pater, interveniente Jesu Christi propitiatione: Here saith Beza, the Apostle doth enumerate three causes of our peace, Faith. God, and Jesus Christ, not coordinate causes, and of the same k●nd, but subordinate; The Apostle beginning from an instrumental cause, given us by the grace of God, to wit, Faith, whose scope and object is God the Father, by the intervention of the propitiation of Jesus Christ. A second Scripture is, Gal. 2.16. We knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law; where Mr. Eyre's gloss to evade the force of this Scripture, is, that the phrase [that we may be] is as much as that we may be manifested and declared, and know that we are justified. To this I answer, that the Apostle is not speaking here of a declarative Justification, but of a Justification real before God; therefore when he speaketh of not being justified by the Law, he meaneth not a declarative Justification; and therefore when he speaks of Justification by faith, he means not a declarative Justification, for then the opposition is not ad idem; for look in what sense he taketh it in the first member of the opposition, it must be taken in the same sense in the latter member; but it is nor meant of a declarative Justification in the first, therefore neither in the latter: For that neither was the question between the Apostle and the Justiciaries, nor could the Apostle say with truth, that works do not evidence Justification. As for Justification in foro conscientiae, it is not Justification properly, but the knowledge and assurance of it; Justification is to be considered as an action of God, for it is God that justifieth. The Apostle giveth an account why he and the believing Jews did believe in Christ for Justification, because they knew that they could not be justified by the Law: Now there is no way but by the Law, or by faith in Christ, therefore they did believe in Christ; where Justification by the faith of Christ, is made the final cause of their believing; Now if they did therefore believe that they might be justified, how can that that was the end of their believing, evidence that they were justified already before they did believe? and here let the Reader observe, that both the act and object is expressed; and if as Mr. Eyre ordinarily understands the object by the act, why are both expressed? Therefore the grace of Faith relatively considered, as apprehending Christ's righteousness, is that by which we are justified. The third Scripture being, Rom. 8.30. I have already vindicated in my tenth Argument against eternal Justification. A fourth place which he hath abused, is, Rom. 4 22. where it is said, that it shall be imputed to us if we believe, that is, faith in Christ shall be imputed to us for righteousness, as it was to Abraham; for there is but one way whereby both he and we are justified. Mr. Eyre's answer is, That this particle [if] is not conditional, but declarative, and so he taketh the meaning to be this; Hereby we may know, and be assured that Christ's righteousness is imputed to us if we believe; where observe that he wrongeth the scope of the Apostle, which is to encourage us to believe, as did Abraham, from the good effect of it; for hereby righteousness shall be imputed to us if we believe, he speaketh of a future mercy to be obtained, and Mr. Eyre telleth us of an assurance that we shall have, that it was done already; where he changeth the time passed for the time present, and so overthroweth the Apostles scope, and putteth a declarative sense upon the words for a conditional; This is not to interpret Scripture, but to suborn the Spirit to serve his own turn. And hence I argue against him, If the imputation of righteousness be a thing that is not already, but shall be imputed if they believe, than the particle [if] is not declarative, but conditional: But the imputation of righteousness is not a thing then done, but was to be done; Therefore. And for this the words are plain, it shall be imputed if we believe. A fifth Scripture is, Acts 10.43. To him give all the Prophet's witness, that through his Name whosoever believe, shall receive the remission of sins. He saith, it is not said by believing we obtain remission of sins; and a little after, we obtain remission by Christ, but we receive it by faith. I answer, There is an ambiguity in the word obtain, if by it he understand we do not merit, purchase forgiveness, we grant it, for whoever made the instrumental the meritorious cause of forgiveness of sins? but if by it he understand a receiving the remission of our sins through Christ, which then, and never till then was received; we say thus, forgiveness is obtained by faith, as a cause to apply Christ's righteousness for Justification; nor is this receiving a receiving of the knowledge of remission, as a thing before done, and the knowledge of it only now obtained by faith; for it is said, that by faith we receive remission, not the knowledge of remission; all the Prophets testify this, we receive remission, not the sense of the remission of sins. Therefore Mr. Eyre's interpretation is contrary to all the Prophet's witness. Besides, were we justified from eternity, as Mr. Eyre will have it, when by God's eternal act this remission was given, it had been an injury to God. Besides, an improper speech to say, All that believe shall receive remission; They should have said, ye were remitted before, if ye believe, ye shall know it, The six●h Scripture is, Acts 13.39. By him all that believe shall be justified from all things, from which they could not, etc. [He saith, that this showeth the excellency of the Gospel above the Law, and that here is nothing at all of the time of Justification; though he affirm, that he that believeth is justified, yet it followeth not the Elect are not justified before faith, much less that a man is justified by the gracious act, or habit of faith.] I answer, let it be granted he commend the Gospel-sacrifice for sin above the sacrifices of the Law, yet he saith, that by obtaining the Law they could not be justified; and what they could not have by the Law, or any sacrifice therein offeted, that may be obtained by Christ through faith; where if his purpose were to exclude faith from Justification, he might have said only, by him we are justified from all this, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses; but he describeth the persons and the condition expressly; and if Believers only are justified, than unbelievers are not, and faith is necessary: Therefore though we be not justified by it, as the matter of our righteousness, yet as the instrument to apply it; and the Apostles limiting this to Believers were vain, if unbelievers also were the subjects of it. A seventh Scripture to which he hath done violence, is, 2 Cor. 5.21. where Christ is said to be made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; where this is made the final cause, why our sin was imputed to Christ, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, and he will have Christ's being made sin, and our being made the righteousness of God in him, formally the same act in God: For he saith, this phrase [that we might be mad●] doth not always imply the final cause, but sometimes the formal. And so his meaning is, that Christ was at the same time made sin for us, and by that act of God we were made the righteousness of God in him. To this I answer, First, it offers violence to the Text; for that doth not say, that we were then made, but that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, it laid the foundation for this. Secondly, Let him assign any other end that God had in this act in respect to us, if this were not his end; surely had it not been for this, God would not have imputed our sins to Christ. Thirdly, That which he saith, is manifestly false; for this phrase [that we might be] always doth express the final cause, his instance doth not prove the thing in hand; He saith, That when light is let in that darkness might be expelled, the immission of light is formally the expulsion of darkness. I answer, if it be granted, this hindereth not, but that it might be the end why the light is let in, as in a room that hath shuts to keep out the light, the room is dark; now let a man that desires light open these shuts, at the same time the light doth physically expel the darkness, and yet it was the end of the man in letting in the light to expel the darkness. Fourthly, The imputation of sin to Christ and righteousness to us, are two different acts, and have two different effects, and therefore are not formally the same; for by imputing sin to Christ, he is charged with the guilt of it, and is obnoxious to death; and the imputing righteousness to us, is a discharge from the guilt, and we are made capable of life: Now if this were formally our discharge, than we are discharged, and so made righteous before Christ had made satisfaction, even so soon as our sin was imputed; but this is a manifest contradiction; for it is not Christ's being charged with our guilt, but his making satisfaction that procures our discharge; but this is but one drop of that river of contradiction, that flows from him as from a fountain, with which his Book swells like the river of Jordan, till it is foardable by no reason, nor any humane understanding. 4. I deny that the imputation of sin to Christ, and the non-imputation of it to us; If you speak of a formal non-imputation, and discharge, (or else you say nothing to the purpose,) is but one and the same act in God; they are two distinct acts, terminated upon two distinct subjects. The first upon Christ, the second upon us. Imputation of sin to Christ, is a transient act done in time; for God did not charge Christ with our sin from eternity, and every transient act requireth the existence of the subject, upon which it is terminated, or produceth it, as did Creation. And therefore we that had no existence, could not be the subjects of a formal non-imputation, which is an actual discharge from it; and therefore, that which you answer to this objection, we were nor then, and therefore righteousness could not be imputed, by propounding another objection, Our sins were not then, therefore they could not be imputed. I answer, the reason is not alike; for the nonexistence of a subject to whom any thing should be impated, is of greater efficacy to hinder the imputation, than the nonexistence of a sin; for the term or subject of a transient act, is of absolute necessity to be, or to be produced by the act; but there is no such necessity of the thing that is imputed, the act may be without that, but not without the other. Besides, a sin is a moral cause of punishment, and therefore the effect, which is punishment, (which is that that is meant by imputation of sin,) is at the will of him that is moved thereby; and therefore sometimes goeth before the cause, as in the death of Christ, for which the Patriarches were justified before Christ had given satisfaction, and sometimes after it; therefore the punishment might be inflicted on Christ before the sin was committed. I shall now address myself to give an answer to such Scriptures as he hath alleged in defence of his own opinion. The first is, Matth. 3.17. This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. From whence he argueth, that if the well pleasedness of God, which is here declared, is terminated upon Christ mystical, and not to Christ personal, then God was well pleased with all his Elect, (who are Christ mystical) when this voice came from heaven, and consequently before many of them do believe. To which I answer, that I take it to be, and have proved it an error, to say that the Elect as Elect, are mist cally united to Christ; for union necessarily pre-requireth existence, and Christ had not a mystical body from eternity. 2. I deny, as than I did, the assumption, and say the well-pleasedness of God was terminated upon Christ personal, and not Christ mystical: And the meaning is, This is my beloved Son in whose person I am well pleased, and with whose work and office as a Mediator I am well pleased; but it was not the intent of God there to say, for his sake I am actually well pleased with all the Elect, antecedently to their faith. Now I prove it was spoken of Christ personal, and not Christ mystical. 1. If Christ considered as Mediator be personally considered, than this is understood of Christ personal, and not Christ mystical: The antecedent is true: Therefore the consequence. The reason of the consequence is, because this is spoken of Christ as Mediator; But Christ mystical is not the Mediator of the world, for than we have so many Redeemers and Saviour's of the world, as are united to Christ, and then Christ alone did not tread the winepress of his Father's wrath. 2. Christ mystically considered, was not baptised by John: But this beloved Son in whom God was well pleased, was baptised by John: Ergo. 3. This was terminated on him, to whom the Heavens were then opened, and upon whom the Spirit descended like a Dove: But this is true only of Christ personally, not mystically considered. 4. This voice was terminated on him, for whose sake God is well pleased with such as believe; But God is not well pleased with believers for the sake of Christ mystically considered, but personally; Ergo. 5. This voice is terminated upon him, who is by a peculiar generation and Sonship so a Son, that it is incommunicable unto others; But this belongs only to Christ personal; Therefore this voice was not terminated upon Christ mystical. 6. Now to all this I add this, that the consideration of Christ as a public Mediator is not sufficient to denominate him to be a Head, and the Elect his Members, so as to make a mystical uninion between them, it may constitute him a public person and surety; but to make him a Head mystically united to any, it requireth the existence and faith of the person united. Now whereas you say that Mr. Woodbridge did uncivilly interpose, and others, or else you had urged more; it is to make the world believe I could not answer you; whereas you could drive on your Argument no further by a new Medium: and then you appealed to the people, which occasioned that interposition you complain of. And here I shall answer to such Arguments as you use, p. 124, 125. to prove, it was terminated to Christ mystical. Your first is drawn from the authorities of Musculus, Calvin, Beza, Pareus; None of all which acknowledge no more than that it testifies that great love of God, in whom God is well pleased with such as believe, showing the only way of appeasing God, and reconciling God to man; but none of them do affirm Gods actual well-pleasedness with any persons before faith, but that Christ is he by whom God's wrath is turned away, as the only Mediator to reconcile God and man; but none did afore you dream, that this Son in whom God was well pleased was the mystical Christ, or that this voice was terminated upon Christ mystical. Secondly, You say it is against the scope of the words to limit them to the person of Christ, they being a solemn declaration of Christ's investiture into his office of Mediatorship; We grant it is a solemn inauguration, or instalme. of Christ in this office, but deny your consequence, that because Christ is here considered as Mediator, therefore, what is so spoken to him, is terminated to Christ mystical, (though it might be spoken for th●ir benefit and comfort that shall believe. Thirdly, You say there is no reason why those words should be terminated to the person of Christ, seeing that God was never displeased with him; nor had our Saviour any doubt or suspicion of it, and therefore it was needless that God should declare his well-pleasedness to him in his own person. I answer, this was spoken for to satisfy us, that Christ was a Mediator well fitted for this work, that God was well pleased in him as one endued with sufficient ability to reconcile; and God was well pleased with him, because he never displeased him; and therefore was the more fitting person for this work; and therefore though it be granted Christ needed not this testimony, and that it was spoken as an encouragement to us to believe in him: Yet it followeth not that therefore God was well pleased with us for his sake before we believe, because he is well pleased with Christ, and his Mediatory work. Fourthly, You say the well-pleasedness of God is to be extended unto them, for whom Christ offered up his sacrifice: But Christ did not offer up his sacrifice for himself. I deny your Major, and do say, that in this voice God did declare for the benefit and comfort of them that do believe that God was well pleased and satisfied with Christ, and his Mediatory work, that they may know they believe on him who is a person in whom, the Lord taketh infinite delight; and therefore he being so dear to God, they shall find favour for his sake that believe; but that therefore he is actually well pleased with them, whether they believe or not, yea, when they live under the power of sin, I take it to be no less than presumptuous boldness to determine, and it carries a spirit of contradiction to the whole Gospel. And to this end the Apostle saith, Without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11.6. To which you say, the Apostle speaketh there of men's works, and not of their persons. I answer, it is manifestly false; for he speaketh of their persons, as well as of their works. For, 1. He saith, by faith the Elders received a good report, that is, all of them in general; but with whom were they thus reported of? surely by God himself; hence he declared his thoughts of them, thus Abraham is called the friend of God; and Noah, Thee only have I found righteous; and David is called a man after Gods own heart. 2. In particular Abel, he by faith offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained testimony that he was righteous; God did not testify only that his action was righteous, but that he was a righteous person, and so Enoch, by faith was translated, etc. and he received this testimony that he pleased God, that is, that his person pleased God, for would God translate him to heaven for a righteous action, if his person had not pleased God? And the very scope is to prove that he was a Believer, and by consequence that his person did please; for without faith it is impossible to please God, and so Mr. Perkins, and all Interpreters that I know speak of it. Besides, is it possible that men's act●ons can please, where their persons please not? Surely no, God had first respect to the person of Abel, then to his offering; and he had no respect to Cain, and then he regarded not his offering, therefore their persons as well as their works did please, and both by faith; for let their actions be never so conformable to the rule, unless their persons be accepted, their services cannot be accepted, and their best actions being mixed with sin, need Christ, and must be accepted through Christ, as well as their persons. And whereas a little after you make an Elect person to be pleasing to God, but none of his actions; it is altogether against reason, to imagine that a tree should be good, that never did, nor can bring forth good fruit; and if all the sins, of the Elect, be pardoned, because they are justified, what is there in their actions wherewith God can be displeased, when their want of faith and conformity to the rule is pardoned? Secondly, those Scriptures which are usually alleged by him and others of that opinion for eternal Justification, are principally these two, Ephes. 1.4. 2 Tim. 1.9, 10. In the first it is said, God chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world; and in the 6th. verse. He hath made us accepted in his Beloved. I answer, It is one thing to say, God did choose us in Christ before the foundation of the world, and another to say, God justified us, and reconciled us: God's Election denotes God's will of purpose to justify and reconcile, and is terminus diminuens, amor ordinativus, not collativus; it is a term of diminution, and doth not actually collate the things purposed; it is true, that Justification and Reconciliation, is a fruit of God's Election, but it is not coeternal with it; and when it is said, he chose us in Christ, this, as I have showed by the testimony of Dr. Twisse, doth not denote any existence that we then had in Christ, but only the way and means by which we obtain the things purposed in Election, to wit, in Christ, or for Christ's sake. And therefore as it is not said, that we were sanctified from eternity, though he chose us in Christ, that we should be holy; so neither are we justified from eternity, for there is no difference, because a man cannot be the subject of a moral change, to pass from a state of death and life, till he do exist, (though he may be predestinated to be the subject of such a change in time) any more than he can be the subject of a physical or natural change. Nor doth that passage in the 6th. Verse confirm it, where it is said, He hath made us accepted in the Beloved; for that is to be understood of the Elect Ephesians, as they were now regenerate, and not to be referred to God's eternal purpose. And all this is made more manifest, in that those that were Elect, and chosen in Christ, are said to be children of wrath, without God, without Christ, and without hope in the world, which, as we have showed, is inconsistent with the state of Justification. The second place in Timothy, where it is said, 2 Tim. 1.9, 10. That grace was given us in Christ before the world began; but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, holds forth no such thing as eternal Justification; but grace is said to be given in respect of the firmness, and immutability of God's purpose: Therefore in this place, Gods giving is not an actual collation, but an eternal preparation of grace to be given infallibly to the Elect. And thus Augustinus, Apostolus datam dixit gratiam, August de Doct. Christ. l. 3. c. 34. quando nec erant adhuc, quibus daretur; quoniam in dispositione, ac praedestinatione Dei jam sactum erat quod suo tempore futurum erat: The Apostle saith, Grace was given when they were not as yet, to whom it should be given, because in the appointment and predestination of God that was done, which in its time should be done; Vide Junius, Calvin. and to this Junius and Calvin give in their suffrage with him. The other Scriptures alleged by h●m are in pag. 128. which relate to the death of Christ, from whence he would prove, because it is said that we were then reconciled, and had redemption in his blood, therefore we were justified before faith, from the time of Christ's death; But observe how the places brought for our Justification from Christ's death, do utterly overthrow the eternity of Justification: For, if we were then enemies, and then reconciled, then was he not reconciled from eternity. That in Ephes. 1.7. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, signifieth nothing but that the price of redemption was paid by him, and we have forgiveness of sins, because it is purchased for us, but it is not actually given: For although Christ's death be the meritorious cause of Justification, yet is it not the only cause; and therefore we are not actually justified, till all those causes be actually, which have an influence into it; Col. 1.20, 21. and that in Col. 1.20, 21. signifies no more, but that peace is thus fare made by the blood of his Cross, that now the cause of enmity is removed by a satisfaction made by the death of Christ, and God is now willing to forgive such as believe; whence he addeth, these mercies named shall be enjoyed if they continue in the faith grounded, Ver. 23. and settled, and be not moved from the hope of the Gospel. Eph. 2.13, 14. And the like I affirm of that place, Ephes. 2.13, 14. and of that in 2 Cor. 5.19. 2 Cor. 5.19, 20. we are causally and meritoriously reconciled; Th●s was God's design in Christ, in giving him to die; but God and they were not actually reconciled, that believe not; Hence the Apostle exhorteth in the same place the Corinthians to be reconciled to God; and when God justifies, and is actually reconciled, the reconciliation is mutual; there is a change in God's dispensation, though not a change in his affection; and when it is sa●d, that we are said to sit with him in heavenly places, this is spoken in regard of a right purchased, Eph. 2.6. and the certainty of the thing to be obtained, though we do not yet personally sit with him; and all such places as speak of our being enemies to God, and that while we were enemies we were reconciled, signify nothing but this, that we were translated out of a state of enmity, into a state of actual reconciliation by Christ, as soon as we believe, Rom. 5.10. as that, Rom. 5.10. for in the first verse he speaketh of them that were already justified by faith; and in the 11th. We have now received the atonement, so that there he speaketh of actual believers, not that they received this while they remained unbelievers, and enemies to God; and if you understand it of what was done for us before we had faith, and were regenerated, it signifieth nothing but the reconciliation meritoriously made by removing the guilt of sin by a sufficient price paid, even while we were actually in the state of enmity; but the paying of the price is not the whole, nor the formalis ratio justificationis: For this price paid, is part of the matter of our righteousness; but the formal nature of Justification stands in the imputation of this righteousness, which is an actual bestowing of it, and in our receiving of it by faith, then, Mr. Eyre, pag. 132. and not till then are we formally justified. Here Mr. Eyre objecteth two things. First, That Christ did not only pay the price of our reconciliation, Object. 1 but that God did so fare accept it for us, that upon the payment he did not impute our sins to us; for the Apostle define. Justification to be a non-imputation of sin. 1. This is petitio principii, a begging the question, to say, God did accept it so as he did not impute sin to us, (that is, at the same time when our sins were imputed to Christ.) 2. I add, that Gods imputing sin to Christ, is virtually a non-imputing it to us; but not formally, and therefore not a formal Justification. 3. I add, that the non-imputation of sin containeth not the whole nature of Justification, unless under it be comprised the imputation of righteousness. Secondly, He objecteth, that the payment of the full price for our Object. 2 deliverance from the curse of the Law, is a yielding the question, that we are actually set free from the obligation of it; for when the debt is paid, the debtor is free in Law; it is unjust to implead a person for a debt which is paid. To this objection I have already given sufficient answer; but because it is the main Argument to which he, and all of his judgement trust; I will here also give a solution to it. I answer then, by denying the consequence: For, in the first place, payment of a debt is refusable when it is not the same in the obligation; but now if there were nothing else to say, but this, this were enough to prove it not the same; dum alius sol●it, necessariò aliud solvitur: while another payeth the debt, another thing is paid. But secondly, if a surety of our own appointment pay the debt, than it may also be available, but the surety is provided by God, and not by us. And thirdly; he paid not the same, but the value. Fourthly, besides, Christ's death was meritorious for the discharge of another; not only by the value, but by the constitution of God; for if God had ordained it, it might have been efficaciously sufficient, even for the Reprobate; Therefore as Scotus * Scotus, lib. 3. distin. 19 qu. vin. p 74. saith well, Christi meritum tantum bonum est nobis pro quanto acceptabatur à Deo: Therefore if it wholly depend upon the will of God to accept it, and how fare he will accept it, it is not injustice for God not to give a present discharge; for though he did accept it for them, yet not for an immediate discharge; and why is it any more wrong to Christ's death to suspend the application of it until faith, then to deny the efficacy of it to a fare greater number, if God had so accepted it? Seeing Christ's death shall be as effectual to all intents and purposes, and as certainly applied, as if presently the benefit were obtained, for faith also is merited, and shall be given: And God did suspend it till faith, as that which in his wisdom he saw most convenient. Because, 1. Faith answers to that which is the ground of our being partakers in Adam's sin, it unites us to Christ. 2. Hereby God doth not justify an ungodly wretch so remaining, which is contrary to the purity and holiness of his Nature. 3. Hereby Christ is not made a Patron of wicked men remaining so under the reigning power of sin. 4. Hereby the Doctrine of the Gospel is freed from scandal, it is no Doctrine of licentiousness. 5. Hereby God will have Christ to be acknowledged as a Redeemer, the soul to see his need of Christ, and to prise his love, and he will have him to acknowledge, and take him for his Lord, that will have benefit by him; and therefore until then it is the will of the Father and the Son, that the benefit of this satisfaction shall not be enjoyed until faith; And, Volenti non fit injuria. If the Reader desire further satisfaction, let him peruse the Vindication of my Sermon upon this subject. CHAP. XI. Containing an answer to those Arguments Master Eyre hath brought to prove the antecedency of Justification to faith, that we are actually reconciled from the time of Christ's death, and that faith is not an antecedent condition of Justification. FIrst he saith, that the Essence and Quiddity of Justification consisteth in the will of God not to punish, and that he endeavoureth to prove by two Arguments. 1. Because the definition which the Holy Ghost gives of Justification, is most properly applied to this act; and (saith he) it is a certain rule, Cui convenit definitio, convenit definitum, that is Justification, to which the definition of Justification doth agree. Now, saith he, the definition which the Psalmist and the Apostle gives of Justification, is Gods not imputing sin, and his imputing of righteousness. To this I answer by acknowledging the Argument; but I deny that the non-imputing of sin, and the imputation of righteousness is the whole definition of Justification; but it is a non-imputing of sin, and imputing of righteousness according to the tenor of the Gospel, by virtue of that signal promise, He that believes shall be saved: And this is intended by the Psalmist and Apostle, if it be a full definition; for Justification is a forensical, judicial act; now according to the tenor of the first Covenant, which requireth personal and perfect obedience, we cannot be saved: Now God hath made a new Covenant with us by Christ revealed in the Gospel, wherein he hath promised, whosoever believe shall be saved: Now when God as a fruit and effect of this Covenant, doth not impute sin, and impute righteousness to a person, this is truly Justification; but thus God dealeth with none until actual faith. Secondly, I answer, God's eternal purpose is not formally a non-imputing of sin, but a purpose of not imputing it: Therefore till this purpose be brought into act, we are not pardoned and justified; for although his will be actual, yet his non-imputation is not actual, but to be done in time; for neither is the sin in actual being, which how it can be remitted before it be committed, let him show; for it is not actually, but potentially a sin; And therefore, in what sense it is a sin, in that sense it is remitted only, and neither is the sinner to be pardoned in actual being, but Justification is a change of the state and condition of the person justified, passing him from death to life, and that for Christ's sake; but how can the state of the sinner be changed, who is yet unborn? and never was yet actually a child of wrath? and Christ's death is not the cause of God's eternal will and purpose; and consequently, if that be Justification, we are justified without the merits of Christ, and then Socinian doctrine takes place; but the Scripture expressly mentions Christ's death as the cause of our Justification, for which God justifieth us; In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins; and, God hath set him forth a propitiation through faith in his blood; and for Christ's sake God is said to forgive the Ephesians. Thirdly, Whereas you, say the words, (both in the Old and New Testament,) whereby imputation is signified, which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, do both of them signify an act of the mind and will, an immanent act. I answer, that sometimes when they are related to men, they so signify; Gen. 15.6. Gen. 38.15. Numb. 18.17. Psal. 32.1. Psal. 106.31. Rom. 4.6, 8. yet that they are so taken, when attributed to God, I absolutely deny; but do always hold forth a transient act, and not an immanent act; as, Gen. 15.6. Gen. 38.15. Numb. 18.27. Psal. 32.1. Ps. 106.31. Rom. 4.6, 8. 3 Cor. 5.19. nor can any place be produced relating to God as his act, where it is so taken; for it will ascribe a fallible judgement unto God, to say that he imputeth not sin to a justified person, that is to say, he judgeth and esteemeth them not to have sinned, for God's judgement is according to truth; and therefore such as have sinned, he looketh upon them as such as have sinned, and he cannot esteem them such, as never did sin; though he may, if he will pardon them deal with them as with such as have not sinned, and in this sense he imputeth it not when he pardoneth. Secondly, His second Argument is thus, That which doth secure men from wrath, and whereby they are discharged, and acquitted from their sins, is Justification. By this immanent act of God all the Elect are discharged, and acquitted from their sins, and secured from wrath and destruction: Ergo. To which I answer, 1. By distinguishing upon your Major proposition, that which doth secure presently, actually, fully, and formally, from wrath without any other cause intervening, is Justification. And then in taking the Proposition thus, I deny the Minor, that Election doth presently, actually, fully, and formally discharge the sinner from guilt and wrath; it is but a purpose in God to do it, the sinner is not thereby discharged; Hence as soon as he is borne, he is a child of wrath, which he could not be, if he were justified from eternity, and so continueth until faith; and the death of Christ is a necessary cause intervening between this decree, and the discharge, for which he is discharged; and without which, (supposing the decree, he cannot be secured from wrath,) and Mr. Eyre himself acknowledgeth, p. 140. that sin lay as a block in the way, that God could not saluâ justitià, bestow upon the Elect those good things intended in Election: How then did God's decree secure them from wrath, if he mean only eventually, it doth secure, because they shall not have sin imputed to the condemnation of their persons; this is true, but to little purpose, to prove a present formal discharge, such as Justification is: Therefore when the Apostle saith, Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? The Apostle doth not speak of the Elect antecedenter, antecedently to their faith; but executiuè, or consequenter, as it is executed, and completed in those that are Elected, as Mr. Burgess * Mr. Burg. of Justif. p. 186. hath observed; Therefore, by the Elect he meaneth the Elect Believers, therefore if you resolve it either into a universal negative, No Elect person can be justly charged with sin, or a universal affirmative, all Elect persons are free from the charge of sin, if by the Elect, you understand the Elect before Faith and Regeneration, both Propositions are absolutely false, for otherwise Christ could not have been charged with our sin, if Election did free us from the charge, than was there no necessity of Christ's dying, and then no person is borne a sinner that is an Elect person, nor was ever under condemnation, than neither was Adam a sinner under condemnation, for I take him to be an Elect person, and then no man ever was under condemnation, for we receive not guilt from him, unless he also were guilty, and we in him: But if you take it for Elect Believers, than both Propositions are true, and this is agreeable to the scope of the place; for he had said a little before, Whom he predestinated, them he called, and whom he called, (that is, unto faith,) them he justified. Mr. Eyre, p. 64. As for the Answers which he giveth to the Objections framed by himself, I have considered them, and derected the weakness of them already. There remaineth but one Objection which I have not yet given any Animadversion upon, and therefore will do it here. Object. He saith, 'tis objected that hereby by making Justification to be Gods eternal will not to punish, Justification and Election are confounded. His answer to this is that they are not confounded, because Election includes both the end, which is the glory of God's grace, and all the means from the beginning to the ending, conducing thereunto; his will not to punish, includes precisely, and formally only some part of the means. To this I answer; that according to Mr. Eyre's opinion, there is no distinction at all between Election and Justification; for if it be the same act of Gods will, if the object be the same, if the end of God in both be the same, if the means conducing to that end be the same, then is there no difference at all according to him; burr the antecedent is true, Therefore. That with him it is the same act, pag. 61. is evident, pag. 62. for he acknowledge no transient act, but an immanent eternal act of his will, purposing salvation in Christ, that the object is the same needeth no proof, the end is the same, the glory of God's grace in both, and that the means conducing to that end is the same; Let him that hath but a spark of reason judge, for if the act be the same, the object the same, and the end the same in both; why the means should not be the same, no reason can be imagined, and let him assign what means God hath appointed for the execution of the eternal Election, and we shall easily show it that the same thing God hath appointed as a necessary Medium to effect our Justification (according to his opinion,) which hold it to be one and the same eternal act of his will: And let the Reader observe, that he maketh no cause of our Justification, but Gods own eternal good will and pleasure, as in the case of Election, for Christ's death with him is not the cause of the act of Justification, but of the effects of it, of the thing willed, and so Christ's death with him is no antecedent means to effect the act of Justification, but a subsequent mea●●●o fulfil the purpose of his will; and what a good friend he is to the Gospel, to debase the merits of Christ, let the understanding Christian judge. As for those arguments which he useth to disprove that our faith, pag. 52. or faithful actions, are that Evangelical righteousness, by which we are justified, maketh nothing against me: For, if we speak of our Evangelical righteousness, that is the matter of our righteousness, or that for which we are justified, I acknowledge it is wholly in Christ subjective, and it is ours only by imputation, and that faith is but the instrument to apply this; as for that Reverend * Mr. Baxter. Brother and Servant of Christ, against whom these are leveled, he hath since explained his meaning, that he understandeth not faith to be the matter of our righteousness, or a righteousness with Christ, but he calleth it our subordinate Evangelical righteousness; in which he disagreeth from us, and I confess, (it had been more satisfaction to his Brethren, if he had not used that term;) And therefore being not concerned in it, I pass them by. The next File of Arguments that he brings up against our cause, we find in the 9th Chapter, which though he will have them give fire, yet they do no execution, nor will they stand the Field, and abide the shock of a solid answer; which, because they are a company of tame Soldiers, we will take them prisoners, and see how they will abide to be examined. He saith, that faith doth not justify as a condition required on our part to qualify for Justification. Where I premise, that we understand not by qualifying us for Justification any moral disposing, and qualifying us sensu pontificio, in the Papists sense, inchoating our Justification, as if we were to be justified by something inherent in us; but by qualifying we mean nothing but this, that according to the tenor of the Gospel and New Covenant, it makes us subjects capable of the act of Justification, for as much as the condition required is now fulfilled; and as faith is God's gift, so it is a passive condition; as it is our act, so it is an active instrument, not elicited by the power of free will, but by assistance of special grace,) whereby we apprehend Christ's righteousness for Justification, and in this sense we are justified by faith according to the Scriptures. Now let us consider his Arguments. First, That Interpretation of the phrase, which gives no more to faith in the business of our Justification, then to other works of Sanctification, cannot be true, because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith in way of opposition to other works of Sanctification; but to interpret Faith merely thus, that it is a condition to qualify us for Justification, gives no more to Faith then to other works of Sanctification. We shall reverence the Major, and let it go; but must commit his Minor to the Marshalsea as a Rebel against reason: For though we make Faith a condition, and a passive condition in the sense explained, yet this hindereth not, but that it may be an instrumental cause of Justification, and in this sense we give more to faith, then to other works of Sanctification; Besides, we make not as he affirm works necessary antecedents to Justification, necessary antecedents to Salvation we do, but not unto Justification: For we acknowledge that of August, to be true, opera non precedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum. And now I shall retort this Argument upon himself, That Interpretation of the phrase, which giveth no more to faith in the business of Justification then to other works of Sanctification, cannot be true, because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith in a way of opposition to other works of Sanctification; but to interpret Faith (subjectively taken,) thus, that it justifieth us only, because it evidenceth our Justification, is to attribute no more to faith then to other works of Sanctification: Ergo. If he answer that faith subjectively taken, for the grace of faith is not opposed to works, because it is a work. I answer, 1. If it be a work, yet it is the work of God, and not ours. 2. It justifieth not as a work, but as an instrument to apply Christ's righteousness: Nay, 3. I see not but the opposition stand as strongly, as if he took faith objectively for Christ's righteousness, or obedience; for certainly the matter of our Justification, is the obedience of Christ to the Law, and so we are justified by works properly in the person of another. Secondly, That Interpretation which gives no more to faith then to works of nature, such as are found in natural unregenerate men, is not true, but to interpret faith a necessary antecedent of our Justification, gives no more to faith then to works of nature. I deny the Minor; for, conditio sine quà non, a condition, without which a thing is not done, may be a necessary condition; yet it is not so necessary as that is, which is a cause by which the thing is done; the eyelids must be opened as a necessary antecedent unto sight, But will you therefore say, it is as equally necessary as the eye itself; so it is in the present case, sight of sin, sorrow for it are necessarily required in the subject where God will work faith; but it followeth not that they are as equally necessary, and have as much influence into Justification, as Faith. The third Argument is this, That by which we are justified, is the proper efficient meritorious cause of our Justification, but Faith considered as a passive condition, is not a proper efficient cause of Justification. I answer, by distinguishing upon the word [by]. That by which we are justified, as the material cause of our Justification, or the matter for which we are justified, is the meritorious proper efficient cause of Justification, and in this sense we are not justified by faith. 2. It may be taken for the instrument by which that righteousness for which we are justified is apprehended and applied, and in this sense we are justified by faith, and taking it in this latter sense, I deny the Major: Nor is faith only the instrumental cause of Justification, in foro conscientiae, as a little after you affirm, though it be taken properly for the act of believing; but in foro Dei, nor a bare condition without which, but a condition by which, by virtue of God's Covenant it is obtained; and therefore I acknowledge a true causality in faith unto Justification. Fourthly, That which maketh us concurrent causes in the formal act of Justification with God and Christ, because our Justification in respect of efficiency, is attributed to them, is not true, but to make faith morally disposing us to Justification, maketh us concurrent causes with God and Christ in our Justification. I answer, 1. He attributeth more to us than we affirm; we say not that faith doth moraly dispose us to Justification as he taketh it in the Argument, [it is no meritorious moving cause of Justification, nor is all moral disposition a moral causality.] 2. The Major is not universally true, for Faith is a social cause, but not a cause of Justification; Besides, what Faith doth, it doth it, virtute agentis principalis, and by virtue of God's Covenant, not as our act, nor by any inherent worth in itself. 1. Nor doth it follow from hence, that if any condition be required in order to our Justification, than it is not free, for the very condition is freely given, nor is it left to be performed by the power of our freewill, this would hinder the freeness of Justification. 2. It is not denied that we are concurrent causes with the merits of Christ, but Christ and Faith are not causes ejusdem generis; for Christ's righteousness is that for which we are justified, Faith is only that whereby this righteousness is received, and applied unto Justification. Fifthly, That Interpretation which makes Works going before Justification, not only, not sinful, but acceptable to God, and praeparatory to the grace of Justification, is not according to the mind of the Holy Ghost; but to interpret Justification by faith, that faith is a condition, which doth qualify us for Justification, necessarily supposeth a work, or works which have not the nature of sin, but are acceptable to God, and preparatory to grace. The Major we shall let pass as innocent, the Minor hath guilt, and weakness more then enough to be imputed to it. 1. We say, Faith doth not us qualify as an inherent disposition, preparing us for a Justification, to be effected by it as an inherent grace, only it puts the subject into a capacity of being actually justified by the righteousness of Christ, according to the tenor of the Covenant. 2. Faith doth not justify as a Work, but as an instrument to apply Christ's righteousness. 3. Though Faith be a Work, it is not ours, but Gods; and therefore none of our Works justify. 4. Though there be a priority of nature in Faith unto Justification, yet there is not any priority of time; but the same moment that Faith is wrought, we are justified. Sixthly, That Interpretation of any phrase of Scripture which involveth a contradiction, is not to be admitted; but to say, Faith is a passive condition, that doth morally qualify us for Justification, implies a contradiction. I subscribe the Major with both hands, and should be loath such a pouring shower of contradictions should fall from my pen, as have done from yours, which were enough to drown the reputation of a man, that would be counted one of the more manly sorts of Divines. And I deny your Minor, it implieth not a contradiction to say, Faith is a condition of Justification. Your proof is this, to be both passive and active in reference to the same effect, is a flat contradiction. Now, that is active which is effective, which contributes an efficacy, whether more or less, to the production of the effect, a condition hath not the least efficacy. I answer, therefore it is peccant against the Law of opposition, for i● is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for Praedicatum non disponitur cum subjecto secundum eandem subjecti partem, & naturam. For faith is active and passive in a different sense; if you take faith in genere physico, it is active; if you take it in genere moris, it is passive, for it is only a condition making us c●●●ble, (according to the Covenant) of Justification, not meritoriously deserving, or by itself effecting Justification; but it is not a● the same time active and persius' in genere phisico, nor active and passive at the same time in genere moris, and therefore here is no contradiction. Besides faith, as it is an act, it is active, and some way helpeth the agent, (not that God needeth it, but because he will not justify us without it;) but in regard that this is a receiving, it is equivalent to suffering, and is a going out of ourselves, renouncing our own righteousness, and so is rightly judged passive, though formally it be an action, yet virtually it is but a passive reception. In the next place we shall consider his Arguments, which he bringeth in the 14th. Chapter, to prove that there was no Covenant between the Father and the Son, to suspend the effects of his death until faith; and that it was the will of God, that his death should be available to the immediate and actual reconciliation and Justification of all the Elect antecedent to Faith. Now because these Arguments are his Triarii, his Soldiers in the rearward in which he puts most confidence; if we can but rout these, the day will be our own. His first Argument runs thus, There is no such Covenant doth appear, Ergo there is none. A negative Argument I acknowledge in matters of great consequence, is available; Therefore I deny his Assumption and all those Scriptures, which promise Justification upon believing, and that limit the benefit of Christ's death un●ill faith, is proof enough to prove there was a Covenant between the Father and Christ to suspend the benefits of Christ's death until faith, but because he will see the place; we refer him to Isa. 53.10. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see the travel of his soul, and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities. Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth this place holds forth the Covenant between God and Christ about the effects of his death; if you take the words as a prediction of the Prophet, they hold forth a promise of God to Christ of the fruit of his death, when God should make his soul an offering for sin, or when his soul shall make itself an offering for sin, for the words will bear it: Now this promise is virtually a Covenant, and doth not limit the benefits of his death to the present time; but first presupposeth this work to be done, and then as a fruit of this, he shall see his seed, (not all his seed presently,) but he shall see it, and prolong his days; the pronoun is wanting, and therefore the words have a twofold sense given them; some expound them of Christ, who after his Resurrection should die no more, others of his issue, and race of the Saints, and say the Authors of our English Annotations, the ancient Greek and old Latin go both that way, and so take the meaning, he shall see his seed that shall prolong its days, with a supply of the relative, and if so, this maketh clear against Master Eyre; But however, take it which way you will, there is enough to evince it; He shall see of the travel of his soul, and be satisfied, that is, he shall see that as the fruit and effect of his death, which shall give him full content, he shall be much refreshed, and gladded as a woman after hard travel, that seethe the fruit of her womb, and he shall live to see it. And then follow the words, which are the words of God delivered as in his person, for Christ was not the Prophet's servant, But by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, that is, by the knowledge of him, not his knowledge taken subjectively, but objectively, that is, the knowledge whereby they know him; where knowledge is put for faith, as, This is life eternal to know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent; and so Paul counted all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ his Lord. Now here God describeth how Christ shall justify many by his knowledge, or by faith on him: Whence I argue, If God in the Covenant made with Christ, did mention faith as a means by which he should justify many, that is, all his seed that should be the travel of his soul; then was there such a Covenant, that the fruits and benefits of Christ's death should not be enjoyed until faith; for it is added, that he shall bear their iniquities; not that this should be a present discharge, but to signify that none else but Believers should be pardoned, because he shall bear their sins, and theirs only; but if they be justified before faith, than he beareth the sins of unbelievers, and so unbelievers, and Believers are the subjects of Justification contrary to the Scriptures. But God made such a Covenant, and made mention of Faith in it, as a means whereby he should justify many, not that Faith is the cause of God's acceptation of the merits of Christ, but of applying it to us. Secondly, That which Mr. Eyre addeth, that our Saviour after he had tasted death, to bring many sons to glory, boasts and glories in this achievement, Behold, I and the children which thou hast given me, Heb. 2.13. Therefore it was the will of God that his death should be immediately available for their reconciliation, for they could not be the children of wrath, and of Christ at the same time. I answer, Mr. Eyre hath dealt fraudulently in citing this Scripture, for he hath left out the 11th Vers. which is the true Key to unlock this, and to show us who are there called his children; for these that are called children, are called brethren in the 11th. Verse, and the same persons are understood without all question, and who were his brethren, why, they that were sanctified; for both he that sanctifieth, and they that are sanctified, are all of one, wherefore he is not ashamed to call them brethren. Now a man is not sanctified before Faith, therefore not a brother before Faith, therefore not a child. 1. The scope of the place is this, the Apostle is comforting the believing Hebrews against the scandal of the Cross, to which the Apostle answereth in v. 9 1. That he was subjected unto death for our sakes, not for his own, therefore his Cross should not offend us. 2. That he did but taste of death, he was but a little while under it. 3. It is was by the special grace of God, that his death for a short time should stand for our eternal death deserved; Therefore we should rather gloriously esteem of his suffering, then be offended. 2. He giveth a second reason in the 10th Verse, it made for God's glory as well as for our salvation; for it behoved him, for whom are all things, and by whom, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the Captain of our salvation perfect through suffering In v. 11. he gives an account how Christ could die, and how this could be accepted in our stead. He answereth, Because that he is one of our kin and nature. Now lest it should therefore be thought that all are redeemed, because all partake in the community of nature with Christ as man: He showeth who indeed are his kindred, brethren, for whom he died, they are sanctified one's; They that are sanctified, and he that sanctifieth, are all of one, as if he should say, Christ died for them that are one with him: Now none are one with him, but such, they are not only all of one common lump, but of the same body, and have the same God for their Father: Hence if none be united but sanctified ones, and if Christ will claim kindred with none but sanctified ones, than none but Believers are his brethren, and children. Now as to your Argument that they could not be the children of wrath, and of Christ at the same time, I retort it upon you, and say, therefore it is evident they were not Christ's children immediately from the time of his death, for than they could not be children of wrath, which yet the Apostle expressly affirmeth of the Elect Ephesians, before regeneration. Thus the Captain of the Lifeguard of his opinion, lieth bleeding at the feet of the truth that he doth oppose. Secondly, If it were the will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debt, and a full satisfaction for all our iniquities, than was it his will that our discharge procured thereby should be immediate: But it was the will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debt, and a full satisfaction for our iniquities: Ergo. I deny the consequence of the Major Proposition, which he endeavoureth to prove, because saith he, it is unjust that a debt when it is paid, should be charged upon the Surety, or Principal. I answer, if it had been the intention of God and of Christ, that the payment should have procured an immediate discharge; it were unjust: But that rests to be proved, and will while the world stands. We deny not the value of the price or satisfaction, but that God or Christ intended it for a present discharge. 1. Because Christ's death, though it be the meritorious cause, yet it is not the only cause of Justification. 2. Christ's was Gods servant in the work of Redemption, and if it were the will of God to limit this benefit till faith, it behoved Christ as Mediator to obey. 3. The merit of Christ's death is not to be valued only by the value of it, but by the constitution and acceptation of God; it is said, that by grace he tasted death for every man; It was an act of grace to Christ, that he should be Mediator, that the sufferings of his humane nature, united to the divine person of the Son of God, should be accepted as a ransom for us from eternal death. Hence Christ's death was not an act of pure justice, but of justice mixed with grace; and is so fare accepted, as the divine will of the Father pleaseth, as we see in denying the fruit of it to Reprobates, and limiting it to the Elect, which might have ransomed all. And why is it any more injustice to have it limited for a time by the will of God for application to the Elect, when it shall certainly be done, then to have it by the will of God absolutely limited to them alone? Hence Christ's death is so far meritorious, as the will of God is to accept it; hence Gods will must not be regulated by the death of Christ, for the time & manner of application, or else it must be injustice in God, (which is a harsh expression in you,) but Christ's death must be regulated by God's will in accepting it; and I have else where given sufficient reason, why God did limit the benefit of it until faith. And from what goeth before, it followeth Christ's death was not solutio ejusdem, but tantidem, for than it would have produced an immediate discharge. This is the great Argument upon which his cause depends; and you see how invincibly it is overmatcht, by opposing the Doctrine of Justification by Faith. 3ly. If nothing hindered the reconciliation of the Elect with God, but the breach of the Law, than the Law being satisfied, it was the will of God that they should be immediately reconciled; But nothing hindered their reconciliation with God, but the breach of the Law. I shall here distinguish in answer to this Argument upon the hindering of reconciliation. 1. Reconciliation may be hindered by that which is the cause of separation, which at first made the breach; or reconciliation may be hindered for want of a fit means to apply the benefit of reconciliation. And thus I apply it to the Minor. And deny it, though nothing do hinder by way of guilt as a cause of separation for want of satisfaction, yet something did hinder by way of application, for the want of Faith as a means to unite the soul to Christ, hindered it; for as none are partakers of Adam's sin, but such as were in him; so none are partakers of the reconciliation wrought by Christ, but such as are in him. Now it is by Faith that we are implanted into Christ, and therefore until Faith we are not partakers of the benefit of actual reconciliation. Mr. Eyre doth err toto coelo, when he thinketh we conceive a new will and affection to be in God upon believing, which was not before, for we acknowledge no new immanent act in God, this were to make him mutable; but we acknowledge a transient act of God to pass upon the believer, and that there is a change of God's dispensation toward the believer, though not a change of affection; and God loved them before with the love of benevolence, not with the love of complacency, and delight, which he could not do while they remained unjustified; The first love is terminated upon their persons, (yet the nature of Justification consists not in it, because it is a love of goodwill and purpose to do them good; The second is a love terminated upon their graces, and so a delighting in his own work, & so a loving them for what he hath wrought in them, and now he pardoneth by virtue of the Covenant of grace, and the promise, Whosoever believe, shall not perish, but have everlasting life. Fourthly, If it were the will of God that the sin of Adam should immediately overspread his posterity, than it was the will of God that the satisfaction and righteousness of Christ should immediately redound to the benefit of Gods elect. This consequence is denied, the reason that he bringeth, is, that there is the same reason for the immediate transmission of both to their respective subjects; for as the Apostle showeth, Rom. 5.14, both of them were Heads and Roots of mankind. To which I answer, & deny that there is the same reason for the immediate transmission of both, for though they be both Roots of mankind, yet we are in the first Adam in a natural way, and so sinned in him before we had a being, and were formally and actually sinners as soon as we had an actual being; but we are in the second Adam by a supernatural work of the Spirit working Faith, and this is not wrought always at our birth, but a long time after. Besides, the scope of the Apostle is not to compare Adam and Christ, as causes in eodem genere, of the same kind that did in the same manner, in every respect communicate the issues of their actions, to their respective members; but to show that Christ's death is no less efficacious, nay, more powerfully efficacious to save all that are in him; then Adam's sin were to condemn all that are in him; and the efficaciousness of Christ's death consists not in the immediate conferring of the things purchased, (for though in regerd of causality, the effects are immediate, yet not in respect of application;) but in the certainty of collating the things purchased, and the excellency of the things obtained; for it is fare mo●e efficacious to save one man, then to damn all the world: The first is an act of Impotency, this an act of Omnipotency; and they for whom Christ died, shall as certainly be justified and saved as if the work were already done. Fifthly, If the sacrifices of the Law were immediately available for the typical cleansing of sins under that administration, than the sacrifice which Christ hath offered was immediately available, to make a real atonement for all those sins for which he suffered. The reason of which consequence is this, because the real sacrifice is no less efficacious than the typical, Heb. 9.14 But those legal sacrifices did immediately make atonement without any condition perfermed on the sinner's part, Leu. 16.30. I answer, that the consequence of the major may justly be questioned; for if they were immediate, it followeth not that therefore Christ's sacrifice must be so, or else it is of less efficacy, First, because that such as brought those sacrifices were actually the people of God, and professed faith in Christ, and if the Profession were outward only, they had an outward cleansing; if real, they had by faith in Christ a spiritual cleansing, signified by the outward cleansing, but all that shall be cleansed by the sacrifice of Christ's death were not in being, much less had an actual faith to apply it, nor is the death of Christ less efficacious, because they did but typically cleanse, they could not purge the conscience, Heb. 9.25, 26. hence they were often repeated, but Christ by one sacrifice once offered hath cleansed us, they had their power and efficacy only in reference to Christ's blood, which was typified thereby. Secondly, we say that Christ's death doth immediately cleanse in respect of causality though not in respect of actual application, the defect is not in Christ's blood, but in the want of faith, that it might be applied. But Thirdly, I deny the minor, those legal sacrifices did not immediately make atonement without any condition on the sinner's part; for that is apparently false; For, First, the man that would have an atonement made for him by sacrifice, must have it be done by the slaying of a beast, offered up and burnt with fire, to signify that without blood there 〈◊〉 no remission, Levit. 1. and to set forth the grievous sufferings of Christ. Secondly, Levit. 1. he must bring his sacrifice to the door of the Tabernacle, without which it should not be accepted, yea, blood should be imputed to him, and he should be cut off: Leu. 17.4. this Tabernacle signified Christ, Heb. 9.11. Heb. 9.11. by whom all services as a door must have passage to, and acceptance with God, and he must voluntarily bring it, to show his voluntary Profession of faith, though it were a duty commanded, and a sin not to do it, yet he must voluntarily bring it to show his voluntary service, and profession of faith in Christ. Thirdly, he must put his hand upon the head of the beast, Levit. 1.4. Exod. 29.10. Leu. 1.4. whereby he confessed his sins, and worthiness to die, though through God's mercy this death was inflicted on the beast, by which was signified, that he must confess his sins and worthiness to die, and that God hath laid his iniquities upon Christ, and by this laying on of the hand is signified his apprehending Christ; Exod. 24.8. and likewise the blood was sprinkled upon the people, Heb. 9.19. Heb. 9.19. The Priest took the blood of calves, and of goats, and he sprinkled the book, and all the people, under which is typified the application of Christ's blood to the conscience upon believing: Hence Calvin saith, upon Heb. 9.19. Calvin apud marl. Heb. 9.19. Quòd autem ex hyssopo aspergillum fiebat, & lanâ cotcinâ, non dubium est quin mysticam asperginem quae fit per Spiritum representaverit, scimus hyssopum singulari purgandi & excoquendi efficaciâ pollere: Itâ Christus Spiritu suo vice aspergilli utitur ad nos sanguine suo abluendos, dum seriò poenitentiae nos sensu afficit, dum excoquit pravas carnis nostrae cupiditates, dum pretioso justitiae suae colore nos tingit; and without these ceremonies thus performed, the atonement was not available. Sixthly, if it be the Will of God, that the death of Christ should be available, for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect, without any condition performed by them, than it was his will that it should be for all of them: But it is the Will of God that it should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect, viz. infants, or else they cannot be reconciled. I answer, Mr. Eyre is hardly put to it, that he must run to the Philistines to sharpen his goad; this argument is taken from Suarez, who argueth against faith in general upon this ground, because Infants are justified without it. Now this argument proveth, if it proveth any thing at all, that we are justified without it, and not before it, and so believers are not the sole subjects of justification, as Mr. Eyre elsewhere affirmeth; but the case of Infants is not to be urged in most questions, especially when we are speaking of what God requires in those that are adulti, of age unto salvation; but I deny his minor, and affirm that Infants are not united to Christ without saith, they are saved by faith as well as we. Thus * Zanch. 5. Tom. in Com. in Hoseam. p. 28. Zanchy, uniamur huic capiti Christo, Spiritus propriae fidei per sese omnibus ipsis etiam parvulis pernecessarius est, justus enim ex solâ fide suâ vivet, non alienâ: assensus autem propriae voluntatis omnibus adultis est necessarius, etc. ac proinde etiam parvuli quodammodo sibi ponunt hoc caput, cùm Spiritu fidei interno in hoc caput donantur: That we may be united to Christ, the spirit of a man's own faith by itself is necessary to all, yea to Infants also, for the just shall live by his own faith, not by another man's: but the assent of our own proper will is necessary to all that are of age. And a little after he saith, and therefore also Infants do in a manner appoint themselves this head, when they are given unto this head by the internal Spirit of faith. So also learned * Rivet ad vers. Babyl Jesui. Tom. 297. p. 254. Rivet, Agnoscimus Deum in Infantibus supplere quod deest propter aetatis imbecillitatem internâ Spiritûs sui operatione, qui fidei semen in ipsis ingenerat, & vi suâ eis applicat meritum Christi, cujus suo tempore in eyes sensum est excitaturus: We acknowledge, that God supplieth in Infants, what is wanting through the weakness of their age by the internal work of his Spirit, who engendereth a seed of faith, and by his power applieth the merits of Christ to them, whereof he will raise up a sense in his time; therefore I acknowledge there is at lest wrought in them semen fidei, a seed of faith, by which they become members of Christ, and that relation which is in their faith to Christ● merits, is the instrument by which they obtain remission of sins, and without which they could not be saved, nor may this seem strange, seeing we grant, that in men grown up they are merely passive in the first work of grace, their understandings and wills no ways concurring antecedently to this work, and seeing it is a work wrought in us without us, why may not children be capable of this? Besides, if Adam had stood, even Infants before the use of reason had been sanctified, and Christ was so from the womb, and John Baptist, and Infants received the seal of the righteousness of faith, and are they capable of the seal of the righteousness of faith, and not of faith? And therefore though they have not the use of knowledge, this hinders not a seed and work of faith, they have not actual reason, yet they have reasonable souls; and when it's said that faith cometh by hearing, it is to be applied to persons that are of age, to whom the ordinary means to beget faith, is hearing of the Word preached. Seventhly, if it were the Will of God, that Christ should have the whole glory of our reconciliation, it was his Will that it should not in the least depend upon our works and conditions, because that conditions will share with him in the glory of this effect, and our salvation would be partly of works, and partly of grace, partly from Christ, and partly from ourselves, nay, it would be more from ourselves then Christ. Ans. I shall here distinguish upon conditions; A condition is either strictly and properly taken for an absolute condition, required on our parts, performed by ourselves without the help of grace, no way given and merited by Christ, upon which the effect of Christ's death should depend, as a cause of the effect, if not deserving, yet at leastwise obliging God to give the effect; such a condition would indeed share with Christ, and the honour of our salvation would be ascribed, partly to ourselves, and partly to Christ; nay, we should be more beholding to our selus then to Christ, because notwithstanding all that he hath done, we might have been miserable, unless we had by the liberty of our Will, and improvement of our natural abilities performed this condition; but we deny and abhor such a condition as derogatory to Christ. Secondly, a condition may be taken in a less proper sense, for an Evangelical condition appointed by God to suspend the benefit of Christ's death, till the condition be performed, which condition is not the fruit of freewill, but the absolute purchase of Christ, and the free gift of God, and shall be infallibly given in the Lords due time to all, for whom Christ died, effectually to apply the benefit of his death unto justification; this condition we acknowledge, nor is it any wrong to Christ; for it is not the matter for which we are justified, and it is the fruit of his death, and freely wrought by his own Spirit, and the death of Christ is not rendered the less certain or effectual, but as absolutely effectual, as if the effects were already enjoyed. Eighthly, If it were the Will of God that his people should have strong consolation, and that their joy should be full, than it was his Will that their reconciliation should not depend upon conditions performed by themselves. I answer, that the consolation and joy of God's people is no whit lessened, or abated by this condition before explained; for their salvation is as firm and sure, as if that condition were not required, for they are not left to perform the condition by natural strength; as for the condition which Calvin opposeth, it is a condition of works in the Papists sense, not in ours. And when the Apostle saith, Rom. 4.16. Our salvation is of grace, that it might be sure to all the seed; the same Apostle saith in the same verse, It is of faith, that it might be of grace, and yet you are willing to leave out those words, because they make against you: nor is it less sure by faith, Acts 16.48. then if it were without it; for faith is merited, and shall be given, As many as were ordained to eternal life believed; Phil. 1.29. and To you it is given not only to believe, etc. Ninthly, If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available while they live in this world, than it was the Will of God it should procure for them immediate and actual reconciliation. Ans. This consequence is denied, the argument maketh against a condition in an Arminian sense, not in ours; for upon the first moment that a man believeth he is justified, and all his sins past are actually pardoned, his sins to come virtually, so that no following sin shall unjustify him; though it may take away his aptitude for heaven, yet not his right: and though his sin may deserve damnation, and without actual repentance and faith he cannot be saved, yet grace shall be given to enable him to repent and believe, so that though there must be nova remissio, yet there is not nova justificatio; though a new remission is needful, yet not a new justification; pardon of sin is a continued act, but our justification quoad statum is done simul & semel, once and for all; this you know to be the Orthodox opinion, yet you fraudulently conceal it, and oppose us, as if we held a condition in an Arminian sense, and that so often as we fall into sin, we fall from justification, and so no man could be sure of salvation until death. Tenthly, If it were the Will of God, that the death of Christ should certainly procure reconciliation, than it was his Will it should not depend upon terms and conditions performed by us. Answ. Still your consequence doth halt downright, for the salvation of the Elect is not uncertain as to the event, but as certain as the unchangeable decree of God can make it; but this is, Cram bis vel ter recocta, & fastidium parit. Eleventhly, If he willed this blessing to his Elect by the death of Christ but conditionally, than he willed the reconciliation and justification of the Elect, no more than their non-reconciliation. Answ. If Mr. Eyre be not, he may; and I am ashamed of this gross and wilful ignorance; I believe he knows it as well as he knows there is a God, that the Orthodox abhor these positions of the Remonstrants, & that we acknowledge that God willed the salvation of Peter with another manner of intention, then of Judas, and that we acknowledge no condition antecedently to their Election, but that he hath absolutely predestinated the Elect unto the end, and as absolutely to the means, and that God did not stand indifferent to the event, whether they shall be justified, saved or no, but absolutely decreed them unto life as the end, unto justification as the means, unto faith as a means to bring them unto justification; so that though they be not justified nor reconciled actually, yet he absolutely willed that they should be reconciled, and therefore gave Christ to die for them, and will give faith to apply the benefits of his death. As for the proof of his consequence, if he willed their salvation only in case they believe, than he willed their condemnation if they believe not. I distinguish upon God's Will, it is either secret, or revealed, voluntas signi, or beneplacity; praecepti, or propositi; if you look to the will of God's purpose, and his goodwill and pleasure, he absolutely willed their reconciliation, so that nothing shall hinder it; but he did not will an absolute reconciliation without Faith; there was no condition of his will, though of the thing willed; but if you look to the revealed will of God, the will of precept, so he declareth it is his will, that he that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned, and thus he willeth their damnation if they believe not. Twelfthly, If God willed unto men the benefits of Christ's death, upon any condition to be performed by them, it will follow that God foresaw in them an ability to perform some good which Christ hath not merited, conditional reconciliation necessarily presupposeth freewill. Answ. Still his arguments are guilty of this common fate to be lame in the consequence, and to fall very short of the mark intended; It doth not follow that God foresaw any such ability in man, nor doth such a condition as we establish, enthrone freewill; we yield him that God willed this blessing upon a possible condition; not possible to nature, but possible by grace; not because man can perform it, (for it requireth the same Almighty power that was required to raise Christ from the dead, Eph. 1.18,) but because God by his Spirit will work and give it. And those he calleth his adversaries, do mean it in this sense, it is a fruit of a promise made to Christ, and an effect of his death that Faith shall be given, but not a fruit of the Covenant made with us, but rather the condition by which we are really received into Covenant. Thirteenthly, If God did will that our sins should be accounted to Christ without any condition on our part, then was it his will that they should be discounted without any condition on our part: But the Antecedent is true: Ergo. I answer, 'tis pity that a man, whom we hope means well, that his Arguments should go out like a snuff of a candle in the socket, as these do; And I confess it is a ridiculous argument, and inference, yet I will give a solution to it. I therefore deny his consequence: It is readily granted, that the imputation of our sins to Christ did not depend upon any condition of ours, for we had not then a being when this imputation was made, nor was it needful either for Christ, or us, that any condition on our parts should be the ground of this imputation; it was a free act of God in mercy, taking off the guilt from us, and transferring it on Christ, and his sole will and pleasure was the cause of it; but that therefore it was the will of God that it should without any ondition on our part be discounted to us, is a miserable consequence, more fit to be laughed at, then refuted. But to omit nothing that may have the face, though not the force of an argument unanswered; I deny the consequence, and the reason of it, and affirm that the charging our sins upon Christ, was not our discharge formally considered, the imputing out sins to Christ was not a formal non-imputing them to us, virtually it was, it was a foundation laid for the non-imputing them to us, it was a paying the ransom for us, a legal translation of the eternal punishment upon Christ, a laying help upon one that was mighty; but this was not, nor is ever called in Scripture Justification: here is no formal imputation of any righteousness to us, who are not yet borne, much less cited before a Tribunal, and absolved from the guilt of sin. Besides, 'tis not the charging of a surety with the debt, bue the discharging of him rather that carries the force of an Argument, to prove our discharge: but although Christ in his Resurrection was legally discharged as a public person, and all that he did represent, fundamentally, meritoriously, and causally; yet not personally, and formally, which is necessary to Justification. Thus have I answered his Arguments, which he hath brought to prove the antecedency of Justification to Faith, there remaineth yet one Argument, and Objection behind, with which I shall put an end to this discourse, leaving that which relateth to the Covenant to Mr. Woodbridge, to whom it peculiarly belongeth, from whom I doubt not but the world will receive a satisfactory answer. The Argument yet unanswered, is this; If a man have the Spirit of God given him before he believe, than he must needs be justified before he doth believe, because than he is in Covenant before he believeth, and he that is in Covenant is justified. To this I answer; First, by Concession, willingly acknowledging faith to be the Spirits work, and that no man can believe without the help of the Spirit working Faith. Secondly, I deny the Consequence, that although the Spirit worketh Faith before we can believe, yet doth it not follow that a man is justified before believing. And the reason of the Consequence I deny also, it followeth not that he is in Covenant before believing, for there is no distance of time between the giving of the Spirit, our believing, and being justified, and in Covenant, or being passed from the state of death into a state of salvation, because there is a synchronisme in these, in respect of time, they being altogether, as soon as ever there is fire there is heat; so as soon as the Spirit is given, Faith is wrought, and the person justified, and in Covenant, and sanctified, at the same time; for God is able to act in instanti, in a moment; the Spirit is then said to be given to us, when he doth manifest his Divine presence by working something in us peculiar to the elect, for though those that shall perish may be enlightened, and taste of the powers of the world to come, and may be said to be partakers of the holy Ghost, yet properly none receive the Spirit but the Elect, and what others have is not a true saving work; now because no work before Faith is truly saving, and have a necessary connexion with salvation, therefore the Spirit is not received before Faith, and so they are simultanea, all together, the Spirit, Faith, and Justification, and being in Covenant; and therefore though there may be a precedency of nature in this gift of the Spirit before Faith, yet followeth it not that we are justified, and in Covenant before Faith, but at this very instant is the believer taken into Covenant, and justified; and thus I willingly acknowledge the first grace is absolutely given, to wit effectual vocation, or Faith, by which the soul is brought into an estate of Justification, and Faith is made the condition (though wrought by God) of our Justification. So that our being in Covenant and justified, follow Faith in order of nature, which is contrary to that which Master Eyre hath all along contended for, that a man is justified from eternity, or from the time of Christ's death, antecedently to our birth, and faith; and that the unregenerate, so remaining, if elected, are justified in that estate: which opinion, if it be received, how it should not destroy the vitals of Religion, is past my understanding to imagine. Having therefore had the glory of God, the vindication of this blessed truth, the salvation of the souls of God's Elect, the preserving them from Error that are yet free from the infection of it, the reducing those that are gone astray before mine eyes; and having with earnest prayers unto God sought for guidance herein, I undertook this task, and through his grace have finished it; and I trust I have not (I am sure I have not willingly) departed from the truth: and if in any thing I have written, I have erred from the truth, as humanum est errare, upon the first discovery of it I shall through the grace of Christ become a thankful Proselyte; in the mean time I commend the Christian Reader to the grace of God in Christ. And the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, tread down Satan under our feet, establish and settle us in the truth, and give us to receive it in the love of it, and grant to us the Spirit of wisdom, and revelation in the knowledge of him, that the eyes of our understandings may be enlightened, that we may know what is the hope of his calling, and what is the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the Saints, and by the exceeding greatness of his power, work Faith in the hearts of his Elect, where it is yet wanting; according to the working of his mighty power, and fulfil that which is lacking in our faith with power, and so keep us by his mighty power through faith unto this salvation, which is ready to be revealed at the second coming of Christ, Amen. A Postscript of the Author by way of advertisement to the Reader. WHereas it is said, pag. 238, that it is not denied that we are concurrent causes with the merits of Christ in the work of Justification, lest Mr. Eyte in particular, or any other should through wilfulness or weakness mistake the mind of the Author, he is desired not to dismember the sentence, but to take it as it is there explained; And I further declare, that I understand by it no more, but that faith is a concomitant, social cause with Christ in the work of Justification, but not a or meritorious cause of the same kind; but a subordinate instrument appointed by God for the receiving and applying of Christ's righteousness unto Justification; and that this faith is God's Almighty work, and free gife, without which no man shall ever have benefit by Christ's righteousness: and because it is our act, though it be God's gift, (for it is we that believe, and not God; in this sense alone it is said, that we are concurrent causes with Christ; not that we are justified by faith as our act, but as it is an organical instrument to apply Christ's righteousness for this end: and this I conceive is the unanimous opinion of all the Orthodox. FINIS.