JUstification may be considered as an Act of God upon the Creature, The de [...] ­nicion, or description of Iustifi­cation. or as a state of the Creature resulting from that act: As God's act, it is, God's reckoning or reputing a man just and righteous. As the Creatures state, it is, his being reckoned, and standing for just and righteous in the sight of God. That this is a Scripture-desinition or description, may ap­pear from Rom. 2.13. For not the hearers of the Law are just before God, but the doers of the Law shall be justified: Where to be just before God, and to be justified, is all one; therefore Justification is a man's being just before God, reckoned, reputed by God so to be; Another place that proves this description, you have Gal. 3.11. But that no man is justifyed by the Law in the sight of God, is evident; for the just shall live by Faith: The justified man is a just man in the sight of God. To be justified be­fore God, or in the sight of God, or by God, are all one; for it is the same phrase, [...] in both places; and the meaning is onely this, that God must reckon that man just whosoever is ju­stified, according to that in 2 Cor. 10.18. Not he that commendeth himself is approved: I may add, not he whom all the men on earth, or all the Augels [Page 2]in Heaven commend, is therefore approved, but whom the Lord commendeth.

This act or state of Justification is variously expressed in the Scripture, I shall give just a taste of it. The de­scription of [...]ustifi­cation v [...] ­ried in the Scripture. In Gen. 4.7. It is called God's accepting of us: If thou dost well, shall thou not be accepted? And again, Gods having respect unto us, in the same chap. v. 4.5. The Lord had respect unto Abel, and unto his Of­fering; but unto Cain and his Offering he had not respect.

Once more; Justification is expressed thus, To have a Tessimony from God that we please him, Heb. 11.6. But I shall keep to my first description, be­cause that is especially made use of by the Apo­stle Paul, in his professed Discourses upon this subject, viz. That Justification is a mans being reputed just and righteous in the sight of God; and indeed the Apostle Paul as a close Disputant keeps to his terms, and rallyes all the terms of a sort together, which in this business are these three especially, [...], and [...], that is, Just, Justice or Rightcousness, and Justi­fication. Every [...]ustified person [...]s reputed a just man, by vertue of a Justice or Righteousness that constitutes him so, or at least makes him a Subject immediately sit for this Act of Justification to pass upon him: For Justification is a legal or judicial Act, the Act usually of a Court. Now men in their Courts will not pronounce a man just when he is accu­sed, or is brought upon his justification; except there be a righteousness appearing in him, except there be something sufficient brought in his ju­stification: And do we think that God wil tran­sact such a great business more slightly than we are wont to do? Why, this Justification of a mans person, it is done in the sight [Page 3]of God; and (that I may a little illustrate it) it seems to be done in the Court of Heaven, before all tht Augels of God; for they re [...]oice at the conversion of a Sinner, and so at his Justificati­on, Luke 12.8, 9.15.10. Therefore in the Court of Heaven, when one is to be justified, the great inquiry that is made, is after a Righteousness: And the Apostle Paul's Epistles when he treats of this subject, ring of nothing so loudly as of a Righteousness: No less then thirty several time doth the Apostle make mention of that Word Rightcousness, in that one Epistle to the Rom. and and at least twenty of those times it is referred unto Justification; therefore Justification must be by a Righteonsness: The great Question therefore is this; What is the Righteousness which if a man have, he is a Subject capable of being justified, that is, reputed a just man in the sight of God? Now the Answer to this Question cannot be made, till I have established four preliminary Propositions.

The first position is this, That there are only two kinds of righteousness imaginable by us; 1 or rather, but two to be found in Scripture; & they are by the Apostle fairly distinguished, & each part of the distinction expressed in several synony­maes, or words signifying the same thing. There is the Righteousness of the Law, and the Righ­teousness of Faith, Rom. 10.5.6. The Righteous­ness of God, and our own Righteousness, Rom. 10.3. And as Righteousness is thus variously di­stinguished, so is Justification (which is the Re­ward of Righteousness) said to be of several kinds, according to the several Righteousness which it proceeds upon; (if the Righteousness [Page 4]be that of the Law, by the Works of the Law, then is the Reward reckoned of Debt; if the Righte­ousness be that of Faith, the Reward is in the nature of a Grace or Gift, Rom. 4 4. Now to him that worketh (according to the Law) the Reward is not reckoned of Grace, but of Debt, and [...] contra, to him that believeth, and is for the Righteousness of Faith, the Reward, that is, Justification, is reckoned of Grace, not of Debt. Having thus given a distinct account what Justi­fication is, how that it is the constituting a man just before God; and what ground or reason it proceeds upon, viz. Upon a Righteousness found with the person to be justified; he hath a Righte­ousness to plead for him: And having given you the onely distinction that there is of Righteous­ness, it is of the Law, or Faith; however either part of the distinction may be varied in synony­mous expressions; and so the Justification follow­ing upon one of these Righteousnesses, viz. That of the Law is of Debt; upon the other, viz. The Righteousness of Faith is of Grace; I shall draw up the terms that belong to either part of the distinction, whether of Righteousness or Justi­fication, together, that so ye may see the Apo­stle is full of these two, and only these two; as al­so, that the Scriptures may appear wherein this subject is touched at, and so fall upon a fair di­spute for the Cause, which is this, Whether of these two ways must serve us in the present state of things? Which way of Righteousness, which way of Justification we must betake our selves unto, if we would be saved? For without Justi­fication, no Salvation; and Salvation at the day of Judgement will follow onely upon our Justi­fication [Page 5]in this life; God will then do that in the face of all the world in acquitting or condemn­ing, which now he doth effectually in a more co­vert and secret manner. To draw up (there­fore) these two parties into the field. 1. The Law in its party or list of Synonyma's, hath these severals, The works of the Law, 2 Gal. 1.6. The deeds of the Law, Rom. 3.20.28. The Law of Works, ver. 27. By works, without any addition of the Law. If Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, Rom. 4.2. Here glorying and boasting belong to this Tribe too, as a consequent upon Legal-Justification, or Law-Justification. The Verb used is this, To him that worketh. I shall not instance in any further Synonyma's belonging to the Law, such as this, that it is called a fleshly way, and flesh; Are ye so foolish, having begun in the Spi­rit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh. I come to give the synonymaes or conjugata that belong to the way of Faith: The substantives are these, 1. Faith alone; Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteous­ness. The Faith of God, Rom. 3.3. The Law of Faith, ver. 27. The righteousness of faith: Rom. 4.13. Grace 'tis of Faith, that it might be of Grace. Abundance of Grace, and the gift of righteousness, Rom. 5.17. It is also called the Promise. Faith then is made void, & the Promise made of none effect, Rom. 4.14. And lastly, to mention no more the Promises; is the Law then against the Promises of God, Gal. 3.21. the verbs, To him that worketh not, but believeth, his Faith is counted unto him for righteousness. Having given this Muster-Roll as it were) of both parties, I come now to some other Positions, the first was this viz. 1. That there are but these two ways (imaginable of [Page 6]fication; there are but two sorts of Righteousness, and so but two ways by which men do, or with pre­tence of reason can seek Justification in, else there had been more mentioned by the Apostle.

The second position is this, 2 2. That these two wayes are quite opposite one to the other, and in­cons [...]stent one with the other, that is, as to the Ju­stification of the same man, at the same time; nay if a man doth but seek to be justified by the one, he cannot be justified by the other at the same time: This opposition I have argued out for me expresly by the Apostle, Rom. 11.6. If by Grace, then it is no more of works, otherwise Grace is no more Grace; but if it be by works then it is no more of Grace, o [...]herwise work is no more work, Rom. 4.4, 5. Now to him that worketh is the reward, not reckoned of Grace, but of Debt; but to him that worketh not, but believeth, his Faith is counted for righteousness.

3d. 3 Position is this; The way of works was once, and still in its own nature is a way of justification, Rom. 7.10. The Commandment was ordained to be unto life; yea, this way was the ancient, and the first of the ways of God in his dealing with man, and seems to be natural, and necessary to the primitive Estate of mankind; For God made made man upright in his own Image, of knowledg, righteousness, and true holiness, and gave him the Law, though not written in Tables of stone, yet in his heart, which was better; else it had not been sinne to have committed Murther, Adultery, Stealth, false-witness bearing, Perjury, Idolatry, and what not, in the Estate of innocency; for where there is no Law, there is no transgression.

God gave man a Law, and surnished him with abi­lity to have hept it to a tittle; so that, if he would, he [Page 7]might have had the works of the Law to shew for himself, The way of Justifi­cation by the [...]aw unsolded and a [...]gu­ed to be the first & natural way of ju­slification. at what time soever the Creator should have called him to account, and all the time he and others had kept themselves innocent and holy; they must have been acceptable to God: he would have had respect to them and their works; and they would have obtained this Testimony from God, that they pleased him; which was all that Enoch (who was too good to live in the World) had to shew for his justification: And this had been enough for Adam, or any other man to have produced for their Justification, if Satan had at any time turn­ed Accuser: And thus living according to the Will of God, they should have continued in the favour of God, and perhaps after some term of years have been translated to some more happy an estate: Then they might have gloryed without sinning; that is, they might have pleased them­selves with such thoughts and speeches as these: Happy are we that we took heed and care to please God, and kept our selves innocent; for now have we obtained a glorious reward; we might have rui­ned our selves, as we see the Angels have done: We had a Power to have started aside from God; but we have kept our selves from that mischief: Such an innocent glorying as this (and no higher glo­rying can I imagine lawful, even in such a state) was not forbidden by the Law of Works; it was not ex­cluded Rom. 3.27. Thus we see Justification is a a thing feasible and attainable by works; by the Law, if a man have the works of it: Our Sa­viour and the elect Augels were justi­fied by the Law.

Yea, our Saviour Christ had the Works of the Law, and the Law justified him; and the Angels that kept their first estate, they were doubtless ap­proved [Page 8]by the Law of their Creation, and had all the Apostate Angels turned Devils and false Accu­sers of them, as they are of the Brethren, their Works would have justified them in the sight of God, Not that the good Angels had no o­ther re­ward but what a Co­venant of Works would al­low. and before the world; though I say not that the good Angels have no other reward but what a Covenant of works allots. But I doubt not to affirm, That the good Angels were justified and re­warded by a Covenant of Works; in as much as there was a full trial made, when the other Angels fell of their voluntary obedience: So that the Law in it self, hath not only a power to justifie and reward, but hath actually rewarded the observers of it, those that had the righteousness of it: Yea all the Work of our redemption by Christ, was brought about onely with the good leave of the Law: Christ must make a recognition, and pub­likely own the Authority and Majesty that was still remaining in the Law: acknowledgement must be made how that that had been offended; and some reparation must be made unto the glory of God, which was much impaired; as it is a revenue from us, in the transgression of the Law: And this was the onely way decreed by God, that the Law must satisfie it self upon him, whosoever would under­take our Redemption; and then the Law must ju­stifie him; all which it did upon our Saviour: Which proves the unquestionable Power and Authority that the Law had in it to justifie man, had he but the works of it.

But now let any man or Angel but sin, If the [...]aw be once bro­ken in a tittle, it can justifie no longer. and the Law can justifie him no longer; if he have but the least failing in obedience, the Law can onely con­demn this person, Man or Angel, whoever he be; but I shall limit my self to mankind: For this take [Page 9]that Scripture, Gal. 3.10 Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law, to do them. So that if a man hath once sinned, and yet seeks to be justified, he must not seek justification by the righteousness of the Law any longer; there comes a necessity of Grace, Par­don, Mercy, which the Law hath not in it; the Law hath no such thing as Grace or Pardon in it. The Law onely saith, He that doth them, shall live in them; and he that doth them not, is accursed.

Now this Grace, Mercy and Pardon which a man comes to have a necessity of, upon his first breach of the Law, is in the way of Faith, which I have proved to be the opposite way of Justificati­on to that of the Law. It is of Faith (saith the A­postle) that it might be by Grace; the way of Grace is the way of Faith.

So that is the third assertion, with its explicati­on and proof. The fourth Assertion is this, 4 That every man in the World hath broken the Law, Rom. 3.23. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. The Jews call the Gen­tiles by this Name, The sinners of the Gentiles, or of the Nations: But what saith the Apostle spea­king of the Jews, of whom himself was one? What then? Are we better then they? No, in no wise: For we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin, as it is written, There is none righteous, no not one, v. 9, 10. When the Jews brought a Woman taken in Adultery, unto our Saviour, to see what Judgement he would pass upon her, he delivered the Woman by this sentence of stoning her, Let him that hath no sin, cast the first stone at her: Now if there had then been but one there that durst pretend to have been without sin, the Wo­man might perhaps have lost her life, John 8.34. [Page 10]And we find it amongst our selves, none but some brain-sick people dare pretend to be free from sin; even actual sin, committed in their own person, ei­ther in deed, word, or thought at least. Now if we have all thus offended the law, and transgressed the law, shall we dare appeal unto it, or can it ju­stifie us?

The fifth assertion therefore, 5 which determines the Question negatively, is, That the law is disabled from justifying us, by reason of sin: In Rom. 8.3. Justification is called [...] that impossibility of the lavv, translated thus, What the Law could not do; the lavv novv cannot do it, according to that famous assertion of the Apostle Paul to this very purpose. Gal. 3.21. For if there had been a Law given which could have given life, ve­rily righteousness should have been by the Law: The Iavv cannot novv justifie, and vvhat is the reason? Why the Apostle tells us in Rom. 8.3. What the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh: The law became thus disabled in the matter of Justifi­cation through the flesh, through sinful flesh, as ap­pears by the following words; so that now it could not justifie us if it would never so fain.

We can conceive no way now that the Lord hath to justifie by us the law, but this one; first to pardon, then to give us a stock of grace & ability to keep his law, as he gave to Adam; but then mark, here you see, first the way of Grace & Faith must be made use of, before the law can do us any good, or stand us in any stead: therefore still the fifth assertion holds true that the law in the present state of things cannot justifie us, except the way of grace should first pass upon us, and then what need vve come to [Page 11]the lavv again? No, it is so true that the lavv can­not novv justifie us, nor give life unto us; that if it could have done it, it should have done it, and God would not have made use of any other way.

I might now give several Scripture-proofs of this assertion, under several Heads: As,

1. By the Law now comes onely the knowledge of sin, Rom. 3.20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified; for by the Law is the knowledge of sin. Where-ever the Law comes now amongst sinners, it discovers that they are guilty in such, and such a particular; I had not known sin (saith the Apostle) but by the Law; for I had not known lust, except the Law had said, Thou shalt not co­vet, Rom. 7.7.

2. The Law worketh therefore Wrath, there­fore it cannot justifie; this is the Apostles Argu­ment Rom. 4. ver. 15. Now the Law worketh Wrath these two ways, either it setteth home the Wrath of God already deserved upon the Conscience, or it gives occasion to further sinning, and so to a fur­ther desert of Wrath; for the Law hath this strange effect now upon a sinners heart that seeks to be justified by it, that it will (contrary to the first de­sign of it which was to sanctifie, justifie, and save) it will now stir up all manner of lusts in the heart (as the Sun shining on a Dunghil sends forth a stink) and so not onely discovers our former ill­demerits and deserving of Wrath, but provokes to further sinning, & so lays us under more wrath stil; if this be not a truth, let any make sence of these Scriptures, if they can, Rom. 7.8, 9, 10, 11. Sinta­king occasion by the Commandment, wrought in me all manner of Concupisence, for without the Law sin was dead; for I was alive without the Law once; but when [Page 12]the Commandment came, sin revived, and I dyed; and the Commandment which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death; for sin taking occasion by the Command­ment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 13. Was then that which is good, made death unto me? God forbid; but sin that it might appear sin, working death in me, by that which is good, that sin by the Commandment might become out of measure sinful. I know several of these expressions are, and may be in part interpreted of sin in the guilt, that it appears by the law; but it must also be understood of the power of sin, that the law discovers that likewise whilest it irritates and provokes it; and I would fain know if there can be any other sence of that whole context from the 1. to the 7. ver of that chap. especially the 5. ver. When we were in the flesh, the motions of sin which were by the Law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

3. The law by both these effects discovering of sin, and exciting sin, as also shewing the Wrath due to sin is so far from justifying, that it becomes the Ministration of Death and Condemnation to the sinner, and not of justification unto life; and for this we may consult the whole third Chap. of the second to the Corinthians.

My 6th. 6 Assertion therefore is this, Faith is the way, and the onely way that we have to take for Justification being sinners; We must have Mercy, Grace, Pardon; We must not think to stand upon our terms, to require Justification as a due debt; We must be glad to receive it as a gift, and this is the way that Faith leads us in: That Faith and Grace are one way, I have proved before, in reck­oning up the several Synonymaes of those onely two wayes which the Apostle mentions. Now that [Page 13]Faith is the onely way for us, appears from what hath been already said and proved: For if the law be no way, and there be only these two wayes ima­ginable, then there is no other way but this of Faith left us: But I shall yet give one full Scrip­ture-proof of this, Rom. 3.21. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no fiesh be justified in his sight; but now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested—even the righteousness which is of God by Faith. 24. Being justified freely by his Grace. 28. Therefore we conclude, That a man is justified by Faith, without the deeds of the Law.

The 7th. and last Proposition is this, That de fa­cto, there hath been no other way of Justification which hath taken effect upon any sinful man, nor any other way adhered to by any of the true Saints of God since the fall of Adam, but this way of Faith. And the Apostle takes this way of proof, viz from the event: For most people are more af­fected with Events, then with Arguments from the nature and profound reason of the thing. There­fore having proved it first from the nature of the law, I come to examples, and they shall be but two, one plain, the other mystical; and lastly, prove it from a Testimony out of David to this way of Ju­stification by Faith; herein following the Apostle in the way which he takes, or rather herein onely marking out the way which he takes, not imita­ting it in doing the like.

The first and onely-plain example which the A­postle proves Justification by Faith by, is that of Abraham; this example of Abraham the Apostle hath continual recourse to, in his Discourses of this subject, both in the Romans and Galatians, and well might, having to deal with the Jews and Jewd [...]izing [Page 14]Gentiles, who gloryed in nothing more, then to be called and accounted Abraham's Seed; and the A­postle in his urging this Example, plainly proceeds upon such a supposition as this, Certainly your Father Abraham was justified in the right way, and you will de­sire to be justified in no other way then he was: Now He prove to you clearly, that he was not justified by the law, nor by vvorks, but by Faith, & by the pro­mise; therefore justification is not by the lavv, nor by vvorks, but by Faith. Thus the Apostle argues, Rom. 4. Gal. 3. Rom. 4.1. What shall we say then, that Abraham our Father, as pertaining to the flesh hath found? That is, either Abraham our fleshly Father hath found, or Abraham our Father hath found ac­cording to the flesh, that is, in the vvay of a flesh­ly righteousness: VVhat hath he found? Hath he found Justification by the flesh? Shall vve say he hath? It follovvs ver. 2. For if Abrahaw were ju­stified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God; that is, but he hath not vvhereof to glory be­fore God, therefore he vvas not justified by vvorks: For if he vvere justified by vvorks, he might glory before God; for the lavv of vvorks, if a man hath these vvorks, doth not exclude glorying before God: But novv Abraham hath not vvhereof to glory before God, therefore he vvas not justified by works, v. 3. For what saith the Scripture, Abra­ham believed God, and it was counted to him for righ­teousness, v. 4, 5. Now he that believeth, as the Scri­ture saith Abraham did, he worketh not, that is, seeks not Justification by works. Novv see Gal. 3. vvhere the same example is brought in proof by the Apostle, v. 6. Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness, v. 7. Knovv there­fore, [Page 15]that they which are of Faith, and for the way of believing, the same are the true Children of A­braham, and the onely blessed or justified persons, v. 18. For if the Inheritance be of the Law, it is no more of the Promise; but God gave it to A­braham by Promise, therefore he had not the Inhe­ritance by the Law, nor the Works of it; there­fore we must not expect it that way, for we must bejustified the same way that Abraham was. Having given you the plain example, I shal likewise give you the Mystical or Allegorical example which the A­postle produceth to prove this last assertion, that de facto, Faith hath been all along the way of Ju­stification; and it is safe using Allegories when the truth is once well established; and I have heard it observed, that the Jews were much taken with this way of Allegories: The Allegorical example therefore is that of Hagar and Saraah, The Al­legory of Hagar and Sarah. Isaac and Ishmael, in Gal. 4. from the 21. ver. to the end. The substance of it is this; Hagar was Mount Sinai in Arabia; and that Mountain vvhich the Jews call Sinai, the Arabians call Hagar: Novv upon Mount Sinai, or Mount Hagar, vvas the Lavv delivered, as much as to say, Allegorically: Hagar and her Seed are for Mount Sinai, for the Lavv, and the Works of it, for justification: But novv Sarah ansvvers Jerusalem that is above, and to Mount Sion; that is, she vvas a Type of the Gospel-Church, vvhich is for Ju­stification by Faith. Novv vvhat saith the Scripture ( v: 30.) concerning these tvvo Mothers and their Children, vvhich was not onely true literally, but is to be understood mystically and figuratively of the two Seeds, of those two sorts of men that ad­here, the one to the Law for justification, the other to the way of believing; what saith the Scripture? [Page 16] Cast out the Bond-woman and her son, for the son of the Bond-woman shall not be heir with the Son of the Free­woman; as much as to say, Those that go to Mount Sinai, to the Law for Justification, shall never be heirs of God, but only the Gospel-Churcch, those that adhere to the way of Justification by Faith, according to that Scripture, Gal. 3.18. If the In­heritance be of the Law, it is no more of the Pro­mise; but God gave it to Abraham and Sarah, and her Seed by promise. Abraham is the Father of us all, Rom. 4.16. and Saraah, vvhich ansvvers to Je­rusalem that is above, is the Mother of us all, Gal. 4.26. Novv if any should object, that this prove; de facto onely since Abrahams time, for all that vvould be accounted of his Seed: I ansvver. Let them look into Heb. 11. and there they may see a Catalogue of Saints from Abels time, dovvn to the time of the Maccabees, and in the end of that chap it is said, These all obtained a good report through faith ver. 39.

I come novv to my last proof, vvhich vvas to be from Testimony out of David, vvhich the Apo­stle likevvise makes use of for an Argument, Rom 4.6, 7. vvherein the Apostle tells us there is a de­scription of the blessedness of Justification, and particularly that Justification vvhich is by Faith and give me a Scriprure-description, this is Au­thentick and Divine: Ver. 6. Even as David als [...] describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom Go [...] imputeth righteousness without works: This is purely a description of Justification by Faith: Now what is it? It follows v. 7, 8. saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are cover­ed; blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin: Here David makes him the onely blessed man [Page 17]that is justified by Faith; and what is this Justifica­tion other then pardon of sin, forgiveness of Ini­quity, Mercy, Grace, a thing that the Law is not acquainted with; the Law cannot justifie the un­godly, as Faith can, Rom. 4.5. How Faith receives pardon, and what this Faith is, I shall have best op­portunity to discover in the following part of this Discourse; in the mean time I reckon that I have established these two positions in the general, that the Law is now no way of Justification; and that Faith which is the way of Grace and Pardon, is the only way left us, which sufficiently appears from Reason and Example; the Reason is that of the fall and sinfulness of mankind: The Example is that of Abraham, which may serve instead of all, and that which is of kin to it, viz. the Allegory of Ha­gar and Sarah, Isaac and Ishmael, together with all the Saints of the Old-Testament, reckoned up in Heb. 11.

To which as an overplus, I may adde the reason of God's approbation of this way of believing, and preferring this way before the reviving the old way of Works again: And this we have Rom. 4.16. The rea­son why after there was once a necessity of pardon, the Lord was pleas­ed to con­tinue the way of grace alto­gether. Therefore it is of Faith, that it might be by Grace. When once man had fallen, and so brought on a necessity of another way of Salvation, (if the Lord wouldshew so much mercy) when once the way of Grace became necessary, the Great God liked this way of Grace altogether; not to pardon man, and then set him up a new in the way of Works; and the Lord liked the continuation of the way of Grace, rather then re-introducing the old way, that hereby he might have a great revenue of Glo­ry from his Grace, which would be shown in this way; the Lord liked not so well that his Creature [Page 18]should come, and (as it were) challenge his Justi­fication and Salvation as a Debt, which in the way of the Law he might have done; To him that work­eth the reward is not reckoned of Grace, but of Debt: The Lord liked not that the Creature should glory and boast that it had saved it self, as in the way of Works it might have done; for glorying is not ex­cluded by the Law of Works, but onely by the Law of Faith; whereas this way of Grace excludes glo­rying, and that indebtedness of God to the Crea­ture, and holds the Creature in continual debt and obligation to God: When Paul would have had the Thorn in the flesh, the Messenger of Satan taken off from buffeting him, the Lord teacheth Paul to be contented with this answer, My Grace is suffici­ent for thee, for my strength is made perfect in weakness, 2 Cor. 12 7, 8, 9. This way of believing taught Paul to depend upon the Grace and Strength of God, by which the Lord received an Honour which he should not have had if the temptation had been suddenly taken off. And this we find to be the great Reason alledged by the Apostle frequently in this subject: God in the way of his Gospel-Grace, goes quite cross to that way which man would have chosen, for this very reason, to hinder man's glo­rying and boasting; so we have it, 1 Cor. 1.28, 29. The base things of the World, and things which are de­spised, hath God chosen to bring to nought the things that are, that no flesh should glory in his presence: And in the 30.31. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us Wisdom, Righteousness, Sancti­fication and Redemption, that according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord: So in Rom. 3. when the Apostle had shewed what God had declared to be his Righteousness, even that of [Page 19]Faith, Where is glorying then, saith the Apostle? It is excluded. Again, the righteousness of the Law and Works, is called our own righteousness; but Faith is called the righteousness of God, Rom. 3.22 Now God will not allow that we should be justified by our own righteousness, he will have another righteous­ness which is not our own, that we may glory in him alone.

Having asserted and proved those two Positions, That the Law is no way, and that Faith is the onely way of Justification: I come now to answer the ob­jections that may be made against what I have as­serted, either in behalf of the Law, or against the way of believing.

The great objection (and that which contains almost all that can be mentioned) is started by the Apostle Paul himself, Gal. 3.19. Object. Wherefore then ser­veth the law. Wherefore then ser­veth the Law? is the Law of no use then, as you seem to make it? For if it were once a way of life, as you acknowledge, and the Scripture affirms it was ordained to be unto life, Rom. 7.10. and it be now no way unto life, but the way of Faith onely is, then you make it an old antiquated thing out of date, out of use. And the Apostle is sensible that this inconvenience would be ob­jected, Rom. 3.31. Do we then make void the Law through Faith?

But the meaning of the objection in Gal. 3.19. is chiefly this, Wherefore then serveth the Law; that is, To what end or purpose was the Law given to the Children of Israel by Moses? You assert, say the objectors, that as soon as Adam fell, the Law be­came of no use to him, nor any of his posterity, in the matter of Justification; but yet we find that the Law was given by Moses 2000. years after A­dam's fall, and it was given in the most glorious [Page 20]manner, with the most astonishing glory that ever God appeared in, at any time unto the World; it was delivered by Angels, with the voice of a Trum­pet, with Thundering, and Lightning, and Earth­quakes, so that the whole Mountain was of a fire; and all the people saw and heard the thunder and fire, and the voice of Words: Yea God himself is said to descend upon the Mount in fire, and speak with Moses, Deut. 4.17, 18, 19, 20. Heb. 18.19, 20, 21. And say the Objectors, Whereas you seem to say in your third Position, That the Law was onely a way of Justification to Adam: The Scripture makes no mention that ever the Law was given to Adam, but onely to the Children of Israel; and when ever you have a comparison made between the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace, or betwixt the Lavv and Faith, it is the comparing still of the Covenant vvith the Children of Israel under the Old-Testament, and the Nevv-Covenant mad by Christ vvith his people under the Gospel: So vve sind these two ways compared in 2 Cor. 3. through­out the chap. and Heb. 8. throughout that chapter; but especially from v. 6. to the end; In 2 Cor. 3. there the Law is indeed called a Ministration of death, but yet it is the Law of Moses; for in the same ver. it is said to be written & engraven in stones, which is plainly the Law of the ten Commandments; and that when Moses brought them to the people, his countenance had such a glory and lustre upon it, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly be­hold his face, ver. 7. And this Law of Moses is cal­led the Old-Testament, ver. 6. And this is that which is compared with the Gospel which Paul preached, ver, 12.13. Seeing that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech, and not as Moses, which [Page 21]put a vail over his face, &c. Ergo, The Law reacht fur­ther then the days of Adam for a way of Justificati­on; for it was given to the Children of Israel by Mo­ses, and it was their Covenant or Testament; and if it be done away, it was not till the dayes of the Gospel by Christ, according to that of the Apostle John, 1 John 17. The Law was given by Moses, but Grace came by Jesus Christ: So in Gal. 3 23. Before Faith came, we were kept under the Law, shut up unto the Faith which should afterwards be revealed. So in Heb 8.6. speaking of Christ; But now hath he ob­tained a more excellent Ministry, by how much also he is the Mediator of a better Covenant, which was esta­blished upon better promises, ver. 7. For if that first Covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second; but finding fault, he saith, Behold the dayes come saith the Lord, when I will make a new Covenant with the House of Israel, and with the House of Judah, not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers, when I brought them out of the Land of Aegypt. And what Covenant was that I pray, but the Law, the Law of Moses? ver. 13. In that he saith a New Covenant, he hath made the first old; now that which decayeth and waxeth old, is ready to vanish away. From this whole context I con­clude, sayes the objector, That the Law, which is famously known to be the Law of Moses, was a Co­nant till Christs time at least, with the people of of God, Jews and Proselytes, and so a way of Justi­fication, which is quite contrary to your fifth and seventh Positions; or else shew of what use the Law was, when given to the Children of Israel be­sides this of being a way of Justification, or a Co­venant of Works, which is all one. Wherefore then serveth the Law? Is it of no use now unto us? [Page 22]Or rather, wherfore then was it given to the Jews? Was it of no use to them? Was it not their Cove­nant? And therefore must it not be their way of Justification? Else shew how it would deserve the Name of the first, or old Covenant or Testament?

Nay, to adde a little more matter of Ob­jection, the Law hath the Language of a Cove­nant, a condition annexed, and that when it was given to the children of Israel; and the Lord tells his people, Lev. 18.5. after the delivery of the Law, That if a man do these things, he shall live; And Moses is said by the Apostle Paul, Rom. 5.10. in those words of Leviticus, to describe a legal righ­teousness in opposition to the Righteousness of Faith; For Moses describeth the righteousness of the Law, that the man which doth those things, shall live by them; but the righteousness which is of Faith, speak­ethon this wise—that is, in an opposite manner: Therefore certainly saith the objection, the Law when it was given by Moses, was given as a way of Justification: Nay our Saviour himself saith in Luke 10.28. speaking of the law of Moses, This do, and thou shalt live: Therefore certainly the law is a way, if not the onely way of Justification un­to fallen man; for those Jews then were fallen, as well as we are now.

This is the objection, which is indeed weighty and considerable, and of purpose rai­sed by the Apostle, in the first great branch of it, that it might receive an answer: It consists of several branches, to all which I shall endeavour to apply an answer in its place; and first I shall be­gin with that part which is greatest, which when well answered, the rest will receive an easie soluti­on; and it is this: For what ends or purposes was the Law given to the Children of Israel, if not for a way of Justification? Now as I gave the objection first in [Page 23]the Apostles words, so I shall give you the answer to it in his words in that same Chap. Gal. 3. This great objection therefore the Apostle answers in the same way that our Saviour sometimes answered the cavilling Pharisees with a question all as hard, or harder.

A: You come, saith the Apostle, in a cavilling way against the Doctrine of Faith which we preach, and tell me, the law hath been a way, and therefore is a way, and the way of Justification; and you tell me it was not onely a way to Adam in innocency, but to all the people of God, before that Jesus, and we his Apostles preached up this way of believing: And you go to prove this last thing that you say, that it was the way to all the Saints of God till Christ's time (which is the great thing that I deny) by a meer cavil; Forsooth else wherefore doth it serve? Of what use else is it? And I answer: you with an harder question by far? Wherefore then sereth the promise? To what end serve the promises? To what end serves the Go­spel that was preached to Abraham? Gal. 3.8. The Scriptute foreseeing that God would justifie the Heathen through Faith preached before the Gos­pel unto Abraham, &c. You ask, To what end ser­veth the Law then? And I ask, To what end ser­veth the Gospel then, that was preached to Abra­ham before the law was given? Yea, to what end serves the Covenant made of God in Christ, to A [...] ­braham and his Seed 430. years before ever the law was given by Moses, ver. 17. Shall I ever be indu­ced to believe, that when God had set up a way of Grace, nay had established & confirmed it in a Co­venant, not to Adam only, who was a remote Fa­ther, but to our Father Abraham and his Seed, nay [Page 24]had confirmed it in Christ; shall I think that the law coming by Moses 430 years after, should dis­annul this Covenant, and make the promise of none effect? What did God repent of his being so gracious, and set up a way that had no Grace, and can have no Grace in it? or was not the great God obliged to make good his Promise and Cove­nant? Why, if it be but a mans covenant, yet af­ter it is confirmed, no man disannulleth or addeth thereto. Now this was Gods Covenant, and there­fore saith the Apostle. Gal. 3 15, 16, 17, 18. that is, This is the full scope and genius of his Discourse; Finding thus a Covenant made and confirmed so long before, I wil never believe, it can never be, that the law coming so long after, should come in to put an end to it, to make the way of Justification by Faith to cease; What ever therefore the law came for, this could never be the end of it.

And here the Apostle might have ended the en­quiry, having silenced the question by a greater: For it is as certain, (if not more) that God cannot fa [...]l in the promise of his Grace, as it is that he should exact the rigour of his Law. But yet now, if those which make the objection will be sober, the Apostle will give them further satisfaction yet.

2. Ans. There were other ends of giving the Law, There were other ends of giving the Law, besides justifica­tion by the works of it. besides Justification by the works of it; For the Apostle wil readily allow that there were great and weighty ends of the delivery of the law, that it was delivered with great Majesty and Authority, that the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good: The Apostle never speaks light­ly of the law; no you shall find, saith the Apostle, that by the preaching of Faith we go the highest way in the World to establish the Laws Rom. 3.31. [Page 25]We will allow any thing that can be thought or imagined for the honour of the law, if you will a­bate us thus much, that it is not a way of Justifica­tion: I come therefore to shew some other ends of the law's being given (which were indeed very con­siderable) besides that of its being a way of Justifi­cation by the works of it.

And first in general, and I shall answer in the words of the Apostle in the same verse, where the objection is made, Gal. 3.19. Is was added be­cause of transgres­sion. The Law was added be­cause of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made: Here may be observed in this answer, the substance of the answer, which is the true reason of the laws being given; and two at least (if not more) cautionary circumstances in the manner of expressing this reason or answer. The substance of the answer, or the main reason of the law's being given, was this; it was [...], it was given for the sake of, or by occa­sion of, or because of transgressions. How trans­gressions occasioned, and even necessitated the gi­ving of the law, we shall easily understand, if we consider, that, All trans­gressions did not occasion the giving of the Law first it was not given because of A­dam's transgression or transgressions; for then it must have been presently given as soon as Adam fell, whereas it was not given for the space of 2400. years after Adam's fall; so it seems it was not ne­cessary to be given for Adam's Salvation, by occa­sion of his transgressions, he had indeed the pro­mise of the Seed of the Woman given him present­ly upon his fall, by which he was to be saved. A­gain, it was not necessary to be given for Abra­hams salvation, not by occasion of his transgressi­ons; it was not given in his time; he had the pro­mise and the Gospel preached to him, by the Faith of which he was saved; the Law was not given [Page 24] [...] [Page 25] [...] [Page 26]till above 400. years after he received the promise, which was long after Abraham was dead and buri­ed: So you see all transgressions did not necessi­tate the Law's being given; for all the good men that were before the Law had their transgressions, and yet the Law was not given in their time, they went to Heaven without it. The truth is therefore this seems to be the plain reason of the Law's be­ing added with respect to transgressions. Before the Law and the Scriptures written by Moses, How trans­gressions occasion­ed the Laws de­livery. the People of God had only the Light of Nature, the Promise given to Adam, or other promises and dis­coveries from God, made to some eminent Patri­arch, such as Enoch and Noah, but especially and fa­mously to Abraham; and by these delivered to the people. Enoch is said to be the seventh from Adam, and to prophesie, Jude 14. and Noah to be the 8th person, a Preacher of Righteousness; which per­haps may as wel signifie his being the eighth famous Preacher from Adam, as one of the eight saved in the Ark, 2 Pet. 2.5. from these the people of God before the Law had a traditional Divinity and Go­spel, which might serve well enough, and did very well with the People of God in their days (who were but few, as it should seem) to hinder them from running out violently into transgressions; but when God had entered into Covenant with a carnal Seed of Abraham that should come of his Son Isaac; and this Seed of Abraham accor­ding to the promise, grew and multiplied like the stars of Heaven for number, & could not be con­tained in their duty by so few traditional Rules as the Patriarchs and the good men in their days lived and served God by, or that the Pro­phets which they had amongst them, one at a time, were not able to teach so great a people as they [Page 27]should be taught, but that they would be apt to break out into manifold transgressions, except they had the Law written plainly for them in Ta­bles of Stone, so that every man might teach his Neighbour, when they grew irregular and ungod­ly, saying, Know the Lord; then, for the sake of these transgressions, and for the prevention of them the Law was added. So you see the Law was given by Moses onely occasionally. If the Children of Israel could have been contained in obedience as well as Adam and the Church of God in his time was, and till Abrahams time, and after Abraham's time for a great while, and this without the Law, it seems the Law had never been given by Moses.

This is the substance of the answer, and to this suits exceeding wel another place of the same Apo­stle, 1 Tim 1.7, 8, 9. There are a sort of men (saith he) that have swerved from the way of Faith, and they will needs be teachers of the Law; but alas, they know not what they undertake in it: 'Tis true (saith the Apostle) the Law is good if a man use it lawfully; but you may make such an use of the Law, viz. in the matter of Justificaton, that it may do you a mischief: And whereas these ignorant Law­preachers tell us, that the Law was given by Moses for a way of Justification, we know, saith he, ver. 9. that the Law is not made, was never given for the righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for the unholy and prophane; for these serve the Laws of the first Table, for Murtherers of Fathers, and Murtherers of Mothers, for Man-slayers, serves the sixth Commandment. For Whoremongers, and them that defile themselves with mankind, serves the seventh Commandment; for Men-slayers the eighth; for Lyars, for perjured per­sons the ninth; and if there be any thing that is contrary to sound Doctrine. The Law was given [Page 28]because of these transgressions and transgressors, else it should not have been given at all more then it was before, viz: Clearly written in the heart of man before the fall, and obscurely, in the heart of all men ever since, yet plainly enough for those that were minded to use their light faithfully and honestly, to­gether with those vouchsafements they should have had from God at times of further Discoveries.

This is the substance of the answer of the A­postle; and this reason, Because of transgressions, you see was a weighty reason why the Law should be given to the Jews, if God had any love for them to make them his people above all other Nations, viz. to keep them from running out into these gross sins, which otherwise they would, and other Nations not having the Law did run out into C. 19. Ver. 19, 20. He sheweth his Word unto Jacob, his Statutes and his Judgements unto Israel; he hath not dealt so with any Nation: And as for his Judg­ments, they have not known them; for though the Work of the Law be written in every mans heart as the Apostle tells us, Rom. 2.14.15. (where he is speaking of the Gentiles) yet men will not be at the pains to read or study what is written there, nei­ther would Israel have done it, had not the Law been written for them in Tables of stone too; they would not have known God's Judgements any more then other Nations, had not God given his Law to them by Moses: And this we see by the event; for that, notwithstanding this Law, yet when they came amongst other Nations, they ran into their abominations, though they had express Laws against them; what would they have done therefore if they had been wholly without this Law? There was therefore a necessity, at least a great requisitness of a Law to be given to Israel, [Page 29]if God loved them, and would manifest his love to them more then to any other people; he could not do it in an higher instance, then in giving them the Law. Therefore you see the Law might be given for other reasons then this, to be a way of Justifi­cation by the works of it, I will shew further anon why the lavv vvas given with respect to transgres­sion. I shall onely in the mean time observe one or tvvo things further in the Apostles answer to the objection, which I mentioned by the Name of cautionary circumstances in his Answer; one is this, [...], it was added, non data sed addita est; it is not said simply, the Law was given, but added because of transgressions; Added to what? Why to the Promises, to the Go­spel that vvas on foot before, long before; above 2000. years before, in Adam's time; 430. years be­fore, in Abraham's time; it vvas added to the Cove­nant that vvas before confirmed of God in Christ; and it vvas added, not as a supplement, for the Go­spel vvas compleat in it self; it saved thousands before ever the Lavv vvas given by Moses; and it vvould have saved thousands more, and might have served till the coming of Christ, for all any absolute necessity that there vvas of it. Onely if the Lord vvould be so gracious to his people of Is­rael above all Nations in the World, to give them his Will in Writing at large, that they might be the better contained in their obedience, better then o­ther Nations vvere; This vvas the Lords Bounty and Grace to them; but it is certain, 'tvvas never given them to be so much as a necessary supple­ment to the Gospel that vvas before, in the matter of Justification: It vvas added onely occasionally, as an useful Appendix, not as a necessary supple­ment; [Page 30]not vvith design to supplant, but to serve the Gospel. I have mentioned one of the limitati­ons or cautionary circumstances vvhich the Apostle useth in his assigning the reason of the Lavv's be­ing given; As the law was given onely oc­casionally and addi­tionally, so it was but a tem­porary dis­pensation. it vvas added, there is another, [...] until such time as the Seed should come. As the Law was but occasionally and additionally given at first; so it is but temporary in its continuance; as there is [...] in its beginning; so there is an [...], a set-time of its continuance: Here observe, that though the Apostle doth allow that there was a weighty reason, a great occasion of the Law's being gi­ven; yet he is afraid at the same time, lest the Law should get too much advantage by this allowance of his, and therefore gives these several terms of diminution, whilest he speaks most for the honor of the Law. Let us return now a little more to dis­cover the mystery that is contain'd in that phrase [...], the Law was added, because of Transgressions; for you shall find that there is much of mystery in it yet, besides what I have mentioned; What I have mentioned, lyes more obvious; that which remains is much more won­derful and mysterious, yet expresly asserted by the Apostle in several places. The Law therefore was added because of transgression in these three respects. The Law was added because of transgres­sion, in three re­spects. 1. To hinder transgression from being committed. 2. To aggravate transgressions that were or should be committed. And 3. ultimate­ly to finish transgressions, and make an end of sin by driving and directing the wounded sin­ner to a Saviour. And all those three reasons are as I may say, fundamental in the occasion of the Law its being added to the promises, till the [Page 31]time that the Seed should come. 1. The Law was added because of transgressions, that is, to hin­der transgressions from being committed; and the Law was added to hinder transgressions these two ways. 1. As a large plain Rule to shew them what was their duty, that so they might not run into transgressions through ignorance: And 2dly, as a fiery Law to deter them from sin, and frigh­ten them into their duty, that so they might not run into transgressions through negligence. 1. As a large plain Rule to shew them their du­ty. This particular, and this onely I insisted up­on ere-while, when I explained what was the substance of the Apostles Answer to the Objecti­on, and I shall add no more unto it.

2dly, It did not onely hinder transgression by informing them in their duty lest they should run into transgression through ignorance; but as a fiery Law to deter them from transgression, and to frighten them into their duty, that they might not transgress through negligence; though this doth not so much refer to the matter of the Law, as to the manner of its delivery. But yet this manner of its delivery is as much taken no­tice of by the Apostle, and was as necessary al­most as the matter of the Law it self. Now this manner of its delivery with dread and terror, consists of two things: 1. Wherein consists the terror of the Law. That it was delivered with thunderings and lightnings, &c. 2. That it was delivered much in the form of a Covenant of Works, without that mixture of promises which the Gospel abounds with; and these two things make up the terror of the Law of Moses; and indeed this terror made up of these two parts, is almost all that which is peculiar to their [Page 30] [...] [Page 31] [...] [Page 32]dispensation: For else, for the matter of it (set­ting aside the Ceremonial and Judicial Law) it remains still obliging us in the dayes of the Go­spel; and the Apostle professeth to establish the Law even by the preaching of Faith: 'Tis true, it was first of all given to the Jews, that was their priviledge; but now that it is given, it is ours as well as theirs; that therefore which seems to be peculiar to them in it, was the manner of its de­livery, both being without promises, and in that terrible manner given upon the Mount; but yet still it was thus given because of transgressions, to hinder transgressions; they needed this ter­ror at that time; Children though they know their duty, must have some terror to make them do it: The Heir, whilest he is a Child, differeth no­thing from a servant, though he be Lord of all; he is u­sed like a servant, harshly, severely; he is under Tutors and Governors till the time appointed by the Father, Gal. 4.2. there is the same [...] that the Apostle hath in his answer to the obje­ction, [...]: But because this particular hath some affinity with the second ge­neral end mentioned, why the Law was given with respect to transgressions, I shall now enter upon that; and it was this, 2. The Law was ad­ded because of transgressions, for the height­ning and aggravating of transgressions, Rom. 5.20. The Law entered, that the offence might a­bound, [...], subingressa est, irrepsit; the Holy Ghost is pleased frequently to use such words as should shew that the Law came in by the by, for some considerable ends indeed that the Lord had in delivering it, but not as the great establisht way for Justification, for certainly that [Page 33]could not come in by the by; but the Law came in thus, it stole in, subingressa est, it crept in by stealth irrepsit, so the Original signifies. But what was the end of the Law when it thus entred? why, it en­tred because of transgressions, that the offences of men might abound: In the 12. ver. of R [...]. 5. [...] read, that sin entered into the World; and [...], that the Law entered; the Law hunted it, followed it, stole in afterwards to discover sin; for as ver. 13. hath it, Before, or until the Law, sin was in the world; that is, not before the Law did oblige, but before the Law was delivered in such a solemn manner as it was upon Mount Sinai; before the Law sin was in the world; but sin was not imputed when there was no Law; yet death reigned all this while till Moses his time, which was the curse of the Law. Now that men might know wherefore they suffered death, and the curse, it was sit the Law should come into the world in a solemn manner delivered, that so sin might be imputed by men to themselves, as it was by God to men, witness death, the curse of the Law, which reigned from Adam to Moses; from A­dam that sinned, to Moses that gave the Law; sin did not appear to be sin, till the Law entred; & there­fore it is said, Sin that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good, ( viz. the Law) that sin by the Commandment might become out of measure sinfull. So Rom. 3.20 the Apostle proves that the Law can­not justifie; for by the Law is the knowledge of sin. The Law is so far from justifying (saith the Apostle) that it only brings sin to light, brings the knowledg of sin with it, makes the offence to abound; and if that be the way to justifie sinners, to aggravate their sins, & bind on their guilts more then ever u­pon their consciences, let any man judg; & there­fore indeed the Law in the immediate great intent [Page 34]of it was a killing Letter, an Administration of Death, a Ministration of Condemnation, a Ministra­tion of Desperation, and not of righteousness unto justification; and accordingly it was delivered with thundering & lightning upon Mount Sinai, to shew the horrible fire, darkness & tempest that there was in the Law it self, to all that should come near it, to think to make use of it for a way of Justification; as Moses put a Vail upon his face to shew the vailed­ness of his Dispensation, so the Law was delivered with fire, to shew the fieriness of the Law unto the conscience; for the Law was not only terrible to the beholders of it, when it was given upon Mount Si­nai; but this terribleness is in the Law it self, to all that ever had to do with it, feelingly ever since, to all that ever came near it for justification. Indeed for those that stand aloof off from it, only play a­bout it at a distance, & hope to be saved in a loose way by their works, by their good doings, and by their good meanings, they may perhaps never feel the stinging fiery lashes of the Law; but let any of these self-Justiciaries drive their Principle to an Head, let them come up near to the Law, let them advance toward Mount Sinai, and approach it, and challenge their Justification from God by the Law, and they shall quickly find themselvs scorched and scalded, & sent away with sad hearts and affright­ned consciences; they' [...] find the Law to be a mini­stration of Death, and not of Righteousness. I might here shew in several particulars, how the L [...]w doth discover sin, it discovers habitual sin; St Paul, or the man personated in Rom. 7. had never found there had been such a bottomless depth, such a lively body of death within him, but for the Law; when that came, sin revived, and he dyed, Rom. 7.9. 2. It discovers actual sin; I had not known sin (that is, lustings to be sin) except the Law had said, [Page 35] Thou shalt not covet, ver. 7. But I shall not insist longer upon this particular: The third end of the Law's be­ing [...]ded I hasten to the third great end of the Law's being added with respect to transgressions, and that was for the finishing of transgressions, and making an end of sin as the ex­pressions are, though somewhat otherwise used, Dan. 9.24. What shall we think, that when God had given promises to Abraham, and confirmed a Co­venant in Christ to him and his Seed, that he now gave a law to drive all his people into despair? this amounts all to one, as if he had broken his promise and his covenant, as I have before argued out of the Apostle Paul; did the Lord only send his law that they might know their duty, and be affright­ned into their duty, as the first particular carries it? & if they did not do their duty, should the law ag­gravate their sin, & bind on their guilts upon their Conscience, and so leave them under desparation, and be a ministration of death to them? Was this all the Law came for? If this were all, they might better have been without the law at a venture, then have had it; they might have done better with the promises alone: This therefore was not all the end of the Law, to bring them into desperation, and there to leave them; but by this desperation, which indeed the Law was to bring them into, to make them hunger and thirst after another righteous­ness then that of the law, which by the law they might see they could not have, to make them in love with the promises, with any thing that looks like mercy and grace, and in a word to direct them and drive them to Christ and a Gospel-Justificati­on, Gal. 3.24. The law was our School-master to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by Faith, ver. 22. The Scripture (that is the Law) hath [Page 36]concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ, might be given to them that be­lieve. 23. Before Faith came, we were kept under the Law, included as prisoners, shut up unto the Faith which should afterwards be revealed. Rom. 10.3. Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness, unto every one that believeth. So that indeed the Law was given, not to undermine the promise, but to serve the ends and honour of the promise. The law entred not to preach a Legal Justification, but an Evangelical. The Law came into the world to confess its own impotency to save or justifie us, as also to send and direct us to one that could, according to that of Rom. 3.20.21.22: Therefore by the deeds of the Law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for by the Law is the knowledge of sin: But now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that believe. The righteousness of God with­out the law is witnessed by the law: There are o­ther Scriptures to this purpose, which I forbear to mention. Thus the Law and the Gospel do mu­tually good turns for one another; the Law prea­cheth the Gospel most effectually; for men never well close with the Gospel, till they feel the lash of the Law: And the Gospel again most effectually establisheth and obligeth to the keeping of the Law; for till men have a principle of faith, they ne­ver have a living principle of obedience; thus the elder, which is the Law, is made to serve the younger, that is, the Gospel; but the Gospel hath an ingenuity in it, to return the Law a due acknow­ledgement.

[Page 37]And the Law might well direct the sinner to Christ, and preach Justification by Faith; for this was the onely way of recovering its own honour and obedience, which was due unto it, Reas. 1. Why the Law might well direct to Christ. as appears in these three particulars. First, for that Christ personally fulfilled it to a tittle; he lived a most per­fect life, and performed unerring obedience for more then thirty years together, here amongst men upon earth; and this is said by some Divines to be for the Justification of his own person, 2 and is known by the name of his active obedience. 2. For those whom he was to save and redeem from un­der the law, from under the punishments and pe­nalties which were due to them for the breaches of it; he underwent all that the law exacted from him as their Mediator, till the law was fully satisfi­ed. 3. 3 As for the persons themselves thus redeem­ed by the sufferings of an innocent and legally-righteous Saviour; they are not owned by this Sa­viour to be his redeemed ones any further, then as they acknowledg the perfect holiness of the law, & that they themselves are obliged as Creatures, and the redeemed ones of Christ, to endeavour to their utmost to keep the law still to a tittle, and do actu­ally perform a sincere obedience to it, not dispen­sing with themselves in any command of it, but be­wailing their infirmities wherein they fall short of unerring obedience; so that in the way of faith, the law obtains its true end, though not exactly in the persons justified, yet in their Saviour; Christ is the end of the law for righteousness, Rom, 10.4. Yea, and in their persons thus far, that they perform a sin­cere obedience, and endeavour an unerring obedi­ence to the law; and thus the righteousness of the law is said to be fuifilled in them, in as much as they [Page 38]walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit, Rom. 8 4.

So that now I have answered the great objecti­on against Justification by Faith, which was th s, Wherefore then serveth the Law? and that with some advantage to the present cause; I have shewn, that whatever the law was intended for in its delivery, it was not given for a way of Justification, because the way of faith was establisht before; the reasons of its delivery were these: 1. It was given to the Jews in mercy, to shew them their duty more plain­ly then they could otherwise have known it by the light of nature, or any other way of teaching which they had amongst them till that time, that so they might not run into transgressions through ignorance, and it was given with terror, that they might not rush into transgressions through negli­gence; and these two particulars made up the first end of the delivery of the law, viz. to hinder trans­gressions from being committed. 2. It was added to heighten transgressions in the guilt of them, when they should be committed. 3. Not to leave them in desparation, but to direct them unto Christ; and I have shewn that great advantage did accrue to the law this way, that hereby it came to pass, that though it was not fulfilled by the first A­dam in the first giving of it, yet it was all as well fulfilled by the second, and every way recompen­sed and satisfied as if it had never been broken; so that I reckon the Objection is quite taken off, and may be retorted upon the objectors, thus: If they ask, Wherefore then serveth the Law? We an­swer, It serveth to lead men unto Christ, that they may be justified by Faith.

[Page 39]I have some things yet to add upon the two last last ends of the law's being given, which I thought not fit to insert in the first mention of them; upon the second end of the law's being given, viz. for the aggravating of transgression, and loading the Conscience with guilt, I have this to add. It is so true that the law was given to the Jews to make the offence to abound, and to press the conscience with guilt, that it had the same effect upon the Gen­tile World to whom it was not delivered as it was unto the Jews; so saith the Apostle, Rom 3. where, when he had recited out of the Psalms, a Catalogue of sins which the law doth condemn men for, from the 10. to the 19. ver. in that 19. ver. Now we know (saith he) that whatsoever things the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law, that every mouth may be stopped and the whole world might be guilty before God. Certainly the Gentiles are a part, and the greatest part of the world; now the whole World becomes guilty before God by the law, and every mouth is silenced and stopped by it. I do not say that the law as given to the Jews by Moses, had this effect upon the Gentiles, to whom it was not given; but the Apostle tells us, Rom. 2.15. how this came to pass, that the law, though not given to the Gen­tiles in the same manner as it was to the Jews, did yet convince and condemn the Gentiles as well as the Jews, because the effect and substance of the same law that was written upon Tables of Stone by Moses, was written in the hearts of the Gen­tiles; so that their thoughts did accuse them when they did evil, as well as excuse them when they did well. Now hence I draw an argument, a minor [...] If the law written, upon the hearts of the Gentiles, though obscurely, had yet an accusing and con­demning [Page 40]power in it to them, how might it well have upon the Jews, to whom it was delivered plainly written and engraven in stones, with thun­der, lightning & earthquakes, as is before expressed?

That which I have to add upon the third great end of the Law it's being delivered, viz. to direct and bring the wounded sinner to Christ, O How [...] Christ? is by way of answer to this question, How did the Law lead to Christ? I shall give several answers unto this question, and first of all, The Law was our School-master unto Christ, A. [...] as the Dispensation of the Law, made way for the Dispensation of the Gospel. Sowre things make the sweet more pleasant; Darkness makes Light more desirable; Slavery and Severity makes Liberty more welcom. Quinese [...]t serv [...]re nescit imperare, the School makes fair way for the University. This consideration makes the succession of the Gospel to the Law more comely; and it is insisted on very much by the Apostle in Gal. 4, for the seven first verses. Ver. 3. When we were Children, we were in bondage unto the Law; but when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son to redeem us into liberty, and to give us the spirit of sons, Gal. 3 23. Before Faith came, we were kept under the Law, and kept under by the Law, shut up unto the Faith which should after­wards be revealed; wherefore the Law was our School-Master to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justi­fied by Faith; but after that faith is come, we are no longer under a School-Master; it would now be an in­congruous thing to be under a School-master any longer, as it was very convenient that before we should be; and thus the Law was a School-master unto Christ, (as John Baptist was) by its severities to humble us, and break our hearts, and to make us [...] people ready & prepared for the Lord. [Page 41]And the beauty & great conveniency of the suc­cession of these two Administrations of the Law & Gospel each to other, appears still in the great work of Conversion upon every sinners heart, where the same method is observed: first to hum­ble the soul by legal convictions, then to make a discovery of Christ & the Grace of the Gospel. And this our practical Divines insist much upon in their Sermons and Treatises, giving us this ac­count of the Work of Grace upon the heart, that first there is conviction, compunction and humiliation, all yet a legal work; then Faith or Conversion. And I do verily believe, that the Spirit of God doth use this method (though as all acknowledge, not with the same degrees) in every work of Regeneration. And again they observe, that as after the Gospel and Faith is come, it is absurd to return to the Law of Moses in the whole Dispensation of it; so they apply that Scripture Rom. 8.15. Ye have not received the Spirit of Bondage again to fear, to this purpose; That after men have received the Spirit of Adoption, (which in some degree every regenerate person hath received) they receive not again the spirit of bondage to fear; which they take to be a spi­rit of legal convictions, preparatory to the Work of Conversion; and indeed (according to the Calvinist-principles) it must needs be true, that after they are regenerate, they can never receive a spirit of Bondage again, because a spirit of bondage is not Grace, but onely preparato­ry to it; and therefore men that have once been regenerate, can never return to this Spirit with­out being emptied of all Grace.

[Page 42]But here it may be further queryed, Q How did the Law direct those to Christ that lived and lived be­fore Christ came? that in­deed it is not to be doubted that the Law in the dispensation of it, made excellent way unto the Gospel; for those that were to live in the days of the Gospel; as we find in the Analogical successi­on of Law and Gospel in the Work of Grace; but how was the Law a School-Master unto Christ to those that lived in the dayes of the Old-Testa­ment? Who dyed before Christ came? How were they directed to Christ by the Law? The Law might perhaps be a Ministration of death, and desperation only to them: How did the Law witness the righteousness of God by Faith unto them? In answer I shall first of all premise these two things and then answer more directly. 1 1. Ne­gatively, that to these it must not come to de­stroy the promise and the covenant that was made before, nor the comfort of it. It must not come to hinder, but they might have as true sa­ving comfort from the promises, as the Saints before the Law had; or else the Law had been a­gainst the promises, 2 which the Apostle denyes with a [...]. 2. It must preach Christ to them as truly, though perhaps not so clearly as it doth unto us. 3 Thirdly and more directly; The Law did preach Christ to the Jews under the Old-Testament these two ways; 1. Virtually or con­sequentially. 2. Formally and expresly. 1. Vir­tually, as it convinced them all of their necessi­ty of some other besides a legal Righteousness, as I have shewn at large in explaining the second end of giving the Law, because of transgressi­ons. 2. Expresly, as it made mention of Christ; and this it did either improperly & figurative­ly, in types and shadows, or properly in the pro­phecies and promises of Christ.

[Page 43]Or the answer may be better given after this distinction of the Law. A differ­ent accep­tation of the Law in the Scrip­ture. The Law in Scripture a­mongst the various significations of it, hath these two very eminent. 1. It signifies the strict and bare command, and so is naturally a Covenant of Works that hath no mercy or grace in it, can onely justifie the righteous, and condemn the transgressor; and in this sence it hath been taken by me (for the most part) hitherto in my Dis­course; & I have produced several places where it is taken in this sence in the Scripture. Take that for instance, As many as are of the works of the Law, are under the curse, as it is written, Cursed is e­very one that continueth not in all things that are writ­ten in the Book of the Law, to do them, Gal. 3.10. 2dly, The Law is taken in a sence all as large as this is strict; and that is, for the whole Old-Te­stament. So it is likewise taken in several Scrip­tures, Gal. 4.21. Tell me, ye that desire to be under the Law, do ye not hear the Law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, &c. where the whole Book of Genesis is made a part of the Law; again in Rom. 3. the Apostle makes the Psalms a part of the Law, where having quoted a great part of the 14. Psalm in the 19. ver. saith he, Now we know, that whatsoever things the Law saith, &c. and so in other Scriptures. Now to apply the distinction in answer to the last query; The Law strictly ta­ken for a Covenant of Works, did only teach Christ virtually and by consequence, as it taught them that they could not be justified by its righ­teousness; and thus (for ought I know) the Law in its accusations taught Christ to the Gentiles, as it convinced them of the insufficiency of their own righteousness. But now the Law in the se­cond [Page 44]sense as taken for the Scriptures of the Old Testament, taught Christ formally and direct­ly, though more obscurely then the Gospel tea­cheth him, viz. in Types and Prophecies; it were endless to reckon up all the Types, Promises and Prophesies of Christ that are in the Old-Testa­ment: This way indeed the Law could not teach Christ unto the Gentiles, who had not the Scrip­tures of the Old-Testament. It is now high time, and yet in this place seasonable enough, to answer some other parts of the objection (which I proposed at large some pages since) which pleads for the Law its being a way of Justificati­on unto the Jews at least, before the coming of Christ, if not to us now; and something of that which remains yet unanswered, Obj. 2. The Law was given to the Iews as their co­vnant. is this: If the Law was not given to be a way of Justification, why is it called a Covenant, the Old-Testament or Covenant, 2 Cor. 3.14. and the first Covenant, Heb. 7.8. expresly said to be made with the Chil­dren of Israel, when the Lord took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Aegypt? For whatever you have argued about Adam's estate of innocency, that God made a Covenant of Works with him, and that if he would, he might have been justified by Works, by the Law; that since him all men have sinned, and the Law was no way of Justification to them; Whatever you have argued to this purpose, say the objectors, yet we find not that the Law was given to Adam, but onely to the children of Israel by Moses, and given to them as a Covenant, therefore called the old Covenant, or first Covenant, in Heb. 8. out of Jer. 31.31, 32.33, 34. Therefore it was gi­ven them as a way of Justification; for certainly [Page 45]the Justification that they were to seeke of God, they were to seek in the way of a Co­venant, therefore in the way of the Law, which was their Covenant.

To this I answer some things by way of con­cession, A. 1. By way of concession in two par­ticulars. afterwards some things more conclu­ding: And first of all I grant that the Law is no where (to my remembrance) said to be given to Adam, but onely to the children of Israel; I am sure usually when mention is made of the giving of the law, Where the law is said to be gi­ven, it is to the chil­dren of Is­rael, not to Adam. Yet Adam had the Law, and it was a Covenant of works to him. 1. He had the Law. it is likewise noted in the same place as given to the children of Israel by Moses, so 2 Cor. 3, 7. Heb. 8.9. 1 Joh. 17. For the Law was given by Moses, Gal. 3.19. Wherefore then serveth the Law? It was added because of transgressions— and it was ordain­ed by Angels upon Mount Sinai, in the hands of a Me­diator, viz. Moses: Though when I make this con­cession that the Law is not said to be given to A­dam, but to the children of Israel by Moses, I still think it may be easily collected from the Scrip­tures, that Adam had the Law too, and that it was to him a Covenant of Works. 1. That he had the Law; for 1. if Adam as a creature had not the Law written in his heart, how came the Gentiles, who had not the Law given them by Moses, to have it written in their hearts? 2. Else as I urged it before, it had been no sin for man in innocency to have killed whom he pleased, to have lyed, forsworn himself, to have defiled his own body by Adultery, or other uncleanness; for where there is no Law, there is no transgression. 3. If Adam had not the Law before his fall, how came he to have it written in his heart presently after? as it is certain he had; for all other men have it so written, and I cannot think that Adam alone [Page 46]wanted this excellency of all mankind; neither do I think that he got this advantage by his fall, to have the effect of the Law written in his heart, which he had not written there before; therefore he had it written in his heart before the Fall. It was to him a Covenant of works. 2. It was a Covenant of Works to Adam in innocency. For Adam then had no need of Grace or Pardon before his fall; and I have proved that the Law is in its own nature a Covenant of Works; and Adam had the Law, therefore it was a Covenant of Works to Adam; I deny not but Adam might have some positive Laws in his Covenant of Works, as we find one, viz. that of the forbidden fruit.

My second Concession is this, That the Law was given to the Jews as a Covenant; 2d. Con­cession. and where-ever mention is made of the Old-Covenant, or First Covenant, the parties covenanted withall, are the people of the Jews: So it is in 2 Cor. 3.6.14. in the 6. ver. we have mention made of the New-Cove­nant, which is that made by Christ in preaching the Gospel; and in the 14th, of the Old-Testa­ment or Covenant, which is that made with the Jews: So in Heb. 8.6, 7. the first Covenant is that which Moses was the Mediator of; the second or better Covenant is that which Christ is the Media­tor of; this must not, cannot be denyed; and I have been often offended at persons, that when they make a distinction of the Covenants, a first and se­cond, old and new, they make the first, that with Adam in innocency; & the second the Covenant of grace made with the faithful ever since; this though it may be true Divinity, yet is not Scriptural; or if it be somewhat Scriptural, yet it is onely to be drawn by consequence out of the Scripture: But there is another determination in this business that [Page 47]is more plainly Scriptural in the words and phrases of Scripture, which is, that the first Covenant, the old Covenant or Testament, is God's Covenant with the Jews by Moses; the new Covenant is that made with the faithful by Christ; and what others aim at in that other way of stating the Covenants, may be attained without that confusion which they make.

Having made two as fair Concessions as the ob­jectors can desire, A. 2. I come now to the determinati­on of the question, or repelling the Objection, af­ter I have minded you of a distinction of the Law, which I lately gave, and it was this, That some­times the Law is taken strictly for the bare com­mand, with the threatning annexed to the breach of it, and the promise of life upon the strict obe­ence of it: So it is in Gal. 3.10. sometimes it is ta­ken for the whole Old-Testament, as Rom. 3.19. where the Psalms of David are made a part of the law; sometimes taken for the five Books of Moses, as in Luke 24.44. where the Old-Testament is di­vided into these three parts, The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. Now I answer, Take the Law in the first sence for a Covenant of Works strictly, and so it was not given for a Cove­nant to the Jews, for then it must have come in a­gainst the promises, or the Covenant of God in Christ that was made before: But take it in the second or third sense, either for the whole Old-Testament (as we call the Writings of the holy men of God till our Saviours time) or for the five Books of Moses, the dispensation by Moses from the Mount; and this I confess was a Covenant to them, but then it was a Covenant of Grace, and indeed contained in it all the promises that were gi­ven [Page 48]before it, that traditional Gospel which Abraham and the holy Patriarchs before him were saved by, is in­serted in the Law of Moses, else it had been a vain thing for the Apostle Paul to have undertaken to prove Justification by Faith out of the Old-Testa­ment, yea out of the Law of Moses; for, as a man cannot bring a clean thing out of an unclean, so neither can he bring Gospel out of pure Law; if therefore the Law of Moses had not been a Cove­nant of Grace, the Apostle could never have proved Justification by faith out of it, which yet he doth not onely by strained consequences, but as there professedly. Abraham believed God, (saith he) and it was imputed to him for righteousness; they therefore which are of Faith, are blessed and justified with faithful Abraham, Galathians 3. ver. 6, 7, 9. which is as fair an Enthymema, as can be, and every Sophister can supply the Proposition that is wanting. St. Paul proves Justification by Faith by two great Arguments out of Genesis, the first Book of Moses, viz: by Abraham's Justification, and the Allegory of Hagar and Sarah, which I explain­ed and urged before.

Nay the Apostle makes a great affirmation in­deed, which is this that even Moses himself the great Law-Covenant Mediator, doth in his Writings give a clear distinction of the two Covenants of Works and Grace, shews us the tenour of one Covenant and another; When he had produced the Allegory of Hagar and Sarah out of Genesis, saith he, Alas, Moses in this Story gives you Allegorically the two Covenants, Gal. 4 21. to the 24. But the chief place for proof of what I have said, is Rom. 10.5, 6.— for Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the Law, That the man which doth these things, shall [Page 49]live by them, Lev. 18.5▪ But the righteousness which is of Faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart who shall ascend up into Heaven, &c. and so goes on in the words of Moses, Deut. 30.12, 13, 14. Here we see Moses in his Writings, delineates and describes the two ways of Works and Grace, of the Law and Faith; and it is proved out of the same [...]oses, that the Law is no way to justifie sinners: Now I shall but draw out the Apostles Argument, which I suppose to be this: Moses describes two ways of Justification, that by the Law, and that by Faith; that by the Law Moses tells you is no way for sin­ners, because you must continue in all things, or you are accursed; therefore certainly he described the way of Faith too, that ye might betake your selves unto it for justification and life; therefore the Law, take it either for the whole Old-Testa­ment, or for the Dispensation by Moses, and it was a Covenant indeed with the Jews; but it was a Co­venant of Grace, for in it Moses describeth the way of Grace, that his Disciples might adhere un­to it. But here you will object still; Well, Object. if Moses his Dispensation or Covenant which he was the Mediator of, was a Covenant of Grace, and not of Works for Justification, why is it called a kil­ling Letter, a Ministration of Death, a Ministrati­on of Condemnation, as it is 2 Cor 3.6, 7, 9. Why is the Lord said to find fault with it, and so to abro­gate it, and make a new Covenant? Heb. 8 7, 8. By this it should seem to be a Covenant of Works, for else God would not have found fault with a Co­venant of Grace, nor abrogated it.

To this I answer, 1. Here observe, That this [...] no Jewish Argument; for they would not acknow­ledge that their Law is a ministration of death [Page 50]whilest they seek life by it, nor yet a ministration of condemnation, whilst they seek justification by the righteousness of it; but it is a cavil or objecti­on against the Apostle Paul, who calls the Law a ministration of death and condemnation, and yet acknowledgeth that it was the Jews covenant, and that Moses in it describeth the righteousness of Faith.

2dly, 2 I answer, That these two are very con­sistent; it might prove a ministration of death to them, and yet be a way of grace and life in it self; so is the plainest Gospel in the World a savour of death unto the disobedient and unbelievers, that yet is certainly in the great intendment of it a way of grace and life.

3dly, 3 The Law proved a ministration of death to many of them, because they mistook it for a co­venant of works, though it were not given with that intention; they did not see the Grace that was contained in it. There was a vail upon their heart, and is to this day upon the hearts of many of the Jews; their minds were blinded, so that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is alolished, they could not see Christ the end of the Law, 2 Cor. 3.13, 14, 15.

4thly, 4 There is thus much indeed to be said con­cerning the dispensation it self, that it was dark and obscure; the children of Israel had not onely blinded eyes, and a vailed heart, but Moses had al­so a Vail upon his face, ver. 13. which was one rea­son they could not see that Grace which was in his Dispensation. Moses had a vail over his face, so that they could not look stedfastly to the end of his Dispensation. The fault of the first Covenant. There was some kind of fault as it were in the Law it self, so the Apostle tells us, Heb. [Page 51]8.7. For if that first Covenant had been faultless, there should no place have been sought for the se­cond. What this fault was, is commonly known and discoursed, and it was the obscurity of it; the pro­mises of it were not so plain; & therefore it is said, Christ is the Mediator of a better Covenant, establisht upon better promises, ver. 6. There was a Covenant of works inserted in their Dispensation. Else how could the Apostle give you a description of the righte­ousness of it out of Moses? Which he doth both in Rom. 10.5. and Gal. 3.12. And no caveat entred in the place where the Covenant of Works is delivered: 'Tis true, the same Moses describeth the righteousness of Faith too; but an inobservant Reader might chance to mistake the Covenant of Works for his way to Heaven, as well as take the Covenant of Grace for his way; and they might keep in that way all their lives, if they were not strict observers of the effects of that way upon their Consciences, which was to gall and sting them, and weary them out of their very lives, till they came to the way of Grace. And thus we find the generality of the Jews did mistake, and ru­ined themselves by it; so that unless God had by a wonderful hand, as he plucked Lot out of Sodom, and perhaps by irresistable illuminations and at­tractions, brought a remnant to himself, all Israel had been burnt up by the Wrath of God; they had been as Sodom and Gomorrah, Rom. 9.29. to the end: Rom. 10.1.2.3. I might well transcribe every word of these eight Verses.

Now this was the fault which God found with his first Covenant; that though it were a Covenant of Grace, yet he is so gracious, that he thought it was not plain enough to save the generality of them; they would be still mistaking and misconstru­ing [Page 52]his Covenant; it would not make them holy enough, nor save enough of them; and therefore this Fault the Lord amends in the second [...]ove­nant, in the New-Covenant, Heb. 8 9 For finding fault he saith, Behold the dayes come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new Covenant with the House of Is­rael, not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers, when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the Land of Aegypt; because here is the rea­son of the change, because they continued not in my Covenant, and I regarded them not: It was a Cove­venant which they brake with me, and I brake with them upon; there was a fault in that Covenant which seems to be this: It had not Grace enough in it to hold them, they continued not in it: The fault is laid upon the Covenant, not so much upon the parties covenanting, though they were not free from blame; God indeed was free he was rea­dy to give his Grace and Spirit under the first Co­venant, but the Covenant was not a free channel for conveyance of this precious Water of Life, for the Spirit runs freest in the clear promise; & there­fore the Gospel, which is full of rich and plain promises, is called the ministration of the Spirit, and called by the Name of Spirit; whereas the Law of Moses was a dead, meer out-side literal thing, in comparison of it, 2 Cor. 3.6. I say, the fault was laid upon the covenant, which yet was a covenant of Grace: Now what other fault it could be then this, that the Lord did not think it gracious enough, I cannot imagine; and I think that is the fault the Scripture pitcheth upon: Now because Moses's Dispensation, or the first covenant made with the Jews, was thus faulty, had a covenant of Works in [...], and was mistaken by the Jews to be a covenant of [Page 53]Works, it might well be called by the Apostle, There was the same rea­son of the Gospel its being ad­ded to the Law, that there was of the dis­pensation of Moses to be ad­ded to what they knew of God be­fore. a killing letter, a ministration of death and condem­nation, and deserve to be abrogated and disannul­led, if the Lord will make a better, clearer, more gracious and saving; and yet it can by no means be concluded hence, that it was truly, either in its own nature, or in the intention of the Lord who gave it, a covenant of Works; nay the contrary here­unto, is sufficiently evinced.

Ob. 4. But yet there is a very considerable Objecti­on behind, which is thus: You have acknowledged that in Moses's Writings there is a covenant of Works described; that St. Paul asserts; now I will add saith the Objection) that it is not onely there described, but there commended to the children of Israel as a part at least, if not the chiefest part of the Dispensation by Moses; and it is given with as great Authority, and hath as solemn a Sanction upon it as any part of the Law of Moses; for in that place which the Apostle Paul quotes out of Moses, viz. Lev. 18.5. for the description of a le­gal righteousness, we have these words, Ye shall therefore keep mp Seatutes and my Judgements, which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord. So in the fore-going verses 1, 2. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the Lord your God; then fol­low the three verses wherein the covenant of Works is described; ver. 3. After the doings of the Land of Aegypt wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do; and after the doings of the Land of Canaan, whither I bring you; shall ye not do; neither shall ye walk in their Ordinancee. Ver. 4. Ye shall do my Judgements, and keep mine Ordinances, to walk therein; I am the Lord your God. Ver, 5. Ye shall therefore keep my Statutes, [Page 54]and my Judgements, which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord. Here I observe, 1. The sim­plicity and plainness of the delivery of these com­mands, which contain the covenant of Works; they are delivered without any caveat or caution to the Reader, lest he should mistake this for his co­venant which he should be saved by. 2. I observe the Authority and Majesty they are delivered with; even with this addition three several times in the compass of four verses, I am the Lord, and I am the Lord your God. This doth not look like an old antiquated covenant made with Adam about 2000. years before, and of use to him, but onely for the strst day of his creation: I conclude therefore saith the objector, That it is a valid covenant, and delivered with intention that men should be justi­fied by it; And besides I add that which hath great strength in it, That even Jesus Christ himself re­peats this covenant of Works in Moses his own Words, and directs a man to this covenant for sal­vation, that came to ask of him what he should do to be saved; the place is, Luke 10.25, 26, 27, 28. And behold a certain Lawyer stood up and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the Law? How readest thou? Christ sends him to the Law; and you shall see it is not to the Law in a large sence, as it comprehends both a covenant of Works and a covenant of Grace; but to the Law taken strictly for a covenant of Works; it follows therefore ver. 27. The Lawyer answering, said, The Law saith, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbour as thy self: And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast answered right; this do, and [Page 55]thou shalt live; which are the very words of Moses, where he describes a legal righteousness; From whence I conclude, That the Covenant of Works is still good unto Justification; the Covenant of Works is still in force; else Moses would never have delivered it in that simplicity, and with that Au­thority; else Jesus Christ himself would never have directed one unto it, to get eternal life by it.

I answer, 1. 1 That Moses indeed did deliver a co­venant of Works to the people of Israel, as truly as he did a covenant of Grace, and that without any caution (that I can find) in the place where it is delivered; and I think I may say also, that our Sa­viour Christ did deliver a Covenant of Works too, in that 10. of Luke above-mentioned.

And 2dly, 2 I may add, There was very good rea­son why they might, and why they did. For that the covenant of Works is still in force, all men by nature are under it; for it is nothing but the natu­ral law of our creation▪ All men are natu­rally un­der a Co­venant of works. There was indeed a posi­tive Law besides given to Adam; but the observing of it needed not have created any trouble to inno­cent man: All men are naturally under a covenant of Works, for they are naturally under the Law of their Creation, which is the covenant of Works. Yea the Saints themselves are not freed from it, any further then from the condemning power of it, by Christs having suffered the penalty for them. That all men are naturally under the Law, or un­der a covenant of Works, which are all one, ap­pears, for that all those whom Christ came to re­deem, were under the Law, Gal. 4.5. which must be meant of the Law, strictly taken for a covenant of Works; for else none but the Jews and proselyted Gentiles were under the Law, as delivered by Mo­ses; [Page 56]whereas in that Scripture it is plain, that all those whom Christ came to redeem, were under the Law; therefore it is meant under the Law as a covenant of Works. Besides, the Apostle in Rom. 7. the first six verses, argues thus, That the conscience or soul of a man must either be married to the Law as its Husband, or to Christ as its Husband; and till it is marryed to Christ, the Law is its natural Husband; but when it is married to Christ, the law is its husband no longer; therefore till a man come to Christ, he is under a covenant of Works; there­fore all men naturally are under a covenant of Works, for no man is in Christ by nature.

I answer in the third place, 3 That it's true, Moses and our Saviour both preached a covenant of Works, as well as a covenant of Grace; and well might, because all men are naturally under it: Yet neither our Saviour, nor Moses did it, with design to make men seek justification by Works, but on­ly to burthen mens consciences with insupporta­ble loads of guilt, that so they might readily flee to the hope that was set before them in the covenant of Grace, which they had together with the cove­nant of Works in the same Dispensation; That Moses did it with this design, St. Paul asserts, as I have shewn in several places; the law entred that the offence might abound, and so was a School-Ma­ster unto Christ: And that our Saviour did it with this design, the place quoted in the objection will sufficiently evidence, Luke 10.25. to the 28.25. v. Behold a certain Lawyer stood up and tempted him, say­ing, Master what shall I do to inherit eternal life? Here this Lawyer came not with a good intention; for it is said he stood up and tempted our Saviour, made the question rather to see what our Saviour would [Page 57]say, then to get any satisfaction to himself; and in the 29. ver. it is said, This Lawyer was willing to ju­stifie himself. Now how could the pride of this tempting Lawyer be better repressed, then by sen­ding him to the Law, to a covenant of Works; which if he would but set himself in earnest to keep, would quickly prick the bladder of his pride; and let out that wind with which he was so swoln, as to dare come and tempt Christ, and justifie himself? But now our Saviour takes another course with the Woman of Canaan, who after she was tryed with a knock or two, with some harsh words, so as to be called Dog, yet continuing humble and submis­sive, had her faith extolled by our Saviour, and is strengthened with the highest consolations; as we have the story, Matt. 15. from ver. 22. to ver. 29. Thus God resisteth the proud, he hath a Covenant of Works to oppose them withall; but he giveth Grace, and sheweth Mercy to the humble; he hath a covenant of Grace to comfort them with.

Obj. 5 There is one objection yet more concerning the ceremonial law, which I did not mention at the first, and it is this, Certainly it appears from the ceremonial law, that the law of Moses was given to them for a covenant of Works; else why had they such multitude of ceremonies imposed upon them, if they were not to have life for the observation and doing of them, together with the duties of the moral Law? And it is very observable, that in that place of Leviticus which the Apostle quotes, as con­taining the righteousness of the law, the ceremo­nies are as strictly enjoined as the moral duties of the law are, with this badge of the law of works upon them, The man that doth them, shall live in them, Lev. 18.4, 5. Ye shall do my Judgements; that is, [Page 58]say Commentors, my judicial Laws, and keep mine Ordinances; that is, say they, either moral or cere­monial; so in ver. 5. You shall therefore keep my Sta­tutes and Judgements, which if a man do, he shall live in them; I am the Lord. Now hence I argue, saith the Objector, Here you have acknowledged, is a covenant of Works described. Now here is their whole Dispensation by Moses, of laws moral, cere­monial, and judicial, contained; therefore their whole Dispensation was a covenant of Works; be­sides, if the Law moral alone, which you have cal­led the law of Nature, he of it self a covenant of Works, as it seems to have been to Adam, who had but a few other commands besides, viz. such as we call Positive; and if every man by Nature be un­der a covenant of works (though a stranger to the Old-Testament or New, as having never heard of either) being under the law of his creation; how much more were the Israelites under a covenant of Works, who, besides the moral law, had the judi­cial and ceremonial added for them to observe, and altogether given them vvith this language of a co­venant of Works, these ye shall observe, which if a man do, he shall live in them; I am the Lord. I shal add onely one observation more to strengthen the objection, and it is this, That when St. Paul dis­putes against the Galatians for embracing a cove­nant of Works, most of his Work lyes in beating them off from the ceremonial law, vvhich they were exceedingly addicted to, as looking upon the lavv of Moses to be very much of the nature of the covenant of Works, and the ceremonial law as a great sign of it, there being so much vvork cut out for them in it, and verily believing that if they vvere pretty strict in keeping the ceremonial law, [Page 59]God vvould justifie and save them. Therefore it is very probable, that the law of Moses was given to them as a covenant of Works, for this reason as well as others, that there were so many ceremonies appointed for them to observe; most of which it is more then probable the greater number did not understand, and so must take up, und satisfie them­selves with the Work done, then which, vvhat can look more like a covenant of vvorks, for men to do a great many things which they did not under­stand, meerly because God had commanded them? Now for answer to this objection, and I shall give it in several particulars.

A. 1 I confess that the ceremonial law proved a great snare and a stumbling-block unto the careless Jews, and so to the Galatians; for when they found such a great task of ceremonies set them, they cared not much to study the meaning of them, but took up with the doing of them, which to do, did not much trouble their hearts or consciences, and so placed themselves by it under a covenant of vvorks, in their treating with God for Justification.

2dly, I grant that the ceremonial law was a great burthen, and an unsupportable yoke even to those that were good amongst the Jews, Acts 15.10. and it is a great piece of the liberty of the Gospel, to be freed from it.

3dly, I grant that the laws moral, judicial, and ceremonial, were given altogether, and are inclu­ded in that place, where a covenant of vvorks, or the righteousness of the Law is said to be described by the Apostle; and I grant in this particular, that though the law of nature alone is a covenant of vvorks to those that are in a state of nature, though they never received any positive law from God; [Page 60]yet that it is possible for a ceremonial lavv, or a law consisting of many ceremonies, or positive laws to be a part of a covenant of vvorks; as we find in Adam's covenant of works, there was a Sacra­ment, as some reckon it, of the Tree of life; and there was a positive law concerning the forbidden fruit, which vvere neither of them branches of the law of Nature; and he might have been as well for­bidden as allowed all the trees save one, if the Lord had pleased; he might have had a systeme of positive and ceremonial laws inserted in his cove­nant of vvorks, if the Lord had thought good, and no wrong had been done him; for he was able to have kept them.

4thly, 4 Yet here I deny that the ceremonial law was any part of a covenant of works, though brought in near that place where the righteous­ness of the law is said by the Apostle to be descri­bed, and that for this reason, which fully answers the objection: That the ceremonial law did con­tain Gospel in it, which cannot be said of any branch of the covenant of works: I allowed in­deed above, that the law taken strictly for a cove­nant of works, did preach the Gospel virtually or by consequence, as it burthened the sinners con­science, and so made him seek further for a righte­ousness; but I said then, it is the law taken in a large sence onely as it contains the whole Old-Te­stament or at least a considerable part of it, that teacheth Christ and the Gospel formally and ex­presly. VVhy now the ceremonial law teacheth Christ in many, perhaps in all the parts of it, if wel understood. VVhat could the shedding of so much blood for remission of sins signifie, but the shedding of Christs blood for them and us all, which [Page 61]is the great mysterie of the Gospel? Now if any say they understood it not, and yet must do it, and so it was all one to them as if it had not singnified any thing at all; and therefore must still pass with them as a covenant of works.

I answer, 1 in the words of the Apostle, Rom. 3: 3. What though some did not believe, did not un­derstand, must their unbelief and ignorance make the Faith of God, that Doctrine of Faith which the ceremonial law preached, of none effect, or signifi­cation? But you will say, they could not see the blood of Christ in the blood of a sacrifice, having no clearer discoveries then they had of Christ? I ans. I confess I cannot say they could see so much, though still so much was contained in it, as now we well understand. But yet if they could not see so much, yet somewhat they might have learned; for cer­tainly God appoints no idle, useless, insignificant ceremonies in his Worship; therefore I suppose they might have learnt thus much by their ceremo­nies, and particularly by their sacrifices, which I suppose was known even amongst Heathens in their sacrifices, that when they killed a Beast for attoning the anger of God, here life went for life, and God might as well have taken their lives from them, as accepted the life of that Beast; and so by this they might see that their lives and salvations did depend purely upon the Mercy and Grace of God; now this sufficiently weaned them from the law or covenant of works, which had no Grace or Pardon in it; it was therefore the grossest mistake of all to understand the ceremonial law for a part of the covenant of Works, when it was greatly in­tended to be a Gospel to them.

[Page 62]5thly and lastly, If yet it were dark, and did con­found them with the multitude of duties which it imposed; Why might it not herein do the good turn that a covenant of Works did for them? Which was to make them study and search, and long for the pure and clear discoveries of that rich Grace which we now see in the dayes of the Gospel? I have now done with this objection also, which I of purpose kept out from the rest, in which I only considered the moral law as a covenant of Works, for these two reasons: 1. For that the ceremonial law neither was, nor could be a part of the cove­nant of Works, which the moral law both was, and is to all that are under a covenant of works. 2dly, and consequently, I therefore kept off from any consideration of the ceremonial law, in my discourses about the law its being given by Moses, that so I might have my discourse run clear in the business of the covenant of works, and draw a line in it from Adams estate in innocency, to the very days of the Gospel, which with any mixture of dis­course about the ceremonial law, would have been broken and disturbed. VVhereas now you see the law taken strictly for a covenant of works, might have justified Adam, but could not justifie the chil­dren of Israel; and therefore though added to the promise given to Abraham, and that in the lan­guage of a covenant of works, yet was never gi­ven with design that they should accept it for such unto Justification; which appears from this double demonstration, as I may call it, a priori, & a poste­riori. A priori, for that before the law was given there was a covenant of Grace, which the law could not come in to disannul; and a posteriori, for that the very same Moses that brought their law [Page 63]from God out of the Mount, did not more truly acquaint them with the nature of a legal righte­ousness, then he did with the righteousness of Faith, Rom. 10.6. But the righteousness of faith speak­eth on this wise, Say not in thy heart, &c. being a text quoted out of the same Moses, Deut. 30.11. which make this argument, vvherefore should Moses first describe to you a legal righteousness, and tell you, as appears by clear consequence out of him, that ye cannot attain unto that righteousness, and then describe unto you the righteousness of faith; but for this end, that ye might forgo the one, & cleave to the other? And there are infinite places in other Scriptures of the Old-Testament, which give their testimony to Christ, and the Righteousness of Faith, which sufficiently argue, that the Old-Te­stament never went about to establish a way of Ju­stification by the Law.

And here I think it may be of great use to search into this place of Moses, which the Apostle asserts to contain the description of the righteousness which is by faith, that so we may find both that it is so, and what this righteousness of faith is. The place is, Deut. 30.11. to 15. quoted and paraphrased by the Apostle, Rom. 10.6, 7, 8, 9. An inqui­ry into the sense of Deut: 30 11, 12 in Rom. 10.6. But the righteousness which is of Faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into Heaven? &c. clearly referring to Deut. 30.11, 12,—as any may see in the Margent of their Bibles. Now let us go to that place in Deut. and see what Gospel there is in it, and how evi­dent it is, that there is Gospel in it. The words are these: For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off; [Page 64]it is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, who shall go up for us to Heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the Sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the Sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? but the Word is nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it. This is the whole Pa­ragraph, in which the covenant of Grace, or the righteousness of Faith is described, according to the Apostle Paul. But how is the Gospel or righ­teousness of Faith described here? First of all, I must separate that which doth not seem to look like Gospel, from that which is pure Gospel, in this place: And here we may observe, That the mat­ter of the Gospel spoken of, is the law or com­mandment which he had delivered to them; This Commandment which I command thee this day; the same which is spoken of (as I think, there being no visible difference as to matter) in Lev. 18.5. the place asserted by the Apostle to contain a legal righte­ousness; it was for matter, the law of Moses; This Commandment, saith he, which I command thee this day. Again. I think it will appear to be meant of the ten commandments, because it is added, That Commandment which I command thee, is not far from thee, but is nigh thee, even in thy heart and mouth: Now the ceremonial law was not written in their heart; neither had all the children of Israel, nor the generality of them to whom yet this is spoken, been taught the law effectually by the Spirit of God, so as that should be the sense of these words, This Commandment is in thine heart; and indeed, that is the promise of the new Covenant, not of this by Moses; but the effect of the Moral law was in their [Page 65]heart, for it was in the heart of Heathens; If it be ob­jected, as perhaps it may by some that the matter of the Commandment which Moses commanded them that day, was not likely to be the ten commandments, nor that chiefly; nor to be the same with that in Lev. 18. because this is in Deute [...]rom [...], which very word signifies a second Law, or a second Edition and giving of the Law, and had more Gospel in it then the Law in the first giving of it had. I an­swer, 1. by concession, That there were indeed two several Covenants, which the Lord is said to have made by Moses with the children of Israel, Deut. 29.1. These are the words of the Covenant which the Lord comman­ded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the Land of Moab, be ides the Covenant which he made with them in Ho [...]eb; which a as a Mountain adjoining to, if not a part of Mount Sinat. 2. That perhaps in this Deutetonomy, or second Covenant by Moses, there [...] m [...] promi­ses, and more of Gospel, then in the first Edition of the Law there was. But 3dly, This doth not hinder, but the commandment mentioned in Deut. [...]0. might be chiefly for matter of it the moral Law, or ten Commandments, 'tis true, there were promises added to encourage unto the keeping of them; and there were also terrible threatnings unto the breaking of them; all the twelve tribes being divided into two equal parts, the one half placed upon Mount Gerizim, to bless the people that were obedient to the Law, the other half up­on Mount Ebal, to curse all that brake it, Deut 27.11, 12, 13▪ But that commandment, for the sake of which these promises and threatnings were added, was the Law of the ten words or two tables, which were twice gi­ven to Moses in Sinai, and again repeated in this Covenant in the Land of Moab, as we may see in Deut. 5. and the very word Deut. signifies a second Law, or a second giving of the Law. and this was the Commandment which that day Moses com­manded them.

Lastly, Another thing in this Paragraph that will not seem perhaps to some to look like Gospel, is this. That all the comfort of this Gospel by Moses, lies in Doing. This Commandment (saith he) is not far off, but in thy heart and in thy mouth, that thou mayest do it; and so obtain life and justification by it: This seems to look right like that place in Le­vitious so often mentioned, where Moses is said to describe a Legal Righteousness; The man that doth them, shall live in them: And so in all the Chapter [Page 66]after, there is blessing if they do the command and cursing if they do not; this to some may not look like Gospel. But yet here is the Gospel, and there­fore wherein doth it lie? VVherein is the Go­spel expres­sed in this place of Deut. or how will it appear? I have shewed wherein it cannot lie, or doth not seem to lie; I will shew yet wherein it must be ex­pressed, and wherein it is visibly expressed, and that is, in that easiness which Moses doth so much insist upon in this Scripture of doing the Com­mandment. The Commandment for the matter of it was perhaps the same with the Covenant of Works; and Doing (partly at least) brought in the reward of it, that is, Justification: But is this the Language of a Covenant of Works think you, to fallen man, such as the Israelites were? The Com­mandment is easie; there are no such difficulties in keeping it, as you may imagine; ye shall not need to climb as high as Heaven after it, nor to coast all Lands, and compass the Ocean for it; propose no such vast undertakings to thy self for the accom­plishment of it, for thou needest not; the Word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, that is near; yea but near­er yet, in thine heart, that thou mayest do it, and thou mayest do it with ease and sweetness; No, I have shewn at large, that the Covenant of Works, or the Law taken strictly as a way of Justification, serves now to sinners onely to terrifie their Con­sciences with laying home its charge; it hath no such comfortable words in it; nay I shewed out of the Scripture, that it is an utter impossibility that the Law should be done by a sinner so as to justifie him: A man might as well climb up to Heaven, or compass the vast Ocean▪ yea (to add another impossibility which the Apostle adds in his Paraphras upon this Text in Deut. a man might as well de­scend [Page 67]into the infernal Abyss, and make a resurre­ction, as be justified by the Law: This therefore cannot be the Language of the Law. But now take the keeping the Law in a Gospel-sence (as perhaps that Rom. 8.4. is to be understood, where the righ­teousness of the Law is said to be fulfilled in us, that walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit) and then the Gospel in this Scripture is obvious; it is easie to keep the Law now, even that command­ment which Moses commanded them, even the Mo­ral Law; that is, to keep it sincerely, not exactly to a tittle, but in the substance of it: This Word therefore which Moses means when he says, The word is nigh thee, as the Apostle adds in his Para­phrase, must be the word of faith which he preached. The Word is nigh thee; that is, not the Word of the Moral law taken in its utmost exactness, to be fulfil­led to a tittle; this is not nigh thee; it is as far as Hea­ven, further then either of the Indies, further then Hell it self; thou sinner canst never attain unto it, to do it. But yet the Word of the same Command­ment in a moderated sense, in the gracious accep­tation of God, where sincere obedience is accept­ed for unerring observance of it; This Word is nigh thee, even in thy heart and in thy month, that thou mayest do it; and it is (saith the Apostle) the Word of Faith which we preach; this the new creature can undertake with the assistance of God, even the keeping the Commandments of God in an Evan­gelical manner, through Faith, which works by Love: Here thou dost not claim thy wages upon thy doings, as if they deserved it; or as if they an­swered the letter of the Law; and so thou comest not to the Law for thy Justification; but though the great Rule of thine obedience be the Law, yet thou goest to the Gospel for thy Justification; thou [Page 68]comest by Faith to the Promise, and Goodness, and Grace of God for thy Justification. And in­deed, there is nothing but Faith will encourage thee in such a keeping of the Law as this is. The Law strictly taken, will dishearten thee; that will thus reason the case with thee: VVhat are all thy works, what is all thy obedience, so long as thoughast broken such and such a Commandment, hast omit­ted such and such a duty? What is thy sincerity good for? What is thy good meaning and real in­tention worth? I must have a full task performed; I must have unerring, never-failing obedience, or else I must curse thee with all the curses which thou findest written against sinners: Now the Soul by Faith thus answereth the Law: 'Tis true, were I to stand to thy award, it must be all as thou hast said; but I am upon other terms with the Lord for my Justification; I am upon terms of Grace and Mercy, of which there are no footsteps in thy whole way of Justification; and though I was born under thy power, yet I have a Saviour that hath freed me from under it, by suffering the penalty for my breach of it; and now I am assured, That if I walk faithfully, and deal honestly with God, endeavouring in sincerity to walk after the Spirit, to do all the Wills of God from the heart, my sin­cere obedience will now be as well accepted, as un­erring obedience would once have been. Thus you see, Faith bears off from coming to a legal-Justifi­cation, and Faith bears up the Soul against all ex­postulations of the Law with it, and against all the accusations of Satan in the Conscienc, and yet doth keep the soul intent upon the design of universal obedience to the pure and holy Law of God. Faith requires thy obedience to the Law; the prea­ching of Faith doth establish the Law; and yet the [Page 69]Law in this moderated sense onely observed, re­quires thee to go, or rather takes for granted that thou goest to Grace, Mercy and Pardon by Faith, for that thou art not an exact Doer of the Law. So I have shewn how this place in Deut. seems to speak Law, yet must be understood to speak Go­spel; and what Gospel that is which it speaks. Yet I may not expect to go off without opposition in this interpretation; and I am sensible that these two or three things will be objected against me, Obje­ctions a­gainst the interpre­tation of Deut. 30.11, 12. 1. That I make Faith too easie a business, as if those that could not keep the Law, are yet able to be­lieve; whereas some think it as hard a business to believe, as to keep the whole Law. 2. They'l say, That I make the Gospel but a Covenant of works in a new dress, and substitute Evangelical obedi­ence in the room of Legal, as the matter of our Justification. 3. They may perhaps add, that I leave out the great Gospel-mysterie, which according to the Apostle is contained in Deut. and that is Christ. That which Moses expresseth thus, the Commandment which I command thee, is not in heaven, that thou shouldst say, Who shall ascend for us into Heaven, & bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it; The Apostle Paul expresseth thus, Who shall ascend for us into Heaven, (that is, to bring Christ down from above; or who shall descend into the deep? that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The Word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth and in thy heart; and (leaving out, that thou mayest do it, he addeth) the Word of Faith which we preach, that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Here we see the Apostle sinds Christ in all that speech of Moses; and it was Faith on him [Page 70]that justified; therefore it was not a keeping of the Law according to sincerity, instead of unerring obedience, which Moses meant, and so the exposi­tion given of Moses is useless. Now I shall answer first this last objection against the interpretation of Moses his Covenant of Grace, and then come to the other two objections; and I shall do it in the words of truth, (as I hope) I am sure in the words soberness. The last objection first an­swered. 1. I do believe all this, which the Apo­stle adds by way of Paraphrase, to agree wel with the words of Moses. 2. That yet I cannot believe that any ordinary Saint, or any other then some mightily inspired by God, like an Apostle, could have understood all that in Moses his words, when they were first delivered, viz. That Christ should descend into the deep, and after that be raised from the dead, and ascend into Heaven, because Moses sayes; Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend for us into Heaven, and bring the Word from thence, that we may hear it, and do it? Or because Moses sayes, Who shall go for us beyond the Seas, and bring the Word unto us?—Neither can I believe that it was their duty in Moses's time to confess with their mouth the Lord Jesus, or to believe in their heart that God had raised him from the dead (a thing which was not at that time true) I say, I do not think it was their duty to believe it, because to us it is contained in the Word of Faith, to wit, the Gospel which the Apostle preached. Neither do I believe that it was a necessary duty of that time, so much as to believe that God would raise Christ from the dead, and that for this reason; For all the Apostles in the dayes of Christ's Flesh, were igno­rant of this Mystery; yea, did not believe it, or un­derstand it after Christ had told them of it, as is [Page 71]very plein in Luke 18. from 31. to 35. The reci­ting the words of that Text is plain proof enough, without urging them by force of Argu­ment. 31. Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the Prophets concerning the Son of Man, shall be accomplished. Ver. 33. They shall scourge him, and put him to death, and the third day he shall rise again. Now it is said ver. 34. that they un­derstood none of these things; and this saying was hid from them; neither knew they the things that were spoken. Therefore certainly these things were not necessa­ry to be known and believed in Moses his time: And therefore, though there be so much Gospel con­tained in that Text of Deut. to us, now that the Apostle hath discovered it, (unless we will say, they are additional glosses upon that Text of Mo­ses, which perhaps may prove no false Divinity) I say, Permit all that be contained to us in that Text of Deut. which St. Paul hath discovered in it, yet by them under the Old-Testament (as I think) there could be no more understood then this; That they were not to lay it upon themselves as abso­lutely necessary to salvation, and so unto Justifica­tion, to keep the whole Law in the strictness of it, but that they were to minde the keeping of it from their heart, to turn unto the Lord their God with all their heart, and with all their souls, and so to keepe his Commandments and his Statutes which are written in this Book of the Law, as it is ver. 10. immediately preceding those Verses in Deut. 30. where the righteousness of Faith is said to be described, and this to do, to keep the Law with all their heart sincerely, they should find ea­sie and pleasant; whenas for a strict Covenant of Works, Do this, and thou shalt live, they would find [Page 72]it an unsupportable yoke and burthen.

Now I come to answer those other two objecti­ons against my interpretation; The first [...] answered. the first is this, That I make Faith too easie athing in comparison of keeping the Law; whereas many good men judg it a hard to believe, as to keep the whole Law:

I answer, 1. That indeed I do think the way of Faith to be an easier way in it self then keeping the whole Law: For I ask any sober man, Whether it be not easier to keep the Law in a sincere manner, that is, to guide my actions onely by the rule of it, and honestly to endeavour toconform to it, though in some things I fail) if this be not easier, then the exact keeping the Law to a tittle? The question I suppose is answered as soon as made. Why then I say, I look upon the way of believing to be this: Corning to God humbling my self for my sins, ad­dicting my self to his service, and walking faithful­ly with him, The de­scription [...]. and in this way of well doing, seeking for glory, honour and [...]mmortality: In one word, It is an Honesty to God, upon terms of Grace, and I being honest and true to him, doubt not of his faithfulness to me, for pardoning my sins, and providing for me here, and saving me here af­ter: Erge, if this be Faith (for proof of which I re­fer to my interpretation, and require a better or fairer in confutation of it) I say, if this be faith, then the way of Faith is easier then keeping the whole Law.

2. But yet I have not said, that though it be ea­sier, yet it is in a mans own power to believe; it is not i [...] a man's own power to move a finger with­out God, and it is equally impossible without God to move a singer, and to remove a Mountain; yet there is no man in his right wits but will acknow­ledge, [Page 73]that it is easier in it self to move a singer, then to remove a Mountain. The last objection is this:

But then you substitute Evangelical works in the room of Legal; and so still you turn the Gospel, The se­cond ob­jection answered which is called the Law of Faith, into a Covenant of Works.

Now for this objection, I confess it hath some weight in it, though for those that make it, they are usually soaring in high notions, and strangely wedded unto their own apprehensions, and are somewhat of an Antinomian strain; yet I will ac­knowledge, that it may be made by a sober man: I should prevent my self in what I have to say in the following part of this Treatise, if I should answer it at large in this place; yet to give some taste of an answer here, I make this distinction; That there are indeed two wayes of running upon a Covenant of works, either in whole, or in part. Two ways of run­ning up­on a Co­venant of Works 1. Either upon a Covenant of Works purely and strictly, so none durst touch or meddle with it. 2. Upon it in part, so as to mix it with the Gospel. A. Now I answer therefore, That indeed our great care is to be laid out about avoiding of these mixtures of legality in our treating with God for Justification; and that is the great design of this Treatise, to caveat us a­gainst these mixtures which we are very apt to be saulty in, as I hope they shall see in the sequel of my Discourse, that please to go on in it. Hither­to we have seen, that there is Gospel in the Law of Moses, and what this Gospel in the Law is; as also, that the reason why it was delivered by Moses, could be no other, but to put his Disciples upon the way of believing, for Justification. There are many o­ther places in Moses, especially in the Book of Deut. [Page 74]that have much Gospel in them. I shall onely add one Allegorical or Typical Argument, which yet I think hath much evidence in it, to prove that the Law of Moses had Gospel in it; it is this: That the Law of the two Tables when it was written the second time by Moses from the mouth of God, or else by the singer of God himself, are ordained by God to be put in the Ark, and the Ark to be put under the Mercy-seat, and Cherubims to cover the Mercy-Seat, and the presence of God eminently promised to be found between those Cherubins, Exod 25.21, 22. Thou shalt put the Mercy-Seat above upon the Ark, and in the Ark thou shalt put the Te­stimony that I shall give thee, and there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the Mer­cy-Seat, from between the two Cherubims which are up­on the Ark of the [...]estimony of All things, &c. Hence I frame this argument; If the Law be hid in the Ark, which alone seems to be an instrument of Sal­vation, and this Ark placed under the Mercy-Seat; the Greek word for which, being [...], is in Rom 3 25. applyed to Christ, and translated Propitiation,—whom God hath set forth to be a Propitation through Faith in his Blood; and the presence of God eminently promised to them upon this Mercy-Seat or Throne of Grace, then the Law which was in its own nature a Covenant of Works, and to sin­ners a killing-letter, was yet to the Israelites shrow­ded, and covered with Grace and Mercy, (Mercy rejoicing against, or triumphing over Judgement, Jam. 2.13.) and they defended and protected from the wrath and curse of it, by a gracious presence of God with them: that Christ's offering was in­terposed betwixt the Law and them, and that this was in some sort (though more darkly then to us) [Page 75]signified and discovered to them, and so, that the law was never given them with this design, that they should seek Justification by it as a Covenant of Works.

I have done with the objections of the Jews, which may be made against my first Position, that Justi­fication is not, cannot be by the Law; that it is, and must be by faith, all which were made by occasion of the Old-Testament Dispensation, chiefly the giving of the Law by Moses. I shall before I con­clude the more Doctrinal part of my Treatise, on­ly mention an objection which might be made on behalf of the Gentiles, against Justification by Faith, and for Justification by the Law: And it is this.

You have said that the Law of our Creation is naturally a Covenat of Works, The ob­jection in behalf of the Gen­tiles a­gainst Ju­stification by Faith. and that the Gen­tiles had the Law, or the effect and substance of it written in their hearts, and we read not of any Promises that they had; therefore either they could not be justified at all, or they must be justified by the law.

I answer: 1. All are not of Opinion that the Heathens were in a justifiable condition till Christ was explicitely and plainly preached to them; and for those that are not of it, they will meet with no difficulty in this Objection; for, if the Heathens could not be justified at all, it ceaseth the enquiry which way they were to be justified

2. Some are of Opinion, That God never made any creatures under an utter impossibility of plea­sing him, and being made happy by him.

3. Therefore in a consonancy to my preceding Discourse, I say, If it can be made appear that the Heathens without the law of Moses, and the Scrip­tures [Page 77]tures of the Old-Testament could not discover so much of the Goodness, Grace, Mercy, and Love of God to mankind, as upon which to ground a lively hope, an unfeigned and operative faith, that God was ready upon their repentance and amend­ment of life, to forgive their sins, and to be at peace with them; the second opinion is to be avoi­ded, and the first received: For, I do verily be­lieve, that if the Heathens were any of them sa­ved, or in a possibility to be saved and justified, it must be by their treating of God in the way of be­lieving, for that the law was rendred utterly weak, and unable to [...]ustifie so much as one sinner. Now because I do not think it convenient in this place to engage in that controversie, Whether or no the Gentiles were in a salvable condition; I shall nei­ther produce the Scriptures which seem to prove they had sufficient Gospel-light to produce Faith, (which they must have if they were saved) nor the others, which would seem to prove that they had no such light.

Now to conclude this first part, having proved it ex hypothesi, on the Gentiles part, that if any of them were saved, it must be by faith, and absolute­ly as to the Jews, notwithstanding all the objecti­ons to the contrary, that they were under a Cove­nant of Grace, and that the law was never given to them to put them upon seeking Justification by the works of it. The first great Propositions which were under demonstration, still stand firm and un­sha [...]en; That the law is no way to sinners for Ju­stification; That Faith is a way, and the onely way; and that God hath set up this way, without which all mankind must have perished, and that he hath led his people in this way throughout all ages, be­fore [Page 76]the law, and under the law; that as they were all under sin by the law, so they were likewise un­der the discoveries of Grace for their Justification by Faith: I come now to some more practical and experimental inquiries, which I shall introduce with an use of Conviction and Reprehension from the Doctrinal part of the foregoing Discourse.

VVE have seen in the foregoing Discourse, that there are but two wayes of Justifi­cation, the one by Works, the other by Faith; that these two are opposite one to the other; that the Law or Works is now no way to fallen man, but Faith onely; that all that ever were justified, were justified by faith, even Abraham, and David, and all the Saints of God under the Old-Testament, all the Saints before the giving of the law by Moses, and ever after; yea the Gentiles themselves, if any were saved, must be saved this way. An use Convicti­on and Reproof How greatly then are they mistaken, that even under the Gospel will needs be justified by Works? This falls with clear evidence of conviction and reprehension up­on such a generation of men; and yet such there are in abundance (who would think it!) even at this day; yea the greatest part of professors run this way. Although man be turned out of Paradice, (which was his place of Justification by Works) and at the door a Cherubin be set with a flaming Sword to dispute the passage, yet they will needs enter again, though they venture life and soul and all. Though Mount Sinai be covered all over with smoke, though they hear the thunderings, see the lightnings, feel the Earth quake at a distance, and [Page 78]be forbid to approach the Mount, yet they wi [...] make up towards a cousuming fire that wil certain­ly devour them. Though one way of Justificati­on be impossible, so that the Apostle professeth That if there had been a Law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the Law, Gal. 3.21. I say, though one be absolute [...] impossible, and the other way easie, yet they wi [...] leave the easie way, and take that way which is no passable way at all. Yea though after they are en­tred upon that way, they feel themselves lashe [...] and galled, and stung as it were to death with fier [...] Serpents, in a Wilderness and Labyrinth of guilts and pressures of Spirit, yet they will not be beat­en off from going this way, but onely a very few of them. They run still upon the Pikes, and press upon the thick Bosses of God's Bucklers. Yea, [...] thing stranger yet! Though the law it self preach faith, yet those that pretend to very great skill it the law, and are called great boasters of the law [...] they will not believe the law in this particular [...] though the law give witness to the way of belie­ving, yet they will understand the law as giving te­stimony rather to its own way of Justification.

Now to set home this Conviction and Repre­hension, Consider that there are these four great iniquities found in a legal Spirit: 1. An horrible perversness and self-willednefs; When God would have them go one way, they will go another; [...] right cousness of God is revealed in the Gospel, from faith to faith, as it is written, The Just shall live by Faith, Rom. 1.17. And they give God the lye, and say, The Just shall live by Works, and will go the quite opposite and contraty way 2. Here we see their intollerable pride, which is the root of this [Page 79]self-willedness; they will not be justified by Gods Righteousness, but by their own Righteousness; they prefer their own Way to God's, their own dis-approved Works, to God's approved Way of Righteousness. 3. Here we see the sottish sense­lesness, and brutish fool-hardiness of these men; for in doing thus, they are as a Ship that runs her self upon a Rock; as a Moth that flyes at the Can­dle; they perish every Mothers Child of them that thus steer their course. 4. See the high dis-inge­nuity that there is in this way of theirs: What do they herein, but spurn at the very bowels of their Heavenly Father? When God had found man fal­len by his own voluntary defection, he might have left him as he did the fallen Angels, to have perish­ed for ever; but he was graciously resolved not so to lose his creature, but finds out a way how he might recover his creature (Man) again, in which certainly there are most admirable contrivances of Wisdom, Power and Mercy; and he proposeth terms of Reconciliation; he offers his Sons blood; bids the sinner but come and humble himself, and ask pardon, and return to his Allegiance, and trust in him for Pardon, Grace and Perseverance to E­ternal life: No, saith the Legal self-Justificiary, I have never sinned, I have deserved no anger, no displeasure; I need no pardon, no mercy, I have no need of the blood of Christ: I say, all this, and a great deal more, which were not fit to be expres­sed, must lie as in the Seed, and in the Root, in a Legal Spirit, though perhaps it may never come di­rectly to such expressions, nor actual imaginati­ons; for let any one but imagine what would be the Language of a sinner that seeks not Justi­fication by Faith, Grace and Mercy, but by the [Page 80]Law, which can justifie none but for perfect and unerring obedience; and I think I may say, it can be no other but such as I have mentioned, or fat worse; it must be onely a deal of blasphemy a­gainst the Grace of God, as useless and needless against the person of Christ as coming into the World to save sinners, when there was no need o [...] a Saviour, &c Now to have these things lye in his heart at the bottom, though but as in a spawn, not perfected or come to the birth, how odious must it needs be in the eyes of God and good men? And yet all this lies in a legal-Spirit, for which they just­ly lie under a severe reproof from the foregoing assertions. Obj.

But surely (may some say) there are no such men as these you mention; there are none that pre­tend themselves perfectly holy; there are none but think they stand in need of pardon; we all cry God mercy for our sins; and why should you say that men are generally apt to do thus, to seek Justifica­tion by Works, and that most professors run this way?

I answer, Ans. 1. That it is true, few men profess to go this way amongst us, and perhaps few ever, (ex­cept those that do, or have held perfection in this life, and that as a thing necessary to salvation) did profess to expect salvation by the Law as a Cove­nant of Works in the strict sense of it.

2. That yet there are very many; and (as I have said) the most of professors are guilty of this fol­ly, yea we are all of us naturally inclinable unto it, viz. To seek Justification by the Covenant of Works; and in proof and explication of this second answer or assertion, I shall do these three things: 1. Prove that the greatest part of men [Page 81]and professors go this way. 2. I shall endeavour to discover wherein their error or mistake lies, that they should not dare to profess this way, and yet be thus deeply guilty. And 3dly, I shall give some characters of a Legal and Evangelical spirit, where­by we may discover if we are guilty, and unto what degree we faulty this way. The f [...]st particular in the con­vict ontha [...] very many are guilty of legality The first thing which I am to do, is to prove, that there are very many men, yea many, most professors that are guilty of this folly; yea, that we are all natu­rally inclinable to it, and have been from the be­ginning. If there had not been such a generati­on of men in the Apostles times, all the Discour­ses and Argumentations of the Apostle Paul against this sort of men, in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, had been useless: Now certainly the A­postle did not trifle so with the world, as to set up Enemies in his own imagination, and then sight with them: And yet it cannot be denyed by any, that the Apostle spends large Disco rses and Ar­gumentations against such a sort of men. Besides, that the thing may be out of question, that there were such men, the Apostle Paul names them, points them out with the finger, lays hold of them, binds them down with such Arguments, as they can never dis-entangle themselves from. He points them out; they were the Jews, they were the Gala­tians, and others; the Jews, see Rom. 10.1, 2, 3. Bre­thren, my hearts desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they may be saved; for I bear them record, that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge; for they being ignoram of Gods rightcousness, and go­ing about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the right cousness of God. Here you see the Apostle draws up an high charge against Israel [Page 82]in the lump, and bulk, that is, the people of the Jews in general; it was a general mistake of theirs, that they missed of God's righteousness, that is, as I have explained it, the righteousness which is of God by Faith, and went about to establish their own righteousness, that is, a righteousness of works of the Law; they were ignorant of this, that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness, as it is in ver. 4. of that chap. The Jews they would needs be justified by works; they are one sort of men named by the Apostle, as guilty in this parti­cular. But, which is yet stranger, not onely the Jews, but the Galatians, who were Gentiles, who had never received the Law, and lived under it, as the Jews had; had onely been educated in Heathen Idolatries and filthiness, till the Gospel came a­mongst them; yet even these, after they had recei­ved the Gospel, had begun in the Spirit, that is, in the way of Justification by Faith, in a Gospel way, and had made publick Encomiums of the blessed E­state the Gospel had brought them into, crying, O the blessedness! Gal. 4.15. They so loved the Apo­stle Paul for his preaching the Gospel to them, that they could have pulled out their own eyes, and have given them to him if it would have done him any good; yet even these, after all this, they no sooner had some Law-Teachers come amongst them, but they turn off from the Apostles Doctrine unto another Gospel; not that there is any more then one Gospel but some under pretence of [...]oin­ing the Law to the Gospel, to make them more com­pleat in their Christian Religion, had perverred the Gospel of Christ; & instead of making a more compleat Gospel, had reduced all the Gospel they had left, un­der the service of the Law; so that the Law was up­permost, & ruled in the great business of Justificati­on; [Page 83]& yet these after they had thus sophisticated the Gospel, had gotten the Galatians to be their admi­rers and followers; which puts the Apostle upon strange admirations, exclamations, expostulations with his Galatians in his Epistle to them; I wonder (saith he) ye are so soon removed from him that called you unto the Grace of Christ, unto another Gospel, Gal. 1.6, 7, 8, 9. And, where is the blessedness ye spake of when I first preached the Gospel to you? Gal. 4.16. And again (saith he) certainly you are bewitched, O ye foolish Galatians, Gal. 3.1. And again, O my lit­tle children, of whom I travel in birth again until Christ be formed in you, Gal. 4.19. He had travelled with them in the new-birth once already, and Christ had been in some sort formed in them; they had received the Gospel, but they were now turn­ed off to the Law, and he was fain to travel with them again; you may see plainly what their disease was, Gal. 4.21. Tell me ye that desire to be under the Law—they had a desire to be under the Law; and in chap. 2.16. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law; for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified. Here the Apostle mentions the Di­sease, that they would needs be justified by the works of the Law; and he proposeth his own, and the other Apostles and converted Jews, their exam­ples for their imitation; We (saith he, in ver. 15.) We, who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gen­tiles (that was the name they gave the Gentiles) we knowing that a man is not justified by works, have belie­ved in Christ—and, if we have done so, who had more pretence of reason to cleave to the Law then [Page 84]ever you had, if we have quitted the I aw for the Gospel, certainly we may well wonder at you, that were sometimes sinners of the Gentiles, and not Jews born, that you should quit the Gospel for the Law: So Gal. 4.89. Although then when ye knew not God, were without God in the world, as other Gen­tiles were, Although then ye did service to them who by nature are no Gods, that is, served Idols; and al­though this was somewhat tollerable then in the dayes of your ignorance, yet now after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how tur [...] ye again, or back to the weak and beggarly Elements, unto which ye desire again to be in bondage? Not that they ever were in bondage before to the Jewish Ce­remonies, but they were in bondage before unto Idols, and they had been freed by Christ, and now fell back, and desired to be in bondage again, not as before unto their Idols, but to Jewish Ceremo­nies, and the keeping the Law of Moses: And this the Apostle aggravates so, that he seems to make it a worse business in the dayes of their knowledge, thus to go off to the Law, then in the days of their ignorance to serve Idols. Thus you have seen their Disease; now for further proof yet, that this was their distemper, we may observe, that the Apostle applies several arguments by way of remedy, which were proper onely for this distemper, in that one chap. Gal. 3. I shall observe mine several Arguments sive of which are contained in the first five verses of that chap. and are more particular and experi­mental for the conviction of the Galatians, the minor of every 'yllogism being evident in their experience; the major evident in its own nature, or from Scripture; the other four being suf­ficiently convincing to every man, and of no par­ticular [Page 85]concernment to them more then others; in ver. 1. Who hath bewitched you, that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes fesus Christ hath been evi­dently set forth, as if he had been crucified amongst you? Makes this syllogism, They who had Christ clearly preached to them; so as if he had been cru­cified before their eyes, should not for shame go off to the Law—But you have had Christ thus clearly preached; Ergo, 2d. Argument in the 2d. ver. Ye re­ceived the Spirit by this plain preaching of Christ, which ye never did by your Law-Preachers: This, one would think, was a mighty Argument to them. This onely would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by the preach­ing of Faith. The Syllogism; They that have recei­ved the Spirit by the preaching of Faith, should not for shame go off—But you have received— Ergo, 3d. Arg. in ver. 3. Are ye so foolish, having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect in the flesh? 'Tis a disgrace for wise men to begin in any way, and alter their way at all before they make an end, but it is a higher disgrace to begin in a better way, and end in a worse; to begin in the Spirit, and to end in the Flesh: As much as Spirit doth excel Flesh (their Horses are Flesh, and not Spirit, Isa. 31.3.) so much doth the Gospel-way of Justification excel the Legal. The Syllogism is this They that have once begun in a more excellent way then the Law is, should not go off to the Law; but you have begun in a more excel­lent way, viz. the Spirit: Ergo, 4th. Arg. from the 4. ver. Have ye suffered so many things in vain, if it be [...] in vain? They had not onely embraced the Go­spel, and begun in the Spirit to do something; but they had suffered many things from the persecuting Jews, for professing a pure Gospel-way; and now [Page 86]would lose all their sufferings. 5th. Arg. from the 5th. ver. He therefore that ministreth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doth he it by the works [...] the Law, or by the hearing of Faith? The Law-Preachers could neither administer the Spirit to their Hearers, nor yet work miracles in proof of what they delivered, both which the Apostle had done, and their present Minister Epaphrus did do; and yet they were so mad upon the Law, and the way of Justification by works, that they were ready to shake off the Gospel for the insupportable bur­then of the Law. There are ye see at least five Arguments in the compass of five verses proper to them, and all five proposed in the way of interro­gation, to express the Apostles vehemency, his trouble at their desection, his strange admiration at it, his longing for their recovery, all which this interrogation-form implies. Then the Apostle proceeds to general and universal Arguments, not of such particular concernment to them, such as I have in my former Discourse urged, viz. the ex­ample of Abraham from the 6. to the 10. from the nature of the Law, requiring strict obedience, or else accursing the sinner, ver. 10. from an express proof out of the Old-Testament, Hab. 2.4. The just shall live by Faith, therefore not by the Law, (saith the Apostle) for the Law is not of Faith, 11, 12. And then comes in that great Argument which I have so largely insisted upon, That there was a Covenant of Grace on foot before ever the Law was given by Moses, which could not be bro­ken; therefore the Law came not in for a way of Justification, else it must have disannulled this Co­venant, from the 15 to the 1.

[Page 87]I now recollect and argue, Here you see that not onely the Jews, but the Gentiles desired to be under the Law, would needs be justified by the works of the Law, else the Apostle had disputed largely and strenuously against no Enemy: Nay the Galatians, though they never had had the Law before, but onely first Heathen Idolatry, and then a pure Gospel, and received it with joy and admi­ration, and great intensness of affection; received the Spirit through the Ministry of it, suffered much for the profession of it; begun wel, and did run wel; yet, though they had begun in the Spirit, no sooner came the Law-Preachers among them, but they turned from St. Paul, who had called them un­to Christ, like fools, and men bewitched unto ano­ther Gospel, that is, unto a Law-Gospel. The Law-Preachers no sooner came amongst the Galatians, but they turned the very Gospel which the Apostle had preached and they received into so much Law, so that there ye might have seen Christians to be the pure Disciples of Moses, nay far worse then the true Seed were in Moses's time. Now from hence I infer the first assertion in the coviction, viz. That there have been, and therefore may be such a ge­neration of men that (notwithstanding the prea­ching of the Gospel, nay and the profession of the Gospel, are legal in the business of Justification, followers of the Law, seek to be justified by works; and also, that we are very apt to run into this way without much care and caution: Who would ever thought that the Galatians that had so many rea­sons to engage them to keep in that way of Faith, should ever have turned carnal and fleshly in the business of Justification? Certainly this Aposta­cy of theirs argues a great aptitude in humane na­ture [Page 88]to this way, unless you will think that the Ga­latians were of another make from all the men in the world.

I shall add somewhat moreof proof to this pro­position, and the parts of it, by and by; only I must first enter upon the explication of the 2d. thing proposed, viz. Wherein this legality lyes, or where­in the great inistake lies, that so many should seek to be justified by a Covenant of Works, and yet acknowledge themselves sinners; and in the expli­cation of this, there will new proof arise to the first Proposition, viz. That men are generally ad­dicted to the way of works.

2dly, 2d. par [...]i­cul [...] in the con [...]i­ction, viz. wherein [...]. I Ne­ga [...]vel. Therefore it comes to be explained where­in this legality lies, of what it consists, which men are so generally inclinable unto; and this is the chief thingin the Conviction; this I shall dispatch in three Propositions; the first is negative, shewing what it is not, yet ought to be, if they understood what they go about. 1. It is not a professed put­ting themselves upon the Law of God strictly, as it requires perfect, unerring obedience for Justifi­cation; so the Jews durst not adventure their souls; the Jews acknowledged themselves sinners, though not such sinners as the Gentiles: We find when the Jews brought the Woman to Christ that was taken in Adultery, he set the Woman at liberty by this Sentence of stoning her; He that hath no sin let him [...] the first stone.

Neither did the Galatians assert themselves free from sins alas! they had been sinners of the Gen­tiles, Gal. 4.8. They had been Idolaters; and accor­dingly the Apostle disputes against them with such arguments as took that pro confesso, that they were sinners, Gal. 3.10. Is many as are of the works of [Page 89]the Law, are under the curse; for it is written, Cur­sed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law, to do them. Now surely (as it might be supplyed) you will not pre­tend to have continued in all things; therefore you cannot expect to be justified by the works of the Law.

Though I must needs say this, If they had gone wisely to work in their seeking Justification by the Law, they must first have found themselves free from sin, hitherto of their lives, together with a power of keeping themselves free for the remain­der of their lives, or else must have desisted in the beginning; and therefore the Apostle batters down their high imaginations of self-righteousness with such arguments as these; The Law saith, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things; now you have not continued in all things: And in Rom. 3.19, 20. when the Apostle had recited a Catalogue of sins out of the Law, he infers, Now, we know that whatsoever things the Law saith, it saith to them that are under the Law (and so to you Jews especially) that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God: As much as to have said, As for all these sins, some are found in one, and some in another; and where-ever any of them is found, there that man's mouth is stopped by the Law, and every such person is become guilty or sub [...]ect to the Judgement of God: 20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight, for by the Law is the knowledge of sin; the Law tells you what is sin, and so the wrath due to sin; and by the Law every transgrestion should re­ceive a just recompence of reward. And so Gal. 5.3. I testifie again to every man that is circumcised, [Page 90](which was the usual sign of their going off to the Law) that he is a debtor to do the whole Law. And yet this you dare not undertake, O ye Galatians, this you dare not profess to do. A strange Dispensati­on that they gave themselves, that they would aim to be justified by the Law, and yet not hold them­selves obliged to keep the whole Law! How could they ever think that the Law should justifie them! and yet these arguments brought by the Apostle to convince them, both shew, that they did not pre­tend to answer the Law byunerring obedience, and fulfilling of it, as also that they should have done thus, had they gone wisely to work.

So much for the first Proposition, shewing what their way was not, yet ought to have been, had they understood themselves.

2. Yet though they did not profess to appeal to a strict Covenant of Works for Justification, and did not understand themselves in what they did, yet by the way that the Jews & Galatians took for righte­ousness, they fell under that way of Works, & were so reckoned by God to be, and by the Apostle in his Discourses against them; else his Arguments had concluded nothing against them. And the rea­son is this, for that, though they did not formally intend a Covenant of Works, yet the way they took, was of that nature and tendency; and we have a distinction in the Schools, of sinis Scientiae & Scientis; now the sinis Scientiae is eternal and unal­terable, as proceeding from the nature of the thing, let the finis Scientis be what it will; so if the way they took be legal, it is no matter whether they intended it or no. But you will say, What was that in their way, or what is that in this way which you say men usually taken, which makes it so justly, [Page 91]and unavoidably be called and reckoned by God a putting our selves under a Covenant of Works, though we are not our selves aware of it? I an­swer in the third and last place.

3dly, Where­in Legality consists, positively. It is such a mixture of the Covenant of Works with the Covenant of Grace, as in which the Covenant of Works is predominant, and so most justly gives the denomination to their way; I fix upon the Word Predominant: For else (as I shal shew anon) all the Saints have some legal mixtures in their Spirits, even whilst they treat God for their justification and acceptation; but because they are byassed and swayed more by Evangelical Prin­ciples, then by Legal, they are after the Spirit, not after the Flesh, in the business of Justification.

I shewed in the first Proposition, that the Jews and Galatians did not profess themselves perfectly holy, and so durst not appeal to the Law in a strict sense for a righteousness: I shall now further shew how in many things it appears that these Legallists, even whilst such, did profess and adhere to the Go­spel, which is the way of Grace; and then, that yet by reason of their Legal mixtures, all their Gospel was soured to them, and turned into so much Law; and they are no longer to be reckoned for Christians, but the Disciples of Moses, in Gal. 5.2 3, 4. There are three proofs of this together, that they were great professors of the Gospel, when yet at the same time the Apostle disputes a­gainst them, as adhering to a Covenant of Works for Justification. Ver. 2. Behold, I Paul say unto you, That if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing: Here you see they thought to have had some profit and benefit by Christ: Now this was a great mixture of Gospel in their way; for if hope [Page 92]of benefit by Christ, be not Gospel, what is? Nay you may see in another place of this Epistle, that they had hope in the death of Christ, which cer­t [...]inly is a mixture of the Gospel with their Legal way, Gal. 2.21. If righteousness come by the Law (as your way leads you to say) then Christ is dead in vain; but you will not allow that Christ died in vain; you hope for benefit from the death of Christ, notwithstanding your cleaving to the Law for a righteousness: Here was a great mixture you see of Gospel with their way. And in the 3d. ver. of Gal. 5. we see they thought it was not their duty to keep the whole Law, but that I have spoken to already: in ver. 4. You may see yet the strangest mixture of Gospel in their way, which yet the A­postle calls Legal, that can be imagined; for they did profess themselves (all this while they so cryed up the Law, were such admirers of it, and Vota­ries to it) they did profess themselves to be under Grace, to be in the way of Grace, Gal. 5.4. Christ is become of none effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Law, [...]e are fallen from Grace; that is, from the way of Grace and Mercy, to be upon perfect, strict, exact terms with God; Ye renounce the Grace of God, the benefit of Christ's death; Christ can do you do good; let your false Preach­ers call what they preach Gospel, while they will; and you may think you are removed to another and better Gospel then what you received from me, chap. [...]. v. 6, 7, 8. But there is no other Gospel but what I preached: Some indeed have pervert­ed the Gospel of Christ, and made it a mongrel thing; but it's Name now muse not be Gospel any longer, but Law and Works, not Grace and Gospel. Here you have [...]en that they did not only avoid [Page 93]the rigor of the Law, in exacting perfect obedi­ence to a tittle, but did take in the Gospel-Prin­ciples into their way of Justification; such as the Death of Christ and the Grace of God; and yet these were legal all this while, else the Apostle had disputed impertinently where he had no Adversa­ry: Now what was that which soured all their Gospel, which made their Grace no Grace, and their Christ no Christ, and made them perfect Debtors to the Law, thus unexpectedly to them­selves, but this? that they went to make a com­promise betwixt the Law and the Gospel in the matter of Justification; they would join them to­gether, that were as irreconcilable as fire and wa­ter. The Law is not of Faith; if it be of Grace, then it is no more of works, otherwise work is no more work.

Now by reaso [...] of the incompossibility and in­compatibleness of these two, in their For else, as the Elements are said to be mixed in a natu­ral body, losing their proper forms, so the L [...]w and Gospel will well mix, one of them, viz. the Law, losing as I may say, its natural form of a Covenant of works, may be well reconci­led to the Gospel, and mixed with it, for the matter of it. proper and precise noti­on and nature, they that mix these two, must destroy one of them; they can never agree toge­gether in this business of Justifi­cation, any otherwise then heat and cold agree in water, that look unto what degree the one is there, the other is expelled; so much as there is of cold, so much there is wanting of heat; and so much as there is of heat, so much there is wanting of cold; so here, so much as there is want­ing of legality in any heart, so much there is of a Gospel-Spirit, & é contra. Now because these Jews and Galatians did more hanker after the Law, then after the Gospel (though they owned many Go­spel-principles, and durst not own the Law in the [Page 94]strictness of it, yet) their predominancy of incli­nation to the Law for righteousness, justly gave them the denomination of Legal; as the predomi­nancy of cold in water justly gives it the name of cold water; and the Evangelical or Gospel-like men and women, though they have always had some Legal-mixtures in their obedience, yet, be­cause Gospel-Principles are predominant, they obtain the name of Spiritual and Evangelical.

And according to this representation which I have now given of Legal-persons, that is, that they are more propending and inclining to the Law, then to the Gospel, doth the Apostle be-speak them, and speak of them; he speaks to them so in Gal. 4.21. Tell me (saith he) you that Desire to be under the Law — They were such, as though they durst not quit the Gospel, and come off wholly to the Law, yet had a desire to be under the Law. So he speaks of them, Rom. 9.31, 32. But Israel which fol­lowed after the Law of righteousness, hath not attain­ed unto the Law of righteousness. Wherefore? because they sought it, not by Faith, but as it were by the works of the Law. And this, though it were but an [...] as it were, and a Desire, yet it ranked them under a Covenant of Works; and accordingly the Apo­stle useth such arguments against them, as would have served any that had perfectly renounced the way of Faith and the Death of Christ, and whol­ly betaken themselves to the Law of Works.

I have done with the second particular in the Conviction, viz. the explication of the Legality which is so generally to be found, and wherein the deceit lies; that men, who acknowledge themselves sinners, and profess themselves Christians, may yet set themselves under a Covenant of Works for [Page 95]their Justification: They that wil, after what I have said, deny that there may be, or hath been such a thing, such persons to be found that did ac­knowledge themselves sinners, and profess them­selves Christians, and yet sought to be justified by the works of the Law, let them quarrel with the Scriptures, and with the Apostle Paul if they dare, out of whom I have so clearly described them, and confute him if they can: Again, if any one questions that which I have asserted to be the manner how this comes to pass, that these persons are justly de­nominated and reputed Legal self-Justificiaries, viz. by the predominancy of their inclination to the Law, more then to the Gospel, let them shew a more probable way, and I shall gladly quit this

Now the explication and proof of this matter being the very great thing of all should not pass without some improvement or observation from it, which I shall perform by and by; in the mean time, methinks a sober person might very well de­sire to be further satisfied in this great business, viz. the explication of the nature of a Legal-Spi­rit. I suppose it will be acknowledged, that that which gives denomination to a Legal-Spirit, is, his greater propension to the Law, then to the Go­spel; but yet it may be queried: Wherein doth this propension exert and shew it self? in what one word, or more then one, would you express it? Now this I confess is the great difficulty; hic labor, hoc opus est; this were worthy of the most excel­lent Saint, and the most learned and accurate Head to discover; I can do it onely after my manner, that is, rawly enough; but would God I could provoke some able man to undertake it in the strength of God.

[Page 96]Very many of those that have medled with it, have dealt rudely and yet saucily with this subject, I mean the Autinomians: They will express the whole business presently, in one word; and tell you that it is Doing. So far as you seek to get life by doing, you are legal; they will tell you, ye mu [...] not act for life, but from life; a mighty distinction with them, though quite false: And for proo [...] they'l bring you such a Scripture as this, Mark 10.17. where the young man came to our Saviour, and said, What shall I Do that I may inherit Eterna [...] life? Which is a question that I suppose might be asked by a good man, though he was not good that asked it; unless it be asked with such a design as if one thought that the doing good actions might merit, heaven; by this Divinity of theirs w ^ch they have of late spread far and near, they have made their fol­lowers, which I fear are very many, think strange­ly of good works, as if they had no influence a [...] all, not so much as secondary to the obtaining o [...] our salva [...]ion; and so onely as matters of love and thankfulness from us; but not as absolutely neces­sary unto the pleasing of God, and continuing in his favour, according to that of our Saviour, Joh. 15.9, 10. As the Father hath loved me, so have I lo­ved you; continue in my love. How may we do that? ver. 10. tells us; If ye keep my Commandments, ye shall abide in my love, even as I have kept my Fathers Com­mandments, and abide in his love. Yet I would do the Antanomians this right, to say that I think they have very many of them aimed honestly; that they have lighted upon many Gospel-strains, and have done very well in observing that there is a vast differ­ence betwixt serving God with a Legal, and with [Page 97]an Evangelical Spirit; though they have not been so happy in telling us wherein the difference lies; and for the difference which they make, the Legal way to lie in Doing, the Evangelical way in Belie­ving, I confess it hath a great countenance from Scripture, as to the sound of words; but, as they explain their sense, I reckon there is a great disa­greement from the Scripture. As to their sence of the word Believing, I shal have some occasion to ex­amin it anon; but as to the word Doing in their sense, I say at present, That though the Scripture seems to express the whole business of Legality in that word, Rom. 4:4. Working or Doing; yet certain­ly in a far other sense from their explication of it: For the Scripture in that place understands Work­ing or Doing in a strict Law-sense, so as to expect a Reward for it of Debt; whereas they will tel you, if you look upon Works as having any influence upon Justification, let the works be what they wil, you are so far Legal. Now having proved, as I sup­pose, their exposition of Working or Doing to be but a false gloss, I shall do my endeavour (and no more can be expected) to deliver the truth in this matter.

I suppose therefore, according to that Text Rom. 4 4. where Legal Works or working are accurately described, that Legality lies in Doing any work with this supposition or conceit in my mind, that now I have justly obliged God, not only by a Justice of performing promise, but a Justice of strict distribution according to the natural desert of an action: My meaning is best expressed in that commonly known word of Merit; he that doth an action to God supposing that he hath now [Page 98]merited a reward from God by distributive Ju­stice, The rea­son why I make pre­fumtion of Merit, the form of Legality, is for that reward of Debt is the Characte­ristical note of a Legal Reward; therefore the expectation or pre­sumtion of such a reward ought to be in a Legal Spirit. he is Legal in his action, and none other.

It will bepresently said, Then there will not be found so many Legal professors as you assert there are, for that few amongst us, if any at all, acknow­ledge Merits. I answer, though they do not ac­knowledge it with their mouths, yet this I suppose is the secret Language of their hearts, and where it is not, let them be free from the imputation of Legality for me; I see no rule to condemn them of it, though I wil add this. I think many men may disown it in words, nay and think they are not guilty of it, that yet are extreamly guilty; such a a secret unsearchable Disease of heart is this of Le­gality.

I have perfectly done with the explication or discovery of the Disease in its own nature; I shall come anon to give some symptomes of it, that are signs and effects of it; in the mean time let us see what improvement, what observations we can make upon that Anatomical Discovery which was made of the Galatians e'ne now.

And here, Obser. first of all, I shall observe the strange and unhappy disappointments that the Legal self-Justitiaries meet with, the miserable cheat that they put upon themselves. They think to mix Law and Gospel, they dare not stand to the Law alone; they would fain have a little help from the Gospel to eke out their defects in a Legal Righteousness, [Page 99]and alas! the Gospel turns them off with scorn to the Law onely, to be tried and judged by it; which wil certainly condemn and devour them.

2dly, Obser. I observe the strange absurdities and self­contradictions which these self-Justitiaries, both Jews and Gentils, run into, in their prosecution of a Legal Righteousness: There are no less then four contradictions which the Galatians ran into in this business: 1. They would be justified by the Law, and yet acknowledged themselves sinners, which is a contradiction; for it is obvious that the Law must condemn sinners. 2. They would be ju­stified by the Law, and yet not be bound to do the whole Law; where [...]s the Law hath no other way imaginable to justifie any persons, but when they have the works of the Law, when they have done the whole Law. He that doth them, shall live in them. 3. They would be justified by the Law, and yet have benefit by Christ and his death; whereas Christ [...]ras not the Minister of Circumcision; Christ came in­to the world and dyed, because the Law was bro­ken, and could not justifie. 4. See the greatest of contradictions imaginable. They would be justifi­sied by the Law, and yet profess the Gospel, and the way of Grace; therefore the Apostle convin­ceth them with this Argument, If ye seek Ju­stification by the Law, ye are fallen from Grace, Rom. 11.6. If by Grace, then it is no more of works; yet all these absurdities and contradictions the Galatians swallowed, that they might go on with their way of Works, which they were so greedy after, and addicted to, besides all those evident arguments, both general, and of more particular concernment to them, which they went against; though they had received the Spirit by the Gospel; though miracles [Page 100]were done amongst them in confirmation of the Gospel, neither of which attended the Law; though they had done and suffered so many things for the Gospel, yet all of a sudden, like men bewitched, away they turn to the Law, and in effect, though not in profession, they leave the Gospel. From whence again I add new proof, as I promised to the first thing proposed in the conviction, which is my third observation.

Therefore certainly mankind is exceedingly ad­dicted to this way of works, Obser. though not in a-strict way, yet in this mixt way, which comes all to one at last, and must be called by the same Name I say I may justly infer from this one example of the Ga­latians, That mankind is exceedingly addicted unto this way of works.

For though an argument ab exemplo be not ordi­narily cogent, yet such an example as this wil of it self almost amount to a demonstration; for it is not an example of one man, but of a great com­pany of men; they were the Churches of Galatia, as it is in chap. 1. ver. 2. and Galaria was not a Town or a City, but a large Countrey that had many Churches up and down in it; and these were such as had gladly received the Gospel, they had recei­ved the Apostle Paul as if he had been an Angel of God, even as Christ Jesus; they blessed them­selves exceedingly in this, that they had heard the Gospel from him, they received the Spirit by it. &c. Now notwithstanding all this, no sooner do a company of Law-Preachers come that could do no Miracles at all, could not convey the Spirit in their Ministry, and yet the Galatians are so bewitched, and besotted with them, through their own natu­ral inclinations to a Legal Righteousness, that [Page 101]they fall off to the Law in the sight and view of all those demonstrations and convictions to the con­trary, and swallow down four several contradicti­ons to boot; Ergo, hence it evidently appears, that men are exceeding apt to run into this way of Ju­stification by Works; unless we shall imagine, that this inclination in whole Churches of Galatia, was some strange kind of special distemper, arising from the soyle or some such trifling cause that hin­ders it from being common to us with them: I say, I take it for proved and granted from this exam­ple, which is to me much like an Induction; the whole Nation of the Jews, the Churches of Gala­tia, that were Gentiles, were wholly given to this way; therefore this way is mighty natural to man­kind; and we have all a strong propension and in­clination to it; but here comes in one considerable objection, upon the answering of which, the truth of this last Assertion wil be much clearer, and that is this:

You say, Object. that because the Nation of the Jews and the Gentile- Galatians were so much addicted to the way of Justification of Works, therefore it is an argument, that all mankind is addicted to this way, and that we are in danger of running into this way; but you do not seem to observe the great snare and stumbling-block that lay in their way, to put them upon it, and that was the Ceremonial Law, which they did not understand as typical of Christ and Gospel-Mysteries, but looked upon it as a task of duties, which if they did go thorow, and do their best to keepe, they should undoubtedly please God, and be saved: Now this Ceremonial Law was given to the Jews, and not perfectly out of use when the Galatians were thus led aside by it; [Page 102]but was preached up by the devout Jews that were turned to Christianity, that if they were not cir­cumcised, and kept not the Law of Moses, they could not be saved, Act. 15.1. Now this the Gala­tians receiving as true, and holding the Gospel with it, they did with the Jews too much dote up­on Ceremonial Observances; and so their Gospel which they professed with it, was sowred and spoi­led by it; but we are not in this danger; we know that the Ceremonial Law is down, and so we are free from this snare and danger; therefore we need not fear lest we run into a Covenant of Works, or seek Justification by works. This is the objecti­on, and you see it is considerable, to which I shall endeavour an answer.

And first of all I answer by way of concession in three particulars. Ans. 1. 'Tis true, the Jews, had the Ceremonial Law imposed upon them by God, and the Galatians by the seduction of false Teachers, received it likewise as their duty. 2. The Ceremonial Law was apt to prove a snare to all that were under it, in leading them into a Cove­nant of Works: For to be set to do a great ma­ny things which we understand no meaning almost in, how naturally will it teach us to take up with the opus operatum the work done, & to look no fur­ther? Which easily mis-leads us into an opinion of Merit, especially when we think our selves prettily well to have discharged our selves of the duties of the Moral Law besides. 3. Let it be granted that this did actually prove a great snare both to the Jews and Galatians, which appears from this, that the Apostle when he is rebuking the Galatians for their Legality, he instanceth for proofs often in their observing the Ceremonial Law, Gal. 4.8, 9. [Page 103] I winder (saith he) that after ye were set free from bondage to Idols by the Gospel of Christ, ye should desire again to enter into bondage to ceremonies, which there he calls beggarly rudiments; and in ver. 10, 11. saith he, Ye observe dayes, and months, and times, and years; I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain: Nay, the Apostle instanceth so fre­quently in the business of the Ceremonial Law, that an incurious Reader might think that all thrir fault was but this, that they made Conscience of keep­ing the Ceremonial Law; though 'tis certain, and I have proved it already, that this was not the great­est fault they had fallen into; for then the Apostle would onely have gone about to convince them, that the Ceremonial Law was abolished by the death of Christ, or at least that they being Gen­tiles, need not have their Consciences obliged to it; which doth not scarce at all appear to have been a­ny part of his design; but his main design is to beat them off from a Covenant of works, unto which the Ce­remonial Law served for an Inlet. And indeed this was the nature and genius of their mischievous er­ror; they thought, as the Jews also did, that though they were not so strict as they should be in obser­ving the great & weighty duties of the Moral Law, yet if they were strict and careful in observing the Ceremonial, this would make some amends for their other great defects; and herein we see the Ceremonial Law proved a great snare. Thus our Saviour chargeth the Jews, even whilest it was their duty to keep the ceremonial Law, that they pla­ced the observances of the ceremonial Law in the room of their obedience to the moral Law; Ye pay tythe of Mint, and Annise, and Cummin, and have o­mitted the weightier matters of the Law, Judgement, [Page 104]Mercy and Faith; these ought ye to have done, and notto leave the other undone, Matth. 23.23. and so in Isa 1. chap. ver. 10. And this I think is the judge­ment of all Divines to have been the error of the Jews and Galatians. Now let these three things be granted; yet in the 4th. place by way of direct an­swer to the objection: Though the Ceremonial L [...]w were apt to prove a Snare, and actually did prove a Snare to the Jews and Galatians, yet it was their natural inclination to Legality, to a Legal way of treating with God for their Justification and acceptation, that betrayed them into this Snare, or that made it prove such a Snare to them: For else the Ceremonial Law was, in its true use, and in the design of the Lord when he first gave it, a great blessing unto the people of Israel, it was a part of that Dispensation which is called their wis­dom and their glory in the sight of the Nations, Deut. 4.6. I say, the Ceremonial Law was not in its own nature unavoidably such a snare as would lead them to a Covenant of Works, nor in the design of God who gave it; nay it was designed to be to them a sigurative Gospel; and therefore, though it was somewhat capable of being made use of to such an end, to serve the turn and humor of a Legal Spirit, yet none but those that were so addicted, could have made such a perverse and destructive use of it, or, if it had been unavoidably, I say, make the supposition that it had been unavoidably such a dangerous snare to the Jews, who had the Ceremo­nial Law given them from Mount Sinai, yet the Gentile- Galatians had not such a temptation to receive it, with that veneration that the Jews had; and having received the Gospel before, and stil re­taining the profession of it, might have been well [Page 105]antidoted against the danger of it; and yet they receive it suddenly in this noxious and mischievous use of it: And for what reason can we imagine all this to have come to pass, but because they were naturally disposed, and exceeding apt to catch at any occasion of serving God, as it were by the works of the Law, or according to a Covenant of Works. 5thly, I say therefore, that though we have not the Ceremonial Law of the Jews to prove a Snare to us, yet we have this radicated inclinati­on to a Covenant of Works which betrayed the Jews and Galatians by occasion of the Ceremonial Law, into the prosecution of Justification by Works; and this I think was formerly evin­ced from the example of the Jews and Galatians, as by an induction. 6thly, As for the ceremonial Law, perhaps it would be granted, that if we had such reason to receive it as the Jews had before Christ, when it was their duty to observe it, or but such a seeming reason as the Galatians after their seduction thought they had; perhaps it would be granted, that if the case were so with us as it was with either of them, that then we should be in great danger to do as they did, and to vent that natural Legality, or addictedness to the way of works, which hath been evinced to be in all men, in ceremonial observances: Now let but so much be granted, and then I have this to offer, That though we are free from the ceremonial Law of the Jews, & know it abrogated by Christ's death, yet we may stil have a like danger, though not the same; nay, the Christian Church hath for many hundreds of years (I shall not meddle with the present state of things) I say, the Christian Church hath for many hundreds of years together formerly, been under [Page 106]as great a danger from ceremonies, as the Jew [...] were in from the ceremonial Law; and for proof of this, I shal onely quote some passages out of the preface to the Book of Common-Prayer, un­der the title, Of Ceremonies, why some be abolished, and some retained; where you have these, besides o­ther expressions: Some Ceremonies are put away, be­cause the great excess and multitude of them hath so encreased in these later days, that the burthen of them was intollerable; whereof St. Austine in his time com­plained that they were grown to such a number, that the estate of Christian people was in worse case concerning that matter, then were the Jews; and he counselled that such yoke and burthen should be taken away, as time would serve quietly to do it. But what would St. Au­stine have said, if he had seen the Ceremonies of late dayes used amongst us, whereunto the multitude used in his time was not to be compared? This our excessive multitude of Ceremonies was so great, and many of them so dark, that they did more confound and dark­en, then declare and set forth Christs benefits unto us. There are other considerable passages concerning ceremonies in that Preface; but this that I have transcribed, serves sufficiently for my purpose, and I suppose fully takes off the objection, that since the ceremonial Law is down, Christians cannot be in the same danger that the Jews & Galatians were from ceremonies. I have yet one more particular to add by way of answer to the objection, and it is this in the seventh place. That I verily believe, though the Jews had had no such Law given them, nor the Gentile-Galatians such a Law preached a­mongst them by the Jews, nor had any such cere­monies ever been set up in the Church of Christ, as the quotation speaks of; yet both the Jews and [Page 107] Galatians, and we all have such an inclination to, such an earnest desire after the way of Works, that without a strict hand over our selves from giving way to this natural disposition, we should be all exceeding apt to find out some way or other of venting this humour, either by inventing ceremo­nies and superisttions, or doing the duties of the Moral Law superficially, and yet resting upon them for our Justification: As for duties or good works that are truly good, though they may be abused af­ter their performance by a spiritual pride adhering to them; nay, though they may perhaps be spoiled sometimes by an opinion of merit, yet because I cannot think it possible for a man that doth exer­cise himself to serve God with a perfect heart, to turn all his really-good Works into Legal-Works, by an opinion of Merit; I shal except this from being a third way in which Legality predominant may exert and shew it self. But for the other two ways of invented ceremonies, or superstitiu [...]s ob­servances, and an external obedience to the duties of the Moral Law, I think the nature of man is so addicted to the way of Works, that though there were no ceremonial Law amongst us at present, ei­ther from God or men; yet men would generally find out one or both of those ways to vent their Legality, even to an opinion of merit in them. This I shal shew to have been usually practised in the times of the Scripture, and since, and in our own time; that is, that ceremonies or external services, not commanded in the moral Law, were invented even whilest there was a ceremonial Law in force, and vast numbers since its abolition, and both rested upon; as also, that a superficial perfor­mance of Moral Duties is found both in the Scrip­ture, [Page 108]and in our own experience to have been rest­ed upon. For the latter first; How common wa [...] it with the Jews in our Saviours time to think, that if they kept the Letter of the Law, they had dis­charged their duty contained in that command­ment! If they did not kill a man, they thought they discharged their duty in the sixth Command­ment: If they did not commit Adultery, they had discharged the seventh; and so having kept the Law, they might expect the Law should justifie them; and therefore St. Paul whilst a Pharisee, he was touching the Law blameless, as he thought, which if he had truly been, and continued so, he might well have expected to be justified by it: And so the young Pharisee, Matth. 19.20 says of the Commandments, All these have I kept from my youth: And upon this he rested hitherto. I have heard one my self whom I judged a wicked man, and so did many others besides me; yet sayes he, Well, I am confident if any Family in such a place have the blessing of God, ours hath; for we have prayers mor­ning and evening, and never a cross or angry word pas­seth between me and my wife from one end of the week to the other. This imperfect obedience to the Moral Law, he made the matter of his Justification, per­haps even to an explicite opinion of Merit. Thus you see men that have any conformity to the Mo­tal Law, are apt to place their trust there: But now because there are few so strict as St. Paul whilest a a Pharisee was, or as the young man was; but that there is a consciousness of guilt from the Moral Law, therefore they are the lewest Legallists that rest upon their obedience to the Moral Law alone, if any do; they must help patch up their righteous­ness with ceremonial observances, so that the cere­monial [Page 109]Law (whether given by God, or invented by men) hath most custom, and bears up the weight of these mens expectations; and I think I may make this assertion, (at least this guess) that there were never any in the world that sought Justificati­on by works, but they were much in love with some superstitlons, or at least with Ceremonies; yea, even those who have been most strict in observing the duties of the Moral Law, as to the Letter of it; yo [...]r greatest Pharisees, they are as much for ob­fervation of Ceremonies as any men in the world. How were the Pharisees in our Saviours time addi­cted to invented ceremonies and superstitions, though one would think they had enough cere­monies in their Law already? What washings had they invented? &c. And it is said, they taught for Doctrines humane traditions and inventions, Mat. 15.9.

Wicked men, and those that are careless in keep­ing the Moral Law, are for ceremonies to patch up a righteousness; Pharisees are for them to have a redundancy of righteousness, such as may make sure work, yea such as may serve themselves and o­thers too; and this cannot well be but by such Works as were not their duty to do, and so must be inventions of their own; so that, however it com­eth to pass one way or another, both the strict Le­galist, and looser self-Justitiaries, lay the chief stress in pleasing God, and seeking his favour upon ceremonious observances. I shall instance in one place of Scripture, where, as I take it, there is a ful and lively Description of a Legal-self-Justitiary; it is Mic. 6 6, 7, 8. And wherein is it that he pleaseth himself most, or hopes to please God best, but in ceremonies, (that is external services not comman­ded [Page 110]in the Moral Law) and some of those invent­ed? Wherewith (saith he) shall I come before the Lord and how my self before the high God? Shall I come be­fore him with Burnt-offerings, with Calves of a year old, will the Lord be pleased, (so as to justifie me) with thousands of Rams, or with ten thousands of Ri­vers of Oyle? Shall I give my first born for my trans­gression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul [...] Here you see the poor man offers very fair in his way; if he may have it by ceremonious services, he wil do any thing, he wil suffer the loss of any thing his Estate, his Relations; yea his dearest Relations, his first-born; here the man mixeth Heathenish Sa­crifices with Jewish ceremonies; but you see the ma [...] is willing, at least seems willing to do any thing: The Papists wil whip themselves; Baal's Ptiests w [...] cut themselves AFTER THEIR MANNER, with Knives and Lances till the blood gush out upon them, 1 Ki. 18.28. Any thing but BELIEVING. These self. Justificiaries are quite out in their guess what wil please God. They are ready to think with Naama [...] when he was to be cleansed of his Leprosie, that they must do some GREAT THING to be cured, 2 King. 5 13. They slightly pass over THIS POOR EUSINESS OF BELIEVING, as he did his com­mand of washing in Jordan. Are not Abana and Par­phar, Rivers of Damasous, better then all the waters of Israel? May not I wash in them and be clean (saith he) so he turned and went away in arage, vor. 11, 12. So saith the legal Spirit, Pish, what is this Belie­ving, I wonder! that is a poor thing; what, onely Believe! I'le offer to God rich Sacrifices, Holoen­rists, and Hecatombs; nay, thousands of Rams, ten thousands of Rivers of Oyle; yea my first-born, the fruit of my Body; this is better then believing [Page 111]in any man's Judgement. Any thing but believing. But it is better to hear the Lord to declare himself what he is pleased with, than go by our own fool­ish guesses; and therefore see the 8. ver. of Mic. 6. and the Lord tells us what it is; nay the Lord tells us that we know our selves what it is, if we would but consult our own hearts, ver. 8. He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord re­quire of thee, but to do Justice, and to shew Mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God. Alas! God doth not require all this operous, laborious, and costly service which men are apt to put themselves upon. He loves nothing but truth in the inward parts. Serve God honestly, trust in him, love thy neighbour, do Justice, shew mercy, and this is better then all whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices, Mark 12.33. And this I shall shew anon (as I have partly already in the exposition of that Deut. 30.11.) is believing, that is, it contains the great mystery of believing in it. Not that I have so little of a Schollar, as to say or think, that shewing mercy is believing; or doing justly is believing, except in a figurative sense, as we put the Name of the cause upon the effect, or the Name of the chief ingredient upon the whole composition. We must not so miscall things, lest at last we have no Names left us to call things by; but I say, herein is contained the my­stery of the way of believing, in opposition to the way of Works. But to return, What a brave flourish doth Micah's man make with his legal Righteousness? What high promises? What vast offers doth he make? thousands of Rams, ten thou­sands of Rivers of Oyle, more then ever any Em­peror in the world could set on running! Yet these mighty offers doth this man here make to the Lord [Page 112]for his favour, in the mean time he misseth passeth by this poor contemptible way of believing. Only believe, believe and all things are possible. Do just­ly, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God. No, but men that wil merit heaven; they must be doing such a number of Duties, so many Ave-ma­ries, so many Pater-nosters, Heathenish, vain repe­titions; they must give themselves so many stripes of a Good-Friday. Surely they think God slights plain honesty as an homely thing, and that he is ta­ken with gallant, gandy, magnificent services, or else with barbarous cruelties and severities.

Thus I reckon I have in some sort proved my se­venth and last assertion in answer to the objection, viz. That men are so far addicted to the way of works, that though they had no ceremonial Law at all, yet they would be finding out some way or other to vent this humour, either in superficial o­bedience to the Moral law, or in full tasks of Cere­monious observances which they could invent for themselves. The Heathens did it in barbarous Sa­crifices, and vain repetitions; the Pharisees in di­vers washings, and that Jew in Micah, in costly and diabolical offerings; so that though we are freed from the Ceremonial law of the Jews, and should be freed altogether from the Ceremonies in the Christian Church, yet we are not quite out of all danger of seeking Justification by works. All now that I can apprehend my self any way engaged to speak unto further, upon the second particular in the conviction, by way of discovery wherein this legality should lye, is, That seeing I have asserted that it must consist onely in opinion of Merit; I should speak a little to prove that there is such a thing as that commonly in practise in the world of [Page 113]which I shall give a brief proof both in Jew and Gentile, which will yet further evince, that we are not wholly free from the danger; and then I shall come to give some marks and signs of a Le­gal-spirit. That there was such a thing among the Jews, Mr. John Smith a late Writer, in his se­lect Discourses, hath taken very good pains to prove. In that Discourse which treats of a Legal and Evangelical Righteousness, he tells us, That it was a great affirmation of the Jewish Do­ctors, That happiness by way of Merit, is far greater and much more magnificent then that which is by way of Mercy; and so that they reckoned (they are his own words) upon a more triumphant and illustrious kind of happiness, victoriously to be atchieved by the merit of their own works, then that beggarly kind of happiness (as they seem to look, upon it) which cometh like an Alms from Divine bounty. And accordingly they held (I shal give you the Authors words) That the Law deli­vered to them upon Mount Sinai, was a sufficient Dis­pensation from God, and ALL THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE BY HIM for the advancing of them to a state of perfection and blessedness; and that the proper end and scope of their Law was nothing but to afford them several wayes and means of merit. But yet see what their great brags of Merit came to! See what strange Dispensations they gave them­selves! even such as the Galatians gave them­selves, whilst they sought to be justified by works; for the same Author in the third Chapter of the Discourse mentioned, quotes this passage out of the Misna, Lib. Maccoth. Sect. ult. [...] the meaning whereof is, That therefore the Precepts of the Law were so many in number, that so they might single out where they plea­sed, [Page 114]and in exercising themselves therein, procure Eter­nal life; or as Obadias de Bartenora expounds it, that whosoever shall perform any one of the 613. Precepts of the Law (for so many they make in number; without any worldly respect for love of the Precept, behold, this man shall merit thereby everlasting life. Here they might have been convinced by those two Arguments which the Apostle Paul useth against the Galati­ans, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things. And he that is circumcised, that is, professeth to be justified by the Law, is a debtor to keep the WHOLE Law. And this we find the Pharisees to do in our Saviours time, & they taught, that if a man had devoted what he should have given his Parents, to God, he was dispensed with from the duty of the fifth Commandment to Father and Mother; he might say it was corban, that is, a gift already given to God, Mark 7.11. Matth. 15.5. So that they taught their Disciples to pick and chuse among the Commandments, which they would do, and which they would leave undone; nay, to leave out some of the greatest commands of all, that they might but fulfil some one of their inventions. Here you have seen the pre­sumption of mankind in the business of Merit, instanced in the Jews; they liked the way of Me­rit rather then the way of Mercy, and yet cheat­ed themselves with this, That if they kept any one Law of the 613. (that is, if they kept it con­stantly, as the same Author tells us) they should merit everlasting life. And that there is such a thing as opinion of Merit in their serving of God at this day amongst men professing Chri­stianity, we may know easily, if we hear but what the Papists teach, and hold, and practise; [Page 115]they won the very word Merit, that good works are meritorious: And, if they seem to avoid the thing which we mean, by their distinction of Meritum excongruo, & condigno, yet we will easily fasten the Thing upon them. For Merit, as I have said, in the Scripture-notion of it, is when a man that doth any action to God, expects the Reward of Debt, and so demands it at the hands of the Law: Now these men profess that they can do more then the Law requires of them; they can lay up a stock of good Works that shal serve for others, which the Church may dispose of to those that want them, and they shall be meritorious for them; therefore it must follow that they have done what the Law requires; for how can he do works of supererogation, which were not demanded of him by the Law, and which the Church may dispose of at pleasure, who hath not kept the whole Law? There is such a thing as opinion of Merit amongst the Papists in their serving of God; therefore we may be guilty of it: How doth the Pope tell them, and they believe it, that if they do such and such things, which are not made the condition of pardon by God, for going such a pilgrimage, for taking such a penance, &c. they shall have their sins pardoned for so long a time? And wherein doth Justification consist so much as in pardon of sin? Therefore they seek Justification by Works, even by inventions of their own, which is worse then by Works commanded. Now that which is so gross amongst them, may be as truly though more refinedly amongst our selves. I have now done with the two first particulars in the Conviction. I shall onely now recollect what I have said and proved, that so I may borrow some [Page 116]strength for what follows, and so proceed.

Is it so then, that all mankind is so exceeding apt to seek Justification by Works? And is it such an hidden and unsearchable evil of heart, that we cannot easily know it, it hath so many self-deceits, and runs through so many contradicti­ons? Doth it lie in opinion of Merit, & yet is Merit so generally disowned, and yet so many real votaries to it? What need then have we to search, and try if we are not guilty in this particular, and how far we may possibly be guilty? For, though we have found out the very notion in which it must lie, viz. The Opinion of Merit; yet this will not serve usually to find it out by; for who of us doth not renounce Merits, and yet who of us (if the foregoing assertions be true) is not addicted to Legality? I shall come therefore to some other ways of discovery of this evil di­stemper of heart; some marks and signs of it, some effects which discover their cause, though never so occult and hidden before. And this is the third particular in the Conviction which I promised: The first was to discover, that there are such men as seek Justification by Works. The second was to discover wherein their Legality lies: And this third to discover by some signs where this Legality is to be found, either in a predominancy, or in any less degree.

Now for the discharge of this last part of my Work in the Conviction; The third thing in the Con­viction, viz. the Characters I shall first premise two things, and then come to the Characters. The first is this, That all men in the world are either prophane and Atheistical; or else in some way or other Religious; as for those that are pro­phane and atheistical, I have nothing to do with them in this Discourse, for that they have [Page 117]nothing to do with Justification, who make no pursuit after it at all. The second observation that I would premise, is this. That as for the Religious World, those that treat with God af­ter any sort for their salvation, they are all redu­cible to one of these two sorts; they are either Legal or Evangelical in their service and obedi­ence; for there being but two wayes of Justifica­tion, either in the Scripture, or imaginable by us by unerring obedience and meriting, or by the way of mercy, which accepts an humble sincerity; I say, there being onely these two ways, all that seek Justification must be of one of these two ways; and hence I would infer, that where­ever we find in Scripture any two ways of ser­ving God, that have followers and abettors, be­ing two opposite ways, whereof one is good and acceptable, the other evil and displeasing to God, there are these two ways of Legal and E­vangelical service; and the Characters of the good way may be referred to the head of Evan­gelical, the Characters of the bad unto the head of Legal Worshippers: Or if we cannot make a clear reference of every miscarriage in Religion unto legallity, yet this I dare affirm, and shall prove, That the distinction of Legal and Evan­gelical Worshippers, or of such as are fleshly, and such as are spiritual in the Worship of God, is very ancient; nay as ancient as all Antiquity; so that throughout all ages in the Scripture, and in our own age in undeniable experience, there may be traced these two sorts of religious per­sons, and that by Characters that are visibly Le­galor Evangelical. And whatever be the infinite perty differences of Sects in any age or place, yet all men professing Religion, may be reduced [Page 118]to these two classes or sorts of Legal and Evan­gelical Worshippers; and these are the great things that are to be minded in them; if you find that they are spiritual Worshippers, pass by their petty differences; if they are fleshly, be not deceived by that fair shew which they make in the flesh; for the Antiquity and continual sucees­sion of these two sorts of Worshippers, and that as they include all sorts of Religious persons, see one Scripture, & then I come to the Characters; it is in Gal. 4.29. But as then, that is, in Abraham's time, he of the one side that was born after the flesh, the son of the Bond-woman Hagar, the Son of a Covenant of Works, perse [...]nted him on the other side, that was born after the Spirit, that is, the true Son of the Promise, the Evangelical Worshipper, so it is now. As it was in the beginning, so it is, and ever wil be to the end of the World, two sorts of Worshippers, which two sorts all Religious per­sons may be referred unto. If it were proper to enlarge upon this observation, I could give more ample proof of it.

Now for the Characters, It is a [...] way which [...]e joiceth and glori­eth in ex­ternal pri­viledges and per­formances The proof that the legal way is an ex­ternal fleshly way. the first shall be this, They that are for a Covenant of Works, for the Law, are much and chiefly for external services; this I have partly touched before; but I have a very fair occasion to speak to it here again, and I dare promise the Reader to free him from the trouble of needless repetition. I say, those that are under predominant Legality in treating with God for their justification and acceptation, they are chiefly for external services in their Worship, and expressions of their obedience un­to God. This the Apostle calls flesh, or a fleshly outward way of serving God, in Phil. 3.2, 3.— the Apostle speaks home to this Character. I will [Page 119]give you (saith the Apostle in the first ver.) some SAFE advice and counsel what sort and party of men you should avoid, and what sort you should close with: Ver. 2. Beware of Dogs, beware of evil workers; beware of that evil sort of Wor­shippers that are in the sight of God no better then Dogs, and not children: Now who are they? Why the concision [...]. By the Con­cision is usually understood the Circumcision, or legal Jew, that gloryed in his Circumcision, here called the Concision, by an Ironical Paronomasia, alluding to the Factions and Schisms which they made every where; Beware of these (saith the Apostle) and do not receive them, nor adher to them; for we are the Circumcision, that is, the true Children of Abraham which worship God in the SPI­RIT, in a true SPIRITUAL way of Worship, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no considence in the flesh, which they, the legal Worshippers have; they are fieshly, we are after the Spirit, and wor­ship God in the Spirit. They have considence in the flesh, we have none. Now what is this confidence in the flesh, which the Concision, the Dogs and evil Workers had, but the true Worshippers had not: This the Apostle explains at large in the 4, 5, and 6. verses. For (saith he) if any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might TRUST in the FLESH, I more. What is that of the Flesh where­in he might glory if he would? He tells us ver. 5. I was circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Isra­el, of the Tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the He­brews, as touching the Law a Pharisee, or blameless; so i [...] follows ver. 9. as touching the righteousness which is in the Law, blameless; that is, as touching the letter of the law Moral or Ceremonial. This is [Page 120]the matter of fleshly glorying or boasting, which you see is made up either of external Rites and Priviledges, or the external obedience to the moral law.

That which he calls flesh, is an external thing. Now that fleshly and legal are Synonymous, or words importing the same thing, and so used by the Apostle, is not onely clear in this Scrip­ture, but in other Scriptures; for instance Gal. 3.3. Are ye so foolish, having begun in the Spirit, that is, a Gospel-way, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? that is, will ye end in a legal, that is, a fleshly way? Fleshly and Legal are all one: Now the way of the Flesh is an external way, made up of outward Rites, Ceremonies, Priviledges and Per­formances; therefore a legal way is a way in which men please themselves with external Pri­viledges and Performances.

I shewed before, that those that are addicted to the way of works, durst not pretend to an u­niversal conformity to the law in a strict sense of it, and yet do seek to be justified by Works; therefore they must have some Works to glory in, and to uphold their Spirits in a confidence of Divine acceptance: Now therefore what can these Works be, other then external confor­mities to the ceremonial or moral law, and these ceremonies either as given by God, or else su­perstiously invented by themselves? I shall now a little further exemplifie what I then asserted, and that by some assistance from the second thing premised, in shewing that in all times the evil sort of Worshippers (which because they are not Evangelical, must be legal) have done, and do exceedingly please themselves in exter­nal [Page 121]Priviledges and Performances, in doing which I shall avoid useless repetitions.

We find, The first external priviledge which the Iews glori­ed in. that the Jews who were as well to be condemned for Legality before the dayes of the Gospel, as under it, (there having been always a fleshly and spiritual Seed) were exceedingly taken with their being circumcised, and of the Seed of Abraham, and made a peculiar people to God in the Lump and Body of the Nation, which did not hinder at all, but for particular persons they might be wicked enough, strangers to God, and heirs of wrath. Thus the Jews, as Jews, scorned the Gentiles, called them Dogs, and the sinners of the Gentiles, or Nations; whereas to be Jews born, was nothing but an external Priviledge. And therefore the A­postle, when he comes to convince them of this fol­ly and vain fleshly boasting, he makes no more a­do but to cut them off from this stump that they stood upon, by that great distinction so frequent in his Epistles, of Israel according to the flesh, and the true Israel, or the true Seed according to the Promise, that is, Believers: All are not Israel that are of Israel, (saith he) and he is not a Jew that is one outwardly, neither is that Circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and Circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the Letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God, Rom. 2.28, 29. Now that which amongst us may an­swer to such a fleshly boast as this was of the Jews, (for I chiefly aim at the usefulness of this Doctrine to our selves) may be this, viz, the Name of Chri­stians, and the general Baptism that all amongst us can pretend unto: Though this cannot be accoun­ted so great a Priviledge to us, (now that Christen­dom is so large) as Circumcision, and being natu­ral [Page 120] [...] [Page 121] [...] [Page 123]or proselyted Jews was to them, who were a single Nation, chosen for a peculiar people to God out of all the Nations of the World. I come therefore to some other things.

They gloried also very much in their Temple; The se­cond ex­ternal pri­viledge the [...]ws gloried in. there is an eminent place amongst many, for this, Jer. 7.4. Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord are THESE; that is, THESE BUILDINGS, THESE COURTS, pointing, as it were, with their singer at the Buildings of the Temple; as much as if they had said, See! we have the Temple of the Lord with us, and his Worship and Service amongst us, and therefore no evil can come to us, whatever these Fanatick Prophets threaten us with. Now see what a strange infatuation and besottednesse these men were under! for they were as wicked as men could be, by oppression and blood-guiltiness, yea Idolatry it self; as you may see in ver. 10. Will ye steal murder, and commit Adultrey, and swear falsly, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other Gods, whom ye know not, and come and stand before me in this House, which is called by my Name, and say, we are de­livered to do all these abominations? It this House, which is called by my Name, become a Den of Robbers in your eyes? Behold, even I have seen it, saith the Lord. Here is a crew of Legal-Worshippers, of Carnal-Worshippers, that certainly could not pre­tend to Justification by the strict Law of God, yet trusted in the Temple and Temple-Worship, ver. 8. Behold ye trust in lying words that cannot profit; and what those words are, you have seen in ver. 4. Trust ye not in lying words, saying, the Temple of the Lord, &c. No, saith the Lord. ver. 3. Amend your wayes and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this [Page 123]place: Here is Mercy, Grace, Pardon; here they are put upon the way of believing, ver. 5, 6. For if ye throughly amend your wayes and your doings, and if ye throughly execute judgement between a man and his Neighbour, if ye oppress not the stranger—then will I cause you to dwell in this Land that I gave to your Fa­thers for ever and ever; But else never think that the Temple or Temple Worship can save you, or deli­ver you—Ver. 12. Go to Shiloh, go unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I set my Name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel. Now did God destroy his people at Shiloh for their wickedness, the place where God set his Name at the first, and cannot he deal as severely with a second place? Therefore saith God, except ye repent, and amend your ways, I will do unto this House as I did to Shiloh, and I will destroy you as I did my people at Shiloh, for all your Temple. But here we see how men may dote upon a Tem­ple, so as to think themselves secure from God's Judgments, though they themselves are ful of wick­edness: Whysomewhat like this are our people ready to do, tho God forbid there should be such a gross thing found amongst us in the dayes of the Gospel, as this of the Jews was; yet how do many dote up­on Churches and consecrated places, crying, as it were, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, and that after our blessed Saviour hath told us as much as this in my apprehension, that one place is no holier then another; neither Jerusalem nor Mount Gerizim, but men should worship the Father in spirit and truth, and in every place (saith the Apostle, (perhaps we might gloss) in every place alike) men should lift up holy hands, without wrath or doubting; and yet how are some apt to think [Page 124]that if they pray in a Church, though the Assem­bly be not there, that a prayer in a Church is far more acceptable then in their Closet at home? Not as if I did not far more prefer publick Worship, then private or secret devotion; or that I were a­gainst a convenient decent Meeting-place.

Again, The Iews gloried in ceremoni­ous servi­ces. how did this Jewish, Legal, Carnal righte­ousness please & pride it self in the ceremonial ser­vice of Sacrifices, and the like, but never look at the heart, Isa. 1.11. To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to me, saith the Lord; I am full of Burn, [...]ffer­ings of Rams, and the fat of fed Beasts: I delight not in the blood of Bullocks, or of Lambs, or of He-Goats. Ver. 13. Bring no more vain Oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new Moons, and Sabbaths I cannot away with—Not as if all these things were at this time unlawful, for they were their duty; but here you see they were abundant in these, and fail­ed in matters of common honesty and justice, as we may see ver. 15, 16, 17. Your hands are full of blood; wash ye, make ye clean, put away the evil of your do­ings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do well, seek judgement, relieve the oppressed [...] judge the fatherless, plead for the Widow. These things they ought to have done, and not to leave the other un­done; and when ye have done these things, saith the Lord, Come now, and let us reason together, though your sins be as Scarlet, they shall be white as Snow, &c. ver. 18. Here was Gospel, that if they would mind the true reformation of their hearts and lives, they might expect the pardon of their sins; but these Le­gal- Jews they never mind this inward holiness, no nor common honesty, and yet make no question but they shall make God amends very wel by keep­ing Festivals, New-Moons, Sabbaths, days of so­lemn [Page 125]Assemblies, and by Sacrifices of Rams, Lambs, Bullocks, He-Goats; as if God were fed with the blood and fat of these beasts, and were migtihly attoned by incense & sweet perfumes, See Psal. 50. from 7. to 14. as if then he must needs smel a savour of rest in all that they did.

And the Gal. we find were come to this, Gal. 3.10. Ye observe days, and months, & times, and years, that is, Jewish Feasts; I am afraid of you, lest I have be­stowed upon you labour in vain: When they once came to observe them, there was a great deal of danger, and cause for the Apostles sear, that they would rest in the observance of them, for that this was the reason why they took to observing of them (when it was not now any longer the Jews duty so much as to observe them) because of their inclination to a Covenant of Works, which chiefly expresseth it self in an external service.

So likewise the Colossians (amongst whom the same pestilent Law-Preachers had been) they were ensnared to the making conscience of dayes, Sab­baths and new Moons, and also in the business of meats, that some were clean, and others unclean, which was once the Jews duty to observe; insomuch that Peter tells the Lord, he had been so strict in the business hitherto, that nothing common or un­clean (meaning of the flesh of unclean Beasts and Fowls) had entred into his mouth, Acts 11.6.8. But now was not only not their duty any longer, but at least to the Gentiles a sin to make any conscience in it; for that they could hardly begin such a thing, at such a time, upon the inticement of false Teachers (for none else perswaded the Gentiles to it) but from an evil inclination of swerving from the pure Go­spel which they had received from the Apostles, un­to a Covenant of Works, thus served out to them by their false Teachers. And it argues almost as ill [Page 126]a disposition in the Galatians and Colossians but to take up these things as their duty, as it did in the Jews to place so much in them when they were their duty; Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new. Moon, or of the Sabbath-dayes, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ, Col. 2.14, 16, 17. These things when they were in use, and were mens du­ties, were at best but shadows; and yet these sha­dows did men exceedingly glory in, and preferred them before true holiness, and the spiritual Wor­ship of God; yea they thought verily, that whilest they did observe these things, they might commit all manner of Villanies, and yet escape the judge­ment of God: Yea, they thought they were deli­vered to do all sorts of abominations, as it is in Jer, 7.10.

The Apostle finds out such a generation of Jews in his time, Rom. 2. from the 17. to the 25. Behold thon art called a Jew, and restest in the Law (a full ex­pression, I think, of one that seeks Justification by the Law) and makest thy boast of God, and knowest his will: And the Apostle proceeds to describe a great Lawyer indeed, one that thought himself sit to be a Guide of the blind, a Light of them that walk in darkness, an instructer of the foolish, a teacher of babes, and one that had the form of knowledge, and of the truth in the Law. Yet what kind of man is he for his Morals? Why he is a Thief, an Adulterer, a Sacri­legious person, what not? ver 21, 22. Thou there­fore which teachest another, teachest thou not thy self? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adul­tery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou that abhorrest Idols, dost thou commit Sacriledge? Yet this man hopes [Page 127]to be saved by the Law; for it is said, He took up his rest in the Law, he rested in the Law, and made his boast of God. Where then must he center his hopes? and upon what can he ground his boasting, but upon some ceremonial performances? Therefore one that seekes Justification by the Law, may, and it is often found that they do practise it only in some ceremonious observances. I shall give onely one proof more of this, and so hasten on to what follows; and it shall be of the Lawyers, Scribes and Pharisees in our Saviour's time, who were the great boasters of the Law, and expected Justification by the righteousness of it. I have al­ready observed, that they were much for Tything of Mint, Annise and Cummin, those lesser things of the Law: I shall add more of our Saviours obser­vation upon them, Matth. 23.5. That they made broad their Phylacteries, and enlarged the borders of their Garments: Of which, saith Dr. Hammond, the first, to wit, Phylacteries, was an invention of their own wholly, together with a multitude of attend­ing Ceremonies. The second indeed, that of Bor­ders, prescribed by God, but yet both abused by them to a vain glorying and boasting; They washed the out-side of the Cup and Platter, but within there was nothing but filthiness and nastiness. They were with­out as whited Sepulchres, but within Sepulchres still that is full of dead mens bones, and all rottenness; they did devour Widows Houses, teach undutifulness to Pa­rents, &c. Now what could these men therefore, that yet sought to be justified by the Law, uphold themselves withall, but in outward conformities, even to an excess in ceremonious observances? Invented Ceremo­nies and Superstiti­ons.

Now I shall observe in a few word what invented ceremonies they had, besides those which the Law laid, upon them, in which also they gloryed; and [Page 128]then apply that part of the Character to our selves, or the present age which concerns Ceremonies, ei­ther commanded or invented. We find often, that our Saviour charged the Pharisees with teaching for Doctrines the Commandments, Traditions and Impositi­ons of men, [...], Mark 7.7. For, laying aside the Commandments of God, saith our Saviour, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of Pots and Cups, and many other such like things ye do: One of which things among the many other, was their Phylacte­ries, of which Dr. Hammond saith they were inven­tions of their own; and if it were not too large, I would here transcribe all that he sayes upon it in his Comment on Matth. 23.5. I cannot omit some things. ‘These Phylacteries (saith he) were a great part (though a great mistake and deceit) of the Religion of the latter Jews, upon God's Com­mandment Deut. 6.8. Exod. 13.16. of binding those words, for a sign upon their hands, and as front lets be­tween their eyes; which certainly were but figura­tive exprestions of that which was before men­tioned, Deut. 6.7. Thou shalt teach them diligently, &c. This carnal people, which were apt to turn all inward Piety into outward Formality, would needs understand this Precept litterally, and made them Scrouls of Parchment, in which they wrote four sections of the Pentateuch, (he mentions which they were.) These Rolls of Parchment were by them prepared with a great multitude of Ceremonies and Decrees made by them, of the Creatures of whose Skins that Parchment was to be made; of the Knives with which it was to be cut, and a great deal more: Being made, they sitted and applyed them to the fore-heads, and to the wrists, and they were called Phylacleries, either [Page 129]because they were to help keep the Law in their memory, or because they were a kind of Amulet or Charm against Fascinations and Diseases; a­gainst the Malus Genius,’ saith Paulus Fagius. This the learned Doctor tells us was a great part of their Religion, and yet a matter of pure invention, attended with a great multitude of ceremonies. I may not here omit the story of Micah, Judg. 17. who had a house-full of Gods, v. 5. and had made an Ephod and Teraphim, and for want of a Priest, consecrated one of his Sons; but yet at last light­ing of a poor Levite of Bethleem-Judah, a young man that had no charge, he bargains with him for ten shekels of silver by the year, about fifty shillings perhaps, a Sute of Apparel, and Victuals; and Mi­cah he consecrates the Levite for his Priest, and what follows? Why an high confidence of Divine acceptance: Now I know (saith he) that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to my Priest. This is the confidence of a great Idolater, meerly from a Levite-Priest for his false Gods; in which in­deed it is plain he pretended to worship the Lord the true God.

I shall give but one place more about inventions; it is Col. 2.20, 21, 22. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why (as though living in the world, that is, living in a meer worldly Religion, a humane, external, and for the most part invented thing) are ye subject to Ordinances, (such as these, touch not, taste not, handle not, which all are to perish with the using) after the Commandments and Doctrines of men, which are words that express humane inventions. That these Colossians herein were Legal, that Micah was Legal, that the Phari­sees that enlarged their Phylacteries, were Legal, I [Page 130]need not trouble my self to prove, having in the beginning shewed the equal latitudes of legal and fleshly, fleshly and external, and the external, le­gal, fleshly way, to lie in dependance upon, and glorying in outward priviledges and performances either commanded or invented.

Now let us see what we have of these Ceremo­nies which we do, or easily may play the Jews or Legal self-Justitiaries in, and then pass on. For this is the chief thing in the Characters that I have to mind, viz. how far they may concern us, that so they may serve us for trial and examination how far we are inclined to a Legal way of serving God. The Jews fault was, that they over-prized Holy­daies, Festivals, New-Moons, whilst they were their duty to observe them. The Galatians and Colossians fault was, that they medled with them at all Now as for our people, truly I think the generality, (I speak not of the great Zealots for Ceremonies) do not place much in Holy-dayes, as to Religion; their greatest danger is from prophaneness upon Holy­daies, in their Whitsun-Ales and Wakes, &c. But if we would step over amongst the Papists, we might see great doings upon Holy-daies. I am informed, upon St Peters day they carry the Pope upon mens shoulders into St. Peter's Church; which doubtless hath pomp enough attending it; and that upon Candle-mass-day they have the picture of the Vir­g [...]in Mary and Christ in her arms, which they carry about with Candles or Tapers burning at noon­day, &c.

Again, the Jews thought themselves very pure and holy, if they kept themselves from Legal un­cleannesses, and from eating every thing that was unclean, and placed too much in this, whilst it was [Page 131]their duty to observe these things. The Colossians erred but in making conscience of the Legal un­cleanness of Meats; Let no man judge you, (saith the Apostle) in meat or drink; that is, value no man's judgement, let no man abridge you of your liberty in it. Now for our selves, we are wholly free from Jewish Observations about meats, and I think pret­ty free from any Religious Observations at all a­bout meats; and if we are forbid flesh in Lent those that are healthy, yet the reason which the Law gives, is civil and political for the breed of Cattel; but if we should come to have our Consciences en­snared to think, that flesh were not as lawful in it self all the Lent-time, as at another time; this were a symptome of Legality, venting it self in super­stition. But now if we go over amongst the Papists, what conscientious observations of Meats are there? To eat an Egg in Lent, is punished with imprison­ment, &c. & that upon a religious account, which is a plain argument of legality amongst them very rise. I might instance in Priests Vestments, as I apprehend an high piece of formality, very fit to please the hu­mour of a Legal Spirit, that for want of substance, pleases it self with shadows, shews and outsides; but I shall not proceed further to touch at things; he that hath an eye to see, let him look into the Scrip­tures; and he that hath an ear to hear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches. But we may speak freey of the Papists & their Superstiti­ons, not onely in doing, but in putting themselves upon needless sufferings; What Pilgrimages and Processionings; what Abstinencies and Penances do they put themselves upon, wearing Sackcloath, scourging themselves? What crossings, cringings and sprinklings do they impose upon themselves? [Page 132]'twere endless almost but to name the kinds of their inventions: Yea some of our own people will say over the Creed and ten Commandments for a prayer, and when they come as beggars at your door, they will say over the Lords, Prayer, as if it were a charm to the house from all mischief. Now I look upon all Superstitions, where they are with any seriousness practised, as those things which do exactly sit a Legal Spirit; for, as I have several times intimated, your Legallists cannot endure to come at the Law in the spiritual sense of it, so none but a Gospel-Spirit doth; it is Faith alone that e­stablisheth the Law, and obeys the Law: Now be­cause the Legallist cannot endure to come up to the true spiritual obedience of the Law, and yet seeks to be justified by Works; he is fain to find out a thousand things to please himself, and satisfie his Conscience with, whereby he thinks he makes God amends; and we have seen in the instances before us, how that though men are as wicked as they could be, by lying, swearing, and committing adul­try, yea and Idolatry too; yet they cryed, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord; they thought God must love them because they were Jews, especially when they brought him rich Sacri­fices, and burnt rich Incense, and kept all their Fe­stivals in the time and manner appointed▪ Now what then their over-valuing the Commands of the Co­romonial Law was, that is Superstition to us now. For not having such a Law left us by God, we find out somewhat like it, and place the same considences in it that they did in their Law; onely ours is so much the worse by not being of Divine institution.

I have now only one particular more belonging to this Character of external fleshly service; and [Page 133]that is, an external partial conformity to the moral Law, which is indeed the last and strongest fort of a Legal-spirit. As for these external Priviledges or Ceremonies and Superstitious Performances which I have insisted upon, they are a slighty thin cover­ing if we come once to try it, and rationally to ex­amine it; and though people wrap themselves in it, yet they cannot bear out any rough argument from galling or pinching through it. External conformi­ty to the duties of the Moral Law. What defence is it for an Harlot to say, This day have I paid my vows, to one that can convince her of being a com­mon Whore, Prov. 7.14. But now if men have li­ved in some conformity to the duties of the Moral Law, as the young man in the Gospel had done, All these have I kept from my youth, (saith he) speaking of the commandments: Believe it, our Saviour himself shall not by an ordinary word perswade him that he lacketh any thing more. Let us see the beld auda­cious Pharisee in the Parable, that goes into the Temple to pray; how doth he challenge his accep­tance with God? and upon what terms? We have it in Luke 18.11. God I thank (saith he) that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this Publican; I fast twice in the week; I give tythes of all that I possess. Really the man might well have thanked God, as he did, had it not been for two things; 1. His making comparisons. 2 His valuing those things which he mentions, as a suffi­cient Righteousness: It was good not to be an Ex­tortioner, Unjust, an Adulterer; it was good to fast, and to give tythes of all; and he might well bless God that he was enabled to do these things: but this was but a partial holiness; for all the Com­mands are not reckoned up here; then perhaps it was but an external obedience to these commands [Page 134]that are referred to; he was no actual Adulterer, but might he not commit heart-Adultery? He was no Extortioner or unjust person, as he saith: But if it were true at all, it may be it was onely thus, That he was not so in the highest degree; perhaps what others accounted injustice and extortion, he did not: But I need not go upon a Perhaps; I will lead the Reader to a certain place of Scripture where the Legallist prides himself, and challenges acceptance from God onely upon a partial and ex­ternal obedience unto some duties of the first Ta­ble; it is Isa. 58.2, 3. In the 2d. ver. we have an high commendation, as one would think of them; They seek me daily, and delight to know my ways, as a Nati­on that did righteousness, and forsook not the Ordinan­ces of their God; they ask of me the Ordinances o [...] of Justice, they take delight in approaching to God. These are great matters, and upon these the Jews grew high, and argue the case with God for his acceptance; they wonder, when they are so good, that God should make so little reckoning, so small account of them, ver. 3. Wherefore have [...] fasted, say they, and thou seest not? Wherefore have [...] afflicted our soul, and thou takest no knowledge? The Lord answers them in the same verse, Behold! in the day of your fast ye find pleasure, and exact all your [...] bour; behold! ye fast for strife and debate, and to smit [...] with the fist of wickedness. They did something in o [...] after their Fasts which was contradictory to the nature and design of a Fast; they did indeed observ [...] the ontside of the duty, as ver. 5. tells us; they d [...] afflict their soul, they went with heads bowed down a [...] butrush, and did spread sa [...]kcloth and ashes under the [...] Here was all the outside of a Fast; But what (sait [...] the Lord) wilt thou call this a Fast, and an accepta [...] [Page 135]day unto the Lord? Ver. 6. Is not this the fast which I have chosen, to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Here is a fast indeed, all others are but mock-fasts, the outside and Forma­lities of a Fast, which (when over-much attended) use to eat up the substance of a duty. Here you see external conformities to the duties of the mo­ral Law may fill men with a pride, so far as to chal­lenge divine acceptance, making no question but they have well deserved the favour of Almighty God, whilst in the mean time they are oppressors and exactors; which argues, that a legal way in the service of God, is a fleshly and external way. And besides, I observe in this Scripture that we may as well let our Legality run out in Divine Services in duties of Worship, as in second-Table-duties; and indeed I think that is a worse kind of Legality (for it is usually attended with more wickedness) than when men take up with being just and true in their dealings with men. Thus our rude people if they go to Morning and Evening prayer, and join with the Church in the service bymaking their responds, and observing the several gestures of sitting, stand­ing and kneeling, they are ready to please them­selves with an opinion that they are very well ac­cepted of God, though they are known wicked people. I shall now apply the Character, though I have done little else all this while; but now I shall do it more professedly.

Wouldst thou know if thou bee'st under the predominancy of this dangerous evil of Le­gality? Then try thy self by this Character. The ap­plication or u [...]e of the Cha­racter. How dost thou find thy self affected with any external priviledges? Dost set thon but only a due value up­on [Page 136]them? For though we may not over-value them, we must not slight them. What conscience hast thou of places, days, meats? Beware of ha­ving thy conscience ensnared by them; for this wil presently betray thee into legality; for first you come to have a conscience of these things, and then you let the strength of your spirits and of your devotion run out into them; and so they prove as a Wen unto all the true spiritual Worship of God. If thou valuest these things beyond the true spiritual Worship of God, thou art a Legal­list of the worst sort; for there are two kinds of Legal persons better then thy self, who yet perish. But to leave this, I come to the external conformi­ties unto the Moral Law, the partial obedience to this, and mans resting in it; and here is the greatest danger of all. First sort or Moral Legal [...] such as de­pendchief­ly upon a partial Motality. There are some men that are not far from the Kingdom of God, as the expression is Mark 12.34. and think themselves in it, and of it, that yet are not: Now these can be none other but such as have high conformities to the commands of the Moral Law; for notwithstanding all the obser­vation of Ceremonies whilst they were in force, notwithstanding all the external priviledges that men might have, yet, without a great conformity to the Moral Law, men might be at a vast distance from the Kingdom of God; but to be near it, not far from it, supposes great strictness of life, that none shall be able to say, Black is that persons eye, as the proverb is. Now I say, there may be many of these that yet are not justified, and so have not put themselves upon the right way of Justification. Now what can be their ruine? Truly nothing but one of these two, Either that they know some lust in themselves which they wil not part with; or else that they have deluded themselves to think that [Page 137]they are holy enough, and so holy as God is well pleased with them. Now I am so charitable as to think, that when men have come up so high as to be near the Kingdom of God, they do not allow themselves in a gross known sin; therefore their ruine must arise from hence, that they think them­selves holy enough, and that they have merited the favour of God by being so much better than their neighbours, as the Pharisees in the Parable did; and this yet is Legality, and that which is most properly so called

Now though there are many that are near the Kingdom of God, and yet perish by Legality; A second sort of mo­ral Legal­lists. yet there is a greater number still that are not so high in their conformity to the Moral Law, that yet per­ish by resting in their conformity to the Moral Law, such as it is. And of this sort I take to be very many of our ordinary people that perish, God knows who they are, I judge no man, but many of our ordina­ry people that perish, who are not high Devotion­ists, nor in any excess superstitious; yet use no great endeavours to get to Heaven, are at no pains with their hearts, to get in Grace, to cast out lusts, to get the knowledge of God and Christ, find no dif­ficulty in Religion, understand it not at all to be a Warfare, a wrestling with Principalities and Pow­ers, a race, a great piece of Merchandise, wherein we venture all for the Pearl, and are often like Merchants, in danger of losing all; which things I suppose no true Christian can be utterly senseless of; all they that they do is this, they live a plain quiet life, mind their business, manage their trade, do Justice between man and man, (which things are good and commendable in themselves) and perhaps they may may have Prayers morning and evening in their Families; yet such men, though this [Page 136] [...] [Page 137] [...] [Page 138]be the whole of their lives, wil expect to go to Hea­ven when they dye; they'l cry God mercy for their fins in a general way, and with a Lord have mercy upon them, they make no doubt to get to Heaven; Now these must lay the stress of their hopes and expectations upon this, That they wronged no man, they have given every man his own, and per­haps have had some duties morning and evening in their Families, and therefore that he that made them, may well afford to save them: Here these men trust upon a conformity to some second table duties, and a slighty performance of some duties of the first Table.

By what I have said, I suppose men may examine themselves whether they are guilty of predomi­nant Legality by resting upon an external or par­tial performance of the duties of the Moral Law. of which I have made two sorts, a lower, and an higher, and I free both from being necessarily su­perstitious, or that their chief danger should arise from thence: And for the first sort I ask, Art thou careless of getting divine knowledge in the Scriptures? Art thou at no pains with thy heart in Religion? Dost thou find no difficulties in it? Art not thou put to struglings, wrest­lings, sightings? & yet expectest thou to get to Hea­ven? Why then thou art one of the common sort that perish by resting upon an outward conformi­ty to the Moral Law.

Again, for the higher, but unsincere Moralist; Dost thou find a difficulty in Religion? Is it rea­dy to break thine heart almost, with the trouble that it puts thee to? Thou art fain to be constant in duties morning and evening, and it may be oft­ner; thou art just between man and man; it may be [Page 139]thou bestowest much of thine Estate upon the poor, and many other good things thou dost; per­haps thou hast some time or other parted with some very beloved sin, that was to thee as a right eye, or a right hand; thou hast found Religion costly and troublesome to thee; and now thou ex­pectest when ever thou diest, to go to Heaven. But stay man, art thou humble? Dost thou see no im­perfections in thy self notwithstanding thy super­lative holiness beyond thy neighbours? Art not thou made sometimes to confess before the Lord, and that with great brokenness of heart, that thou art an unprofitable servant? Art not thou made to admire at the rich Grace of God, that he should take pity on thee when thou wast in thy blood? That he should have thoughts of love to thee, should send his good Spirit into thine heart to move thee, and turn thee to himself, &c? If thou hast experience of none of these things, be thou as strict as thou wilt, so that hone can accuse thee; so strict that thine own Conscience doth not loudly accuse thee; I tell thee (whether thou be superstiti­ous and ceremonious yea orno; for it seldom hap­pens but such an one as thou art is so) thou art one of those that are indeed not far from the King­dom of God, but yet not in it, nor ever shall be whilest thou continuest so; thou art a Legal self-ju­stitiary, that restest in an external unsincere obedi­ence to the Law of God. I have perfectly done with the Character as it is given to discover pre­dominant Legality. Yet here I shal enter two cau­tions, one concerning the Moralist, the other con­cerning the Papist. A cauti­on con­cerning the term Moralist.

For the term Moralist which I use, I fear it may give offence to some ingenuous and worthy per­sons, [Page 140]and therefore I thus explain my self, that I do not oppose Moral to Spiritual, as if the most spiritual Commands of the Gospel were not Moral; or as if the most spiritual Saint were not the highest Morallist; or as if Morality were a low Principle; I know not but I may reduce all the duties of the Gospel to Morality; and I think no sober man wil deny them to be Moral Duties: But I make use of it as part of that common di­stinction made betwixt those two kinds of Laws which Moses delivered, of which some were on­ly ceremonial and typical, and to last but for a time; the other Moral, that is to say, according to the common understanding of it, Perpetual; though as to the Etymological signification of the Word, Moral signifies as much as that which concerns Manners: So Moral Philosophy is op­posed to all other Philosophy, as Practical is op­posed to Speculative; and in this signification of the Word Moral, all the ceremonial Laws whilst they were in use, might have been called Moral; but because use swayes Language more then the Etymology of Words, I here understand the Word Moral purely in opposition to ceremonial or superstitious; so as it signifies those duties that are to be performed by us, as having a more sub­stantial goodness in their own nature, such as Justice, Mercy, and Prayer, &c. Now those men that depend for a righteousness upon the imper­fect unsincere performance of these duties I call Legal Morallists, of which there are evidently two sorts, A cauti­on, con­cerning the Papists. an higher and a lower, there being a­nother sort of Legallists which I have spoken of, namely the ceremonious Legallist. Now I shall likewise enter a caution concerning the Papists, [Page 141]in whom I have instanced often in the matter of Ceremonies and Superstitions, and their placing a confidence in them. And to shew that I do not delight to disparage so much as any one man, much less an whole party of men (but that my onely aim is to make true proof of my asser­tions) I shall, to do them right, quote an Author of their own, whereby it wil appear plainly that some of them (at least) are sensible of the in­sufficiency of these things, viz. Ceremonious and superstitiou. Observances, yea conformities unto some duties of the moral Law, whilst their conformities do not proceed from an universal Charity. The Author is Francis de Sales, once B [...]shop and Prince of Geneva, who in his Introdu­ction to a devout life, in the very first Chapter, hath th [...]se Expressions. ‘Every one (saith he) painteth Devotion according to his own passion and fancy. He that is given to fasting, thinks himself very devout if he fast often, be his his heart never so ful of rancour: And not daring to moisten his tongue in Wine or Wa­ter for sobriety's sake, yet makes no difficulty to drink deep of the blood of his neighbor by slander and calumny. Another will account himself sull of Devotion for HUDLING OVER A MULTITUDE OF PRAYERS EVERY MORNING, though afterwards he give his tongue a liberty to utter offensive, arrogant, and reproachful speeches amongst his Neigh­bours and Family. One willingly draws an Alms out of his purse to give to the poor, but cannot draw Clemency out of his heart to par­don his Enemies. Another forgiveth his Ene­mies, yet cares not to satisfie his Creditors but [Page 142]by constraint. All these people are devout in the vote of the vulgar, yet indeed they are not so at all. And then he gives us an handsome allusion. The servants of King Saul (saith he) sought David in his House, but Michol having laid a Statue in his bed, and covering it with Davids Apparel, made them believe it was David him­self sick in bed: So many persons cover them­selves with certain EXTERNAL ACTIONS BELONGING TO DEVOTION, and the World believes them truly devout and SPIRI­TUAL; whereas indeed they are but statues and apparitions of Devotion.’

Now God forbid that I should judge such a man as this (if he but follow his own directi­ons) to be in a way destructive to his soul, when he professeth to aim at true SPIRITUALWOR­SHIP, not contenting himself with EXTER­NAL ACTIONS onely in the service of God, Though still I must needs say (notwithstand­ing such an Author as this amongst them) that (I think) the Papists do generally ruine them­selves by resting upon externals, nay inventi­ons in the service of God. So much for the cautions, and for the Character, as it concerns those that are under predominant Legality.

Now because the same character that will disco­ver it at this height, will discover it also where it is in any less degree; and for that I have asserted that there is a mixture of Legality in the services of the best Christians and Saints of God, I think it good to improve this character yet further, for the dis­covery of that Legality which may be found in [Page 143]the Saints themselves. That Legality of the Saints therefore which is discoverable and reprovable by this Character, is, 1. That I doubt not but some good men have a Conscience of some superstiti­ous observations, and I would not for all the world think; the contrary, lest I should condemn the ge­nerat on of the just, and think too hardly of some dear Saints of God. And I must needs confess, there is too much occasion given men to run into this extream of Superstition, by the irreverence of others (perhaps good men) in the service of God. How ordina [...]ily do many sit at prayers in the Church, when they are not necessitated by weak­ness, or any other occasion? and with their Hats upon their heads. Now how easily may this give occasion to others that take offence at this irrever­ence, out of a fear lest they should not be reverent enough in the service of God, to approve of kneel­ing at the Sacrament, which I doubt not but many good men may be very zealous for, as also forbow­ing at the Name of Jesus. But yet I reckon that good men are in greater danger of Legality in the mat­ter of Moral duties, then in ceremonies and super­stitions; for though I have acknowledged that some good men may have a conscience of some supersti­tious observations, being misled by the care to be sufficiently reverent; yet to be greatly superstitious in Gospel-days, is a shrewd sign of a rotten heart, and so not so incident to good men. 2dly. For the duties of the Moral Law, good mens Legality lies in two particulars: 1. When they have performed a duty rightly and spiritually, they are apt to re­flect upon it with a spiritual pride, and ready to lay too much stress upon it, and to think that now God must needs grant the Petitions they have ask­ed; whereas perhaps they have answer enough in [Page 144]the very sweetness of the duty it self, and the com­munion with God which they have enjoyed in it; and therefore if they are not humbled after such a duty, to see their great unworthiness notwithstan­ding all they have done, they are so far guilty of Legality; Or which is more usual, 2dly. The Saints too often content themselves with doing their tale and number of duties, praying morning and eve­ning, perhaps reading so many Chapters, but are not spiritual in what they do, watching over their hearts that they worship God in a right manner with those spiritual affections stirring in prayer, that attention in reading that should be; this is commonly known by the name of resting in du­ties; this is [...]egality, and yet I think that which is found more or less in all the Saints; and so far indul­ged to themselves by some Saints, till at last they have a general deadness and benummedness in all their Graces, and then they fall into sad complaints of desertions, and run into a maze and a Labyrinth of doubts and troubles of mind, which perhaps they get not out of for some years together. As for those Saints that pick and choose amongst the Commandments, that are high-flown in their no­tions, and yet err grosly in matters of common Justice and honesty, that are indeed not only slan­derously reported, or unworthily suspected to be so) disobedient to Magistrates, with other like ir­regular Christians, I have nothing to say to them here. I refer these to the head of hypocritical Le­gallists, that expect to be justified by a parcial obe­dience to the Commands of the Moral Law, these not being spots of Gods Children.

There are other miscarriages of the Saints in duties that are to be referred to their Legality of [Page 145]Spirit; as for instance, if they chance through ex­traordinary occasions to have missed the time of prayer morning or evening, to have missed the reading their number of Chapters, or doing any good task which they had laid upon themselves, then they have a great fear and terror, lest God should be angry and displeased with them, though indeed Mercy was at ended instead of Sacrifice; but such as these belong to another head or character of a Legal Spirit, to wit, a Spirit of Bondage, which I shall come unto anon.

I have now perfectly done with the first Chara­cter as to its explication, proof, and application, both to Legality predominant, and that which is found in a less degree, in which I may be thought tedious enough: Onely I would not leave so much as a cavil, without some endeavour at least of an answer to it Now I am sensible that thoughts may arise in some, as if this whole particular were im­pertinent.

Obj. Whoever thought before (may they chance say) that Superstition was Legality? that a parti­al performance of the Moral Law, either by the less strict, or more strict Morallists, was Legality? If men would seek to be justified by the Law, they would endeavour at least to keep the whole Law; and if they knew they fell short of it, as those pro­phane wicked men which you mention out of Isai­ah, Jeremiah, and other places, that were very wick­ed did, and yet rested in Ceremonious performan­ces, and external Priviledges, these indeed deserve the Name of wicked men, but not of Legallists, or such as seek justification by the Law.

Now to this I answer, and I shall say but little more then what I have said before; 1. 'Tis true, [Page 146]none ought to seek Justification by the Law, but those that have perfectly kept it hitherto, and un­dertake to keep it for the future part of their lives. 2. If any seek justification any other way, they do but be-fool themselves. 3. But yet the Jews and Galatians did seek justification by Works, by the Law; ASIT WERE by the Works of the Law; else the Apostle had disputed against no adversa­ry: And yet they did not pretend to perfect and unerring obedience. So I reckon the objection is answered already, that men may seek Justificati­on by the Law, that have not, nor think they have the exact Works of it. But yet to give some over­plus of answer: There being a generation of men that do seek Justification by the Works of the Law, yea, forasmuch as all men are apt to seek it this way, it must be in some kind of actions or other: Now I have shewn that these very men that are taxed for Legality by the Apostle, viz. the Jews and Galatians, they were also taxed for their being so much in love with ceremonies and superstitions, and with external obedience (onely) to the Moral Law; and I cannot learn wherein else their fault of Legality lay; therefore this must be their Legality: For it is certain they must vent their Legality in somthing, in some way or other; and I finding no o­ther great way of theirs, but one of these three, viz. ceremonies, superstitions, and external conformity to themoral law, which all agree in this general na­ture of an external and fleshly service, such as doth not reach the heart, conclude that their way bran­ches it self forth onely into these three particulars. Besides I have shewn that there was a continual suc­cession of Legallists from the beginning, & they all agree in this general of external service, therefore this must be the very matter of their Legality. And [Page 147]for full proof, having shewn what is the form of Legality, to wit, expecting the reward as of Debt, or Merit. I have found out this form enlivening and quickening this fleshly matter of the Legallists service and obedience to God. Thus I have shewn how the ceremonious Jew with his appointed Ce­remonies and invented Superstitions, Micah in the Book of Judges, and the Legal Jew in the Prophe­sie of Micah, made no doubt but to DESERVE very well the favour of Almighty God. The Par­tial Moralists in Isa. [...]8. wonder that God should not accept of their fastings, and take it very hei­nously when they had so well deserved it, that they should be so unexpectedly slighted & dis-regarded. So would the Papists and our selves (many of us) wonder, that upon crying, Lord, Lord open to us, after we had been so superstitious and ceremonious in his service on earth, we should be shut out of the Kingdom of Heaven. I come now to the second Character.

The second mark or sign of a Legal Spirit by which it may be found out, is this, That it is proud and impatient in the service of God. I shall give Scripture-proof that a Legal Spirit is proud and impatient, and Scripture-instances. For a sinful creature to think that it can merit, is pride in it self; yet this I have proved already, that the Jews and Galatians, and all that practise Legality, are for the Doctrine of Merit, and they make no doubt but they shall very well deserve the favour of God; some by their rich Sacrifices and high Superstitions, others by their external obedience to the Commands of the Moral Law. Surely (saith Micah) now God will do me good: God I thank thee that I am so much better then other men, saith the Pha­risee, [Page 148]and upon this challengeth his acceptance, they take it for granted that God cannot but be well pleased with them. This is their pride in its direct and formal act. But now, what if the Lord shew them some dislike? Why there we shall see their pride in its effects, impatience, anger, weariness, fullenness. I gave one instance of displeasure a­gainst God in the former haracter, Isa 58.3, 4. Wherefore have we fasted (say they) and thou seest not? Wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and thou takest no pleasure? They seem to take it very ill at God's hands.

Another instance we have in Cain, who when he found that God did not accept him with an answer from heaven, as he did Abel, he is sullen, and dog­ged, and falls into an angry and malicious passion; Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell, Gen. 4.3. 4 and in ver. 6. God comes graciously to argue him out of this angry and su len fit: And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wrath? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou dost well, shalt thou not be accepted? Do but as Abel hath done, offer in faith, offer thy heart with thy Sacrifice, and thou shalt be accepted as he was. No, but Cain ('tis like) thought he had done well enough in bringing the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord, and that he might very well have deserved to be accepted as well as his younger Brother; and therefore he con­tinues his wrath and malice, and perhaps if he could have had his will at the great God (for it was against him that his passion was chiefly stir­red) he would have discovered the utmost malice against him. But because he could not, his poor servant, and true spiritual Worshipper Abel must rue it, and he takes his first opportunity, and kills him, ver. 8.

[Page 149]Others again of Cain's gang, Legal-Worship­pers, when they have found that God did not ac­cept them (as they thought he might well have done) they are quite weary of his service, and cry out with those in Malachi, chap. 1. ver. 13. Ye have said also, Behold what a weariness is it! And ye have snuffed at it: And so Amos 8.5 they cry, When will the new Moon be gone, and the Sabbath, that we may set forth Wheat? Will such hypocrites (think you) pray alwayes? Will they alwaies call upon God? No, where a man doth not sind acceptance, he will be at last weary of waiting. Now, though whosoever comes with faith and love and an hearty-good-will, shall be sure to sind acceptance with God, yet an hypo­crite, or a Legal-Worshipper shall never find it; and therefore he will be apt ever now and then to grow weary, if not quite to cast off the service of God. I shall instance in a proud speech of one that was quite weary, it was the King of Israel, 2 King. 6.33. And he said, (speaking of the Famine in Sa­maria) This evil is of the Lord, and why should I wait ou [...] he Lord any longer? It seems, say Commenta­tors, that Elisha had made the King some promise of deliverance from the Famine after a while, and the King had waited for the fulfilling it; but at last the King seeing the extremity of the Famine up­on the woman that eat the fl [...]sh of her child, he would wait no longer: Well, and how doth he vent this rage and impatience? Why, he would take off Elisha's Head. Wel, and what then? Would that cease the Famine? No; but saith he by his Messenger, This evil is of the Lord; God deals ex­ceeding hardly and severely with us, therefore Ile cut off his servants Head. A goodly consequence! [Page 150]and that which sussiciently argues against whom chiesly his anger was aimed, even against the Lord himself. Now that this anger, impatience, and weariness in the service of God, is an argument of Legality, is clear, for that pride is the root of it, namely such a pride as by which we think there is very good reason why God should accept of us, and no just reason why the Lord should deal thus severely with us; which if it doth not contain Le­gality, or opinion of merit in it, I despair of ma­king any proof in this business; and yet I shall not onely give this proof by way of argument, but clear Scripture-proof that this impatiency pro­ceeds from Legality; it is in Hab. 2.3, 4. Behold the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shal speak, and not lye; though it tarry, wait for it, because it will surely come, it will not tarry: This was the ve­ry case with the wicked King last instanced out of 2 King 6.33. if the Visiontarry, wait for it: But now it follows ver. 4. If you will not wait, if your soul be lifted up in you with pride and impatience, why this soul that is lifted up, is not upright in him; this Spirit is quite contrary to the Spirit of a just and justified man: But the just shall live by Faith; that is, will be patient in such straits; this is the great famous place which the Apostle Pau. makes use of to prove Justification by Faith in three several Epistles, Rom. 1.17. Gal. 3.11. Heb. 10 38. Ergo, Impatience, weariness of the ser­vice of God is a great argument and symp­tom of a Legal Spirit in the service of God, the thing that we have now under demonstration.

Now to apply this Character: So far as thou findest thy self sloathful, sluggish in the service of God, ready to draw back, and to be weary of well­doing; contentious against God, with Job; angry, [Page 151]as Jeremy and Jonah were in their sits of distemper. So far Legality is discovered to be the principle of serving God. For the Spirit of the Gospel is hum­ble & chearful; I will bear the indignation of the Lord, because I have sinned against him, saith the Church in Micah, ch. 7 9. If God defers to hear and answer prayers, yea gives denials, yet the true Saints of God think it their duty to wait patiently on the Lord, and to find out the cause of these denials in them­selves: Christ calls the woman of Canaan Dog; Truth Lord, saith she, yet the Dogs eat of the crumbs: And this is commended for an high piece of faith, Mar. 7.28 I join these Scriptures of Old and New-Testament together, and use them promiscuously for proof of the same thing, because it is plain there were spiri­tual Worshippers under the Old-Testament, as wel as there are Legal-Worshippers in the new.

Now in a consonancy to, and connexion with this latter part of this last Character, viz. the irk­somness, heaviness, and weary somness that there is often found in a Legal Spirit as to the service of God, I might make this a third Character, That a Legal Spirit is weak and feeble, and devoid of all strength in the service of God: But I shall make this rather an Observation then a Character of a Legal Spirit; yet I shall insist some what upon it.

I say then, The Le­gal spirit is without, strength in the ser­vice of God. That the Legal-Worshipper is faint­hearted & weak in the service of God, like Ephraim in Hos. 7.11. as a silly Dove without heart; and it may very well be, for the joy of the Lord alone is our strength, Neh. 8.10. Which joy the Legallist never partakes of, having never any true sence of divine acceptance: And indeed, what strength can the Law give, us that is now, through our fall, become [Page 152]a poor, weak, feeble thing it self? What the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, &c. Rom. 8.3. The Law became weak through our sin­ful flesh, so that it can neither justifie, nor sancti­fie, and it gives no quickness at all in the service of God; it gives quickness to the body of death in­deed, and to the motions of sin in our members, as it is Rom. 7. [...]. but none at all to serve God with. The A postle therefore appeals to the Galatians ex­perience, that they never received the Spirit by all the preaching of the Law which they had amongst them, Gal 3 2. And this was the very reason of God's n [...]a [...]ing a new Covenant, of his removing his old Dispensat on by Moses, which was so full of Law, and so like a Covenant of Works, Heb 7.8, 19. For there is verily a disannulling of the Command­ment going before, for the weakness and unprofitable­ness thereof; for the Law made nothing perfect. Thus the Law being weak, the Legallist must needs be a weak, imperfect thing in the service of God. But now it is said. They that wait on the Lord by Faith, shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wirgs like Eagle; they Well run, and not be weary, and they shall walk, and not faint. Isa. 40.31. He that be­lieveth on me, saith our Saviour, out of his belly shall flow kavers of living water; this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him should receive, John 7.38, 39. The Gospel of Christ is, and in its prepor­tion ever was so far as at any time it was under­stood and embraced in the times of the Old Te­stament the Ministration of the Spirit. In Col. 1.11. the Apostle prays for his Colossians, that they may be strengthened with All might according to his glorious power; in the Gospel there is ALL M [...]GHT and a g [...]orious Power to strengthen and quicken the Saints with; no wonder therefore if this [Page 153]quicken and encourage them mightily in the ser­vice of God, beyond what ever the Law can do for its dependants and admirers.

I might here take fair occasion to discover what infinite quickning considerations and motive [...] the Gospel carries in it unto the spiritual service of God beyond what the Law could afford: But seeing I do not so much as make this a Character, I shall not take the liberty to enlarge further upon it.

I shall onely now acquaint the Reader why I do not make this a Character, and then pass on. And truly one great reason is for the sakes of some good people, I may say very many that we have a­mongst us who, if we should make this a Chara­cter of a legal spirit, that it is weak, sluggish, heartless in the service of God, that it is not live­ly, active and vigorous; they would presently ap­ply it to themselves, and cry out that they are le­gal, for that they find themselves that they are just thus whereas yet it is true, that every true Saint, the meanest Saint in the World hath more life and vigor of heart in his serving God, then the devout­est and strictest legallist in the World: And what if I should say, in comparing the two Dispensati­ons of the Old and New-Testament, that there is never a Gospel-Saint since the day that the Spirit came down upon the Apostles, but hath more life and spirit or it is h [...]s fault if he have not) then the highest true Saint under the Old-Testament? Would not that Scripture bear me out in it, which says, that John the Baptist was the greatest that ever was born of a woman before him, and yet that the least in the Kingdom of Heaven (which is often interpre­ted of the Gospel-state of the Church) is greater then he, Matth. 11.11. And would not that other Scripture countenance it, which saith, The feeble [Page 154]shall be as David, Zech. 10.8: And accordingly I might affirm, that if these complaining Saints had but the true courage of Saints, and the true Cha­racter of themselves, and at the same time the Character of the highest legallists, yea of the most spiritual Saints under the Old-Testament, they might truly conclude that their Religion was of an higher strain then either that of the one, or of the other If any will make any abate ment of this obser­vation in the height of it, as that the advance­ment of the least Salnt in the king­dom of Heaven a­bove Iohn the Bap­tist, should be meant of Gospel­priviled­ges, let them do as they see cause.; and so this observation might wel serve for a Character to them: Yet because the Saints of God do not always understand, nor are able to make a judgement of their condi­tion, and for that I aim onely at such Characters as may be useful to persons for trial of themselves, I shal at present let this pass without pressing it a­ny further, onely I could wish these multitudes of grovelling, creeping, complaining Saints, were wel chid and awakened, for they make Ministers that they cannot preach free Divinity, lest they should perhaps grieve them: And I verily believe that it hath spoiled many a good Sermon, that would have been far more lively, both for the con­viction of wicked men, and the quickening of other good Christians that could have born it, and done wel with it, meerly the stuffing it with cautions, and qualifying many brave expressions, lest some of these weak tender Christians should be offend­ed; which tenderness in most, is rather a delicacy of spirit, then the quick sence of a wounded Spi­rit, which indeed must be tenderly dealt with. Good men many of them have gotten such effeminate Antinomian Consciences, that they cannot bear sound Doctrine; many Gospel strains are legal in their apprehension. But I must forbear this [...]n­guage, lest I have little thanks for not making this [Page 155]a Character; I shal onely say, before I pass off, that methinks when we serve the great God upon terms of Mercy and Grace, when he offers us pardon of our sins, and the salvation of our souls freely, we should be mighty chearful, and quick, and diligent; when we consider our high calling, to be the chil­dren of God, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ, it should mightily quicken and enoble our Spirits; Seemeth it a light thing (saith David) to, be a Kings Son-in-Law, seeing that I am a poor man, and lightly esteemed? 1 Sam. 18.23. And certainly it argues a great want of faith & hope, not to be very much quickned with these considerations; but / pass on.

And as I have now avoided making this a Cha­racter, which I might have made one; so I shal en­deavour to un-make another that hath been made one by some, or at least to unmake it in part.

They would make this another Character of a legal Spirit, A salfe Character of a Legal Spirit. That it is selfish and mercenary in the service of God, onely works for wages and for the reward, but doth nothing out of pure love, no­bleness and ingenuity. I have heard it delivered in a great Assembly as a great observation, That self­love hath no more Religion in it than an Horse. That is, as I understand it, so far as a man acts towards God for any good that should accrue to himself; so far his Religion is unacceptable. Now for the word ONELY, I confess I know not what to say to that, how that should be a good Spirit that worships and serves God ONELY for the reward. But I suppose, they that speak undervaluingly of this Principle, do mean, or at least should mean by the tendency of their Discourses, that it is a legal Principle to serve God in hope of the reward, or for the reward, and that so far as we serve God from this Principle, we are legal, or at least we mis­carry [Page 156]in so doing. And indeed to shew that I do not slander a party, I have heard several Dis­courses wherein this hath been hotly argued, that it is not a right, or at least not a Gospel-Principle to serve God for fear of Hed, which is to me all one as to serve him in hope of a re­ward; for to avoid Hell is a negative reward, as the enjoying Heaven is a positive. Now for my part I think (whatever we may account of self­love when it is the onely principle) yet, that it is a very good principle in other honest company, and withall I think that there is no Saint up­on earth that doth act towards God meerly up­on the principle of self-love, which I shall shew by and by: But I will say more yet, and that is this, That I think self-love, or acting for the re­ward, and to labour in hope, as the Husband­man doth, who not onely laboureth in hope, but for his hope or for that which he expecteth else he would not have taken that labour) I say, to act for the reward, or in hope of the reward, and so likewise that we may avoid Hell needs not so far the association of other Principles to counte­nance and credit it, as if it were not it self a right Gospel-Principle, for I think, to be encou­raged by the reward which the Gospel promi­seth on purpose, that so we might be encoura­ged, argues a true Gospel-spirit, answering the Gospel-motive; and so that outward motive from the Word or Promise, becomes an inward Principle.

It were endless to quote the Scriptures that encourage us in holiness by the consideration of glory to come. Be thou faithful to the death, and I will give thee the Crown of Life, Rev. 2.10. One more; That which ye have already, hold fast till I [Page 157]come; and he that overcometh and keepeth my words unto the end, to him will I give power over the Nations, (and he shall rule them with a rod of Iron) even as I received of my Father, and I will give him the Morn­ing-Star, Rev. 2 25, 26 27, 28 So it is likewise a Gospel-principle to serve God that we may a­void Hell: We have both together, to get Hea­ven, and avoid Hell, made Gospel-motives, Heb. 12.28, 29 Wherefore we receiving a Kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have Grace whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear; for our God is a consuming fire. And it is the advice of our Saviour, Luk. 12.5. To fear God who can cast bo­dy and soul into Hell; and for that reason, I say unto you my friends, fear him; they are our Saviours Words. Luke 12 4, 5.

Now with whatever fair shews and pretences men may impose these Doctrines upon them­selves or others, that they must not serve God for fear of Hell, nor hope of Heaven; I look up­on Satan to be the Forger of these devices; for if he can get us once out of the fear of Hell, and out of the hopes of Heaven, hee'l make no doubt to bring us into what temptations soever he shall intice us with.

And I would fain know what the other prin­ciples are, when these are removed upon which we should be constrained or engaged to serve God. There is indeed one more lest very consi­derable; but these men that dislike the hope of reward, and fear of punishment, will not like this neither; and it is because it is the duty of the Creature to serve its Creator, whether he promiseth any reward or no. Now this will not look neither like a Gospel-principle, being the [Page 158]very Law of Creation. Well then, what princi­ples will they suggest for Gospel-principles? Why such as these, Love, and Ingenuity, and Gratitude, and apprehending an excellency in the wayes of God. Now I confess these are good principles, and these are right Gospel-princi­ples, the fruit of the Spirit is love; And, we love him, because he loved us first, 1 John 4.19. which is gratitude; Shall we continue in sin because we are not under the Law, but under Grace, and that so Grace may abound? God forbid. This were highly dis­ingenuons, Rom. 6.1.15. And in keeping thy Com­mandments, there is great reward, Psal. 19.11. There is a sight of the excellency of the precept. But pray observe, that where nobleness and ingenuity is the onely Principle of Actions, there is no necessity for any thing to be done at all; for actions of nobleness, and ingenuity, and gratitude, come under no Law, but are left free to the Agent to do, or not to do; only that hereby as he doth them or not, the Agent will discover whether he be of an un­worthy Spirit or no. And thus these men have brought things to a fair pass, that God is to be served under the Gospel onely upon courtesie; so that any that will, may slip their neck out of Christs yoke, and their back from under his bur­then, or else they must acknowledge that men ought to serve God, because there is a MUST upon it; 'tis our duty as Creatures, if we will not, there is an Hell to punish; but to encourage you in it, if you will, there is an Heaven to re­ward.

And what if a Legal Spirit go to work with these principles ONELY, as indeed I think he hath no other, and that he may have all these [Page 159]in a degree, viz. the sense of his Obligation as a Creature, the fear of Hell, and some general hope of Heaven: I say, What if he may have all these principles, are they evertheless good or unsuitable to the Gospel, because he useth them? If he used them to good ends, or used them a­right, they would do him good, as well as they do others good; the reason why these do him no good, is, for that in the use of the same princi­ples in the general, which a good man may use, A Legallist hath always these three gross defects that undo him. Three ruining defects in the service of a Le­gallist. First, though the hope of Hea­ven in general, as a place of happiness, may somewhat quicken him in what he doth, yet he hath no true notion or apprehension of Hea­ven, that the happiness of it consists chiefly in likeness to God, in holiness, which if it were his notion of Heaven, he could not find in his heart to desire it, much less to endeavour after it. The second gross defect is this; All the endeavours that he makes to please God in one thing or in another, (as I have instanced in several wayes) never reach to a thorough heart-work; whereas that is the chief thing that God looks after, be­cause he is a Spirit, & the Father of Spirits. And the lastthing is this, That yet, for all this slighti­ness & hypocrifie of a Legal Spirit, the very rule that he proceeds by in his expectations of his Reward, is, That God is bound to give it him, as having well deserved it at his hands. Now what though a Legallist may make use of the same principles that an Evangelical Spirit doth un­successfully, yet what should hinder but the E­vangelical Worshipper may use the same princi­ples rightly, and with acceptation from God? [Page 160]May not a good thing be abused, or not rightly used? And doth this destroy the nature of it.

Let us now a little examine the word Merce­nary, because indeed it sounds harsh­ly, as if it were a low principle for a Christran to act towards God by; and then we will see briefly, what other Principles there are in con­junction with it in every true Saint of God. The word Mercenary, founds so ill meerly from the common usage of it, not so much from the E­tymology or native signification; the Natural signification of it is, when any one acts for wa­ges, or for a reward: the use of it is when a man that is engaged to do courtifies, or at least stands not in any need to receive courtesies, will yet do no good turns for any, without a good reward in his hand, or well assured to him; nay per­haps, will do any mischief, if he may be well rewarded; so that Mercenariness is a Vice al­waies contrary to Nobleness, that is, more free to do, than receive courtesies, and often contra­ry to justice; but now this Mercenariness, espe­cially as contrary to nobleness, is a Vice onely or chiefly amongst equals, and those that stand not in need of one another; as for those that are far inferiour, it is pride with them to be un­willing to receive courresies, or rewards; for wherefore are any advanced in place, but that they may do good to those that are below them. 'Tis no dishonour at all for a poor man that wants bread, to hire our his labour for a re­ward; nor for a child that is bound, to do what his facher commands, to be encouraged by any reward that his father proposeth to any acti­on.

[Page 161]Now, let us apply these things to the bufi­ness before us, and we shall see how ill, or how well Mercenariness becomes us in our service of God: First of all, we are not here to consider the Saints as doing evill things for a reward, that is the worst Mercenariness of all; no, but they serve God for a reward. Now wherein can the sordidness of this Spirit lye; is it that we need not to receive courtesies at the hands of God? or that we cannot endure to receive a courtesie which we know we are not able to re­quite? Such a struin of nobleness there is some­times found amongst men; out if we should aim at such a strain of nobleness with God, How will such men ever offer to receive heaven, espe­cially when they did not work for it, which makes it far more obliging? Truely, in my minde, it is very high pride for a poor crea­ture, that is poor, and blind, and naked, and in want of all things, that, when God offers to supply his poverty, to cure his blindness, to co­ver his nakedness, he shall not be exceedingly over-joyed at it; and seeing that these supplies are of this nature, that they cannot be com­pleatly obtained till we come to heaven, nor yet certainly obtained, except we persevere whilest we are here, to labour after them, it seems a strange wantonness to me that men should not labor, and own it that they do labour for them, as the command is, No fault in labour­ing for the re­ward, ex­cept it be for the re­ward of a debt. Labour for that meat which perisheth not, John 6.27. 3. The truth is, I cannot apprehend any fault in this principle of acting for a reward, except it should have that formality or Quatenus in it, that it is for a re­ward as of debt. Doth the Scripture any where complain of any of the servants of God, that [Page 162]they served him for what they got by him? Or forbid them to serve him for this reason, be­cause they got by him? 'Tis true, our Saviour upbraids some of his Followers, that they fol­lowed him because of the Loaves, John 6 26. But if they had been followers as well of his Doctrine and Life, as they were of his bodily presence, though it had been as well for the Loaves of Bread for a natural life, as of the Bread of Life from Heaven, they had never received such a check.

'Tis onely an accusation made by the Devil, that Job served God for what he got by him. Doth Job serve God for nought? Hast not thou made a Hedge about him? &c. Job 1.9, 10, 11. And what if Job did serve God for this reason partly? Is it not better to serve God for something, then to serve the Devil for nothing but lying-plea­sures, and Hell at last? But, as I intimated before, so now I affirm, That no true Saint of God acts towards God onely from this principle of Self­love; there are other Gospel-principles that are in the heart of every Saint more or less, as love to God, ingenuity, gratitude; yea, there are in some, strains of highest nobleness and genero­sity. We love God (saith the Apostle, 1 John 4.19.) because he loved us first; there is Love and Grati­tude? Shall we sin that Grace may abound? God for­bid. This I have said to be ingenuity. There have been Saints that have demonstrated to all the World that they did not serve God barely for a reward, either for a temporal reward, no nor for that which is Eternal in some strains of obe­dience; for the temporal reward, I think all the Saints do usually discover this, because they [Page 163]look upon it as their portion, when they come into the service of God, to meet with sufferings in the World; and there is an evident instance for this in Job, whom God made an example of the greatest outward, yea and inward troubles too in a great measure, for this very end, as one great reason, that he might make the Devil a ly­ar, who accused Job to have served God only for these many blessings which the Lord had confer­red upon him, as we may see in the 9.10, 11. ver. of that 1. of Job; Put forth thine hand (saith the Devil to the Lord) and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face; which yet Job ne­ver did, though yet the Lord did more against Job, then here Satan desired to have done. But I shall touch at higher instances, they are those of Moses and St. Paul; The first of which was content to have his Name blot ted out of the Book of life, Exod. 32. the other to be acoursed from Christ, Rom. 9.1, 2, 3. each for their Brethren, their Kinsfolk according to the flesh, that so God might be glorified in their salvation; Ergo, whilst these men were thus spirited, they served God rather for his glory, then for their own salvati­on; for they that would fain have been instru­mental to serve others by their preaching and exhortations, and yet were content for their sakes, so they might be saved, not to be saved themselves, did not serve God in preaching to men, for their own salvation onely, chiefly, nor indeed at all, whilst they are thus considered. Here you see I acknowledge thus much to the Antinomians, and I think I meet them half way, and I would it might satisfie them; I acknowledg [Page 164]that no Saint acts to God purely from a Princi­ple of self-love; there are other good Principles in association with it; and in the next place I acknowledge that, some Saints may act, at least in some strains, so nobly, so generously, as to serve God faithfully, and yet not mind their own salvation at all: witness Moses, and Saint Paul, and Job as to temporal good things at least. But yet upon these instances of Saint Paul and Moses, Moses and St. Paul their no­bleness in serving [...]od. I would make these Observations. 1. That high strain in which they both met, was but occasional, and upon a supposition: it was no constant rule by which they walked; Moses's strain was this, That if God would destroy his people, he should e'ne destroy him too; if he would not pardon their sin in making the calf, he should e'ne blot his name out of the Book of life: there was such a near conjunction betwixt himself and his flock or people, that he could not en­dure to out-live them: nay, perhaps that he did not desire to go to heaven without a consi­derable number of them: here was as it were a provocation to his noble love of his countrey­men. But I would fain know how this strain could be any rule to Moses in his walking? Or whether it signifies thus much? That he did not for his own particular, in his conversation, en­deavour to please God with this design partly, that he might obtain eternal life. Nay, is it not expresly said of Moses, Hebr. 11.29. That he had respect unto the recompence of reward? So I might say of Saint Pauls action, that it was a strain onely upon a supposition, which supposition not coming to pass, nor possible could be no ground for a Series of actions; For this was St, [Page 165] Pauls action; upon supposition that the Jews might be saved by his damnation, he was con­tent to be accursed from Christ; which was a supposition impossible, that for the sake of a man that had been, and still was a sinner, thousands of sinners should be pardoned and saved. 2. It is not perfectly out of question, Whether Moses his action were warrantable: I have seen Com­mentators who say, that, This great zeal of his, might have some mixture of corrupt passion in it, which might make him to speak unadvisedly with his lips, Psal. 106.33. And methinks there is some sign of a reproof of this expression of Moses in the ve­ry place where he speaks it, Exod. 2.32. For that the Lord in the next verse, seems to repeat Moses his words, with a reflection upon them, as when any is angry at expressions, they wil be apt to repeat them again with a displeasure, vers. 33. And the Lord said unto Moses, whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book? Why shouldst thou desire to be blotted out? So I might perhaps aggravate Saint Pauls action: Why should he desire to be accursed from Christ, that others might be blessed by Christ? Why should he express his love to the Jews in such an high instance, especially when it could stand them in no stead. Nay, for my part, I know not whether it be lawful for any man to be content for any ones sake to lose heaven, or be cast into hell: methinks it is a piece of self­hatred, or at least too high a breach upon that innate principle of self-love which God hath planted in the soul. And certainly that in­stance of love in our Saviour his dying for us (which yet was the highest instance in the world [Page 166]of regular love) was not of such a kind as this; for he did not dye for us to remain accursed, but under-went the curse, that so he might procure the blessing for his people, yea, and for himself, Hebr. 12.2. Who for the joy that was set before him, endured the cross, and despised the shame. But in the third place, not to undertake to cen­sure Saint Paul, especially in such an action, where, if there was an error, it was onely in ex­cess of love to men's souls, and high nobleness and generosity. I may safely adde this, that I prosess I cannot see how his action, or that of Moses are imitable by us; for I know not by what rule we are obliged, or so much as permitted to do any such action: though some would per­swade us that we are obliged to be content to be damned, that God may be glorified: thus far I shall go with them, That it is every ones du­ty to be so humble, as to think that if God cast us into hell, he doth us no wrong: But I cannot go so far in compliaure with their fantasticall expressions of love, and submission to God, and designs for his glory, as to say, that if God may be glorified in my destruction, I am content, &c. Alas! What good can my destruction do to God? Or what glory can God have in destroying me, if I walk sincerely with him? and therefore these are but foolish suppositions, and idle offers, which perhaps some good people may make; much-like those in another case of enjoying communion with God, they will say, If God were in Hell, his Presence would make Hell to be Heaven; and they had rather be in Hell with God, than in Heaven without him. Peo­ple had better shew their love to God, and their [Page 167]humility in those actions and duties which he calls them unto, then in such suppositions and fantastical expressions and imaginations as these: That is the third observation, I see not how this action of Moses or St. Paul are imitable by us.

4. Neither were they in constant practice by themselves, or at least they were not the onely principles which they acted by; for Moses I have proved already that he had respect to the re­compence of reward, and that encouraged him in doing and suffering for God. And as for St. Paul, we find him pressing towards the mark, for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus, and exhorting others so to do, Phil. 3.14, 15. And though I doubt not but St. Paul did preach the Gospel willingly, yet he tells us that he did not preach meerly as a free-will-offering to God; but there was a necessity upon him, he MUST do it; Though I preach the Gospel (saith he) yet I have nothing to glory of, (as if I had done a thing that I was not bound to do) for necessity is Iaid upon me, a dispensation is committed to me, yea wo is unto me if I preach not the Gospel, 1 Cor. 9.11. And so we find in the same chap. ver. 24. this advice; So run that ye may obtain; which argues, that the obtain­ing the prize not onely may be, but ought to be in our eyes; and ver. 27. he tells us of himself, that he kept under his body, and brought it into subjecti­on, lest himself should be a cast-away. So that you see, besides these high Principles of nobleness, ingenuity, gratitude, (which are all good and excellent) yet there are other princi­ples that are good and commendable, yea, [Page 168]Evangelical When I say they are Evangelical Principles, I mean they are either so properly, or by way of reduction to, & con­fonary with [...]vangelical Principles, properly so called, they are at least allowed, if not brought to light onely by the Gospel. such as these, that it is our duty, and that else there is a wo pronounced against us, that we may obtain the prize, that we may not be cast-aways. I shall just give a brief account of the order of prin­ciples in a Christians acting for God, as I apprehend them to lie, and then shew why this of mercenariness can­not be made a Character of a Legal Spirie, and then come to give some more true Scripture-Characters. The or­der of principles in every Saints heart in his acting for God. The 3. first. Now I suppose that the order of Principles in every Saints heart is this; 1. He considers himself a Creature, and so bound to obey his Creator; and since God hath alwayes proposed some reward to the keeping, and threatning to the breach of his Law; there­fore these three principles may go hand in hand together; and these are the first Principles that any is to begin with in serving God: Now I think there is no exceeding in any one of these Principles; a man cannot be too sensible of his obligation as a Creature to serve his Creator; a man cannot be too sensible of the greatness of the reward, nor of the danger of Hell; yet I think every Christian hath somewhat more to move him in his service to God then barely these three Principles; as for instance, some such as I have named, love to God, gratitude, yea many times nobleness of heart. We love God (saith the Apostle) speaking in the name of all the Saints, because he loved us first, &c. and these fur­ther Principles seem to follow in this order [Page 169]from the first, that when I am thoroughly con­vinced that it is my duty to live to God, when I consider what danger I avoid in it, what good I obtain by it, I am engaged to love that God, Then Love. who takes such care of his Creatures, that he would not have them perish, nay, that he would not have them do their duty for nought; here is now another Principle, a Principle of Love, beyond the three first Principles: Again, I consider the greatness of the reward, the richness of the grace in providing it by the gift of Christ, the Fathers giving him, and his giving himself; the sending the Spirit into our hearts to perswade us, and win upon us to accept of this grace; all the care that the Lord takes about us; and hereby I am yet more and more engaged to love and grati­tude: Aster that nobleness One may easily be here set all in a flame of love, not counting his life dear for such a God, for such a Saviour; if there be the least spark of Nobleness in one's natural spirit, it will en­flame the whole soul to do some excellent ser­vice for God; not as the Legallist doth, supposing that hereby he shall oblige God, and that per­haps onely in some fantastical service, as rich sa­crifices, or multitudes of superstitious observati­ons; but the principle shall be onely an humble love and gratitude, and the action shall be a true useful, and ingenious action, wherein some real service shall be done for God.

I shall give an instance in the Apostle Paul, in that place last mentioned, 1 Cor. 9.17, 18. a place where you have the Apostle doing two things, one of necessity, that had a wo upon it, if he did it not; so that whether he did it willingly or unwillingly, he must do it, and that was the [Page 170]preaching the Gospel; the other purely volun­tary, and so free lest him, that he might have done the contrary to what he did, and not have sinned at all; and that was as to his mainte­nance for preaching; he might have expected from them that they should maintain him; but he would not, he would maintain himself; and this he took such comfort in, that he calls this his glorying (as I take it) and he would rather dye, then that any man should make this his glory­ing void. Now the principle of this his action was not Legal, as if he thought by this to lay some obligation upon God, or his Lord Christ Jesus; for he knew that he was so far obliged to the Lord for his mercies, that he could never lay an obligation upon God. The principle there­fore was onely this of gratitude and nobleness; he had such a good Master, that he could never do enough for; and therefore when he had sent him to preach the Gospel, which he must una­voidably do, the Apostle spyed out an opportu­nity of doing his duty herein more effectually, and that was, if he would preach the Gospel upon free-cost, though he was allowed by his Master to have demanded a reward; and now spying out this, how he might do an eminent service, which yet was a free-will offering, he catches at it, and will rather dye then let go this opportunity. Ver. 5. It were better for me to dye, then that any man should make my glorying void; up­on which take this paraphrase of a learned Com­mentator; ‘ I have preached the Gospel on free-cost, and would rather choose to famish by doing so, then be deprived of this way of advancing the Gospel;’ and ‘ I would not for all the world lose this comfors and joy, that [Page 171]I have preached to you,’ without receiving any thing from you. Here you see at the same time the Apo­stle can act from a principle of necessity, and al­so of voluntariness or nobleness; he preaches the Gospel from the consideration of a necessity, and he takes nothing for his preaching out of a principle of nobleness; and yet this second ser­vice is a real service, and advantage to the Go­spel; not such a foolish thing as for men to whip themselves, or to offer to the shrine of some Saint, or to say such a tale of Pater nosters, &c. That therefore is another Christian Principle in acting for God, viz. Gratitude and Nobleness.

I shall onely mention one more, and it is this, When one hath been used to serve God, The last and high­est princi­ple of a­ction is from the excellen­cy of the work it self. the wayes of God are so good in themselves, that a man will find a great sweetness and satisfaction in them; that they are the onely ways that per­fect a mans nature, they are the only ways that are rational, he shall more and more see every sin to be a gross absurdity, according to that Scriptuture, Heb. 5.14. Strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those, who by reason of use have their sences exercised to discern good and evil: And believe it, this is an high attainment, to have a sense of what is good and excellent, and of what is evil and base; and to love the first, and hate the latter for it self; this is cer­tainly the very love and hatred that God him­self hath: Now though I have allowed that there are these three Gospel-principles of Love and Gratitude, Nobleness and Generosity, lo­ving and hating things for their own desert, which men may arrive at; yet I dare not speak a light word of the three first principles mention­ed [Page 172]especially of that first, viz. of serving God as our Creator, which I think wil be an everlast­ing principle of service after we have received the fullest reward. And for those principles of acting in hope of the reward, and to avoid Hell, I say first, as before, that they are good and war­rantable, nay Evangelical principles of action, and therefore cannot (simply considered) be reckoned for legal principles; yet perhaps I might say this, in agreement with those that make them characters of a legal spirit, that if they could be discovered in any person to be the onely principle of action (as in Ahab and Pha­roah the avoiding the Judgements that they were sensible of to hang over them, were visibly the onely motives of their religious acts) that person might be adjudged legal. But of this more when I come to speak of a Spirit of Bon­dage, which is the next Scripture-Character that I shall give of a Legal Spirit: Onely in the mean time I reckon that I have evinced that, taking it in the general, without that distinctness in which we are to proceed; so it is not a sufficient argu­ment, nor any argument at all of a Legal Spirit to act towards God for fear of punishment, or in hope of the reward.

I come now to a third Character of a Legal Spirit, The third Character of a Legal Spirit. and it is this, To be under a Spirit of Bon­dage, is an argument of a Legal Spirit. That this is an Argument or Character of a Legal Spirit, first let us see some Scripture-proof, and then I shall come to shew what a Spirit of Bon­dage is. Now for Scripture-proof; I think there is no Character of a Legal Spirit plainer in the Scripture then this; I reckon indeed that the [Page 173]first, viz. That it is external and fleshly in the ser­ [...]ice of God, was a plain Scripture-Character; but I think this is rather plainer, in Gal. 4.22, 23. For it is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond-maid, the other by a free-woman; but he who was of the bond-woman, was born after the FLESH, but he of the free-woman was by promise: which things are an Allegory; for these are the two Covenants. The one from Mount Sinai, which gendreth to bondage, which is Hagar; This is the Law-Covenant: Er­go, Legalists are under a spirit of Bondage, and they that are predominantly, or properly said to be under a spirit of Bondage, are Legalists: the Proposition is convertible, by reason that a spirit of Bondage is a property of a Legal spirit. Again, for a little more Scripture-proof: 1. 'Tis proved from its contrary; the spirit which is contrary to a spirit of Bondage, is a spirit of A­doption or Son-ship: [...]; now this Spirit of Adoption is a peculiar priviledge of the Gospel; therefore the spirit of Bondage must belong to the Law, Rom. 8.15. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have received the spirit of Adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father; which I shall make bold to Para­phrase thus: Ye have not now under the Go­spel received the spirit of Bondage again, as ye did under the Law (for some of these Romans to whom he writes, were Jews) but ye have re­ceived the spirit of Adoption, whereby both you and I, (for the person is changed) and all Go­spel-Saints, cry Abba Father.

The Law SO FAR as it did reign over the spirits of good people in the days of the Old-Te­stament, brought them under a spirit of Bon­dage, [Page 174] SO FAR; and therefore the ve [...] same Saints that now were under a Spirit of A­doption, by the Gospel, yet had been under [...] spirit of Bondage in the times of the Law in a great measure; unless we will make the person. YEE, to signifie specifically, not numericall, that is, of Saints like them of the same Nation in times past, and not of those very Saints i [...] person to whom he writes: but which way s [...] ­ver understood, it asserts that the Saints of Go [...] in the times of the Old Testament, were in [...] great measureunder a spirit of bondage, through the darkness of the Dispensation; which ar­gues, that for those that were under the Law wholly, they were certainly under a severe Bondage from the Law, and so that this may ve­ry well be made a Character of a Legal spirit. I am not ignorant that there is another interpre­tation given of this Scripture by some, yet very agreeable with this that I here give, viz. That in every work of conversion there is a legal convi­ction, which they call a Spirit of Bondage, which goes before faith; and that after a man hath truely believed, he never receives, or re­turns to a spirit of Bondage again. But I think this is not the genuine interpretation; onely it may be allowed for true in a great measure: and I might borrow strength from it for my present purpose; for that this spirit of Bondage in this interpretation, is the effect, or the work of the Law only; but of this the Reader may see more in the 41. page of the foregoing discourse. I come now to shew what a spirit of Bondage is: now this discovers it self in the very name Bondage or Slavery; as also by its opposition [Page 175]to a spirit of Adoption or Son-ship; they that are under it serve not God as children serve a father, but as slaves serve a cruel master: again, it is notified to us by the inseparable companion of this spirit, and that is fear; Ye have not recei­ved the spirit of bondage again to fear; [...], and that which is here called, [...], is in the 2 Tim. 1.7. called, [...], a spirit of fear; God hath not given to us (saith the Apostle, that is under the Gospel) a spirit of fear, but of power, of love, and of a sound minde. A Gospel spirit is a spirit of love; a Legal spirit is a spirit of fear. I shall give onely one Scripture more for this, that is, 1 John 4.17, 18, 19. Here­in is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgement, because as he is (saith the A­postle) so are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath tor­ment, he that seareth is not made perfect in love. We love him, because he first loved us. Here I collect and argue. We, that is, We Saints converted by the Gospel, have all of us a principle of Love, which is quite contrary to that of fear. We shall have boldness in the day of Judgement; and this we have some fore-tasts of in this world; for that spirit which is opposed to [...], a spirit of Bondage to fear, is [...], a spirit of Love and Son-ship or Adoption, which hath an holy boldness in it, Hebr. 4.16. and teacheth us to call God Father. But on the contrary, the Legal spirit hath no such boldness in the presence of God, but is al­waies silled with a tormenting fear and horrour at the thoughts of God; even as the Devils are in a great degree, who believe and tremble, and as [Page 176] Cain was, who when he could have no rest in his spirit, went forth from the presence of the Lord, which he could not endure, and fell to building a city, in probability to drown the noise of his Conscience, which else would still have rung in his ears, and allarm'd him with this dreadful sentence, My punishment is greater than I can be [...] or my sin is greater than can be forgiven. Perfect love casteth out fear; then such as is the proportion a [...] degree of Love to God, to such proportion and degree [...] the tormenting fear of God abated.

Yet here I must needs acquaint the Reader that there is another exposition of this Text, which I think, is very allowable, if not more genuine than the former, that is, that perfect love to God cast­eth out all anxious and solicitous fear of suffering; and persecution for God's Cause; I shall transcribe somwhat of Dr. Hammond upon the place, ver. 17. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have bold­ness in the day of Judgement—because as he is, so are we in this world; which he first thus translates, In this the love with us is perfected, that we have bold­ness—and then paraphraseth thus: ‘In this the perfection of that love which is to be found in a Christian consists, that in a time of danger, when we are brought before Judges, and may probably lose our lives for confessing of Christ, then we re­tain courage and cheerfulness, and confess him willingly; that we behave our selves in this world as Christ did when he was here, that is, lay down our lives in testification of the truth; ver. 18. there is no fear in love; that is, (saith he) such love as this which was in Christ, hath no fear in it; Christ ventured and under-went the utmost, even death it self for us.’ I need transcribe no more: But [Page 177]yet I think I may argue strongly, even from this Exposition, that which I aim at, viz. that a Go­spel-spirit is free from slavish fear of God, at least in a great measure; for still the love spoken of in this text, it is love to God; this love to God is a great Gospel-principle, as appears in the text. Now can any bear a great love to any person, and yet have a slavish fear, a tormenting fear of that per­son at the same time? For my part, I think love and fear, with respect to the same person, are very near as opposite as love and hatred; and a torment­ing, slavish fear of any person, cannot long be without a great degree of hatred: Is it not a fa­mous question in the Politiques concerning the se­curity of a Prince: An praestat timeri quam diligi? Whether it be more safe for a Prince to be loved or feared of his Subjects? Brtvis differentia inter legem & Evan­gelium est [...]mor & am [...]. A­quina: & August. Which things if they were not in consistent, the question would need no decision. Again, take the Exposition last given, that perfect love to God casteth out all fear of men; it fills us with courage and resolution, so that we are afraid of no sufferings whatsoever: Yet is it possible that a man should, from the extraor­dinary inflammedness of his love to God, be full of boldness and courage in the day of Judgement, that is, the day of hottest trials and persecutions, fear nothing, because it is for God, whom he loves dearly, and that for this very reason, that he loved him first, upon terms of gratitude; and yet that this man should have his Spirit contracted and oppres­sed at the same time with a tormenting fear of the God for whom he suffers? I have argued before, that his love to God would not suffer such a tor­menting [Page 178]fear of God; I argue now, that the ex­pansion and enlargedness of heart and soul in his courage and boldness for God, is inconsistent with that contraction of spirit which a slavish fear of God at the same time must needs cause. A man that hath his spirit broken by the tormenting fear of God, can have no courage before men at all; Every man that meeteth me, will kill me, saith Cain when a slavish terror of God had seized upon him. The sinners in Sion are afraid, fearfulness hath sur­prized the Hypocrites, Isa. 33.14. Why what is the matter? it follows: Who among us shall dwell with devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings? When men have a sense of the Wrath of God towards them, which is the cause of this slavish fear, it sills them with fearful­ness and terror in all things else; they begin to be afraid of their own shadow. Therefore this boldness in the day of man's judgement here spo­ken of, must suppose first, some boldness in the presence of God; and so the sense of the text runs clear. There is no fear in Love, where a man loves God heartily, and especially out of a love of Gratitude, because God loved him first, that soul hath boldness and courage in all his sufferings: The Righteous is bold as a Lyon, Prov. 28.1. But the wicked fleeth when none pursueth: If God be for us, saith the good man, who can be against us? Who shall separate us saith the A­postle, from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword, &c. In all these things (and can there be greater in the day of man's Judgement) we are more then Conquerors, through him that loved [Page 179]us, Rom. 8.35, 36. Here is a couragious, fear­less Love; but whence is it spirited, but from the sense of the Love of God. No soul pressed with a slavish fear of God, could have uttered these triumphant expressions And I think, that according to this se­cond Expo­sition of this place in Iohn's Epistle, is that Scripture to be interpreted, 2 Tim. 1.7. For God hath not given us the spirit of fear, (timidity or cowardice) but of pow­er, of love, and of a sound mind; which is thus paraphrased by a Commen­tator: ‘ Surely that God that gave us this Commission and Gifts (for the Mi­nistry) hath not given thee or me so poor a cowardly spirit, as that we should be afraid of the dangers and threats of men against the preaching of the Gospel, but couragious hearts to encounter any difficulty; a love of God which will actuate this Valour, and cast out all fear of danger, and with­all, a tranquility of mind, and a full contentedness in whatsoever estate.’ [...], a Spirit of sobriety; then it follows fully and clearly in countenance of this Exposition, ver. 8. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the [...]estimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner; but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the Gospel, according to the power of God. Now whereas I have used these two Scriptures in the Epistle to Tim. and that of Iohn, in another sense above; then what I conceive is the most genuine; yet still in a sense consistent with that which is genuine; the reason was, not for want of Scriptures to prove what I intended, but for that these Scriptures are used by others in the first sence, and might well be used so allu­sively; and for that I had no such way to restare them to their true interpretati­on, as first by allowing them the accommodation of that other sense, and then shewing that this latter is the more proper..

But here I must make a twofold distinction of fear, viz. in the kinds, and in the degrees of it. The first distinction of fear. 1. In the kinds, there is a lawful and acceptable, yea necessary fear of God, and there is an unlaw­ful, or at least unacceptable fear of God. The first is, that awe we are to have of the Divine Ma­jesty as we are creatures, and with which we are commanded to work out our own salvation even with fear and trembling, Phil. 2.22. This signifies no mor but the creature; keeping its due distance, [Page 180]knowing its place and condition of a creature, ha­ving a due sence of the weighty concernment and importance of that salvation which we are to work out, considering the danger we escape, and the prize we press forward unto; these considerations make us greatly in earnest; 'tis no trifling business we are about, and therefore we do it, and are to do it with fear and trembling, and greatest circum­spection. So the Apostle Paul saith, he was conver­sant amongst the Corinthians, in fear and great trem­bling, 1 Cor. 2.3. which, say Commentators, may signifie not onely his fear from persecution, but those which did arise from the consideration of the greatness of his Work of saving souls. This fear now is lawful and commendable, and so far from being contrary to love as it may very well proceed from love; love to our selves, when we are work­ing out our salvation; and love to others when we are helping onward their salvation. But then there is a slavish fear of God in the spirits of men, which doth not further, but extreamly hinder the working out of their salvation. This fear we find in the sloathful servant, that never set upon impro­ving his Masters Talent, but laid it up in a Napkin, and when his Master called him to an account for his Talent, he tells his Master plainly what was the reason he never so much as endeavoured to im­prove it. For IFEARED thee (saith he) because thou art an austere man; thou takest up that thou laidest not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow. Lu. 19.21, 22. Thus every Legallist hath at the bottom of his heart, if not in his mouth (as this man in the parable hath) strange prejudices and mis-representations of God, which beget slavish tormenting fear within him at the thoughts of God, and therefore may well be called, as it is most appositely, by the Apostle [...] a [Page 181]spirit of bondage, of a servant, of a slave, a spirit of bondage to [...]ear. And for this I shall have re­course to Mr. Smith of Cambridge in his Discourse of Superstition, who hath indeed a rich vein of his own, and excellent quotations out of other Au­thors; and hath in that Discourse many things applicable to my present purpose. In it he makes Superstition, according to the etymology of the Word [...] to consist in an over-timerous & dreadful apprehension of the Deity; for w ^th he quotes Helf ychius, whotakes [...], & [...], for all one, & expounds [...] to be one, that is, [...] or [...], that a superstitious person is one that is very prompt to worship the gods, but withall is very fearful of them; and Mr. Smith tels us that Superstition is indeed nothing else but a false opinion of the Deity, that renders him dreadful & terrible, as being rigorous & impe­rious, that which represents him as austere and apt to be angry: And he further tells us, that Plutarch hath thus defined it in his Book [...] &c. A strong and passionate opinion, and such a supposition as is produ­ctive of a fear debasing and terrifying a man with the representation of the Gods, as grievous and hurtful to mankind: Besides he tells us, That wicked men, whom he makes the superstitious, are apt to account the Di­vine Supremacy as but a piece of Tyranny, that, by its soveraign will, makes too great encroachments upon their rights and properties, and therefore are slavishly afraid of him. I shall recite but two quotations more out of him, which I am not a little affected with; the one is out of Plutarch, the other out of Maximus Tyrius. Plutarch's is this, [...], that if we understood God aright, it would beget a freedom and liberty of soul within us, an [Page 182]hope from vertuous actions, and not gender to a spirit of Bondage, which is the Apostles own phrase, [...]. The other of Maximus Tyrius is as remark­able in his dissert. 4. concerning the difference be­twixt a friend and a flatterer: [...] (saith he) [...], &c. the sense ‘ whereof is this; The pious man is Gods friend, (this is onely I think said of Abraham the great Belie­ver) the supersliticus is a flatterer of God; and indeed, most happy and blest is the condition of the pious man, Gods friend; but right miserable and sad is the state of the superstitious. The pious man emboldned by a good Conscience, and encouraged by the sense of his integri­ty, comes to God without fear and dread; but the su­perstitious being sunk and deprest through the sense of his own wickedness, comes not without much fear, be­ing void of all hope and considence, and dreading the gods as so many tyrants.’ It is no small pleasure to me to read heathens thus rightly apprehending and expressing this twofold way of approaching to God; which altering but the number of [...] into [...], looks so like that which is Divine and Aposto­lical, Now for all this which here I have transcri­bed out of Mr. Smith touching superstition, I reck­on it may be well applyed to the Legallist; and I shall not need to add any more in describing their slavish fear of God.

The second distinction which I promised was of the degrees of fear, The se­cond di­stinction of fear. and this distinction is like­wise very necessary, for that such is the weakness of the Saints themselves, that many of them may have a great degree even of slavish fear of God, and may be far gone under a Spirit of Bondage. The Saints of the Old-Testament by reason of the darkness of their dispensation, were, in a great [Page 183]measure generally under this fear; and 'tis an ob­servation of some, (how solid I leave to others to judge) that therefore the Saints of the Old-Testa­ment are so commonly known by that Name, Such as feared the Lord, because their dispensation was so legal and dark, and attended with a Spirit of Bon­dage; but however that observation be censured, I am sure the Apostle makes an assertion somewhat like it, In Gal. 4.1, 2. That the heir as long as he is a Child, differeth nothing from a servant; [...] though he be Lord of all; even so we when we were children, were in bondage, [...]. The sense is this peremptorily; The true spiritual Seed, and heirs according to the Promise, had much of a spirit of bondage and fear in the dayes of the Old-Testament; and so still it is very possible, and often found, that many true Saints, heirs of God, as then they differed, [...] nothing, that is, nothing to speak of; so now they differ but [...], very little (such is their weak­ness) from servants, by reason of the great mixtures of bondage and fear, which they have in their spirits in the service of God; but yet now, though I have allowed this great mixture of a Spirit of bondage in the Saints, even to a great degree; yet I affirm, that now, and in all ages past, the Saints and wicked Legallists are to be discerned and distin­guished the one from the other by the degrees of this fear, as truly as before I distinguisht them in the kinds of fear; for, as much as the Saints of God have, or may have of a slavish fear in the ser­vice of God, yet they have all enough of that spi­rit of adoption and holy boldness, so as to over-bal­lance it, and to enable them to cry, Abba, that is, [...]ather; which a meer Legallist hath not, but is over­born [Page 182] [...] [Page 183] [...] [Page 184]by his fears, and acts towards God onely un­der the anguish and incitation of a spirit of Bon­dage: Yea, though the gospel bring so much more of the Spirit of Adoption and Son-ship with it, than the Old-Testament did; that, in comparison with it, the Old-Testament be called a killing-let­ter, and a Ministration of death; yet I shall make this further assertion, That all the true Saints of God even under the Old-Testament, had so much of a Spirit of Adoption as did over-ballance their slavish fear and spirit of bondage in the service of God; and the reason is this, for that God hath in all ages accepted of men only as they treated with him upon Gospel-terms and principles. A spirit of a slave was alwayes unacceptable unto God. The two Covenants (as I have shewn at large) were in Moses his time, and Abraham's time; and the one gendered to bondage, that was that from Mount Si­nai; the other unto liberty, and that is from Mount Zion, the new Jerusalem, which is the Mother of us all that are, shall be, or ever were the true sons and heirs of it; therefore they had always in a SUF­FICIUNT DEGREE a spirit of liberty, of sons, a spirit of adoption.

Having made the spirit of bondage a Character, and given you the distinctions upon it, I shal brief­ly shew the inseparable connexion that there is be­tween a legal spirit and it, and the very reason how it comes to pass. The in­seperable connexion between a spirit of bondage and a legal spirit.

And indeed it must needs be, that a legal spirit should be attended with fear and terror; for his very way of serving God leads him into it. He goes to serve God, and to procure acceptance with him by the Works of the Law; now the Law (as I have shew nis of that nature that it cannot [Page 185]justifie but where there is perfect, unerring obedi­ence; and therefore to all that seek justification by it, and are not surnished with this obedience, it can onely prove a Ministration of death, terror, and desperation: So that, let the Legallist fancy what he pleaseth at first when he enters upon his way, as perhaps he may think to please God, and satisfie his own Conscience with offering up some external services, either ceremonious or moral, and never pretend to keep the whole law, and so not to seek justification in the true and proper way that the Law is to justifie; yet he shall find himself first reputed and reckoned amongst those that seek Ju­stification by the Law, (as the Galatians were, who yet did not pretend to the proper righteousness of the Law) and then he shall find in the next place, that because of the imperfection of his obedience, the Law is too weak to justifie him, and yet it will still shew him his duty, and press him to the doing of it, and it will discover his defects, and sins, and the wrath due for them; but to allow strength for the fulfilling it self, or to procure pardon for any breach of it, this it cannot do; and so all the effects of the Law upon the Legallist, can be only to lash, sting and vex him, which must needs sill his soul with horror and dread of that God whom hee serves.

Now I shall not undertake to shew on the con­trary how the very nature of the gospel-way must needs produce peace, and an holy boldness and confidence in the sight of God, though I might shew that out of the very way it self these things would seem to spring; or at least, that it is very a­greeable and suitable to the gospel-way of treating God, that it should be accompanied with peace, [Page 186]joy and holy boldness in the presence of God; for if the great and holy God wil admit any sinful crea­tures, whilst they remain in part sinful, into fel­lowship and holy boldness with himself, who can they be other then those that renounce all love to sin, abhor themselves by reason of sin, and cast themselves for pardon and salvation purely upon his mercy and grace? All which I have shewn to be essential to the Evangelical or gospel-way, the way of faith and grace which I am contending for, Besides, we know the gospel way of serving God receives a denomination from faith; it is called, the way of Faith; They that are OF FAITH are blessed with faithful Abraham, Gal. 3.9. Now if this way hath so much of faith in it, (which we know hath affiance in its notion) that Faith should de­serve to give name to this way, as it doth, then cer­tainly this way cannot want an holy boldness and confidence in it.

But instead of insisting upon this way of proof from the very nature and constitution of the Go­spel: I shall content my self with a few more Scripture-proofs besides what I first mentioned in the entrance of this Character, to shew that peace, joy and holy boldness in the presence of God, are great effects of a Gospel-way of serving God, Gal. 5.22. The fruit of the SPIRIT is love, joy, peace, &c. By the spirit is meant either the gospel, or the ho­ly ghost, which is conveighed by it, or that better part which is within us, called so in opposition to the Flesh: or if you will all three, and then the sense is this, The Spiritual, or New-nature with­in us, brought forth by the Holy Ghost, in the preaching of the Gospel hath such fruits as these; Love, Joy, Peace, &c. So Rom. 14.17. The King­dom [Page 187]of God, that is, the Gospel, where it comes in power, is not meat and drink, that is, it consists not of these chiefly, if at all; but it is righteous­ness, and peace, and joy in the holy Ghost; these are the great designs and effects of the Gospel. And we know that the Gospel is the great ministration of the Spirit who is given in the Gospel as a Com­forter, as an earnest of the inheritance, as an Advocate within us, teaching us to cry Abba Father. It were endless to give all the places which make for the proof of this proposition, that the Gospel hath great joys and comforts attending it; and that the opposite way to it of serving God, which is by the Law, can have no such thing.

If it should be here objected, that it's strange, Obj. if the Gospel-way be so full of comfort and boly boldness in the presence of God, so attended with the Spirit of Adoption, as you have decla­red, that there should be so many sad, drooping, desponding Saints as there are, that though they live holily, and we cannot but think they are good men, yet are not acquainted with any of those comforts, durst not call God Father, are full of fears and doubts touching the favour of God towards them, &c.

I confess that this is a considerable objection: Ans. But I must answer it much after the same man­ner as I discoursed upon that which I might have made the third character, viz. that a Gospel-Spirit was vigorous, quick, and lively in the ser­vice of God; that a Legal-spirit was weak, slug­gish, and unactive. For I meet with the same kind of Christians in this Objection that then I met with, who durst not be tried by that chara­cter.

[Page 188] First of all therefore I acknowledge, there are many sad souls whom I cannot but think to be godly, and true Gospel-saints, and so much I ac­knowledged in giving the second distinction [...] this character. But

Secondly, I dare say the Gospel hath comforts for them, if they could but receive them, which yet the Law hath not in it for the Legallists; no, the Law is full charged with wrath against them; and did they but fully understand what infinite treasures of wrath the Law contains in it self for them, there is never a Legallist in the world but would be fuller of horror and desperation than were Cain or Judas.

Thirdly, Setting aside what may be of extra­ordinary dispensation in the troubles of some Saints, I think it's generally their own fault that they have no more comfort and considence than they have. God would have us rejoice, Rejoice is the Lord alwaies, and again I say, rejoice, Phil. 4.4. Rejoice evermore, 1 Thes. 5.16. The Gospel would have us rejoice, the holy Spirit is ready to fill ou [...] hearts with laughter, and our tongue with singing, in Col. 3.16. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly —singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. in Eph. 5.18, 19. Be ye filled with the Spirit, speaking [...] your selves in Psalms and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord. So we see 'tis the great duty of the Gospel for Saints to rejoice in the thoughts of God. But there are several ways by which the Saints may, and many do deprive themselves of comfort; by falling into sins, which to be sure will break their peace, or else by admitting Satans subtilties against their peace, hearkening to all the [Page 189]whispers of the Serpent against themselves, who sometimes tells them they are not elected; at other times, that they have committed the sin against the Holy Ghost; another time, that they have out-stood the day of grace, or that the spirit of God is departed from them; and these things I believe many that have the Spirit of God dwel­ling in them, have not out-stood their day of grace, much less committed the sin against the holy Ghost, may yet call into question, and hear Satans sugge­stions about them so long, till they be brought in­to a perfect maze and labyrinth of thoughts, doubts and fears; so that, except the Lord should bring them our by a Miracle almost, I cannot ima­gine how they should get out: This fear and ter­ror therefore was from their own faust at first, though now they cannot help themselves.

4thly, Yet still I think it may be asserted, that even for these very persons concerning whom the objection is made, and which are mentioned in the last particular, that even these when they are them­selves, and have the right use of their understand­ings (for I reckon that such sad souls pass through many deliriums, and irrational imaginations) have all of them more kindly strains of ingenuity to God, and of filial boldness, than any Legallist in the world ever hath; they have their lucida intervalla, the smiles of God sometimes, and feel the supports of the everlasting Arms; or if they have not that which you may call comfort, yet at least they are enabled to act towards God with a better spirit then that of a slave

5. But for others that are not thus; and I hope I may say, the greater part of true Saints they have a [Page 190]comfort and joy in the service of God, and their hearts are mightily lightened and quickned by it: Thy word (saith David) is sweeter to me then the h [...] ­ney or the honey-comb; Psal. 19.10. thy word hath quickned me, Psal. 119.50. I rejoiced in thy word, as one that sindeth great spoil, Psal. 119.162. their joy bore the Apostles up above all their sufferings▪ 2 Cor. 15. for as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, si­our consolation also aboundeth by Christ: & accordingly, we are advised by our Saviour, that when we suffer for righteousness sake, we should rejoice and be ex­ceeding glad, or leap for joy, as the word signifies, M [...]. 5.12. And certainly, if the joy of the Gospel be such as will carry us thorough the greatest suffer­ings, it may well carry us thorough all the ordina­ry affairs and occasions of this life: Yet for this see one place in the Book of Ecclesiastes, ch. 9.7, 8. Go thy way, eat thy Bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; why so? it follows, for now God accepteth thy works; When a man's ways please the Lord, and he hath a sense of it (which none but a Gospel-Saint ever hath) it will make him go chear­fully through all the actions and occasions of his life. Now if there be such a general joy upon the true Saints of God, arising from their Gospel-way of serving God, as will carry them through sufferings, and through all the actions of their lives, and by consequence into the presence of God with a chearfulness and holy boldness; is it not most injurious, that the troubles and sadness of a few Saints, brought upon themselves against the design of the Gospel, through the subtilties of Satan, and the Saints own default, should be thought able to make this assertion too light, viz. that a Gospel-spirit hath an holy boldness and a [Page 191]chearfulness in it, and is freed from the Spirit of bondage (which accompanies a Legal Spirit) into the glorious liberty of son-ship and adoption.

I shall onely make one observation more before I pass off from the explication and proof of this Character, which I think will add some light unto it, and it will be of a very contrary nature from the observation which the objection fastens upon, and it is this.

It hath been laid to the charge of the Puritans, that they are too familiar with God in their Prayers: Now truly I will not undertake to defend those good men that have been honoured with that Name, in every thing; but I think in this particular, (as in many other things) they have a great excellency, in that they know better than their adversaries, how to use an holy boldness at the throne of grace. And yet to shew that I am not altogether sensless of the danger that there is of erring this way, I do here acquaint my Reader that I verily believe, that many have grosly erred herein: I have heard of one very famous once in London, a Tradesman, that being gotten in a Pulpit, made thus bold with the great God in prayer, Thou hast said, O Lord, that concerning thy sons, and concerning thy daughters, we should command thee: we command thee therefore, &c: I need not go to aggravate this boldness: I have heard others my self, unreasonably (as I thought) bold in their expressions in prayer; but I dare not charge this upon those good people in the general, which have been called Puritans.

But I am sure however it is with them in one ex­tream, it is as bad and worse with the Papists, and those that are superstitiously addicted in the other, that they dare not use that holy boldness which is [Page 192]allowed them, nay, which is necessary to be used. They think it too great a boldness to go to God in prayer without the mediation and intercession of some Saint or Angel; or if they go to the right Mediator, they dare not go to him but by the in­tercession of the Virgin Mary; all which are but over-servile fears, and denials to themselves of that true liberty and boldness which the Lord ad­mits us unto. If they go to celebrate the Eucha­rist, the Supper or Feast of Christ's body & blood, which we are to eat and to drink at the Lords Ta­ble for our souls health, first the people must not have the Wine; then the Bread must be carryed about, and worshipped like a god; the Table upon which it is consecrated, must be an Altar; it must not be received, but upon your knees; nor taken, as the command is, Take eat; but received from the Priests hand into your mouths, which are all but so many superstitious and servile usages of that Ordinance, which all ought to have an holy bold­ness in, and is not at all prejudiced, but rather fur­thered as to Divine acceptance, by how much the more of discreet and judicious boldness we have in the use of it: And here I shall take liberty to say something to the nature of Superstition, which I shall presently have done with, and so pass on to the application of this Character.

And here I shal take liberty to say something to the nature of Superstition, having (as I reckon) a fair occasion for it; and yet I shall quickly have done with it, and so pass on to the application [...] the Character.

Superstition therefore (which I humbly offer) either consists in, or ariseth from an overcimorous and dreadful apprehension of the Deity. Mr. Smith [Page 193]of Cambridge whom I have so often mentioned, with those other great Authors which he quotes, seems to make that the onely notion of Su­perstition, that it is an overtimorous apprehension of God: Now I suppose Mr. Smith's reasons, to­gether with the Arguments and Authority of those whom he quotes, may very well serve to make that notion of Superstition to pass as a true notion, though not the onely notion of Superstition; though indeed Mr. Smith in that Discourse partly reproves Cicero for translating the word [...], by Superstitio; but allowing this for a true notion of Superstition: Yet Mr. Smith in the same Discourse mentions two others, one of which he calls a gloss of the late Ages imposition, the o­ther a too-strict confining it to Polytheisme. This last being by the Author intimated to be Mr. Mede's (as I suppose) or Dr. Hammoud's; the other that which Mr. Mede or Dr. Hammond hath confuted, or freed the Word from. Now Mr. Mede's, or the learned Author of our age (as he speaks) his noti­on of Superstition is this; I shall give it in Mr. Smith's own words; He seems (saith he) to have too strictly confined it to a cowardly-worship of the ancient Gentile-Daemons, as if Superstition and Polytheism were indeed the same thing; whereas Polytheism or Daemon-worship is but one branch of it. Now this Su­perstition, viz. a worshipping the Superstites (al­lowing it that name, as Mr. Smith doth) I take to be a Superstition that ariseth from an overtimor­ous apprehension of the Deity; but doth not so much consist in it; for they that are guilty of ma­king so many Mediators with God, do it chiefly for this reason, for that they have such a dreadful apprehension of God, that they think they may [Page 194]not dare to come and pray to him without those Mediators, nor to Christ himself without the Me­diation of his blessed Mother.

The reason why [...]ness the Author intimated by Mr Smith, to be Mr. Mede, is, for that he makes great use of the business of Daemon-worship, and by it proves the Papists highly guilty of Idola­try for worshipping of Saints, which he parallels with Gentile-Daemons; though at the same he be for many of those things which some in these LATE AGES have thought Superstitious, as the holiness of Churches the Supper of the Lord to be called a Sacrifice, the Table to be called the Altar, &c. Now this I suppose is that Superstition, or that which by the latter ages imposition is called Su­perstition, and is said by Mr. Smith to be confuted out of the Name by Mr. Mede, or that learned Author of our own. Now I must confess I have taken the Word Superstition in this sense altoge­ther, in several places of my Discourse, herein being in the mistaken notion (it seems) of the late ages about what is Superstition. And I must needs say, I take Superstition to be the placing a Re­ligion in things which will not admit of it, and where it ought not to be, as in the differences of meats, which once had a Religion in their observance; but now have not, and cannot have; in kneeling at the Sacrament, in bowing to the Altar, in the cross in Baptisin, and all ceremonious observances, more than what are naturally decent, such as being un­covered, and kneeling, or at least standing at pray­er, &c. As for Image-Worship, or Daemon-wor­ship. I call that rather Idolatry, then Superstition: For Superstition I take to be a vice in the lesser things of worship; and I am sure if they will not [Page 195]allow us this word to signifie this vice, we must have another word to call it by, for such a vice there is; Ye observe dayes, and months, and times, and years, I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain, Gal. 4.10, 11. Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day; or of the new Moon, or of the Sabbath-dayes, Col. 2.16. and in Mark 7.2, 3, 4. we find, that the Pharisees, and ALL the Jews, except they wash their heads oft, eat not, holding the TRADITIONS OF THE EL­DERS, and when they come from the Market, except they wash, they eat not; and many other things there be which they have RECEIVED TO HOLD, as the washing of Cups and Pots, brazen Vessels, and of Ta­bles, in these Scriptures is such a vice taxed, as I call superstition, that is, the placing Religion where God hath not placed it, and would not have it placed. And I could never yet learn that there was so much significancy in the Etymology of that word, that they need be so curious, and I may say superstitious in keeping it from this hone use that the late ages would have put it to; and as I have observed Mr. Smith makes bold to carp at Cicero for translating [...] by it, for so Tul­ly (saith he) frequently translatos that word, though not so fitly and emphatically as he hath done some others. Now since Cicero seems to have translated it unfit­ly, and the late ages have made perhaps a more fit, at least a sitting use of the word; why may not their using it recommend it to us, especially when it is so well understood in their use of it; but let become of the word what wil, taking it for grant­ed that there is such a vice as placing Religion in things where it ought not. I shall onely shew how this ariseth from an over-timorous apprehension of the [Page 196]Deity; superstitious men wanting the right notion of God, that he is a Spirit, and looks chiefly at the heart, and that he is good and merciful, and re­quires no more of his crevture then what he can well and comfortably perform; they are apt to think that God is upon the catch (as we say) with them, and stands upon punctilio's, and therefore they must be very exact and ceremonious in every thing that they do for him; and hence seem to have sprung all these useless ceremonies, and superstitious ob­servations in the service of God. The Pharisees must be so clean and pure, that they must wash of­ten; when they fast, they must dis-figure their very faces. The Colossians must be so observant, that they must not touch, taste or handle, Col. 2.22. The Laity amongst the Papists must not taste the Wine, it is too good for them; nor touch the Wafer (which is superstitiously invented instead of Bread) with their unhallowed hands, but receive it into their mouths from the hand of the Priest, and that upon their knees; yea, when the Host is car­ryed in the streets, they must fall down upon their knees.

Thus I have dispatched this observation about superstitious mens shiness of God in his Worship, that they have not that holy boldness they ought to have, but a spirit of bondage and of slaves in the presence of God. Superstitious men under any of the three notions of Superstition, are under a spirit of bondage in the service of God. I come now to the application of the Character.

And in this I shall proceed (as I have done in o­ther Characters) first indeavouring hence to dis­cover Predominant, The ap­plication of the Character. then Partial Legality, or the mixtures of Legality in the Saints.

[Page 197]Now for Predominant Legality, as the notions of Superstition have been severally given and ex­plained, Superstition alone may serve to discover where this great evil is. As Mr. Smith gives the notion of Superstition, it seems to me to be no o­ther then the spirit of Bondage it self; and I dare say, if thou art superstitious in his sense, thou art under a spirit of bondage Predominantly, and so under Legality Predominant. If thou lookest up­on God as a Tyrant, and yet servest him, and that as such, what higher description can there be of a spirit of Bondage.

Hither I might refer all the too-severe penances which the Papists inflict upon themselves, in watch­ing, fastings, and scourging of themselves; as if the merciful God were taken with such crueties instead of true worship and devotion. But because I have often touched upon these things already, I shall forbear, though this be the most proper head of this matter: Neither yet am I an enemy to pru­dent penances (if I may so call them) that is means and trials of one's mortification and repen­tance, so they be wisely directed to an end; as for the Intemperate to fast, to afflict his soul and body before God; for those that are apt to be proud in apparel, to deny themselves sometimes the ordina­ryliberties of apparel, and perhaps to wear very mean cloaths, that they may break themselves of their proud humour. I make no doubt if Saint Paul should give us the instances of his mortifica­tion, when he kept under his body (that is, his whole self, though it may be his body in especial manner) and brought it into subjection, 1 Cor. 9.27. (the words are [...]. D [...]. H [...]r [...] ­moad. I give my self black, and blew eyes with beating my self, and make [Page 198]my self a servant) I say, if he should tel us what courses he took in his mortification, what liberties he denyed himself, what tasks he might possibly impose upon himself, I doubt it would make most of us condemn our selves severely for dastardly and effeminate Christians; but yet stil (I doubt not but his abstinencies and impositions were rational, wise­ly directed to an end, viz. to subdue or keep under some passion, or the like end) he did not (sure) sa­tisfie himself, or reckon that God was pleased with his sufferings, further then as they were a reasona­ble service.

So again for the second notion of Superstition, thou Idolater, thou Papist, that canst not come to the great God without a false Mediator, through a fear and shiness, I have no comfort for thee; onely that I know not how merciful God may be to an erronious Conscience, whenas the persons other­wise (setting aside their error) are sincere and cor­dial in their obedience, and hold the Head, that is, Christ, as the Apostles phrase is, 2 Col. 19.

Again, for them that are superstitious in the last and lowest, though (I should think) properest no­tion of the Word, and are grosly so, I take it as a very shrewd sign of a Spirit of Bondage, and Le­gality predominant, not onely for this reason, that they plainly discover themselves to be very igno­rant of the Gospel, by which all the Ceremonial Law was at once laid aside, and no other substituted by the Apostles, nor (as I should think) left to be invented by their corrupter successors; but for that other reason which I mentioned, for that such men that are so much for invented Ceremonies, which I reckon superstitious, are not onely de facto, stran­gers to a Spirit of Prayer, (which is all one with [Page 199]the spirit of adoption, Rom. 8.16. Gal. 4.6.) but must needs set upon the inventing or embraciag these superstitions, for that they think certainly the great God observes as much the little circum­stances (w ^ch are not indeed to be despised) as the substance of every action; and that if you are not mighty exact in every punctilio, the Lord will not accept the most sincere devotion; and hence they came to serve out every action with so much pomp and ceremony as must needs hinder the performance of some other necessary duties, be­sides that the inventions are many times sinful in themselves: Or else there must be another reason of these superstitious inventions, which Mr. Smith suggests, and thereby methinks, brings down his high notion of Superstition somewhat towards this last that we have given; his words are, That superstitious men think, though God is apt to be angry, yet that he is easily to be appeased again by some FLATTERING DEVOTIONS, especially if performed with sanctimonious shews, and a solemn sad­ness of mind; and therefore (saith he) Supersti­tion will alwayes abound in these things, whereby this Deity of their own, made after the similitude of men, may be most gratified, slasishly crouching to it: And then quotes Plutarch taxing the Jews with their [...], their wallowings in the dust, tumblings in the mire, prosternations, un­couth gestures, and strange rites of worship; the very things which we call Superstition, bowing to the high Altar, &c. And again he tells us, That this root of Superstition diversly brancheth forth it self some­times into poedantical rites, and idle observations of things and times: What is it that the lave ages have [Page 200]called Superstition, but this, which here Mr. Smith acknowledgeth to be the effects or bran­ches of Superstition?

But to let pass this criterion of Superstition, as to the word, but yet retaining the thing in­tended by it, which is an over-timorous fear of God, we may find out predominant Legality by this that follows: Art thou engaged in the ser­vice of God ONELY through the fear of Hell? What saist thou to that Scripture, The sinners in Sion are afraid, fearfulness harh surprized the hypo­crites: Who among us shall dwell with devouring fire? Who among us shall dwel with everlasting burnings? Isa. 33.14. Not as if this principle were in it self un­lawful; no, it is a Gospel-principle; and the A­postle Paul himself, (as I have shewed) makes use of it, when he sayes, I beat down my body, lest after I have preached the Gospel to others, I myself should be a cast-away: But the Apostle Paul had other prin­ciples in conjunction with it; The love of Christ constraineth us, (saith he) 2 Cor. 5.14.

I shewed before, that fear of Hell, acting for the reward, or from a principle of natural con­science, these are not Legal principles in them­selves, and in their own nature; so that he that acts by them, should be far judged to be Legal; but onely, they are such as may want the com­pany of other principles not to make themselves pass for Evangelical, but to make the person that acts by them, enough Evangelical; they are a lower sort of good principles, which, let them have as great influence as they will, can do no hurt; onely there must be somewhat more, ask shewed above; and indeed here is the proper place to shew the necessity of some further prin­ciple; [Page 201]and I accordingly promised in that par­ticular to shew it in this. Now I suppose this is is the great reason why there is need of a fur­ther principle besides those three, for that a man may act by all those three principles, and yet be under a Spirit of Bondage. Now there must be some principle to free the soul from this bon­dage, or else the soul can never serve God accep­tably: This Principle must be Love; Perfect love casteth out fear; first, all slavish fear of God, then the fear of men; he that feareth, is not made perfect in love: Look to what degree the love of God is in the soul, to such degree is the slavish fear of God, and the cowardly fear of men abated.

But yet take two cautions in examining thy self by this Character, as to predominant Lega­lity. 1. Be not too rash in concluding thou hast no love to God. 2. If thou thinkest thou hast reason to conclude that hitherto thou hast no o­ther principle of action towards God, but those three, which do not necessarily exclude a spirit of Bondage; yet be not discouraged as to the future; thou mayest have a further principle; thou art in the fairest way towards it that any other is; A spirit of Bondage is far better than a pro­phane spirit: Many Divines hold (and I think rightly) that the Lord in the work of Con­version, doth usually lead men through a spirit of bondage, into a spirit of adoption; though thou shouldst be at present (as to thy state) un­der the Law, yet the Law is a School-Master un­to Christ: And Mr. Smith in that so often quo­ted Discourse of Superstition, tells us, after ha­ving quoted that very place in Isa. 33. The sinners in Zion are afraid; who shall dwell with the devouring [Page 202]fire? as an argument of men under the power of Superstition: though I should not dislike (saith he) these dreadful and astonishing thoughts of future tor­ment, which I doubt GOOD MEN may have cause to press home upon their own spirits, whilst they find IN­GENUITY less active. Thou seest there may be good use of such principles even in good men, therefore they are not bad in thee.

But I come to the discovery of partial Legaity, or the mixtures of Legality which may be found in the service and spirits of good men, from this Character. And this is indeed the Character by which the Legality of good men is usually dis­covered, There are many Saints (as I have in­timated already several times) who, though they walk very exactly, are not conscious to themselves of living in any known sin; nay, it is known by all that know them intimately, that they are very strict in their lives, yet these are still in doubts and fears touching their conditi­on; they are sorely affraid that the Lord is an­gry and displeased with them; though they have no reason from the Scriptures, or from the judgment of other Christians and Ministers, nor from any revelation within them, but onely through Satans temptations: Now these men cannot gather their fears from any other occa­sion or reason, then from their unreasonable conceptions, their over-timorous and dreadful apprehensions of God. They have some secret fears and doubts of his goodness, that he will never be pleased, though they make their way never so perfect before him; though they hum­ble themselves, though they acknowledge their vileness in never so great debasements and ab­horrencies [Page 203]of themselves. The truth is, they are secretly afraid, and it must be so (or else their jealousies must be without so much as the least shew of reason) that they shall never please God, unless they keep the Law to a tittle; and what is Legality if this be not? that is, they think so at some times (and this occasions their fears and doubts) not that they think so always, for if they should think so alwayes, they were perfect Legallists. Or else if they do not think so high as this, that they must keep the whole law, yet they think at least, that they must do some very great thing which is beyond their strength; And so accordingly for instance, they think they must do so many duties in a day, let what business come that can come; and they must do it so well, be they in never so ill a tem­per or frame of heart, (not as if our ill temper excuseth the ill performance of an action, where that distemper is brought upon us by ourselves) and that they perhaps must do as much, when they are sick, as when they are well; that though they be weak in grace, or weak in parts, that yet they must do as much as those that are strong in both. All this now, together with the fears and troubles that attend these thoughts, I call Lega­lity; and it proceeds from a false and over­timorous apprehension of the Deity. And they are not enough sensible, that the condition of man is altered from perfect to imperfect; nor that the terms betwixt the great God and his creature Man are altered from Legal to Evange­lical: And I say once for all, he that thinks God requires any thing of the Creature above its strength; nay beyond what the creature can [Page 204](through the grace of God) well and comforta­bly perform, is a Legallist, and under the spirit of bondage so far. That is certainly a general Gospel-maxime, though made use of upon a particular occasion of contribution to the neces­sity of the Saints, which we have 2 Cor. 8.12. If there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. And nothing is plainer in the Scripture then this, That the Lord will proceed in his taking account of us according to the proportion of Talents that he put into our hands. As many as have sinned without Law, shal also perish with­out Law; and as many as have sinned in the Law, shal be judged by the Law, Rom. 2.12. The Lord wil not expect more then four talents from him to whom he gave but two, nor more then two from him to whom he gave but one, Matth. 25. ver. 14, 15, 20, 21, 22. and from the same per­son sick he expects not the same that he doth from him when he is in health; nor from a mar­ried man the same, as to acts of devotion, that he doth from the unmarried Person, 1 Cor. 7.32.33.

Now this I dare not let pass without these cautions. 1. That I have delivered this onely for the comfort of those that are apt to accuse and censure themselves unreasonably; not for any loose-principled people, who are ready to say, They do all they can, and God is merciful. 2. That this Doctrine, that God proceeds according to the proportions of talents entrusted with us, is not more comfortable to some, than terrible to others. You that have great parts, and great op­portunities, cannot be saved with the same im­provements [Page 205]that others may; if he that had five talents, had brought in but six or seven to his Master, he could no more have entred into the joy of his Lord, then he that laid up his one ta­lent in a Napkin, Matt. 25.20, 21. Or at least he should enter difficultly, and with great loss, 1 Cor. 3.15.

Now as there may be these unreasonable fears and doubts about their ESTATE in the hearts of the Saints, which is so much of a spirit of bondage, for that all unreasonable fears of God are the effects and univocal proper productions of a spirit of bondage: I say, as there may be these fears as to their state and condition, so there may be as to PARTICULAR ACTIONS, an absurd fear that we may not do them, and a guilt after we have done them, when indeed they were lawful to be done; which usually argues a spirit of bon­dage, and so a legal spirit in these actions: Yet I will acknowledge, that to do actions, though lawful, with a doubting mind makes them sins, and may justly affect us with a guiltiness. But many times one does an action freely, and with­out doubting, and afterwards with a scrupulosi­ty reflects upon the action, and then hath a fear and a guilt: Now I say, if this action upon which we reflect thus, was a lawful action, then is our guilt and fear which we have impressed upon us, an argument of Legality, or a Spirit of Bon­dage, for the reason above given.

But yet there is something more to be said as to the clearing of this matter; for I will not dare to call all cautious, wary proceeding, in search­ingout what may, or may not be the wil of God, and my duty in such or such an action, to call [Page 206]call this Legality, and the effect of a spirit of bondage: God forbid! this were Doctrine for a Ranter to vent, not for any sober person. But this is that which I affirm, That we ought to en­quire faithfully and seriously what may be our duty, and what may be our liberty in such or such an action, before we adventure upon it; and if we cannot understand such a thing to be our liberty, as for instance, to take usury-money, to take an oath, &c. we ought not to do it; but yet I say, (and that is the chief thing I intend in this particular) that if we determine against our own liberty, it not onely argues a weakness of judgement, but usually a spirit of bondage, for that our very determination proceeds from a false opinion, and an over-timorous apprehen­sion of God: We think that he will not allow his servants such liberties as indeed he doth; we think him an hard Master, as it is Matth. 24.25.

There are some men whom I dare not but think good men, that yet think a Christian, a Saint of God, should be so exact, so cir­cumspect in things that are of no consideration; so superstitious (I may say) in gestures, habits, language, as if a Christian, when once such, were not to converse with other men, but must go out of the world, as the Apostles phrase is, speaking in such a case as this, 1 Cor. 5.9, 10. And these men I make no doubt, have done much prejudice to Religion by their great reservedness and nar­rowness of principles, which I shall take liberty here to call Legality, and a spirit of bondage, for that it usually proceeds from a wrong appre­hension of God, as if he were hard and austere, and cruel to his creatures. And this narrowness [Page 207]of spirit and scrupulosity, hath been a common and powerful principle in people, so long, till at last it hath issued out in a party and faction a­mongst us; and it is (as I conceive) one of the most considerable ingredients in their Religion whom we call Quakers.

I have done with this third Character: I come now to a fourth, which is this:

A Legal spirit is a persecuting spirit, and that especially of those that are the true Gospel-Saints and Worshippers of God; I shall present­ly give my Scripture for this, it is in Gal. 4.28, 29. Now we, Brethren, as Isaac was, are children of the promise; but as then, he that was born after the flesh, persecuted him that was born after the spirit, even so it is now. He that is born after the flesh was the son of the Bond woman, from Mount Sinai, for ju­stification by works, as all the Allegory wil wit­ness, especially ver. 23. he that is born after the spirit, is the son of the promise, that rests upon the promise in the Gospel-way for Justification. Now as there have always been from the begin­ning these two seeds, these two sorts of Worship­pers; so there was alwayes an enmity between them; and they that are after the flesh, and for the Law, alwayes persecuted them that are for the Gospel; those that are for the Law, are ful of persecuting principles against all that differ from them; they would fain have all forced to be of their way; but yet their persecution is most fiercely directed against the true Worship­pers; they cannot endure that they should live upon the face of the earth.

[Page 208]Cain was a right Legallist; he brings of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord; but never minds with what heart he offers it; yet takes it for granted that God would accept of it, and like it very well: And when he finds that his offering is not accepted, and that his younger Brother's is, he cannot bear it, he hates his Brother, and longs for the blood of his Brother; and wherefore flew he him? saith the Scripture; Alas! for no other reason is the answer made in the same place, but for that his own works were evil, and rejected, and his Brothers righteous and accepted, 1 John 3.12. not that his Brother had done him the least wrong imaginable.

Wherefore did Ishmael (the son of the bond­woman) persecute Isaac, (which persecution we find not to be other than scoffing at him, Gen. 21.9.) but onely because he was the son of the pro­mise? mocking him perhaps with some such taunt as this, There goes a young Puritan, a young Precisian, the Son of the promise.

But come we down to the New-Testament; and who (there) are the great persecutors of our Sa­viour and his Apostles, but the Jews? yet who greater Legallists then they? They at Lystra that would have worshipped Paul and Barnabus for gods to day, are by to morrow perswaded by some Jews that came down thither from Antioch and Iconium, to stone them, Acts 14.11.19. They were the Jews who were so zealous for the Law, that cryed out against Paul, Away with such a fellow from the earth, it is not fit that he should live, Acts 22.22. Might not he justly therefore, as he doth, (not by way of re­venge, but of right appellation) call them Dogs, [Page 209] Phil. 3.2. Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, be­ware of the concision; those that yet have their great confidences in the flesh, ver. 3.4. And as it was then in Abraham's time, and in the Apostles days, so it is now; they that are for Ceremonies and Superstitions, or meerly for an external way of serving God, cannot endure the true spiritual Worshippers.

I shall now in a word endeavour to shew how this spirit of persecution proceeds from their Legality; not that the Law teacheth them any such thing directly; but that the corruption of their spirits incited occasionally from the Law, puts them upon it. Now I suppose it comes to pass thus, that seeing they are in such a way of serving God, as brings them in no true peace, but puts the most of them into great horrors, fears, and troubles of spirit, as is manifested in the former particular, and indeed into a secret hatred of God; they cannot vent their hatred against God directly, that would be too gross; and therefore they find out some pretence or other of venting it against his truest and most faithful servants: They'l accuse them of being too strict, that they are the troublers of their Israel, as Elijah was accused by Ahab. 1 King. 18.17. though indeed Elijah there sets the Saddle upon the right Horse, (as the proverb is) when he tells Ahab, ver. 10. I have not troubled Israel; but thou and thy fathers House, in that ye have forfaken the Commandments of the Lord, and thou hast follow­ed Baalim. So was his successor Elisha served by the King of Israel in his time, 2 King. 6. where is a most pertinent story to this purpose, which I hav [...] somewhat touched at above. There was [Page 210]indeed a sore Famine in Samaria, perhaps upon the prayer of Elisha (as before there was upon the prayer of Elijah, as appears from 1 King. 18.1. compared with James 5.17, 18.) or at least the King of Israel suspected that he was the cause of it, and upon this bears him a grudge; but yet E­lisha promising, or giving some hopes at least that there should be a plenty in some very short time (as Commentators say) the King thinks fit to wait a while, which he in the 33. ver. calls wait­ing on the Lord; and he waits with some signs of humiliation; for it is said, ver. 30 that at the sto­ry of the womans eating her child, he rent his cloaths, and the people looked, and behold he had sack­cloath within upon his flesh: And he hath some Re­ligious words for those that came to make their complaint to him, ver. 26.27. Then cryed a woman unto him saying, Help my Lord, O King; And he said, If the Lord do not help thee, whence shall I help thee? Hitherto all things look pretty well; but alas! this was all but an external religiousness, an ex­ternal humiliation, like that of wicked Ahab; Seest thou Ahab humbleth himself? And therefore this King's forced patience hath an end, and he breaks out into the highest impatience against God; and where hath it its chiefest vent? Why in persecuting the Prophet Elisha: God do so to me (saith he) and more also, if the Head of Elisha the son of Shaphat, shall stand on him this day; and he senta man from before him to be the Executioner, whom E­lisha calls the son of a murtherer, ver. 31, 32. Now alas, what an absurd and impertinent revenge was this? For suppose Elisha had prayed for this punishment of Famine upon the wicked Sama­ritans, what reason had this foolish falsly-religi­ous [Page 211]Wretch to think that there was any sault in Elisha? Could he bind up the clouds from rain­ing? Or would the Lord have answered a Pray­er which had been guilty of cruelty and inhu­manity? It was God who had sent the Famine, not Elisha; yea this wicked Prince acknowledg­ed so much, This evil is of the Lord, saith he, ver. 33. but here is the my sterie of this iniquity, he could not revenge himself upon Heaven; and therefore he lets out his rage upon the best man that was upon earth.

All legal Worshippers have at the bottom of their heart a deep hatred against God and his people.

In the last place, there is in the heart of every Legallist a spirit of envy and emulation. They are all sensible more or less, at one time or ano­ther, that they are not acceptable to God, and that these Puritans, these holy men are; and therefore they cannot endure them, they envy them for their greatest excellencies, and for that they are the favourites of heaven; and they cannot endure, that seeing they take so much pains as they do in their wrong way (as indeed many of them are at great cost and pains in their way) they cannot endure that any should be preferred before them. Legallists and Spiri­tual Worshippers are (as I may say) Rivals for the favour of God. Now the spiritual Wor­shippers take the right way, the Legallists take the wrong way to obtain it; therefore the first [...]e received, the latter are rejected and cast out: What saith the Scriptures? Cast out the bond-wo­man and her son—Now there can be no greater [...]ud than that which is between Rivals. This [Page 212]was the very case bet wixt Cain and Abel, which I have several times explained. And Cain (as I have said) had no other quarrel against Abel, but for that God accepted of his offering.

But now whereas a legal spirit is thus wrath­ful, revengeful, envious; and murtherous, the Spirit of the Gospel, and of all Saints, so far as they are baptized into a Gospel-spirit, is a mica­ble, peaceable, meek, gentle, and easie to be entreated, James 3.17. Hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, envyings, murthers, are all fruits of the flesh, and of those that are BORN AFTER THE FLESH; but the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, LONG-SUFFERING, GENTLENESS, GOODNESS; What excellent virtues are these for humane Society! The Legallist he cryes, It is not fit to suffer such Wretches to live; away with such an Heretick from the earth. Now for the Go­spel-spirited man, he could wish indeed St. Pauls wish in Acts 26.29. I would to God (saith he) that not onely thou, but all that hear me this day, were not onely almost, but altogether such as I am, except these Bonds; he doth not wish them his Bonds, that was his GOODNESS, that last Gospel-virtue men­tioned; but he wisheth that all his persecutors were of his perswasion; so doth every good man; else he could not be a friend to the truth that he professeth: But how to make them such, he pretends to no other means but earnest prayers, strong arguments, and meek perswasions. Thou almo [...] perswadest me to be a Christian, saith Agrippa; I would to God I could do it altogether, saith St. Paul.

And when he comes to deal with his legal-Galathians, first he useth the strongest argu­ments [Page 213]that can be to convince them; after­wards the kindest appellations, and sweetest in­finuations to get an interest in their affections: I have spoken to the arguments at large, the ap­pellations and insinuations I might insist upon, such as these; Brethren, I beseech you be as I am, for I am as you are, yee have not injured me at all; yee know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you at the first, and my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected, but receiv­ed me as an Angel of God, even as Christ Jesus, chap. 4. ver. 12, 13, 14, 15. & ver. 19. My little children, of whom I travel in birth again, until Christ be form­ed in you, I desire to be present with you, &c.

And as St. Paul practised, so he advised Timo­thy to do, in dealing with men of a contrary per­swasion to him; yea, with such as opposed them­selves to him, 2 Tim. 2.25, 26. IN MEEKNESS INSTRUCTING THEM WHO OPPOSE THE MSELVES; if peraduenture God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth. And so he adviseth his Philippians, Chap. 3.15, 16. Whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing: and if in any thing yee be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

The application is onely this: So far as any are of a persecuting spirit, so far they are Legal; and I fear there are great mixtures of this in the hearts of many good men; but I dare make this guess concerning them, that when they have well smarted (themselves) by impositions and persecutions for their consciences, they will be heartily glad of a TOLERATION, which yet they would not have allowed to others, if they [Page 214]had had the power in their own hand; and I fear they will feel the smart as much as any sort of men, (and perhaps more) for all that are good shall be sure to feel the sting of the Serpent; and those most especially that stand next him, hoping to make some accommodation, but yet are true e­nemies to him. I have done with this fourth Character.

I have one more considerable Character to add unto the former; but before I proceed to the mention of it, I shall add some few quotations out of Dr. Moore, and Mr. Smith of Cambridge, for confirmation of those things that I have as­serted as Characters, because I am loath to goa­lone without some restimony from others, in such a considerable subject as I have here adven­tured (through the assistance of God) to treat upon. Dr. Moore in his Mysterie of Godliness, I [...] 9. cap. 7. pag. 470. tells us, That a MEER LE­GALLIST is even a stranger to those things he pra [...] ­ses and imitates under the Law, Vpon the [...] Cha­ [...]acter that the service of the Le­gallist consists onely in extemals and acts so as a Pa [...] speaks, by external imitation, not from a due inwa [...] faculty: and so again in the same pag. The Law (sayes he) not giving life, there is no principle of life and natural genuine compliance of the soul of man wi [...] the SPIRITUALITY of the Law under the first C [...] ­venant. Now if it cannot reach the spirituality o [...] the Law, its service must consist onely in exter­nal conformities: I shall produce somewhat [...] the like nature out of Mr. Smith of Cambridge, in that Discourse of his of the difference betwixt a Legal and Evangelical Righteousness, he hath [...] these words; ‘ That Righteousness of Faith which the Apostle sets up against the Law, and compare [Page 215]with it, is indeed in its own nature a VITAL and SPIRITUAL Administration, wherein God converseth with men; whereas the Law was meerly an EXTERNAL or dead thing in it self, not able to beget any true Divine Life in the souls of men. All that LEGAL RIGH­TEOUSNESS which the Jews boasted so much of, was but from the earth, earthly; consisting MEERLY IN EXTERNAL PERFORMAN­CES, and so falling extreamly short of that internal and God-like frame of spirit which is necessary for a true conjunction and union with God, &c. Again in the same Discourse he tells us, That the most proper and formal differ­ence between the Law and the Gospel, is this, That the one is considered onely as an exter­nal Administration, and the other as an inter­nal; and that therefore the Apostle calls the Law [...], a Ministration of the Letter; but on the other side he calls the Go­spel [...], the Ministration of the Spirit.’ Once more in the same fourth chapter, p. 323. ‘Under the old Covenant, This rea­ches the first and third cha­racters. and in the time of the Law, there were amongst the Jews some that were Evangelized, that were re non nomine Christiani, as under the Gospel there are many that do Judaize, are of as LEGAL and SERVILE SPIRITS as the Jews, children of the Bond-woman, resting in meer external obser­vances of Religion, in an outward seeming pu­rity, in a form of godliness, as did the Scribes and Pharisees of old.’

Another out of Doctor Moore his Mystery of Godliness, pag. 387. ‘The holiness of the Gospel is far transcending the holiness of ei­ther [Page 216]the ancient or MODERN SCRIBES and PHARISEES, and Zelotical Ceremonialists; for all outward Ceremonies of time, and place, of gestures, or vestments, rites, or orders, they are all but signs and shews, but the body is Christ.’

Some passages out of Mr. Smith's Discourse of the shortness of a Pharisaical Righteousness, That Love is an abso­lutely ne­cessary principle of Gospel-obedience. to shew that love is absolutely necessary to a Gospel-spirit; pag. 364. saith he, ‘ The spirit of true Religion is of a free, noble, ingenuous, and gene­rous nature, arising out of the warm beams of the Di­vine Love, which first hatcht it, and brought it forth; and therefore it is afterwards perpetually bathing it self in that sweetest love that first begot it, and is al­wayes refreshed and nourished by it. This Love cast­eth out fear, fear which hath torment in it, and is therefore more apt to chase away souls once wound [...] with it from God,’ rather then to allure them to God, with much more to the same purpose.

One more out of the learned Doctor, con­cerning the last Character mentioned, Upon the fourth Character. viz. a spirit of Persecution, and it is this; That Ishma­el, Hagar's son, had his hand against every man: Upon which he quotes a descant of Philo. that it might signifie thus much, That the Legallist is a great and fierce Disputer upon the Letter, a notable Po­lemical Divine; and his ignorance and untamedness of his carnal heart, makes him very hold and troublesome. I shall need transcribe no more; but if the proof of these Propositions, that the Legallist is for [...] external conformities onely in the service of God; that he hath aflat and dead spirit in his service; that he is proud and conceited, and yet under a spirit of Bondage, &c. I say, if the proof [Page 217]of these rested upon authority, I might be fur­nished with abundant testimonies out of these Authors, and I shall name no more: hitherto therefore it is evident that I go not alone, either in words, or matter and design.

I proceed now to speak to the last character, The last Character. which is this: A man is so far Legal, as he is af­fectedly ignorant of Christ, or acts to God with­out Christ in the daies of the Gospel, Phil. 3.7, 8, 9. when the Apostle had there rekoned up his external fleshly privileges (which if he would have had a trust and confidence in the flesh, he might have boasted of with any Pharisee of them all) these (saith he) were once gain to me; I ac­counted them my riches, and my treasure; but now, What things were gain to me, these I counted loss for Christ: yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ, and be found in him, NOT HAVING MY OWN RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH IS OF THE LAW, but THAT WHICH IS THROUGH THE FAITH OF CHRIST, the righteousness which is of God by Faith. That I may know him, &c. This which I have produced is evidently to the purpose: for that the Apostle is opposing the two righteousnesses, of the Law and Faith; and the righteousness which is of God by Faith is all one with the righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ; and therefore that which he presseth forward unto, is to be found in him, and to know him in the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made [Page 218]conformable unto him in his death, ver. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.

But here I will mark (before I go any further) that there is an inseparable connexion betwixt the righteousness of Faith, There is an insepe­rable con­nexion betwixt the righ­teousness of Faith, and true holiness. and the righteousness of Sanctification; nay, they seem in this place to be put one for the other; for when the Apostle inter­prets his own expressions of counting all things losse and dung that he may win Christ, and that he may be sound in him not having his own righteousness, which is of the Law; he speaks it in words that signifie san­ctification immediately and properly; But which is (saith he) through the faith of Christ, the righteous­ness which is of God by Faith: What is that? it fol­lows; that I may know him, and the power of his resur­rection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death: These are expressions of sanctification; so it follows, ver. 11. If by any means I might obtain to the resurrection of the dead: Which is the highest expression of Sanctification in the whole Scripture, or at least one of the high­est; and so to the same purpose it follows ver. 12, 13, 14, 15. Vnless, we wil say that the Apostle speaks of Justifica­tion in the 7, 8 9. ver­and then, without any for­mal tran­sition, pas­ses on to speak of sanctifica­tion in the following verses. Not but that there must still be a pro­per difference held betwixt Justification and San­ctification, for they have proper, different noti­ons and conceptions: Justification is an act of God without us; Sanctification is an act of the Spirit within us: Sanctification denominates the Person good; Justification denominates the per­son accepted and well-pleasing to God. But for any contradiction that there should be in this, to say that the same inward holiness which is called our Sanctification, may be the very condition of our Justification, I profess I know of none; not that I affirm that it is so, for indeed I am somwhat [Page 219]shye of affirming in those very words, though I shall afterwards have occasion to say something to the like purpose; but if I should, I were not alone in the opinion, those two Authors above­named would abundantly supply me with testi­monies; for they frequently and strenuously as­sert, That the great [...], the RIGH­TEOUSNES OF FAITH, mentioned so often in Paul's Epistles, is onely an INTERNAL HO­LINESS; for which I shall give you several quo­tations out of them, and so proceed.

Mr. Smith in his discourse of the difference betwixt the Old and New Covenant, he comes to speak unto this very Scripture, Phil. 3. Where, ‘saith he, The Apostle amongst his other Jewish privileges, having reckoned up his blamelesness in all points touching the Law, he undervalues them all, and counts all but loss, [...], for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus: in which place the Apostle doth not mean to disparage a real inward righteous­ness, and the strict observance of the Law; but his meaning is to shew how poor and worthless a thing all outward observances of the Law are in comparison of a true internal conformity to Christ, in the renovation of the mind and soul according to his image and likeness, as is manifest from ver. 9 10, &c. in which he thus delivers his own meaning of the knowledge of Christ, which he so much extolled, very empha­tically: That I may be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law; but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by Faith. Where by the way wee may further take notice, what this [...] [Page 220]and [...], the righteousness of Faith, and the righteousness of God is accor­ding to his own true meaning, as he expounds himself; viz. A CHRIST-LIKE NATURE IN A MAN'S SOUL; or, Christ appearing in the minds of men, by the mighty power of his divine Spirit, and thereby deriving a true participation of himself to them; so we have it ver. 10. That I may know the power of his resurre­ction, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death: So far Mr. Smith.’

I shall give now the same observation out of Dr. More, and so proceed. Pag. 387. of his Myste­ry of Godliness, ‘It is plain (saith he) from the constant scope of the Apostle both in his Epistle to the Gal. and every where else in extolling the righteousness of Faith, that he does not vilifie true virtue and morality, but drives at an higher pitch and perfection thereof, and that the righteousness of Faith which he pre­fers to the righteousness of works IS NOT BY WAY OF EXCLUSION OF GOOD WORKS OUT OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH, but of urging us to exacter and more perfect works of righteousness than could be performed under the dispensation of the Law. And in pag. 379, where the Doctor pro­fesseth to explain the great term [...], he tells us, That [...] signifies any virtue or goodness in a man whatsoever, and that [...] is nothing else but to be ap­proved as a good man; or, A doer of what is righteous and good, and that BECAUSE he doth that which is good and righteous.’

Having made this great observation, of which [Page 221]I shall make more use anon. I shall proceed with my Character; That an affected ignorance of Christ, is an infallible Character of a Legal Spirit. I have given a Scripture for it, viz. Phil. 3.7.8. to the 15. upon which I have so long insisted; I shall give now the reason of it, which is this: For that all pardon of sins (which is the greatest thing in Gospel-justification) was ever by virtue of the death of Christ. All the symbolical and vailed-Gospel of the old Testament pointed (though darkly) unto Christ: The rock in the Wilderness was Christ, the Serpent was Christ, the Manna was Christ, the Scape-Goat was Christ, the Paschal Lamb was Christ; and in the fulness of time Grace and the Truth (of these types) came by Jesus Christ. Therefore those that are af­fectedly ignorant of Christ, are affectedly igno­rant of all that looked like Gospel, and so of Gospel-Grace it self; & nothing can be a plain­er argument of Legality then this. And indeed we may almost adventure to say, That most men so far as they are ignorant of Christ in these days of the Gospel, they are affectedly ignorant.

I deferred this Character till the last, because I would first put all those Characters together, in which the faith of all the Old-Testament-be­lievers and ours did agree. All the Old-Testa­ment Saints were more for spiritual heart-wor­ship, than for the externals of Religion; they were all in their degree humble and patient; they were all in their degree quick, lively and vigorous; they had all a spirit of adoption in their measure; they were all of a sweet, meek, and kind heart and spirit, not of a persecuting principle; but I cannot say they all knew Christ [Page 220] [...] [Page 221] [...] [Page 222]in his death, resurrection, ascension and intercessi­on; nay, I should lye if I should say it; these things are peculiar to faith under the dayes of the Go­spel; St. Peter and the other Apostles were all ig­norant of these things, Luke 18. from verse 31. to 35.

Now I shall shew briefly the peculiar addition­als of a Gospel-faith, or rather a New-Testament Faith, without which, ours cannot be Evangelical enough, and so not justifying and saving: And without performing this part of my Work, I should be guilty of a great absurdity for taking up so many pages in describing the Faith of the Old-Testament Saints, or of justifying-faith, which was common to us and them, and in the mean time to pass by that which is proper to our selves, and as necessary as any thing which hath been spo­ken to.

I affirm therefore, that we are to know and be­lieve in Christ, as the PROCURING CAUSE of all our mercies, and the DISPENSER of all good things to us; These are the two great things which we are to know and believe concerning Christ; to which we must add the meditation & imitation of our Saviour, as a pattern in his Life, Death, Re­surrection and Ascension; in all which our Faith hath a great usefulness and necessity; and unless our Faith hath a great and very considerable re­spect unto Christ in all these three particulars, we cannot justly put on the name of Christians.

That old Faith of Abraham and all the Saints of the Old-Testament, which St. Paul disputes for, and proves they were justified by it, hath now a further Name, and is called the Christian Faith, having taken up that great Object Christ, more [Page 223]explicitely and plainly then ever they received it. I shall say somewhat, (but as briefly as I may) un­to all the three generals, wherein our Faith is now necessarily to eye Jesus Christ, that it may be of a right Gospel strain.

1. We must believe in Christ as the great procuring cause of all our mercies. 1. By his blood and offering. Therefore a right New-Testament Faith eyes Christ as the procuring-cause of all our mer­cies, and this in two respects, viz. by his offering up himself a sacrifice, and by his intercessions. 1. By his dying for us, and offering up himself, he hath bought us, Ye are bought with a price, 1 Cor. 6 20. Thou hast redeemed us unto God by thy blood, Rev. 5.9. His blood was the price of our redemp­tion; by shedding of this, and offering it up to God, he became a propitiation for our sins, and we our selves are the purchase of this Price. Acts 20.28.— The Church of God which he hath purcha­sed with his own blood. We are purchased and redeemed from the world, Gal. 1.4. From our vain Conversati­on, 1 Pet. 1.18. Yea, Heaven it self is purchased by his blood for us; for I doubt not but that is it which is called the purchased possession, Eph. 1.14. Now see if we have not reason, nay if there be not absolute necessity (if we would be right Christi­ans) to know Christ, and believe in him, as the pro­curing-cause of all our Mercies, and that by his Death, and Blood, and offering himself; He hath by one offering perfected for ever them that are sancti­fied, Heb. 10.14.

Now our Faith as it eyes thus the death of Christ, is called faith in his blood; and Justification follows upon this Faith onely, Rom. 3.24, 25. Being justified freely by his Grace, THROUGH THE RE­DEMPTION THAT IS IN CHRIST, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation THROUGH [Page 222] [...] [Page 223] [...] [Page 224]FAITH IN HIS BLOOD, to declare his righte­ousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God, Rom. 5.8, 9. But God commen­deth his love towards us, in that while we were yet sin­ners, Christ dyed for us, much more then BEING NOW JUSTIFIED BY HIS BLOOD, we shall be saved from wrath to come. I shall mention no more Scrip­tures to prove that Christ is the procuring-cause of all our mercies by his death and blood; only I shall describe what this faith in his blood is; and I shall express it thus: It is a judging the death and offer­ing of Christ (either upon the Cross, or in the ho­ly of holies, into which he entered by his own blood, Heb. 9.12.) to be the great propitiation of God (who without this offering had decreed no [...] to pardon sins) by which he became propitious and appeased, and for it receives all true penitents into his favour; that is, for the judgement or as­sent of faith to the dogmatical truth in this matter, then for its affiance, faith in the blood of Christ, it is a not doubting but whilst I have the Gospel-con­dition of Justification (what ever it be) this blood will procure my pardon; or thus, in the way of ho­liness to rest upon God for pardon, for the sake of Christ's blood-shedding, and offering it to God. Now this faith in the blood of Christ I look upon as an essential branch of a New-Testament-faith.

2ly His In­tercession. Secondly we are to look upon Christ as the pro­curing cause of all our mercies by his intercessions, whereby he reaps the benefit of the purchase of his blood. His Blood was the foundation of all his Intercession, and his Intercession is as the harvest to that seed-time, when he sowed in tears of blood. He entred into the holy of holies by his own blood; if he had not had that blood with him, I conceive [Page 225]there had been no entrance for him there as a Priest; but now that he is there entred and en­tertained as an High-priest for ever, and ever liveth to make intercession for us, Heb. 7.25. We are to look upon him as the great procuring-cause of all our mercies by his intercessions: If when we were enemies, we were reconciled unto God by the DEATH of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be sa­ved by his LIFE, Rom 5.10. 1 John 2.1. My lit­tle children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not; and if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, and he is the propitiation for our sins, ( HE IS to this very day, upon occasion of any failing of the Saints, he in­terposeth to make God propitious to them, and not onely to them, saith the Apostle) not onely for our sins, who are the Saints of God, but for the sins of the whole world: He doth now, as he did at his death, and first entring into Heaven, (though not in the same form of offering, which was but ONCE) make use of his blood with his Father, to prevail with him, that he may be ready to pardon, and receive into favour all that come unto God by him; all that are come in upon any of their fail­ings, and all that shall come in with unfeigned re­pentance for their wicked lives past.

And as I shewed in the former particular of his death and blood, that he did not onely procure pardon of sin by it, but redeemed us from our vain conversation, and purchased heaven it self for us; so in this particular I might shew, that he doth not onely procure pardon of sins for us by his in­tercession, as our Advocate, but every thing else that we stand in need of: I am going to my Father, saith our Saviour when he was leaving the World) [Page 226]and there I will povide Mansions for you; and what­soever ye ask the Fther in my Name, I will do it, Joh. 14.2, 3, 13. Thus therefore our Faith, if we would have it a right New-Testament Faith, must eye Christ in his intercession; and whatever we desire of God, we must ask it in his Name, and then be­lieve that Christ as an Advocate with the Father, wil take the care of it. So much for the first Head, or general Rule of a New-Testament-Faith: We are to eye Christ as the great procuring cause of all our mercies.

2dly, Gospel-faith eies Christ as the great d [...]spenser of all good things to us. We are to look upon Christ as the great Dispenser of all our good things to us. Our Saviour Christ hath the distribution & disposal of all things committed to him, as Joseph had in Aegypt: The Father judgeth no man, but all judgement is committed by the Father to the Son, John 5.22. Jesus Christ is not onely represented unto us in the Scripture, as standing at the right hand of God, Act. 5.55, 56. which may signifie his Advocatship and Priestly Office, but much oftner as sitting at the right hand of God, whch is a sign of his Kingly Office and Authority; for this see Heb. 10, 11, 12, 13. where sitting is opposed to standing, as Ma [...]esty is to Ministring. And every Priest STANDETH daily, MINI­STRING, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifi­ces, which can never take away sins: But this man, af­ter he had offered one Sacrisice for sins for ever, SATE DOWN at the right hand of God, from henceforth ex­pecting till his Enemies be made his footstool. Our Sa­viour obtained of his Father by his death and of­fering, not onely that sinners might be pardoned, but that he might have the gift of pardon, yea, and of repentance too, which is as great a gift as pardon it self, Acts 5.30, 31, 32. The God of our fa­thers [Page 227]raised up Jesus whom ye slew and hanged on a Tree, him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and sorgiveness of sins; and we are his witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Ghost whom God hath given to them that obey him. In a word, Christ hath all power both in heaven and in earth: So our Savi­our came and told his Disciples after he was risen, Matth. 28.18, 19. Jesus came, and spake unto them (the eleven) saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth: Go ye THEREFORE, and teach all Nations. This is the form of the Commis­sion which makes an Apostle (I have received po­wer, therefore go teach) they are not the Apostles of God immediately, but of Jesus Christ, by the will of God, 1 Cor. 1.1. 2 Cor. 1.1. Eph. 1.1.

To instance in the several branches of this pow­er in heaven and earth, would be too much for me in this place; there is the power of pardoning sins, raising the dead, judging the world, destroying the wicked: These, with many other, I could prove by plain Scripture to be all deposited and be-trust­ed in the hand of Jesus Christ.

Now what is the Faith that belongs to Christ as the Dispenser of all good things to us? (for that is my proper business to enquire after) Why, even the Faith that we place in God the Father: This Christ taught his Disciples when he was about to leave them, Joh. 14.1. Let not your heart be troubled; ye believe in God, believe also in me: As much as to say, Ye have been used hitherto (by your Old-Te­stament-Faith) to believe in God, and you have found comfort and support in it, and yet you do not see that God you believe in: Why so now for my self, I am going in deed out of your sight, and [Page 228]at this you are troubled, but believe in me when I am out of your sight, as ye have hitherto beheved in an invisible God, and ye shall find the same com­fort and support in this Faith, as ever ye found from Faith in God.

None so common a New-Testament phrase, as believing in Christ; He that believeth in me, though he weee dead, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believeth in me, shall never dye; Joh. 11.25.26. and our Saviour there giveth a very satisfactory reason, The diffe­rence be­twixt faith in Christ, and in God the Father which is this, I am the resurrection and the life; therefore he that believeth on the Son, hath life, and shall have a resurrection unto lise. Our Faith ought to be the same in the person of Christ, as it is in God the Father, onely with this differ­ence, that it must not be terminated in Christ as the ultimate object of our Faith, but only as he is the Me­diator and great Dispenser of all things to us by a Power derived from the Father; For this take that eminent place, 1 Pet. 1.21. Who BY HIM (that is Christ) DO BELIEVE IN GOD, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory, that your faith and hope might be in God. This I do but touch upon here; it would require a large Treatise to speak unto it as the subject deserves, viz: how we are to direct our Faith and applications to Je­sus Christ in a different manner then to God the Father; but this is that which I am upon, That in the general we are to six our Faith upon Christ as the great Dispenser of all good things unto us, if we would have it of a right Gospel-strain, nay if we expect to be justified by our faith; for if God set up a Mediator, a Dispenser of all his bent­sits, (as Pharoah (pardon the allusion) set up Jo­seph, and required that all men should go to him [Page 229]for what they wanted) will he (think you) take it well that you should take no notice of his Joseph, his dearly beloved, and onely begotten Son? But come to himself immediately; dare you do it! Can you ever hope for acceptation in this way of addres­sing your selves to God? Might you not justly fear that God will prove a consuming fire to you in in such approaches? So much for the second; ge­neral head, in which our Faith is to respect Jesus Christ.

But 3dly, there is something more requisite yet to be done by our Faith, with respect to Christ, than meerly to look upon him as the procuring-cause, and the dispensing-cause of all our mercies, if we would have it a right New-Testament-faith, or a Justifying-Faith in the dayes of the Gospel, our Faith must conform us unto Christ as a pattern and example: Now there is a two-fold conformi­ty unto Christ which our Faith effects, one Proper, the other Analogical; that which is proper, is to put us upon doing as he did, to be as he was, hum­ble, meek, lowly, &c. Learn of me (saith Christ) these things, and ye shall receive rest unto your souls, Matth. 11.29. Phil. 25.6. Let the same mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus, who made himself of no reputation, &c. Looking unto Jesus, who—Heb. 12.2. But then there is an Analogical conformity which Faith effects, and that is an answerableness to some things in Christ, which it is not our duty to imi­tate in a proper sense, as now to be conformable unto Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection; these we cannot in a proper sense be conformable unto him in, except we be hanged upon a cross till we are dead; then laid in our graves, then raised by the power of God, &c. Now these things are not [Page 228] [...] [Page 229] [...] [Page 230]our duty to go about to imitate properly, but on­ly in some resemblance and likeness. Our Faith must bring us to the cross of Christ, and teach us the crucisixion and mortification of our old man, with the affections and lusts of it; it must bring us to the grave of Christ, and we must be there bury­ed with him, Rom. 6.1.4. We are buried with him by baptism into death; and by this death and burial we must reckon our selves to be dead unto sin, ver. 11. He that is dead, is sreed from sin, ver. 7. How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein, ver. 2. Yea our Faith must earry us yet further beyond death and the grave, into heaven it self; we must rise with him into newness of life; For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. Ver. 5. And as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. Ver. 4. And we must sit together with him in heaven­ly places, in our affections at least. If ye be riser with Christ, seek these things that are above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God. Set your asse­ctions on things above, not on things on the earth, for you are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God, Col. 3.1, 2, 3. Faith in the dayes of the Gospel carries us to the example and pattern of Christ, & conforms us to it, both in a proper and Analogical confor­mity; so that we have something in us that bears some Analogy and likeness to every thing that is to be found in Christ.

But because this third respect, wherein our saith eies Jesus Christ, looks more like obedience then faith, more like sanctification, than that by which most expect justification: and seeing this is not the proper place to shew how far obedience, and [Page 231]holiness, and good works have an influence upon Justification, I shall not insist more upon this; con­tenting my self with the two other respects in which faith eies Jesus Christ, viz. As the procurer and dispencer of all good things unto us, which none can with any fair pretence deny to be neces­sary to our faith as justifying, in the days of the New-Covenant.

Now to quicken, and so to end this Character, viz. That so far as we leave out Christ, we are Le­gal in the business of Justication; I shall represent the Reader with the example of St. Paul (which I have glanced at already) who was once highly legal, end afterwards as eminent­ly evangelical, and that in the daies of the Gospel. And I should think Solomon himself was not a fit­ter person to give an account of the vanity of worldly comforts, than St. Paul was to acquaint us with that vanity & vexation of spirit that there is in pretended legal righteousness, as also with that perfect satisfaction which the Evangelical righteousness brings into the soul: and 'tis from him indeed, and from his Epistles (no doubt indi­ted by the Spirit of God) that this whole dis­couse hath been raised. He was as to his descent, [...], an Hebrew, born of Hebrew parents both father and mother, and of a special and beloved tribe, and circumcised the eighth day exactly according to the Law: for his profession, of the strictest sect [...], in obser­vation of the Law a Phaisee: for his zeal in his profession it was exceeding great, I prosited (saies he, Gal. 1.14.) in the Jew's Religion above many my equals in mine own nation; being more exceeding zea­lous of the traditions of my fathers. And there was [Page 232]no greater argument of his being an high Legal list than this, That he was a bitter persecutor of the way of the Gospel, as he tells us in three several Epistles, Gal. 2.13. Beyond measure I persecuted the Church of God, and wasted it. Phil. 3.6. concerning Zeal persecuting the Church. 1 Tim. 1.13. You have his catalogue of privileges altogether, Phil. 3.4, 5, 6, and there he makes a challenge to any Jew, any Pharisee of them all to shew the same grounds and reasons of fleshly considence and boasting that he could shew for himself; If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might boast in the flesh, I MORE. Now if there had been any goodness in that way of a Pharisaical righteousuess, which S Paul with his utmost zeal pursued after, cectainly he must have fonnd it. But as soon as ever the Lord was pleased to call him by his grace, and to REVEAL HIS SON IN HIM, Gal. 1.15, 16, he casts a­way all his riches and treasures of a legal righte­ousness, as dross, dung, and dog's-meat, not fit for children to feed upon: and what is it that he em­braceth? what is it that can thus metamorphose and transpose him? what doth he see? what hath he espied in the Gospel? Why, it is Christ; a single Christ: He sells all that he had to buy this Pearle, and thinks himself made for ever if he can but com­pass such a purchase. Yea doubtless (saith he) I count all these but dung that I may WIN Christ, or gain Christ; [...], and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, Phil. 3.9.

So we have seen the metamorphosis, the trans­formation of this man, his leaving all his Phari­saical Legal Righteousness for a single Christ, we [Page 233]will see a little further what use he makes of Christ now that he hath chosen him, and thus centred his soul upon him. Why, he will needs know more of him; I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, Phil. 3.8. and saies he, I count them but dung that I may win Christ, and that I may know him, ver. 8.10. There are indeed all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hid in him, as St. Paul tells us, Col. 2.3. and there­fore well might he press after the knowledge of him. Again he will love him: If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed, 1 Cor. 16. ver. 22. He will believe in him: I would be found in him, not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law, but that which is through THE FAITH OF CHRIST. Lastly, he will make his glorying and boast of him, and that is the highest honour we can do to God: for men glory in that which they account their excellency; yea, St. Paul chooseth out that in Christ to glory in, which is most con­temptible in the eyes of the world, and that is the cross of Christ; which shews what an high esteem he had of him: God forbid (saith he) that I should glory in any thing save in the cross of Christ, Gal. 6.14 And though the blind world could see nothing in this Cross that they should rejoice or glory in, yet St. Paul saw these great things in the Cross of Christ, that upon it he vanquished Principalities and Powers, Col. 2.15. that he removed all that from off us, that was contrary to us, nailing it to his cross; so that he might well say as he doth, Gal: 2.19. I through the Law am dead to the Law, that I might live to God; that is, through what the Law hath done to my Saviour, it hath nothing to do with me, I am dead to it, and that is dead to me. [Page 234]Again, see another great efficacy that St. Paul e­spyed in the Cross of Christ, and that was, that it helped him to conquer the World; God forbid that I should glory in any thing save in the Cross of Christ, by which the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world: No wouder therefore if he chuseth the cross of Christ to glory in. Once more we find him in another Scripture chusing his infirmities to glory in, 2 Cor. 12.5 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. I take pleasure in insir­mities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecution, in distresses for Christ's sake: And what is the reason, why not onely for that these are a part of Christ's Cross, but because when these things did press him down, then did the arm of Christ support him, and the Power of Christ rest upon him. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the POWER OF CHRIST MAY REST UPON ME; for when I am weak, then am I strong; that is, with the strength which is in Christ Jesus; and therefore hedoth not only desire that he himself might thus know, love, believe, and glory in Jesus Christ, but he begs for others, that they might have a Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation in the knowledge of Christ, Eph. 1.16, 17. It were almost an infinite Work to trace St: Paul in all the ways of his treating Christ, and using of him; take therefore one place for all, Gal. 2.20. I am crucified with Christ, (saith he) neverthe­less I live; that is one Riddle. I live, yet not I; there is another Riddle: But whence arise these Myste­ries? Why from his conversing with, and possessing of Christ. I live; but (saith he) 'tis not I any longer; [...], but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh, (the whole of my life) it is by the faith of the Son of God, (that is, Faith in the Son of God) who loved me, and gave himself for me: [Page 235]Paul is dead, he lives no longer; but Christ lives in Paul (if you will) and then no wonder St. Paul can do all things, as he tells us he can, when such a person lives in him, Phil. 4.12, 13. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound, every where, and in all things, I am instructed both to be full, and to the hungry; both to abound, and to suffer need; I can do all things through Christ which strengthens me.

Thus the whole of a Christians lise when he is like himself, is a life of Faith upon Christ immedi­ately; his Flesh and Blood is his food; his Grace and Spirit is his strength; the living of Christ in him (which is a Mystical expression) is his life; For you are dead, and YOUR LIFE IS HID WITH CHRIST in God, Col. 3.3. That Christian there­fore that is not intimately acquainted with Christ, is so far legal: The truth of this assertion is clear from this example, for that as soon as ever St. Paul had Christ revealed in him, he left all his legal righteousness, and fastned upon Christ altogether in this manner, which we have partly declared.

And indeed, this is the Character of Characters; all the other Characters before given, signifie but little without this: It is by means of Christs com­ing that we call God Father, that we are freed from that slavish fear of God, which even the Saints of the Old-Testament were under in a great measure; the Heir before was kept in fear; but when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons; and because ye are Sons, God hath sent forth the SPIRIT of his SON into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father, Gal. 4 3, 4, 5, 6. It is by Christ's coming that we are freed from that ex­ternal, [Page 236]fleshly way of serving God in a worldly Sanctuary, and by carnal Ordinances: It was al­most impossible, whilst it was the duty of the peo­ple of God to worship God with so much ceremo­nial service, but they should dote too much upon those externals of worship▪ But saith our Savi­our, [...]he hour cometh, and NOW is; that is, in the dayes of the Gospel, that neither in this Mountain, nor at Jerusalem, shall men worship the Father, but in spirit and truth, John 6.21.23, and the reason was this, for that Christ was the substance of those sha­dows which therefore vanished at his coming.

The truth is, the great thing that we have to mind as Christians, is the knowledge of Christ; the [...], the ex­cellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord. And I have often thought, that they who would study the Gospel aright, should endeavour to find out what there is peculiar in the Gospel, above whate­ver was before revealed; for they shall find that in the Gospel there is the hidden wisdom of God revealed, such mysteries of wisdom as were before hidden from ages and generations, and I believe there is no greater prejudice to the advance of know­ledge in Theology, or the knowledge of God, than that it is so generally presumed, yea and asserted­that there is nothing in a manner new in the Go, spel, neither precepts nor promises; but that the Faith of the Saints in all ages was the same that it is now, onely they appreheuded the same things somewhat more obscurely then we do, and so for the Precepts, that they were always the same Now this presumption will unavoidably hinder all fur­ther enquiry, and the New-Testament shall signi­fie no more to us then the old will do; and so we [Page 237]shall necessarily put our selves again under the Le­gal, instead of the Evangelical Administration, ser­ving God in the OLDNESS OF THE LETTER, which is the Law; and not in the NEWNESS OF THE SPIRIT, which is the Gospel, Rom. 7.6. Whereas to any diligent and unprejudiced enqui­rer it will appear, that there are a thousand new things in the Gospel, and all of them referring more or less to Christ. I shall give but two Scrip­tures for this, and so come to the application of the character: The first is this, in Col. 1.26, 27. I am made a Minister (saith the Apostle) to fulfil the Word of God, even the Mystery which hath been hid FROM AGES AND GENEEATIONS, but NOW IS MADE MANIFEST TO HIS SAINTS, to whom God would make known the riches of this Mystery amongst the Gentiles, which is, CHRIST IN YOU, the hope of Glory. Christ is all the Myste­ry; all the mysterious things of the Gospel are to be more or less referred to Christ. The second Scripture is Eph 3. of which I might transcribe more then half the chapter; see ver. 9. To make all men see what is the fellowship of the Mysterie which from the beginning of the world hath been HID IN GOD, See Mar­lorat in loc. who CREATED ALL THINGS BY JE­SUS CHRIST: This (saith Calvin) Non tam de prima creatione interpretari libet, quam de instauratio­ne spirituali; circumstantia enim loci postulat ut de re­novatione intelligamus, quae continetur in beneficio re­demptionis: That is, This creation of all things by Jesus Christ, is not so much to be understood of the first creation of the world, as of the instauration and renovation, or new Gospel-state of things, into which God hath put them by Jesus Christ. So the next verse unavoidably carries the sense, ver. [Page 238]10, 11. To the intent that NOW unto the Principali­ties and Powers in heavenly places, MIGHT BE MADE KNOWN by the Church the manifold wis­dom of God, according to the eternal purpose which he PURPOSED IN CHRIST JESUS our Lord What, did not the Angels know the Mysteries of the first creation till the dayes of the Gospel? O [...] are they instructed by the Church in the Mysteries of the first Creation? Are Christians (as such) so great natural Philosophers, as that Angels may come and learn of them? The sense therefore is plainly thus; That in the dayes of the Gospel there is a quite new Model, and new constitution of things, by vertue of the Mediatorial Kingdom which Jesus Christ hath received of his Father; and much of this the Angels learn from the Church: Who therefore, but a rank Legallist, will study Jesus Christ.

I come now to the application of the Character. The ap­plication of the Character first to the discovery of partial Legality.

And here I shall somewhat alter my method which I used in the application of the other Cha­racters; for here I shall begin with the discovery of partial Legality, which may be found in the Saints from this Character, and afterwards come to pre­dominant Legality from it. First of all then, Is our New-Testament-Faith to act so much upon Jesus Christ, yea upon him immediately for all things, for pardon, for strength of Grace, for temporal deliverances, &c? Then these Saints are much too blame, and greatly guilty of Legality, that go to God without Christ in any measure: If men go to God in the daves of the Gospel, and where the Gospel hath been preached [...] for I have to do with none other at this time) I say, if such men go to God without Christ altogether, they are not Saints at all, cannot be Saints, (of these I shall speak [...]non.) But there are a generation of [Page 239]Saints, and perhaps the greatest number, who do truly believe in Christ, that yet go to God without Christ in a great measure; they are Christians Do­ctrinally, but yet they are not well versed, nor practised enough in treating with Christ, and with God through Christ: but make their immediate ap­plications to God almost in every prayer, in every act of Faith; they cannot speak in a Gospel Dialect; but are as if they were still living in the daies of the Old Testament, where, that a man feared and be­lieved in God, was his great character of Saintship. Nay, I would adventure to make this censure of hundreds of Christians, that are good and holy men; that, were it not for the doctrine of satis­faction to the Justice of God which hath an hold upon them, they do not discover wherein they have any need or use of Jesus Christ at all either as King, or Prophet of his people, though indeed they wil consent unto all these things when they are preached; & therefore in charity must be concei­ved to have that respect unto Christ w ^ch is neces­sary, even in these particulars also; & I think many Ministers are greatly to blame (who are otherwise good men) in that they preach no more of Christ unto their people: That this is Legality where it is found, I think there is no need of further proof, this character sufficiently convinceth of it; yet I shall in searching out this distemper, viz. Ignorance, and neglect of Christ, both in Ministers and Peo­ple, prove it to be a symptome of Legality from another character mentioned.

And truly I cannot guess what should be the reason of this ignorance and neglect of Christ so general and common, even amongst those that are good, but from a listlesness and irksomness to, and weariness of the waies and knowledge of God. Good people may (chance) think that they know [Page 240]a great deal of God already, they know enough for their converse between man and man, and for many duties of worship to God, and they find this as much as they can attend, together with their businesses and imployments in the world, and so much they know of Christ that he died for their sins, and intercedes with his Father for them, and this is enough to satisfie them; what should they trouble themselves any more about any Gospel Mysteries concerning Jesus Christ, as his Mediato­rial Kingdom and the like, how God the Father orders and disposes of all things by him, how they are to make their applications to him. Now this listlesness & carelesness, I made before a plain sym­tom of Legality; for the more Evangelical we are, the more chearful we are in the service of God; the more attentive to, and inquisitive about any thing that he makes known to us, especially con­cerning Jesus Christ; every dust of this Pearl is precious.

I come in the second place to condemn predo­minant Legality from this Character; Predomi­nant Le­gality dis­covered from this Character 1. In the Jews. and this wil convince two or three sorts of men of predomi­nant Legality: And first of all, to be sure this con­vinceth the Jews of predominant Legality, both those that were at the time of Christ's coming, and have been ever since unto this day, for that they denied then, and still deny to receive Christ at all: If they had been Evangelical under the Old-Testament, they would gladly have received Christ, who is the substance and spirit of all that Gospel which they had but darkly discovered in their dispensation. They that love the dawnings of the day-light, how much more would they be in love with the Sun of Righteousness? but because [Page 241]their hearts were set upon the Law before Christ came, therefore were they such enemies to Christ when he was come; and there is no clearer proof of the charge which the Apostle oftentimes draws up against them, viz. That they were legal, than this, that they are the great enemies of the cross of Christ; and the same may be all applied to the pre­sent Jews that are enemies to Christ.

2dly, This discovers the Legality of the Modern Scribes and Pharisees, and Zelotical Ceremonial­ists (as Dr. Moore calls them; those that are so much for the externals of Religion in the days of the Gospel; that would set up a ceremonial Law again of their own inventing; these argue their great affected ignorance of Christ, and the Go­spel, by which these shadows are certainly done a­way, for that the Body is come; and this I look up­on as a very shrewd sign (though perhaps not ab­solutely concluding) of predominant Legality. But of these I have spoken largely already, and there­fore shall not enlarge further about them, though they come here upon a new account to be convin­ced and reproved.

Lastly, (and so I shal end my Characters as I be­gun them, vide pag. 117. the second observation premised to the Characters) All those that have a zeal for God in the dayes of the Gospel, and yet are not for a single Christ, and for the purity and simplicity of the Gospel, are legal; for that all Religion which is not the right Religion, is Legal. The Jews corrupted the Gospel by adding the observations of the Law to it: The Greeks and Philosophers destroyed the Gospel by inventions of worshipping Angels, and other voluntary humilities, Col. 2.8.18. Beware lest any man spoil you through Philosophy and vain deceit, after [Page 242]the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and NOT AFTER CHRIST, ver. 18. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility, and worshipping of Angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, NOT HOLDING THE HEAD; both these forts the Apostle sets himself vigorous­ly against in several places of his Epistles. Now whosoever shall in a likeness to either Jew or Gre­cian Philosopher, go about to destroy the simplieity of the Gospel, or the simplicity that is in Christ, as it is called, 2 Cor. 11.3. let him have never so much zeal in his way, is legal; and the reason is this, for that whosoever goes about to establish his own righteousness, is legal, Rom. 10.1, 2, 3. Now all those that destroy the simplicity of the Gospel, & yet have a zeal for God, go to establish their own righteousness. I have now done with the Characters

Having discharged now after a sort, these seve­ral great parts of my Work; shewn first that the Law could not justifie, and that yet men wil needs seek Justification by the Law, and having given the description of their Legality, what it is formal­ly in it self, as also by the several characters of a Legal Spirit, wherein it discovers that distemper which is otherwise many times unsearchable; I hold my self now to be a little at leisure to speak unto some things in general touching Justification, which I had no sitter place to speak unto, then this, and wil yet (I hope) further conduce unto the clea­ring and explaining of the great subject that is be­fore us.

There may be therefore these several questions spoken to about Justification: 1. At what time or times a person is ustified, 2. For what act or acts a person is ustified. These two questions (the [Page 243]first of which contains several questions in it) I shall first dispatch, and then speak unto some o­thers that wil arise to be spoken to.

The first Question is this; The first question a­bout justi­fication. At what time or times is a finner justi­fied? At what time or times is a sinner justified? This contains these two questi­ons: 1. Whether or no a sinner be justified from eter­nity? 2. Whether (if he be onely justified in time) Ju­stification, considered as God's act, be one or more, that is, be done once for all at his strst Justification, or else re­peated often upon the person justified, according to the exigency of the person.

For the first Q. Whether Justification be from eter­nity, or in time?

Now to answer and resolve this Question, 1. I should not have made this Question at all, but for that some have asserted that we are justified from Eternity; and I have heard it openly affirmed se­veral times, that Justification is an immanent act in God, like the eternal generation of the Son. 2. Now for the actions or acts which we may con­ceive in Eternity, they either respect God himself or the Creatures; Those that respect himself, are such as whereby he understood, loved, and enjoyed himselfe; and what other soever a­ctions or acts can be certainly ascribed unto God, with relation to his own Essence, but with relati­on to his creatures, no other can be conceived, but in the way of purposing and decreeing what he would be pleased to do in time; 'tis very true, what that Scripture assirms, that known unto God are all his works from the beginning of he world, Acts 15.18. that is, which he intended to work: But that God should be said to do any action adextra, that is, without himself, such as Justification is, which is terminated upon another person, without the [Page 244]compass of his own Essence, when yet there was nothing but himself in being, is to me a contradi­ction. God might indeed in the eternal counsel of his own uncontroulable Wil & Pleasure, PURPOSE to juscifie such and such persons after he had made them; but what is this to actual Justification? It may be as wel said (in my mind) that the World was created faom eternity, because God purposed in his Eternal Counsels to create the World, as it can be said that any were justified from eternity, because God purposed from all eternity to justifie them. Purpose and Decree is one thing, Acting and Performance is another. 3. I cannot understand any countenance which this opinion hath from Scrip­ture; when the Scripture comes to speak of Ju­stification, it expresseth it self as of an action done in time onely, Rom. 4.3. What saith the Scrip­ture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness: Ver. 10. How was it thon reck­oned? WHEN he was in circumcision, or in uncir­cumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcisi­on; that is, in the time of his uncircumcision. A­braham is not said to have been justified from eter­nity, but upon his actual believing; and this actual believing was in the time of his uncircumcision. 4. Seeing justification follows onely upon Faith, (as the Scripture tells us) Justification cannot be before Faith: Now Faith is onely in time, there­fore Justification was not in Eternity, which was before all time. I shall trouble my self with no more as to the answer of the first question, Whe­ther Justification be in Eternity, or in Time?

Now follows the second question; If it be in time, at what time is it? And how often is it? Once onely, or oftner?

[Page 245]Here are two questions more in one, 1. At what time is it? Now for answer; Seeing that the righ­teousness of Faith is the righteousness which God alone accepts unto Justification, therefore Justifi­cation commenceth onely from the time of our be­lieving: When was Abraham justified? Why when he believed; that therefore is the time of Justifica­tion, its beginning.

The Question therefore now before us, is one­ly this, Whether this one act of Justification, which pre­sently follows upon our act of believing, serves for the justification of our persons as long as we live; or whe­ther there be any repetition of God's act of Justificati­on upon our persons afterwards?

Now for answer to this, w ^ch is indeed no contem­ptible Quest. I say, 1. That indeed the first act of Justification (when Divine approbation comes up­on us, according to the Law and Statute of the New-Covenant, Acts 13.39. That by him all that believe are justified) putsi us into a state of favour; and (if there be no intercision in the state, which the Arminians hold there may be) this first act is the great and famous act that makes us happy and blessed.

But yet 2dly, I hold, that seeing Justification chiefly consists in pardoning of sins, (according to that Scripture, Acts 13.38, 39. Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins, and by him all that believe are JUSTIFIED FROM ALL THINGS FROM WHICH YE COULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED by the Law of Moses) every re­newed act of Pardon is a renewed act of Justifica­tion; for though the first act of God's justifying us, upon our turning to God, do acquit us from all [Page 246]our sins till that moment; yet every new sin brings a new guilt for which we might justly be condemned without a new act of justifying grace; and though every new sin doth not put us out of the state of justification, yet it requires a new act of justifying grace for the continuing the state; and this makes the Advocateship of Christ necessary to be continued, who, when a­ny Saint commits a sin, he interposeth with his Father, that, upon his repentance, a pardon may be issued forth in the Court of heaven for that soul, as to that sin: This I hold necessary even for every sinfull infirmity of any Saint of God; that is, I hold Christ's intercession and our habitual repentance at least and faith ne­cessary, chough many times there cannot be a­ctual repentance and faith for pardon, as in the case of secret and unobserved sins. But yet even in such cases our habitual and general repen­tance is necessary, together with Christ's inter­cession, and a renewed act of pardon unto our justification I would not be thought to make this conti­nued justi­fication, which consists in continued pardon, to be of like cons [...]tera­tion with the first act of par­douing & justify­ing grace at first believing; I only contend for this, That it is true and necessary justification. And in extraordinary cases the truth of my assertion will be much more visi­ble; for when any Saint commits such a great sin as (according to the doctrine of the Re­monstrants) makes him no Saint for the time; here must certainly be repeated a new famous act of Justification (according to their doctrine as famous as the first was) as well as a new act of conversion, Luke 22.32.

[Page 247]But I need not go to this Supposition of a Saints falling away; for I can shew that this is no absonous or unheard of thing in the Scripture, that Justification may be repeated even upon a Saint of God that keeps his standing. See that Scripture in James 2.21. Was not Abraham our fa­ther justified by works, when he had offered up Isaac his son upon the Altar? ver. 22. And the Scripture was (then) fulfilled, which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness. Now when was this Justification of Abraham which is here mentioned? Why it was at least thirteen years after Abrahams first famous Justi­fication; for that was upon his believing that God would give him a Son; this was upon his offering up the Son after he was given, when he was grown up to be a stout Lad, and could car­ry the wood for his father up the hill. That first act of Justification passed upon him when Abra­ham himself was in uncircumoision; this after he and all his family were circumcised: therefore the act of Justification may be repeated over se­veral times upon the same person.

And for a little countenance for this from the authority of Authors, Mr Baxter in his Apho­rismes makes mention of a threefold Justifica­tion, inchoate, continued, and sinall, Thesis 59. pag. 233. ‘Justification is not a momentaneous act begun and ended immediately upon our be­lieving; but a continued act, which though it be in its kinde compleat from the first, yet is it still in doing till the final Justification at the Judgment day. Pag. 303. Abraham was justified long before Isaac was offered; yet Ju­stification being a continued act, God is still [Page 248]justifying, and the Gospel still justifying, and Abraham's Justification was not ended before Isaac was offered (nor then neither) and therefore was then in a proper sense said to be justified when he offered up Isaac: these latter expressions which I add are full to Mr Baxter's sense in that place.’ It is all one in my minde whether we use the word repeated or continued when we ap­ply them to Justification; for I think an act can be no otherwise continued but by repeti­tion. The best sim [...]le of an act continued is a ma­thematical Line, which they say is fluxus pun­ctorum, and yet points have no other continuity but by repetition.

I know a learned man that answers this by distinguishing upon Justification, telling us that Justification may be taken either for Universal pardon of sins, which is done at first believing; or else it is taken for divine approbation: the first (he saith) viz. General pardon, is done but once; but acts of approbation may be frequen­ted, as here they were upon Abraham, and so he said to be justified twice, though he kept his standing in grace betwixt the two acts of his Justification. Now I do not deny that there are these two things in Justification, viz. Pardon and Approbation; but since pardon of particular sins is often repeated as well as acts of Approbation, therefore methinks Justificati­on may well be said to be repeated in both these parts of it, though I alwaies hold that the first act of Universal pardon is the most famous. Quest. 2. about Iu­ [...]ification; For what [...]cts weare justified. So much for the first Question about the time of Justification.

Now for the second Question proposed, which [Page 249]was this: For what act or acts is a person justified? I answer first generally, for the acts of faith pri­marily; for the other good actions or good works secondarily; but more particularly I shall answer first negatively: Nega­tively. A man is not justified only for that act of fa [...]th which re­spects the death and blood of Christ. A man is not justi­fied only for that act of faith which respects the death and blood of Christ; and the reason is evident, for that Justification in the Scripture is applyed to other acts of faith besides this. Abraham was justified for his faith in the power of God, that he would give him a Son when he and Sarah were both old. Rom. 4.16, 17, 18. Who against hope believed in hope, that he might be­come the Father of many Nations; ver. 21. Being ful­ly perswaded that what he had promised he was ABLE also to perform; and THEREFORE it was impu­ted to him for Righteousness. So again, there was another justifying act of his faith, when he be­ing commanded of God offered up his son Isaac, that is, did as good as offer him up; shewed his true willingness and readiness to it, the knise was at his Son's throat, and this act of faith is said to be imputed to him for righteousness, Jam. 2.23. Now neither of these acts of faith are said to be in the blood of Christ, and yet are said by the Scri­pture to be justifying acts.

If it be objected that these acts of Abrahams faith had respect to Christ who was the promi­sed seed, as well as Isaac; Object. Abrahams faith had respect to Christ. and that his sacrifi­cing Isaac shewed his faith in the sacrifice of Christ.

I answer: 1. I deny not but Abraham saw Christ's day by faith and rejoyced. 2. How farr Abraham saw Chrift's death and offering I cannot say: But 3. whatever was the know­ledge [Page 250]or faith of Abraham concerning Christ, these answers are [...]at trivial in the present case: for the Scriptures lay the stress of Gods appro­ving or justifying Abraham, upon his faith in the power of God, at least they do openly referr Justification to this faith of his, that God could give him a Son notwithstanding the deadness of his own body and the deadness of Sarah 's womb; and then that he was able to raise him from the dead af­ter that he had offered him up, and so to raise a great Nation out of him. Heb. 19.11. compa­red with James 2.21, 23. which was only or espe­cially an act of faith in the power of God; and these men impertinently carry it to somewhat else, which is uncertain, if not untrue.

I shall insist only upon one more act of faith which was justifying, and yet was not chiefly consisting of a respect unto the blood of Christ, if it had that at all in it; and it is the faith of Noah, Heb. 11.7. By faith Noah being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear prepared an Ark to the saving of his house, BY WHICH he con­demned the world and BECAME HEIR OF THE RIG HTEOUSNESS WHICH IS BY FAITH. Here was a work of Faith in the threatning of a Flood, and precept of building of an Ark; and the stress of his Justification is chiefly laid upon his fear of Gods judgments and faithfull obedience to the command of building an Ark, (which proceeded from a firm belief of the threatning) and BY IT is said to be­come an heir of the righteousness w ^ch is by faith

I might likewise instance in the act of Rahab's faith, which is said to be justifying, James 2.8 [...] seems to have been only this, as appears by the story, that she received the Spyes, and trusted in [Page 251]Gods power for their and her deliverance; and in the faith of Phineas, who had such a coura­gious zealous faith, that he killed a Prince and a Princess at once with his own hand for com­mitting lewdness; and this is said to be accoun­ted unto him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore, Psal. 6.31. but I shall mention no more. But thus you see that there are other acts of faith unto which justification is imputed as well as the act of faith in Christs blood; therefore that is not the only act of justifying faith as such.

If it be objected, as it may well be, that these are instances of justifying faith in the dayes of the Old Testament, when faith in the blood of Christ was not so necessary, but now that faith in the blood of Christ is necessary, that is the only justifying act;

I answer, 1. That for those men that are most zealous for the opinion That faith as dire­cted to the death and blood of Christ is the on­ly act of faith as justifying, they hold that faith in Christ was as necessary under the Old Testa­ment unto salvation as it is now; and un­to these, I suppose, the instances of faith as ju­stifying, in other acts prove pertinently enough That faith in the blood of Christ is not the on­ly act of justifying faith.

2. I affirm, that even in the dayes of the Go­spel other acts of faith justifie besides that by which we have immediate respect to the blood of Christ. I shall prove this second Assertion by Argument and Scripture: 1. By Argu­ment;

Certainly in the times of the Old Testament, [Page 252]though (I verily believe that) saith in the death and blood of Christ was not necessary to Justifi­cation, yet they had something in their faith that did answer our faith in the blood of Christ, as perhaps a respect to the mercies of God, and Gods readi­ness to be appeased; which readiness in God was manifested by the Sacrifices which he had appointed. Now I will argue by analogie; If the Jewes had some such like object for their faith as the blood of Christ is to us, and yet were not justified only by their fixing upon that object, but for other acts of faith, as is evident in the instances given, then nothing hinders but we may be justified by other acts of our faith, as well as that in the blood of Christ. I will give another argument to prove my Asser­tion somewhat like this: We are commanded in the Gospel, John 5.23. That all men should ho­nour the Son as they honour the Father; and where­in did Abraham glorifie God, so much as by his strong faith, Rom. 4.20. If therefore our duty be to honour Christ by believing, as ever any of the ancient Saints honoured God the Father, why will not the same faith in the power of Christ justifie, as did when it was placed in the power of God? which yet I have proved that it did justifie.

Now for Scriptures, &c. I shall give several instances of faith in the power of Christ, or at least in some attribute and excellency of Christ besides his blood, which justified; Luke 5.18, 19, 20. There was a great faith of the paralytick man, and his friends, that if he could but come to Christ he should be healed; and therefore they opened the roof of the house, and let him down [Page 253]through the tiling in his Couch; and when Jesus saw cheir faith, (that is, of the sick man and those that brought him) he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee. Here is forgiveness of sins, which is Justification, upon a faith only to be healed; whether it were in the goodness, or power of Christ, it was not faith in his blood, for this man was as ignorant of that mystery (sure) as the Disciples of Christ were, who yet understood little or nothing of it. Luke 18.33, 34. I shall give but two instances more of this, and they are expresly of faith in the power of Christ, as doubtless the former instance had much of this faith in it; it is in Math. 9.28, 29, 30. There are two blinde men healed, and re­stored to their sight, and that purely upon their faith; which great mercy coming in upon their faith, was certainly a great token of divine ap­probation, though indeed it be not then said that their sins were forgiven them. Now what is the proper object of their faith at this time? It is the power of Christ to help them. Jesus saith unto them, Believe yee that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea Lord; then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith so be it unto you, and their eyes were opened. The last instance is of the Centurion's faith, which I must needs say I think as pertinent an instance as either of the two former, for his faith is highly approved of Christ, I have not found so great faith no not in Israel, as in this stranger to Israel; and upon it speaks of him and others, that are none of the children of the Kingdome, that is, not natural Jewes, that yet shall go to heaven before these that are; therefore I doubt not but this was a justifying [Page 252] [...] [Page 253] [...] [Page 254]faith in the Centurion. Now let us see the compass of this Faith, or wherein it chiefly manifested it self: Why it was onely in this, that Christ was a­ble to cure his servant of the Palsie, nay he thought that diseases were as much under the power of Christ to cure, as the Centurions servants were un­der him to command; he could make Diseases come and go, as his servants would at his command, Mat. 8, from the 5. to the 14.

Having given instances of Faith in Christ which justifies, besides Faith in his blood, I shall give one general proof from a most remarkable Scripture out of the New-Testament, for faith as justifying, which onely carries in it a dependance upon God and Christ in straits, and persecutions, and distres­ses: And indeed I must confess, the former instan­ces are not of so full proof to my particular, (though they are of good use) because til Christ's death, faith in his blood was not so necessary (if at all necessary) to Justification, as afterwards; but this place which I shall now give, wil be beyond all exception; it is Heb. 10.36, 37, 38. For ye have need of patience—for yet a little while, and he that shall come, will come, and will not tarry: Now the just shall live by faith, and if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. The Hebrews here were un­der great persecutions for the profession of the Gospel, and they were somewhat inclined to Apo­stacy, which here the Author of this Epistle en­deavours to prevent by promises and threatnings; 'tis but a little while, and he that shall come, will come, and will not tarry; 'tis not long (saith he) ere de­liverance wil come one way or other, either by the coming of Christ to judgement, or some temporal deliverance. In Habbakkuk it is, The Vision is yet [Page 255]for an appointed time, though it tarry, wait for it: And in the mean time (saith the Author of this Epi­stle) while the Vision tarries, whilst he that is coming, tarries, wait his coming, and endeavour to support your selves by faith, for the just shall live by faith; that is, Faith wil keep him alive in straits: The life that I live in the stesh, (saith Paul) I live by the faith of the Son of God: And saith Ha­bakkuk, Although the Fig-Tree should not blossome, neither shall fruit be in the Vine, &c. (when he de­scribes a Famine) yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation, Hab. 3.17, 18. This could be done onely by such a Faith as the Hebrews are provoked to live by: This faith (you see there­fore) by which the just live, may be as wel a depen­dance upon the goodness, and providence, and po­wer of God to support us in, or deliver us out of straits and difficulties, as resting upon the blood of Christ; and that this living by Faith upon the Pow­er of God, and goodness of God here spoken of, is an act of justifying-Faith, nothing is plainer, for that this is the great sentence the Apostle quotes to prove Justification by Faith out of the Old-Te­stament, Rom 1.17. Gal. 3.11. when yet the occa­sion upon which it is delivered by Habbakkuk, ch. 2,4. was much like that of the Hebrews, and there­fore there is more of that place quoted in the Ho­brews, than in the Romans or Galatians. Therefore if the Apostle would prove Justification by Faith out of this Scripture, he must at least allow it as ju­stifying in that case, in which it is particularly used in the original place, which was resting upon the providence of God in a time of danger; therefore resting upon the providence of God in a time of danger, is an act of Faith as justifying, even in the [Page 256]dayes of the Gospel; therefore there are other acts of Justifying-Faith even in the days of the Gospel, besides that of resting upon the blood of Christ.

2dly, Therefore my great Assertion is, That all acts of true Faith justifie, though there is (I be­lieve) some special excellency in that act which re­spects the blood of Christ; but if our Faith be but a right New-Testament-Faith, every act of it ju­stifies: As under the Old-Testament they that had all things that were essential to an Old-Testament Faith, were justified over and over, by every re­newed act of Faith, whether in one kind, or ano­ther, in one case, or another: One man's Faith shews it self in a time of Famine, as Habbakkuk's; another in imprisonment, as Jonah's and Jeremy's; a third in leaving his Countrey when God calls him out, as Abraham's; or in believing he should have a son born, when it was very unlikely; in be­lieving he should have him again from the dead af­ter he had killed him with his own hand, which was more improbable; another's Faith in building an Ark, as Noah's; another in hiding of Spyes, &c. So now (I say) as it was then in the acts of an Old. Te­stament-Faith, it is in an answerableness in the days of the New-Testament; he whosoever hath all the essentials of a New-Testament-Faith, is justified o­ver and over a thousand times, according to the renewed acts of Faith, if he believe as the Centu­rion did for his servant, or as the woman of Ca­naan did for her daughter, Matth. 16.28. or as the blind men did for themselves; as the Hebrews were to do in the power and goodness of God for their deliverance; or as the Galatians should have done more in the death and blood of Christ, for they [Page 257]did evacuate the death of Christ in the way that they went, Gal 2.21. I say, they that exercise faith in any of these acts, their faith is justifying in eve­ry of these acts; onely provided that the Faith be a true New-Testament-Faith, though I may affirm once for all, That there is no true faith in God, but in the dayes of the New-Testament (after sufficient in­formation) will prove a Faith in Christ, and of a right New-Covenant strain. We see this proved by the e­vent in the Apostles days, Acts 13.48. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the Word of the Lord, and as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed; ‘That is, (saith Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase) all they of the Gentiles that had any care or pursuit of the life to come, the Gentile-Proselytes, or that were fitly disposed and qualified for the Gospel to take root in, re­ceived the Doctrine of Christ thus preached to them. In his Annotations upon this verse he tells us, That this was Mr. Mede's conjecture and that they were already believers.’ So that their conversion was onely this, That their Faith which before was a Faith in God, now (through that disposition and readiness that it had in it to embrace all further discoveries of the Grace of God) turned into a Faith in Christ. Therefore I may say, where-ever there is any act of Faith in God, that act is justifying; and the reason now why every act of Faith exercised upon one occa­sion or another, doth justifie, is this, for that it is faith in us that is our Gospel-Righteousness; therefore whenever there is an act of this righteousness ex­erted, there must eccho an act of Justification from heaven, according to the Law of the New-Cove­nant, which is sealed with the blood of Christ, that [Page 258]whosoever believeth on God that justifieth the un­godly, or on Christ his Son, his Faith is counted to him for righteousness, Rom. 4.5. or he shall not be ashamed, Rom 10.11. He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting life, John 3.36

As often therefore as thou dost any action that doth demonstrate this Faith in God, or Faith in Christ, so often are all thy fins pardoned, so often art thou highly approved of God, for there are these two things in justification: We see Abraham was justified twice according to the express words of Scripture; and there is a third act of his Faith recorded, his going out of his own Countrey, to which I doubt not might be accommodated that Scripture (which St. James onely accommodates unto a latter act of Faith, though it was in the o­riginal place spoken upon occasion of a former) that then that Scripture was fulfilled, which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: And as Abraham was justified twice, yea thrice, and that for several sorts of acts of faith; and the other instances given both out of the Old and New-Testaments, for their various acts of Faith upon very different occasions, yet all because they agreed in the general nature of faith; so thou Saint, whosoever thou art, do but live in the actings of faith, and thou art an haypy, par­doned, approved, and juscified person. All our life therefore should be a life of faith; St. Paul lived no other life; The life (saith he) which I now live in the flesh, I live by the saith of the Son of God, who lo­ved me, and gave himself for me, Gal. 2.20. That di­stinguishing character, one or more (saith Mr. John Goodwin in his Banner of Justification displayed, p. 37.) ‘of justifying-saith which we are at pre­sent [Page 259]inquiring after, respecteth not the object, but the intrinsick nature or complexion of it; for at to the object, it is variously exprest in the Scrip­ture; sometimes it is called a believing God, Rom. 43. sometimes a believing on God, Joh. 12.44. sometimes a believing on Christ, or on the Son of God, or on the Lord, Act. 11.17. Ioh 3.18. 1 Ioh. 5.10. So the object is various,’ onely it must be for the intrinsick nature of it, a believing in the heart, Rom. 10.9. a believing with the heart, ver. 10. a believing with all the heart, Act. 8.37. a faith unfeigned, 1 Tim. 1.5 [...] a faith working by love; and such a faith justifi­eth in all the acts of it, though exercised upon dis­ferent, yet proper objects.

Now I find one Caution necessary to be given upon what I have delivered, which is this; That what I have said of faith, that it justifies in every act of it, to the procuring pardon of sins, and Di­vine Approbation, doth not at all confound the acts of Faith, as if there were not a distinctness to be kept and observed in the actings of Faith; as some may have such a gross conception as this, be­cause I have said that the Centurion was justified for his faith in Christ for the healing of his servant, and the woman of Canaan for faith for her daugh­ter; Abraham for [...]ffering his son, and so every man for any act of true Faith; therefore if a man be to seek for the justification of his person, let him find out but any thing in which Faith may act, and he shall be justified.

As for instance, I think it the duty of any that are enlightned concerning the corruptions of the Church of Chrise, to believe that God wil destroy the Papal Hierarchy, and all the superstitious inno­vations which the Church of Rome hath introdu­ced [Page 260]into the Worship of God; yea, and I think to believe it strongly at this time, when there is so great improbability of it, is mighty acceptable to God, and perhaps another such act of Faith as A­braham's was, that he should have a son, and as ju­stifying. But now if one that hath lived wicked­ly, but now is greatly convinced of his danger, as the Gaoler was, should ask what he should do to besaved and justified, it were a strange thing to put him upon this act of Faith, That God would destroy the Pope of Rome, which yet may be an act of justifying-faith to another man; We would say to him, as Paul and Silas did to the Gaoler when he asked this question, They said, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, Acts 16.30, 31 Believe that the blood of Christ can wash out as great stains as any of thy sins have made; believe that Christ is willing to receive thee, cast thy self upon his mercy and goodness. Though every act of Faith juscifie, yet there is a season for every act of Faith: When the Centurion had a servant sick, his act of Faith in the power of Christ was season­able; the womans faith for her daughter was sea­sonable; the blind men's was seasonable; Abraham's three acts were feasonable; Noah's, and Rahab's, and that of Phineas, were all seasonable.

Faith is a Divine faculty in the soul, which hath great variety of operations, e'en as many as the sight hath objects, which are commended by the several seasons and occasions of acting: Faith in famine seeds us, in prison it sets us at liberty, in weakness of nature it strengthens us, yea and in weakness of Grace too. Faith sometimes [...]ixeth upon the Power of God, sometimes upon the Wis­dom, sometimes upon the Faithfulness of God; [Page 261]sometimes upon one attribute, sometimes upon a­nother: Wee may see in Heb. 11. throughout the whole chap. what variety of glorious operations and effects Faith hath had; Through Faith they sub­dued Kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promi­ses, stopped the mouths of lyons, quenched the violence of fire, out of weakness were made strong, women re­ceived their dead raised to life again, &c. ver. 33. to the end. All which were justifying acts of Faith, onely they were seasonable, and prudent; he that was cast to the Lyons, did not believe to have the sire quenched; and they that were cast into the fire, did not believe to have the mouths of the Lyons stopped: Every act of faith is justifying; but then faith is as an universal faculty, which acts according to all the particular occasions of the soul, and so it justifies:

I shall now add something of testimony out of Dr. More upon this second question, What acts of Faith justifie? because I am very sensible that my answer to it may seem very strange, and sound ve­ry harshly unto some good men; and I shall prove out of him, so far as his Authority wil prove it, That Abraham's act or acts of faith, which were justifying to him, were acts of faith in the Power, Justice, and Goodness of God, and that they justi­fie by such their respect had unto these Attributes, as also, That our Gospel-Faith, which indeed hath many new objects and encouragements offered to it, doth justifie onely by agreeing with Abraham's faith in the general nature of faith, or (to use Mr. Good­wins words) in the intrinsick nature and complexion of Faith, which is ready to lay hold of all occasions of discovering our true and hearty dependance upon God, acknowledging our own weakness, re­nouncing [Page 262]all carnal confidence in any thing short of the omnipotent Power and Goodness of God. And after these quotations out of him, I shal pro­ceed to some other questions. In his Mysterie of Godliness, p. 379. ‘ Faith (saith he) which is so high­ly commended by the Apostle, I say, it signifies nothing else but this in general, viz. An high sense of, and considence in the Power, Justice and Goodnesse of God, and a firm belief that he will assuredly bring to pass whatsoever he hath promised, seem it never so unlikely and dissicult to flesh and blood: And this is that which is so highly commended in Abraham, as it is plain in the 4th. to the Romans, who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many Nations; and being not weak in faith, he con­sidered not his own body, now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, nor yet the deadness of Sardah's womb, being fully perswaded, that what God had pro­mised, he was ABLE to perform; and therefore (says the Apostle) it was imputed to him for righteousness. That is to say, God approved of him.’

In all this Justification of Abraham, there is not a word of the blood of Christ; for though I be­lieve it was the blood of Christ that procured A­brahams pardon (as a price) yet I doubt not but it was Abrahams faith in the power and faithfulness of God that justified him. Again, pag 380: near the end of it: ‘Thus (saith he) from the exam­ple of Abraham would the Apostle commend the CHRISTIAN FAITH unto the World, and in particular to the Jews, the off-spring of Abraham: For at the end of the fourth Chapter he makes this use of Abrahams faith being imputed to him for righteousness, that we might also be brought [...] TO BELIEVE IN HIM THAT RAISED [Page 263]UP JESUS CHRIST FROM THE DEAD, who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification.’ As Abrahams faith in the Power of God to give him a son, was justifying; so is our faith in the Power and Mercy of God (as having raised up Jesus Christ from the dead, who was deli­vered for our offences) justifying. Our faith, viz. the Christian faith, hath somewhat more in it, than was in Abrahams faith; yet Abrahams faith proving Justification to him, we may well be encouraged to expect Justification in the way of a Gospel­saith.

And pag. 381. he gives us another instance of a Gospel-faith, which he parallels with the faith of Abraham; and that is, A faith in the power of God to raise up Christ within us by his living Spirit, from the 11th. ver. of Rom. 8. which I think is indeed rightly interpreted, though (with the favour of that great man) not so happily applied; but that I shall speak unto, viz. wherein I differ from the Dr. upon the next question: The words are these; But if the Spirit of him that raised up jesus from the dead, dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit which dwelleth in you; and if Christ be in you, the bo­dy is dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness, ver. 10. His interpretation of the verse is excellent in my mind, and it is to this sense as I apprehend it: That when we are Christians, and have the Spirit of Christ dwelling in us, and the presence of Christ by his Spirit, we shall be sensible how far yet we remain unsanctified, and that unsanctified part in us which the Apostle calls the body of death, and desires to be delivered from, will appear as ghastly and deadly a thing to us, as [Page 264]the dead body tyed by Mezentius to the living, did to him, because Christ is living in us: But yet now our Christian faith teacheth us to believe, that though the body be dead because of sin, that is, there be a great part of us yet unsanctified and dead because of sinful remainders in it, and by rea­son of this unsanctified part or body of death in us, we are exceeding heavy and indisposed to all holiness and goodness, yet that the Spirit of Christ in us is life and righteousness, and will by degrees qvicken those very dead, unsanctified parts that are yet within us; for if the Spirit of him that rai­sed up Christ from the dead, dwell in us, he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken our mortal hodies (that is, that unsanctified part that is at pre­sent dead in sin) by his Spirit which dwelleth in us. Dr. More's words are, ‘We finding a comforta­ble warmth in the grateful arrivals of the holy Spirit, do believe, That he that raised up Christ from the dead, wil in due time even quicken these our mortal bodies, or these dead bodies of ours, and make them conspire and come along with ease and chearfulness, and be ready, and active com­plying instruments in alll things with the Spirit of Righteousness. Which belief, viz. that God will thus by his Spirit quicken our mortal bodies, is (saith he) a chief point in the Christian faith and most of all parallel to that of Abrahams, who believing in the goodness, and power, and faith­fulness of God, had, when both himself and his Wife Saraah were dry and dead, as to natural ge­neration, and so hopeless of ever seeing any frui [...] of her Womb, who had, I say, Isaac born to him who bears joy and laughter in the very Name o [...] him, and was undoubtedly a type of Christ ac­cording [Page 265]to the spirit. For Isaac is the wisedom, power, and righteousness of God, flowing our and effectually branching it self so through all the faculties both of man's soul and body, that the whole man is carryed away with joy and triumph to the acting all whatsoever is re­ally and substantially good, even with as much satisfaction and pleasure as he eats when he is hungry, and drinks when he is dry. And these now (according to the designe of the Dis Dis­course) are acts of a Gospel-faith, which justifie us, as Abraham's believing in the power of God for a Son did justifie him.’ I come now to ano­ther Question, which is this:

How doth Faith justifie? The fifth question of Iustifi­cation or under what notion and consideration doth faith justifie?

Now to this I answer, that Faith justifies as our Righteousness. It doth not justifie, as some affirm, only by relying upon the blood of Christ, or apprehending the righteousness of Christ; for I have given instances of several acts of faith which were justifying acts, that had not this respect at all unto the blood of Christ, at least not visibly, and the reward of Justification was reckoned to them upon other accounts. Abraham was fully perswaded that God was ABLE TO PERFORM, and THEREFORE it was imputed to him for righteousness, Rom. 4.21, 22. Yea, I have given instances of a faith in Christ that was justifying, and yet was not di­rected to the blood of Christ, by any thing that appears in the Scriptures quoted. No, faith it self is our righteousness; faith in the power of God was Abraham's righteousness; and faith in the power of God, according as our necessities [Page 266]at any time require, will be our righteousness. But more especially, faith in the power of Christ, or in the blood of Christ, is our Gospel­righteousness; though, as I affirmed before, there cannot be true faith in God now in the dayes of the Go­spel, but it will turn into a faith in Christ as well as in God.

And for this Assertion, that Faith is our Righ­teousness, I shal give several Scriptures; Rom. 4.3. What saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness: that is, his believing in God, and relying upon his power and faithfulness for the fulfilling of his promise; this faith of his was accepted so farr, was so highly pleasing to God, that God made him his friend, Jam. 2.22, 23. and reputed and reckoned him (through grace) as righteous as if he had kept the whole Law. So Rom. 4. ver. 5. To him that believeth in God, that justifieth the un­godly, his faith is counted to him for righteousness; What plainer expression can there be than this for our Assertion? his faith is counted for righ­teousness to him, or for his righteousness.

And for a little proof from the testimony of others, for this Assertion (I reckon) is somwhat harsh, see what Mr Baxter and Mr John Goodwin say upon it.

In his Aphorisms of Justification, Thesis 20. pag. 108. saith Mr Baxter, ‘Our Evangelical righteousness is not without us in Christ, as our Legal righteousness is, but consisteth in our own actions of Faich and Gospel-obedi­ence. Thesis 23. pag. 125. In this sense also, it is so farr from being an errour, to affirm [Page 267]that faith it self is our righteousness, that it is a truth necessary for every Christian to know; that is, Faith is out Evangelical righteousness in the sense before explained, as Christ is our Legal righteousness.’ And in the explication of this Thesis, pag. 128. he hath these words: ‘Our Evangelical righteousness, or Faith, is im­puted to us for as real righteousness, as per­fect obedience, not that it is as much in true value, yet it is so accepted because of the value of Christ's satisfaction.’ Thesis 57. pag. 225. ‘It is the act of faith which justifies men at age, and not the habit; yet not as it is a good work, or as it hath in it self any excellency above other graces: But 1. in the nearest sense, directly and properly as it is the fulfil­ling the condition of the new Covenant: in the remote and more improper sense, as it is the receiving of Christ, and his satisfactory righteousness.’

Mr John Goodwin likewise declares himself not to be of their minde, who conceive or teach, That faith justifies as it is an instrument recei­ving Christ's righteousness, pag. 38. ult. Banner of Justification: therefore it must justifie as an act, which by God's ordination investeth us in the priviledges of Justification; therefore in his judgment faith it self is our righteousness.

But I shall adde no more in answer to those men that hold, That Faith justifies only as it applyes the righteousness or blood of Christ un­to the soul; for I have shewn at large above, That faith justifies in other acts of it, besides resting upon the blood of Christ. I shall have only here to do with Dr More his Notion (and [Page 268]it is Mr Smith's too) of the righteousness of Faith, or Faith its being reckoned or imputed for righteousness: and indeed I am very sorry that I should have a word to say against the opi­nion of so worthy a man, and one that labour; so vigorously and successfully against all that effeminacy of notion in Religion which is found amongst the Antinomians, or others. Neither yet do I much differ from him in designe; only I cannot be faithfull to my present subject, if I should not take notice of his unhappy mis-in­terpreting those phrases of the Righteousness of faith, Justification, and Faith's being impu [...]td for Righteousness. I shall first give an account of the Doctor's opinion, and expressions in this busi­ness, and then shew the reasons of my dissent from him herein. [In the 380 pag. of that book, which I have so often quoted, to borrow some authority and assistance from in this Discourse, I mean his Mystery of Godliness, at the end of that page the Doctor commenting upon Rom. 4.24, 25. To believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification, hath these words: ‘In this verse are contained the two grand Pri­viledges of the Gospel; that is, Forgiveness of sins upon the satisfaction of Christ's death, and the Justifying of us, that is, THE MA­KING OF US JUST AND HOLY, THROUGH A SOUND FAITH IN HIM THAT RAISED JESUS FROM THE DEAD.’ I need quote no more to shew the Doctor's notion, and apprehension of the whole business; but yet I shall ex abundanti quote some other passages. The Doctor you see is of opi­nion, [Page 269]That Justification signifies making us just, holy, and righteous; and when we are made so, then God looks upon us as so, because he judg­eth of things aright; and because Faith makes us truly holy, inwardly just and righteous, therefore this righteousness, by which we are thus inherently righteous, is called The Righ­ceousness of Faith. For this see page 379. about the middle of it: ‘ Abraham being not weak in faith, considered not his own body now dead, being fully perswaded that what God had promised him he was able also to perform; and therefore (saith the Apostle) it was imputed to him for righteousness, that is to say. God approved of him FOR A GOOD AND PIOUS MAN, who not con­fulting with the natural improbability of the thing, but giving firm credence to the pro­mise of God, did that which was due to the goodness and power of God, and BECOME­ING A GOOD AND RIGHTEOUS MAN. So that [...], is NOTHING ELSE but to be approved as a good man, or a doer of that which is righteous and good, and that be­cause he does that which is good and righteous.’ And afterwards in the same page, [...] signifies ‘ any virtue or goodness in a man whatsoever, with much more to the same purpose.’ And at last adds in page 372. Sect. 9. This is the only war­rantable notion that I can finde of being justi­sied by faith.

So, Mr Smith of Cambridge (as I shew above) page 220. saith, that [...] and [...], the Righteousness of Faith and the Righteousness of God is only a Christ-like na­ture in man's soul, &c.

[Page 270]Having given an account of the Doctor's judgment, I shall now shew in how many things I agree with the Doctor as to this business, and then where I conceive there needs some rectifi­cation of the Doctor's notion: And first of all, I confess these are two GRAND PRIVILEDGES of the Gospel (as the Doctor sayes) viz. The forgiveness of sins and The sanctification of our na­tures; which latter the Doctor (as I doubt not) mistakes to be meant by the word Justification in Rom. 4.25.

2. I acknowledge, that true Sanctification is produced only by faith; purifying their hearts by faith, Acts 15 9. no other principle will work holiness in the soul. The Law made nothing per­fect, as to inward holiness.

3. I grant, that if true Sanctification should be wanting from Faith, that Faith would not be a righteousness, would not justifie; Faith without works is dead.

4. I allow that Works have some share, per­haps a second place, in the matter of Justifica­tion continued; so saith Mr Baxter often, and I think so saith St James, Jam. 2.24. Yee see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

5. I allow that Justification is attributed se­veral times in Scripture to a Work, the Faith not mentioned, though the Faith is understood, nay the chief honor belongs to faith, and the crown is to be set upon Faith's head, if we wili make a strict and right interpretation of that Scri­pture whatever it be. Thus the act of Phineas in killing Zimri and Cosbi is reckoned for righ­teousness, and yet no mention of his faith, Psal. [Page 271]6.30, 31. Then stood up Phineas and EXECUTED JUDGMENT, and so the plague was stayed, and IHAT was counted unto him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore. So very many of the actions in Hebr. 11. which are there by the au­thor of that Epistle reckoned to be the actions of Faith, and in several places of that Chapter said to be imputed for righteousness, verses 4, 5, 7. yet in the original places, where their stories are recorded, not a word mentioned of their faith: Compare Abel's history, Gen. 4.4. with Heb. 11.4. compare Enoch's, Gen. 5.24. with Heb. 11.5. Noah's, Gen. 6.13, 22. with Heb. 11.7, &c. There is not a word mentioned of their faith in Genesis, but only of their works, and yet their faith in those works is plainly said by the Au­thor of this Epistle to the Hebrews to be a justi­fying faith; Justification is indeed attributed to works, the faith not mentioned. And so some­times pardon of sins and eternal life are promi­sed to other graces besides faith, Acts 3.19. Math. 5. from ver. 3. to ver. 11. for these two reasons: 1. For that they have a share, or a se­cond place in the matter of Justification; but 2. and especially, For that they necessarily sup­pose faith as being the fruits and issues of a true and lively faith.

Yea. 6. I will allow that [...] Righteous­ness, in the New Testament, yea and in St Pauls Epistles signifies Holiness, Rom. 6.13 18, 20. and that [...] signifies to be just, Rev. 22.11. [...], He that is righteous let him be righteous still: which two places the Do­ctor makes use of for proof. But that [...] or [...] should have these significati­ons, [Page 272]where the Apostle is strictly speaking to the business of Justification, I can by no means al­low, yea I think it most abhorrent from the A­postles designe: in this business, what saith the Apostle, Rom. 3.11. [...] there is none righteous, no not one: here the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith, Rom. 1.17. There is no other righteousness takes place here.

And to rip up the whole business again, which here I am put upon by the Doctor's assertion; and interpretations, though otherwise I might have gone on smoothly in my way.

First of all, surely the Doctor will not deny that Justification and Sanctification have diffe­rent proper conceptions and notions, which they are to be understood by; that Justificati­on is God's pardoning our sins, and receiving our persons into special love and favour, that Sanctification is a mans likeness to God in his heart and life; or if the Doctor should deny this, there are several places will evidence it. I shall name but two; Acts 13.38, 39. Be it know: unto you therefore, Men and Brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him all that BELIEVE are justified FROM ALL THINGS, from which yee could not be justi­fied by the Law of Moses: ‘That is, (saith Dr Hammond) shall certainly be freed and pur­ged from the wrath of God, and the punish­ments attending sin in another world, from which the Law of Moses could not by all its Ceremonies, Washings, and Sacrifices, purge or cleanse us.’ The other Scripture shall be that in Janes 12.24. Yee see then how that by works [Page 273]a man is justified, and not by faith onely. Take Justifi­cation here for sanctification, and let any one see if he can make sence of it; nay it is plain in that Chapter that Justification is taken for being high­ly approved of God, and being made the friend of God, ver. 25. And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness; and then (as it were exege­tical of that expression) it is added, he was called the friend of God: But I know the Dr will allow of the particular without this proof, That Justification and Sanctification have these different and proper conceptions mentioned.

2dly, Certainly the Dr. will allow that the A­postle Paul hath a mighty vigorous and curious Discourse concerning Justification, in its proper no­tion, or its foreusal acception, as the Dr himself ex­presseth it pag. 379. ad finem. The Apostle forms a professed Discourse, nay a Dispute with the Jew and Judaizing-Gentile, upon the business of Justifi­cation, taken for Divine approbation; they thought to obtain the favour of God one way, but he shews them another. These two particulars I shall take for granted. Now I proceed.

3dly, The Apostle therefore being to remove one way of Justification, viz. that of the Legallist, and to set up another, he makes mention of two Righteousnesses, one of the Law, the other of Faith: That of the Law, as I have shewed in the beginning of this Treatise, is a perfect conformi­ty to the Law, perfect inherent righteousness, un­erring obedience; this (saith the Apostle) no man hath, [...], there is none righteous, no not one; and the Apostle in that third chap. of the Rom. by enumerating all sorts of sins which we are [Page 274]all more or less guilty of, proves that no man can be jus [...]ed by the Law; this righteousness therefore the Apostle having fully removed, as an impossi­ble unattainable thing, he (as a Messenger from heaven, substitutes another righteousness, which he calls Gods Righteousness, in opposition to our own; the righteousness of God is revealed, that is, that righ­teousness which God will accept; and what is that? why it is Faith: The righteousness of God is reveal­ed from Faith to Faith; as it is written, The Just shall [...] [...]aith, Rom. 1.16.17.

The scope of the Apostles Discourse (I doubt not) is this, That God hath designed and determined, that, seeing men have lost their Original purity, and to can no longer stand upon their own bot­tom, he will take them off from it altogether, and make them live a life of pure dependance upon himself, and that is by faith, which must have holi­ness of life attending it; and those that come off to do this, renounce themselves, their own righ­teousness, and all creature-dependencies, and roll themselves, and all their concerns, upon him, and upon his Son, though their imperfections may be [...], yet this their faith shall be imputed to them [...]r righteousness, which they may plead for their [...]tilication, according to the Law of the new Covenant, and they shall pass for righteous men, as truly iustified and approved, as if they had per­fectly kept the whole Law, under which they were created, especially since God had made provision otherways, how th [...] honor of that Law might re­ceive r [...]ation, viz. by the death of his Son up­on the Cross.

And this I suppose is no santastical notion of Justification by Faith, which I suppose the Dr. is [Page 275]chiefly set against; and seeing how many wayer men had corrupted the Doctrine of Justification by Faith, after he had solidly confuted their opini­ons, betakes himself to that of his own, which I dare say had no evil intention, though I still affirm that it is most unhappily exprest, and I cannot but read it with a great displeasure and indignation.

For to think that the Apostle should make so much to do to decry the design of a legal Righte­ousness, which in truth was no other in it self but true and real, onely it must be) perfect holiness, (however the Legallists all along in their pursuit after the Righteousness of the Law, minded no­thing less) I say, for the Apostle to dispute so vi­gorously against a Righteousness by perfect un­erring obedience, under the name of one's own righteousness, and to set up Faith as Gods righ­teousness, and yet that this righteousness of saith should signifie nothing else but those poor inconsiderable effects of Faith in holiness of life, which the greatest part of Christians attain un­to onely, this seems a mean business for the A­postle to labour about: Alas, 'tis true, Faith works holiness, and all the great Legallists shall ne­ver attain by all their stir and ado, to so much true ho­liness as the meanest believer attains unto; but yet this which we attain, though by faith, is no­thing to give name to a righteousness in the sight of God, for Justification; to be justified by, or for our holiness of faith, is a low and base expression of Gospel-Justification. The righteousness of Faith is an higher thing, when a man comes off from himself, and from all Creature-depen­dencies, and professeth to live upon the Power, and Goodness, and Faithfulness of God, and [Page 276]the blood & spirit of Christ alone, such a man hath made God himself his righteousness, and Christ his righteousness; and this is a glorious righte­ousness indeed, far beyond the righteousness of a perfect and unerring obedience, if a man had it; for this see one proof out of the Old-Testa­ment, and one or two out of the New; Isa. 45.24, 25. Surely shall one say, in the Lord have I righ­teousness and strength, even to him shall men come, and all that are incensed against him, shall be ashamed, in the Lord shall all the Seed of Isral be JUSTIFIED, and SHALL GLORY. For the New-Testament I have often mentioned already that place, Gal. 2.20. yet it can never be too often repeated: I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet not I (or no longer!) but Christ liveth in me, and the [...] that I now l [...]ve in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who lived me, and gave himself for me. Here St. [...]aul had a glorious righteousness indeed, for Christ was his riches and righteousness, and dwelt in him by Faith; that is, he lived upon Christ by faith; 'tis true, he had a Christ-like nature in his soul, but this Christ-like nature was not the righteousness of faith, or the righ­teousness of God, or his Gospel-righteousness, but a fruit of that Faith which was his righte­ousness. All other glorying is excluded in the Gospel, save cr [...]ely to glory in the Lord, Rom 3.27. 2 Cor. 1.30, 31. Of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousnes [...]y —that according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

Now this making God and Christ a mans righteousness, is that alone which commends the Gospel so highly above the Law, sets up he [Page 277]second Adam above the first, & gives a just account of all those Elogies which the Apostle gives of the Gospel, & the way of believing, above the first way of works, which I suppose out of Dr Moor's notion would not arise at all; For though the D ^rs notion should be true, which I confess there is no contradi­ction in, & I have delivered some things above, p 218 & 219. but a little too much in favor of it I would have that expression p. 219. [...] shall say something to the like purpose; under­stood only thus: Tha sanctifica­tion is the condition of our justifi­cation one­ly in the se­cond place, faith in the first. I say, suppose the D [...] notion should be true, That faith justifies us purely, because it sanctifies us; and that the holiness which arises from faith, should be that which is called the Righteousness of Faith; yet how could this ever advance the Gospel above the Law in the bu­siness of Justification: If we take the Law, not in the mistaken sense of the Legallist, but in the pro­per sense of it? For so the righteousness of the Law is unerring obedience, and the righteousness of Faith: in the D [...]s sence) is obedience full of defects: Now comparing obedience with obedi­ence, and the righteousness of Faith with the righ­teousness of the Law, how can the righteousness of Faith be preferred to the righteousness of the Law? How can the second Adam in the holiness which he causeth, be advanced above the first in his earthly righteousness? That therefore which make the ex­cellency and precedency of the Gospel to the Law, is this, that the righteousness of the Law was one's own, this of Faith makes God himself, and Christ himself our righteousness, by our living wholly upon them. I have said as much as I intend, to the Dr.s notion of the righteousness of saith; and I do cordially profess, That what I have spoken hath been meerly out of love to the truth; and if the truth had not engaged and enforced me to deliver what I have, I should not have presumed to en­counter [Page 278]counter such a great man, being my self not worthy to carry the Doctors books after him. And I know the Doctors candor and ingenuity to be so great, that he will give others leave as freely to differ from him as he takes to differ from others.

I shall shut up this Question with a grave ad­monition out of Mr John Goodwin, in his Banner of Justification displaied, pag. 32. ‘That Faith ju­stifies (saith he) is the constant assertion of the Scripture, and the Architectonical doctrine of the Gospel, Rom. 5.1, 3, 28. Gal. 2.15.16. By the way, upon occasion of these (with many the like passages in the New Testament, wherein Justification by faith is [...] expresly affirm­ed) I cannot but mention my dislike of their strein in teaching, who lay down and deliver it to the people for a doctrine positively and plainly, That men are not justified by saith or by believing. Douotless it is not convenient or comely, positively to deliver or assert that for a doctrine of truth, which is so diametral­ly opposite to [...] frequent, clear, and ex­press words of the Scripture. And again, I judge it very incongruous for any Minister of the Gospel to se [...] up a doctrine as it were, in defiance of, or in con [...]st against any thing so frequently and so directly in terminis affirmed in the Scriptures, as Justification by faith.’ I do not [...]uce this quotation to infirmate, as if the Doctor did not hold that we are justified by the acts of faith as well as by any other good actions, but for that I am sensible the Doctor in­tends that we are not more justified by the acts of faith than by any other good actions; which [Page 279]if it were true, I could not see how faith could be worthy of so famous attributious of justifi­cation to it, in such an eminent manner, when the Apostle is silent about other graces, only here and there in some places, where there is no such professed dispute, he speaks word [...] in Tayor of other graces and good works in the matter of justification.

I tome now to a fifth Question, which is this:

How do good works justifie?

And in answer to this I must first premise, That seeing the Scripture is so express in it, that works to justifie, Jam. 2.25. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and [...] by saith only; I dare not pass over this Question with­out speaking to it. But I shall need to speak the less to this, because Mr Baxter and others have delivered so much upon it. I shall first shew the agreement which there is betwixt St Paul and St James in this business, and then shew how works justifie.

'Tis true, St Paul assirms Rom. 3.28. chat we are justified by faith without the deeds or works of the Law. St James saith, that we are justified by works and not by faith only; here seems to be a jarring and disagreement. But they are to be recon­ciled by the observation of the several sorts of works that these two Apostles speak of. St Paul speaks of legal works or works of the Law, which contain in them an opinion of merit or debt, as I have shewn above, pag. 97, 98. and a man is justified without these, nay he cannot be justified if he but pretend to these. Therefore the Apostle James must speak of another sort of works, which, whilest a man doth he yet renoun­ces [Page 280]merit in them; and these works a man may be in part justified by, without any prejudice to the doctrine of Justification by faith. This is fully asserted by Mr Baxter, Thesis 76. pag. 292. ‘Neither is there (saith he) the least appearance of a contradiction betwixt this and Paul's do­ctrine Rom. 3.28. if men did not through pre­judice, negligence, or wilfulness over-look this; that in that and all other the like places the Apostle doth professedly exclude THE WORKS OF THE LAW ONLY from Justi­fication, but never at all THE WORKS OF GOSPEL as they are the condition of the New Covenant.’

Works therefore justifie as a less principal part of the condition of the New Covenant: I am not shy to speak in Mr Baxter's words, since I intend much the same thing; they do not ju­stifie from their own merit; so only legal works justifie, but from divine promise and acce­ptance. For proof of this that it is so, that works do justifie in the second place, besides the express words of the Apostle James, I finde the same thing asserted by the Apostle Paul in three several Scriptures. Dr Hammond Par. All that is required to our justification is faith, not all that is cal­led by that name, but such as is made perfect by addi­tion of those duties which we owe to God and our brethren. Gal. 5 [...] In Jesus Christ, (that is, in the doctrine of Jesus Christ) neither circumcision availeth any thing (that is, unto Justification) [...] uncircumcision, but faith whi [...] worketh by Love. Here faith in­deed is [...]aid to justifie, but it is a faith which worketh by love, a working faith. But yet more plainly the same expression is used in two places to our present [Page 281]purpose; Gal. 6.15. For in Christ Jesus neither cir­cumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision, but a new creature; that is, (saith Dr Hammond) the renewed regenerate heart, and it may be added a new life. 2 Cor. 5.17. If any man be in Christ he is a now creature; old things are past away, behold all things are become new; that is, he lives a per­fect new life, and this new life only availeth, un­to Justification beyond circumcision or uncir­cumcision which are meer external Priviledges. The third Scripture where the same expression is used is beyond all exception to our present purpose: 1 Cor. 7.19. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, these are of no consi­deration in the matter of pleasing God, and obtaining his favour; What then is? why the keeping the commandments of God; this is beyond all these considerations of bond and free, cir­cumcised and uncircumcised. But these are the things with which he compares the new crea­ture and good works: he doth not set these a­bove all, when he compares them with faith; in that place where he mentions faith, that is set above works and other graces, as the cause above the effect, the principal agent above the instrument; Neither circumcision availeth a­ny thing nor unc [...]r [...]umb [...]sion, but faith which WORK­ETH BY LOVE. But in these Scriptures we see plainly that work have an influence upon our Justification; they are of great availe in or­der unto it.

If it be objected that the first Justification passeth upon believing before works, I answer, with many others, that there is in the first faith a rooted disposition unto an universal obedi­ence, [Page 282]there is the new creature or new man of the heart there, and in continued justification there is the new man of the life and conversa­tion.

Now the reasons why the Lord would have works in the condition of Justification, though he doth not justifie for works only or chiefly, may be gathered out of the Scripture to be these:

The first reason is this, Reas. Why works are in the condition of Gospel justificati­on. For that without works faith it self cannot be accounted a per­fect saith. Now certainly if faith justifie, it must be a perfect compleat faith, not a maimed imperfect faith. That without works faith is imperfect, and by works it is perfected, are the assertions of the Apostle James, Faith without works is dead. James 2.20, 26 & ver. 22. Seest th [...] how faith wrought with his works, and by works was his faith made perfect. What an uselets imperfect dead thing is a power or faculty for action without operation? What an useless thing would it be for a man to have eyes able to see, only the man hath a continual blinde put be­fore his eyes that he never doth see in all his life? Why just such a thing were faith with­our action, of no worth or use: What an imper­fect faith had Abraham's been if his works and actions had not attended it? Suppose we that when God commanded Abraham to offer up Isaac, he had refused, and said, Lord how then shall there arise of him a great Nation? his faith had been exceedingly discredited: But when he resolves with himself, I will offer him up, for I know that God that raised him out of Sarah's dead womb can as well raise him from the dead [Page 283]after I have killed him and offered him up, here was a noble faith indeed, his faith was perfected by this work; here that grace shewed what it could carry men unto; When any thing attains its end it receives its perfection: Here faith attained its end in carrying Abraham to do so great a work, and therein was perfected, and so obtai­ned the compleat reward of Justification; then the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God: if works had not accompanied his faith, it had proved but an imperfect dead faith, the Scripture had not been fulfilled which faith Abraham believed God. No artificer will own any thing to be a true and perfect piece of work which will not attain it's end, serve the use it is made for; so will not God own that to be faith which will not put us upon acts of con­fidence in himself, and obedience to his com­mands be they never so difficult. For though God knows the heart, and so can see into the very principle of our actions, yet the Lord is pleased to keep that distance of State and Ma­jesty, that he will not seem to know what he doth know, till the outward man express what is in the inward man. God knew before what was in Abraham's heart, but yet he will not seem to know that he was so great a believer, till he had put him upon this trial of offering up his son; Gen 22.12. Now I know that thou fear­est God, seeing thou hast not with-he [...] [...]hy son thine only son from me. Now I confess, what is here said of works in this reason, That faith receives it's perfection from them, can only, properly and immediately be applyed to the works of faith, to other works only remotely, as faith [Page 284]may have some kinde of influence even upon all good works, but however we see that faith is not perfect without some kinde of works. That is the first reason, Faith it self would be an imperfect thing without works, and so could not justifie.

The second reason why works are taken into the condition of Justification is, Reason 2. For that it were neither comely no nor possible for divine approbation (which I have often affirmed to be contained in Justification) to pass upon any man without them. I put these two into one: 1. It were not comely; What a strange thing would it be in the apprehensions of men, if the great and holy God should own a company of persons in the world for his (for certainly whom he justifies he will own for his) that should only be (though they really were) belie­vers, but never do any service for him? Neither plead for his honour when he is blasphemed, nor own his servants when they are in reproach and distressed? Not to mention their negative holiness, which lyes in avoiding the corruptions of the world; without which negative holi­ness, if God should own them, he would be thought the Patron of all Vice, &c. but I dare not express the uncomly consequen­ces that would follow. Now besides the im­possibility that ariseth from this uncomliness, there is also an impossibility that ariseth from the nature of the thing, and that was the se­cond thing I intended in this reason. I say therefore it is impossible that God should ap­prove of any person as just, or take him into his favor and delights (all which the Lord doth [Page 285]in the great business of Justification) that is not a good and a righteous man. God cannot justifie the ungodly whilest he remains ungod­ly; he cannot love him, nor delight in him, nor approve of him, because then he should approve of and delight in that which were contrary to his own nature, viz. in a sinfull wicked person, being himself an holy God.

3. Reason 3. Good works do not justifie only negative­ly, as without which faith would not be per­fect, and without which the object could not be beloved; but good works do help justifie, as that which (after the intervention of mercy and pardon) do render the object lovely to the holy God, and do naturally conciliate the di­vine love and approbation. 'Tis true, all our obedience, while it is any way defective, cannot constrain approbation and love from God, nay our defects must needs bring a guilt upon our best actions, if we are considered as under the law of our creation. But now, after that the good and mercifull God hath found out a comely way how he may shew favour to sinners, it is certain that all their good actions (though they are not immediate acts of Faith, but of Love or Patience, Justice or Temperance) must needs be exceeding pleasing to him, Gal. 5.22, 23. The fruit of the Spirit is Love, Joy, Peace, Long-suffer­ing, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith, Meckness, Tempe­rance, against such there is no law; that is, against such graces and actions or persons adorned with them there is no law. This is but a meiosis; for indeed such graces and gracious persons, though but imperfectly furnished with them, are yet for these things sake (through his graci­ous [Page 286]acceptance of them) highly pleasing to God. For this see Heb. 13.16. Acts 10.4.

And this is that w [...] Mr John Goodwin ac­knowledgeth, who y [...] denyes that works pro­cure Justification, as Justification signifies remis­sion of sins, in the Fanner of Justification display­ed, pag. 48. & 49. ‘When Abraham is said to have been justified by works when he had offered, &c. the meaning is, that upon this great testimony gi­ven by Abraham of the truth and effectualness of his faith God highly APPROVED of him, and DEAL [...] BY HIM AS BY A PERSON RIGHTEOUS AND JUST, and CALLED HIM HIS FRIEND,’ with much more to the same purpose; by this you see how good works do highly please God, so as to justifie us with an high approbation at least, and I should think too even unto remission of sins; so that if such a man that doth these works thus highly pleasing to God have sins upon him lately com­mitted they should be forgiven him, according to these Scriptures, Dan. 4.27. Break, off thy sins by righteousness and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor, Iam 5.15. If he have commit­ted s [...]s they shall be forgi­ven him. if it may be a lengthning of thy tranquil­lity or an healing of thine error, as the margin hath it. So Acts 3.19. Repent yee therefore and be converted, that your iniquities may be blotted out.— Isai. 1.16, 17, 18. Wash ye, make ye clean, put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes, cease to do evil, learn to do well, seck iudgment, relieve the op­pressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord, though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as whi [...]e a­snow, though they be red like crimson they shall be as wool. So lizek. 18 21, 22. Here you see that part [Page 287]of Justification which consists in the remission of sins is promised to good works as the Gospel re­ward of them; and indeed I do not see how these two parts of Justification can be separated, viz. Approbation and Pardon, so as Faith should ob­tain the one, and Good Works the other, though indeed they may well be conceived as distinct parts of Justification. I crave the pardon of that reverend person mentioned in that I take this li­berty to express my self, I shall conclude this Que­stion with those words of Mr Baxter in his Apho­rismes, Thesis 73. pag. 289. & 290. ‘Faith ONLY doth not justifie in opposition to the works of the Gospel, but those works do also justifie as the se­coadary less-principal parts of the condition of the New Covenant.’ I come now to the last Question, which is this,

How comes faith thus eminently to intitule us to justification?. I have asserted, Quest. 6. that though works do justifie, yet faith doth it so eminently, as that gets the chiefest name of righteousness, and works are never called our righteousness, much less are they the righteousness of faith; though it must be allowed as a good consequence, that if we are said to be justified by works, in a sense works are our righteousness, because all Justification is by a righteousness. But to let pass that, that works are a partial, secondary, less principal righteousness. The Question remains, How comes faith to be so eminently our righteousness, as to bear away the name, so that our righteousness by which we are now said to be justified should be called the righ­teousness of faith, in opposition to works, (that is) legal works.

Now to this I answer: in the general, that the [Page 288]great reason of this must be the divine ordination and appointment. It could not be meerly from the nature of the thing: nothing in its own na­ture can justifie a rational creature but perfect righteousness, unerring obedience. Now the high­est faith in the world can never deserve to be ac­counted unerring obedience; faith was but a part of our duty which we owed to God under the first Covenant, that is, relying upon the power, good­ness, and veracity of God; and therefore where­ever faith comes to be our righteousness, or our chief righteousness, it argues that there is a great deficiency in the creature that is so to be justified; and accordingly the Apostle often glances upon this, that glorying is in this way excluded, not by the law of works, but by the law of faith.

Faith therefore cannot justifie by any natural excellency that it hath in it, for though all the men in the world being now sinners and obnoxi­ous to punishment by the law of their creation, should resolve of their own accord to believe that there is so much goodness in God that he will not destroy the work of his own hands, so depending upon his mercy, and therefore they will endea­vour to do all those things which they think may be pleasing and acceptable to him, why all this faith and confidence, attended with the most sin­cere obedience, will not extort a Justification from Almighty God, except it be in his good plea­sure to justifie such believers, and such obedient persons; because they were all obnoxious to pu­nishment for the breach of his law. Faith there­fore cannot justifie but by reason of divine ordi­nation and constitution that hath passed upon it, such as this, The just shall live by faith; and, That [Page 289]if thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and be­lieve in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved, Rom. 10.9. and for this reason I suppose it is so often called Gods righteous­ness, Rom. 10.3. because it was a righteousness not in its own nature as works were, but a righ­teousness purely of divine appointment: This is Mr John Goodwin's notion of it, Pag. 34. of the Banner of Justification displayed. ‘God was plea­sed to decree, or make this for a law (which the Apostle calleth the law of faith, Rom. 3.27) that faith or believing in him through Christ should interesse men in the benefit or blessing of the death and blood shed of Christ; that is, in that remission of sins which was purchased by his death. And in this consideration faith justifieth, viz. by virtue of the Soveraign authority of that most gracious Decree or Law of God, wherein he hath said or decreed, that it shall intitle men unto, or inright them in part and fellowship of that benefit of the death of Christ which con­sisteth in the forgiveness of sins; or (which comes much to the same) as it is a qualification or condition, ordained, covenanted or appoin­ted by God to bring upon those in whom it shall be found the great blessing of that pardon of sin which Christ hath obtained for men by his blood.’ This is Mr Baxter's opinion too; that is, That saith justifies as it is made the chief condition of the N. Covenant. Page 225 of his Aphorisms, Thesis 57. ‘It is the act of faith which justifieth men at age, and not the habit, yet NOT AS IT IS A GOOD WORK;’ (this is directly against Dr Moor's affirmation, who faith, that [...] is nothing else but to be approved as a [Page 290]good man, or a doer of that which is righteous and good, and that BECAUSE he doth that which is good and righteous; methinks here is a Justification for good works purely, and, if faith comes in here to justifie, it doth it only as it is a good work. Mr Baxter is of another minde, viz. That faith doth not justifie only under that qua [...]enus or reduplication AS a good work. ‘Faith (saith Mr Baxter in the Thesis quoted) doth not justlfie AS it is a good work, or as it hath in it self any excellency above other graces: But in the NEAREST SENSE DIRECTLY AND PROPERLY as it is the fulfilling the condition of the New Covenant, &c.’

But now though I have affirmed that it doth not justifie purely from its own nature, Though faith doth not justi­sie purely from it's own na­ture, yet it hath a great ex­cellency in it self which might somewhat recom­mend it to this ser­vice. but chiefly from the ordination of God, and that it could not have justified without this ordination, yet I shall adde, that it had in its own nature a great fitness to be chosen of God for this eminent ser­vice to justifie men by. It was the fittest medium that we can imagine, when the first natural way of works failed, to promote the honour of God and the good of the creature in Justification; which consideration commends highly the wisdom of God in setting it apart for this use, as the chief condition of our Justification. To evince the truth of this, let us consider a little the natural excel­lencyes that there are in faith.

And first of all faith takes in all spiritual ob­jects, Excel­lency of Faith. and represents them to the soul, so that all other graces are beholden to faith for their ob­jects. Heb. 11.1. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen; hope [Page 291]could not be if faith did not give a real and evi­dent being and subsistence to the things that we hope for, as also to all other the invisible and un­seen things which a Christian, a Saint, as such con­verseth with and lives upon. Again, ver. 6. of that chap. 11. Without faith, 'tis impossible to please God; For he that comes unto God must believe that he is—Now it is by faith that we believe and know that God is; ver. 27. by faith Moses forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the King; for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible; by faith Moses saw him that is invisible. I will acknowledge that rea­son may finde out that there is a God, but if a mans wayes please God, his reason delivers over this observation to his faith, which is an higher thing, an higher principle in the soul then reason; though it never contradicts true reason, yet it is somewhat above meer reason If any one here will say that faith in such a case (as the belief that there is a God) is much the same with reason or a rational conviction of the truth of such a Proposition I will not much contend, only because here the di­vine Penman sayes it is by saith we be­lieve there is a God, and his assertion must have a truth in it, we may distin­guish Reason & Faith thus, That Faith is a more particular faculty or habit of divine principles, such as respect God, and Religion; but Reason is a more ge­neral faculty conversant about all ob­jects whatsoever; and this considera­tion must come in, That meer Reason only makes one a man, but Faith makes a man a Saint: and therefore this Faith must have a divine afflatus and spirit in it beyond meer reason.. It is by faith that we believe that God is, and that he is a rewarder of all them that diligently seek him. And these two Propositions thoroughly believed, are the foundation of all true Religion. By faith we receive the notion of God rootedly in our fouls, and then all the discoveries of God in a­ny the effects of his wis­dome, power and good­ness, in his Works, or in his Word; in his Works, [Page 290] [...] [Page 291] [...] [Page 292]Heb. 11.3. By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Whether faith takes this Proposition, That the worlds were made by the word of God out of the Scriptures, or meerly by observation from the works themselves, it comes all to one, as to my present purpose, which is this, to prove that it is faith that strongly and effectually in us ownes the being of God and the works of God. Again, it is faith receives all the revelations of God by any messengers that he sends unto us at any time And in­deed this is the most pro­per notion of faith, viz. an as­fent to te­stimony.. Who hath BELIEVED our report (saith Isaias) and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed, Isai, 53.1. If the arm of the Lord be not revealed to men in the preaching of the word, it is because they do not rightly believe the report. The word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with saith in the hearing of it, Heb. 4.2, 3. and hence it is, for that faith is the pro­per instrument of receiving the word of God, that the Saints in the New Testament are called as often by the name of BELIEVERS as by a­ny other name, Acts 5.14. 1 Tim. 4.12. and the word of the Gospel is called the word of Faith, Rom. 10.8.

Nay, faith doth not only in the first place re­ceive God into the soul, then all the discoveries of God in his Works and Word, but it pitches upon all the particular objects that are there discovered in the Word, and brings them parti­cularly into the soul; faith doth not only re­ceive the doctrine of the Gospel as true in the general, and from God, but because Christ is there revealed, it receives Christ himself, and [Page 293]brings Christ into the soul, and so Christ comes to dwell in our hearts by faith, Eph. 3.17. which is in­deed a figurative expression; there is faith in Christ as well as faith in God the Father, and there is faith in the blood of Christ, &c. but of these things I have spoken largely above in the last character, I bring them in only here as proofs of the excellency of faith, in that it brings all spiritual objects home unto the soul, that so the soul may converse with them in the exercise of all its graces and virtues. In one word, our whole life here at a distance from God must necessarily be a life of faith, We walk by faith not by sight, 2 Cor. 5.7. for till we come to the beatifical Vision of God, we must see him and all his glories and excellencies by faith; and our treatings with God the Father and the Son must be by faith: I have a long time dear­ly loved that Scripture, 1 Pet. 1.8 Whom speaking of Christ) having not seen ye love, in whom though now you see him not, yet believing ye rejoice with [...]oy un­speakable and full of glory. Faith must come into set love on work upon an unseen Christ, or else none of that glorious and unspeakable joy could arise to a Christian; so that by what hath been said in this first particular, Faith is the root-grace in this present state of things. Excel­lency of Faith.

But secondly, Faith is not only the first grace in order and a root-grace, but it is certainly pro­ductive and efficacious in the actuating all other graces, and setting them on work; when once saith hath brought all these glorious objects in­to the soul, first God and all his glorious Attri­butes, then his Revelations, and especially Christ and his Blood, and realized them all un­to [Page 294]the soul, it is almost impossible but all other graces should in their several courses and re­spects which they have to these objects move and work regularly and intensly. Love we know is the fulfilling of the Law, Rom. 13.10. in ra­tional creatures it is the fulfilling of the Law perfectly even in degrees; in broken creatures it is the fulfilling of the Law sincerely in its de­sires and endeavours. Now this faith makes its great instrument to work by. Faith worketh by love, Gal. 5.6. and I shewed above how faith sets hope on work; now these three Faith, Hope, and Charity are the three great graces, 1 Cor. 13.13. all other graces are reducible to these three, and of these three faith is the root­grace. And therefore we finde often in the Scriptures that all Religion is put upon the bare assent of faith. Rom. 10.9. If thou confes; with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved. 1 John 4.2. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come into the flesh is of God. Not as if a meer confession or profession of Christ were sa­ving, for there are many that do profess them­seves Christians that shall go to hell. But accor­ding to that in the Romanes, if they did believe with their heart that God had raised Christ from the dead, together with the ends of his death & resurrection, certainly all those other things which accompany salvation, or have salvation annexed to them, would follow; because true saith, hearty, unseigned faith is a working faith; it works by love to the making a man a new creature, and to the keeping of all the comman­dements [Page 295]of God. And according to this positio [...] I make no doubt that place in James is to be under stood, Jam. 2. where there is a supposition of a su­peration betwixt Faith and Works; that either that place speaks onely of a false and onely pretended faith, and then indeed there may be such a Faith without Works, a dead and unactive Faith, that is the resemblance and appearance of Faith; or else [...]t speaks of a true Faith, and then it is onely by, way of supposition that the Apostle there speaks, that upon supposition any one's Faith (though it were the highest and truest Faith in the World) should not be accompanied by Works, it would not justi­fie, and it is very true upon that supposition: Be­cause Works are as well required as Faith; not but that where-ever there is a true and lively Faith, there will be Works necessarily attending it; and this I believe all will readily acknowledge.

Mr. Baxter is so much of this opinion that Faith is an operative Grace; and puts the soul, where it is, upon gracious actions towards God, that be puts works and obedience into the desinition or de­scription of Faith. In his Aphorisms, pag. 279▪ Thesis 70. ‘Faith (saith he) in the largest sense, as it comprehendeth all the condition of the New-Covenant, may be thus defined: It is, when a sin­ner by the Word and Spirit of Christ being throughly convinced of the righteousness of the Law, the truth of its threatning—the Nature and Offices, Sufficiency and Excellency of Jesus Christ—his free offer to all that will accept of him for their Lord and Saviour, doth hereupon believe the truth of this Gospel, and accept of Christ as his only Lord and Saviour to bring him to God his chiefest good—and doth accordingly [Page 296]rest on him as his Saviour, and SINCERELY, (though imperfectly) OBEY him as his Lord; FORGIVING OYHERS, LOVING HIS PEO­PLE, BEARING WHAT SUFFERINGS ARE IMPOSED, &c.’ and all this sincerely, and to the end. This is part of his desinition of Faith. A­gain, Mr. Baxter in another place, pag. 238. Thesis 62. according to this definition of Faith tells us, ‘That Faith may be called the onely condition of the New-Covenant for two reasons; 1. Because it is the principal condition, and the other but the less principal; and so as an whole Countrey hath ost its Name from a chief City, so may the conditions of this Covenant from Faith. 2. Be­cause all the rest are reducible to it, either being presupposed as necessary antecedents or means, or contained in it as its parts, properties, or mo­difications, or else implyed as its immediate pro­duct,’ or necessary subservient means or conse­quents. And so full to the same purpose, Thesis 73. pag. 280. Thus we see by Scripture, and according to the opinion of a very learned and good man, that Faith is not onely the first Grace in order, but a very operative Grace, and was in its own nature exceedingly sitted for that service which God hath in much Wisdom and Prudence appointed it unto.

But thirdly, [...]. there is yet a more proper reason then either of these, why Faith should be chosen for this uses and that is, for that Faith is a self-em­rying Grace; to live by Faith, is to live purely in dependance upon God and Christ for every thing; and what fitter instrument or condition of Justi­fication could be chosen after the fall of man, when it was most reasonable that if God would save a man, he should have all the glory? Doth not the [Page 297]Apostle insist mightily upon this, both in his Do­ctrine and particular practice? Justification now (saith he) is not of works, lest any man should boast, Eph. 2.9. But by Grace are ye saved through Faith. So Nom. 3.27. Where is boasting then? it is excluded. By what Law? Of works? Nay, but by the Law of Faith. This is St. Paul's Doctrine. Then for his practice; For my part (saith he) I am crucified with Christ, I am a poor dead thing; Nevertheless I live, yet not I, or no longer I, [...], but Christ liveth in me; and the life that I live, is by Faith in Christ, Gal. 2.20. Now that St. Paul is come to live the life of Faith, he is nothing, Christ is all; he is dead, and liveth not, Christ onely liveth in him. So that you see Faith, besides all its other excellencies, hath a peculiar fitness for this service of justifying a sinner; and yet notwithstanding all these excellent qualities that are to be found in Faith, it could not have justified without a Divine ordination and ap­pointment. Now for any to say (as some do) that Love justifies as much as Faith; nay that God doth rather approve of a man for his Love, then for his Faith, is (methinks) very bold and unscriptural Divinity.

I shall onely adde a word of testimony out of Mr. Baxter to this last particular, and so conclude the question, and all the questions which I have to propose about Justification. Pag. 231. of his Apho­risms he hath these words: ‘If God had seen meet to have stamped any thing else to pass for Justifica­tion, it would have passed currantly; yet take this, Faith is, even to our own apprehension, the most apt and suitable condition that GOD COULD have chosen (for as far as we can reach to know) there cannot be a more apt or rational condi­tion—pag. 232. [Page 298]This is the most self-denying and Christ-advancing Work. Nothing could be more proportionable to our poverty, who have no­thing to buy with,’ than thus freely to receive, &c.

I have now done with all the Questions which I thought any ways necessary to be spoken to for the more particular and distinct unfolding of the Do­ctrine of Justification; and I might here shut up the Discourse with the Uses of the whole. But be­fore I come to the Uses, I judge it convenient to add somewhat by way of Appendix; concerning the means or way how Justification came to be transferred from the Law to the Gospel, or from Works to Faith, for that I have acknowledged that Works and the Law were the first natural way of justifying men, but now that it is altogether brought about by Grace and Faith. That which I have to say, I shall introduce with this objection.

If we were all born under the Law, Object. and bound to obey it to a tittle, upon which obedience it should have justified us, but upon the least breach was armed with this threatning, That we should dye the death; and that we have all broken it, how comes it to pass that we are not all the Laws Cap­tives and Prisoners, and condemned by it? How came there such easie gracious terms to be offered us for our justification, as Faith and sincere obe­dience, that these shall be accepted instead of per­fect unerring obedience? How will this way be for the honor of God's veracity in the threatning, or his holiness, to take imperfect sinful creatures into favour?

Now in answer to this objection I shall not need to meddle with that question, Answ. whether it were in­consistent [Page 299]with the natural Justice or Holiness of God, considered as antecedent to his threatning, or De­cree of punishing sinners with death, for him to have pardoned sinners by an absolute Power and Sove­raign Grace, and so to have received them into fa­vour upon their repentance, without the interven­tion of a Saviour.

But in the first place, 1 seeing there was adecree pas­sed, In the day that thon eatest, thou shalt dye the death, Gen. 2.17. I see not how it was consistent with the veracity of God to remit the sinner without any consideration at all, without a very considerable fulfilling of this threatning.

2dly, 2 The threatning therefore was fulfilled these several ways; 1. Upon man himself in a great mea­sure, for that presently upon man's fall insued his mortality, and all the inconveniences and troubles which we meet with in the World, which are the fore-runners and causes of our dissolution. But secondly, and especially, the great God, in infinite Wisdom and Mercy, provided a Saviour, one migh­ty to save, that should come into the world in the fulness of time (about the 4000th. year of the World, the World being to last but perhaps 7000. years in all) and free us that were born under the Law, and by our sins made obnoxious to the curse of it, from the curse and power of the Law. Now this being the great means of transferring Justi­fication from the Law to Faith, I shall a little in­sist upon the Explication of it. That which I have to say upon it, will be contained in these two as­sertions.

1. That Christ in his own person here upon earth, undertook the Law, and answered it in all that it had to say against us: And whereas it was [Page 300]a killing letter, he took out this condemning power of it for all believers.

2. That this was done by Christ for all ages of the Church; and so it was, and is the great foundation of that Justification by faith which the Apostle Paul contends to have been in all a­ges, before the Law, under the Law, and in the dayes of the Gospel to the end of the world; so that the way of Justification by faith comes in kindly, and in a comely manner, without any neglect or violation of the Law: I begin with the first assertion.

That Christ in his own person here upon earth un­dertook and answered the Law, The first assertion, That Christ un­dertook & answer­ed the law for us. &c. Now to prove and illustrate this assertion, it will be usefull to us, 1. To consider in what condition the Lord Christ found us when he came into the world as a Saviour.

We were therefore all of us Jewes and Gen­tiles, We were all under the law when Christ came to save us. prisoners to the Law. I shall give the ac­count of this in the Apostle's expressions (which are somewhat mystical) to which I hope I shall adde some light by laying them together, and comparing them one with another. Before Christ came, and before faith came, and so at the time when Christ came, & when faith came in the doctrinal discovery, or at any time doth come to us in the hearty closing with it, We were kept under the Law, Gal. 3.23. the words are [...], the Law had set a guard upon us, and as it follows, we were shut up unto the faith, [...], we were all shut up as so many pri­soners unto the Law, and under its guard and custody; and in Rom. 7.6. (speaking of the Law) the Apostle saith, We were held by it, that being dead [Page 301](that is, the Law) wherein we were HELD, or by which we were detained, [...]. For though these places in the Galatians and Romanes may referr to the different dispensations of the Old Testament and New, that before the dayes of the Gospel when faith came to be preached men were under a legal dispensation, they were kept under the Law, and shut up to the faith that was to be revealed, yet I dare affirm, that there is a deeper meaning then that, at least a deeper truth then that, if not in those places, which is this, That till Christ and the way of Justification by faith be made known to the soul, the soul must needs be under a legal frame [...]f heart towards God, under fear and bondage; [...]ay, and a further sense then this yet, and that [...]s this, That till the virtue of the blood of Christ [...]e applyed to the soul, till actual Justification [...]y or upon faith, every man lies under the curse [...]nd threatning and wrath of the Law: the Law [...]ath taken hold of us all, an evident signe of [...]hich is this, That death hath passed upon all; and [...]hat is the reason? why, for that all have sinned, [...]om. 5.12.

And if any could plead exemption from this abnoxiousness to the Law, it must be either the [...]ntiles that had not the Law, as the expression is, [...]m. 2.14. that is, had not the Law given to [...]em; or those that lived before the Law was [...]ven by Moses; now neither of these can plead [...]is exemption, therefore all mankinde were [...]ptives to the Law when Christ undertook the [...]ork of Redemption, or rather until the desig­ [...]ation of Christ by the Father to this work.

For the first, viz. the Gentiles, the Apostle [Page 300] [...] [Page 301] [...] [Page 302]tells us that he had proved them under sin, which is the transgression of the Law, therefore under the Law; and their thoughts within them did ac­cuse for their breach of the Law, which was writ­ten in their hearts, Rom. 2.14.

Neither were they free from this arrest of the Law, who lived before the delivery of the Law by Moses; for the Apostle tells us plainly, Rom. 5.13. That untill the Law sin was in the world; that is, from Adam till the time that the Law was so­lemnly given by Moses sin was in the world: now sin is the transgression of the Law, and ac­cordingly, as sin was in the world all that space of time from Adam to Moses, so Death reigned from Adam to Moses: Now we know that death [...] the wages of sin, and the strength of sin is the Law. 1 Cor. 15.56. Sin could never have brought in death but by the Law, which bindes sin upon the sinner, and with sin the punishment due to it; therefore all that space of time from Ada [...] to Moses, sin and death being in the world ( [...] they were) to be sure there was the Law in its power & energy; it was there in effect, as sure [...] it was in the hearts & consciences of Heathens and the Grave was the Law's Prison, Death it's Arrest, Sin it's great Charge and Accusation, by and upon which Death entred. Sin entred in the world and death by sin, upon the threatning [...] the Law, Rom. 5.12. This was the state and con­dition therefore that Christ found us in; w [...] were all under the Law as Prisoners and Ca­ptives, therefore when the Father sent fort Christ upon the work of Redemption, it is sa [...] Gal. 4.4. God sent forth his Son made of a woman, m [...] under the Law; to redeem them that were under [...] [Page 303]Law. This was written to the Galatians, who were Gentiles, That we (putting himself and the Gala­tians together) might receive the adoption of Sons; therefore the Gentiles were under the Law when Christ was sent forth for their redemption.

And our Saviour tells us what he was commissi­onated to by his Father; Luke 4.18. The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor, he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach DELIVERANCE TO THE CAPTIVES, and recovering of sight to the blinde, to set at liberty them that are bruised (or bound, as it is in Isai. 61.1.) to preach the acceptable year of the Lord; that is the Year of Jubilee, when all servants were set free: thus Christ's coming was to proclaim a Year of Jubilee to the whole world, that the Law's Captives should be delive­red, and those that served God under the tyranny of the Law might receive a spirit of Adoption.

So now thus farr we are gone in our proof of the first assertion, that when Christ came as a Sa­viour and Redeemer of his people, he found them all under the Law, as the lawfull Captives and Pri­soners unto it by reason of their sins, which were transgressions of the Law. Now therefore what remains but this, that if Jesus will save his people from their sins, if he will deliver the Law's Ca­ptives, he must make satisfaction to the Law?

The Law was such a thing as must not be dealt with in a way of violence: 'tis true, when our Sa­viour came to redeem us from the power of Satan, he did that by an holy violence, he fought with all the powers of hell upon his Cross, and conquered them by force of arms (as I may speak) and trium­phed [Page 304]over them in himself, or in his Cross; but now the Law must be taken off in a more honourable way: for the Law had an authority in it, the Law was nothing but the will of God revealed for mans life, with a reward and threatnings annexed; so that the great God himself stood up in vindication of his own Law, that if the Prisoners of it were rescued, it must be upon such terms as these, which appear what they were by the event.

That he that is the Saviour of the Law's Ca­ptives must first be made under the Law himself. The terms upon which the Law's ca­ptives be delivered. God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law.

And secondly, That he must pass thorough a legal Justification himself, before he can take others off from the Laws condemnation; for being made under it, the Law must either justi­fie him or condemne him, which latter it did not for any personal breach that he made of it, therefore it must and did acquit him.

But then for us who were under the curse of the Law, if he will deliver us from it, he must be made a curse, Gal. 3.13. if he will save us from our sins, which were invigorated by the Law, with a sentence of condemnation (all the strength of sin for condemnation being in the Law) he himself must be made sin (that is, as much as an immaculate Lamb could be) viz. a sin-offe­ring, 2 Cor. 5.21. he was made sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; that is, that we might be made righteous by Gods accepting Gospel conditions, instead of legal, for our Justification.

If Christ will redeem us from the wrath of the Law, which is the wrath of God (the Law [Page 305]worketh wrath, Rom. 4 15.) truely he must come under that wrath so farr as it was possible for such an innocent person to be under it; and we know that he was under as horrible a desertion as ever any that trusted in God was under; and that at such a time when he needed the greatest supports, even when he hung upon the Cross, crying, My God, My God, (words of an high saith) why hast thou forsaken mee? words expres­sing a most dreadfull desertion, Math. 27 46. Not to mention his agony in the Garden, which was but a fore-taste of that Cup which he was afterwards to drink off. And methinks there is an eminent place for this in Zech. chap. 13. ver. 7. saith the Lord there, as it were stirring up his wrath against Christ, Awake O Sword against my Shepherd, and against the man that is my Fellow, saith the Lord of Hosts: As much as to say, there is a man upon earth that is my Fellow, and he hath undertaken to rescue the Law's Captives, to re­deem them from under the Law, Curse, and Wrath, now awake my Sword against him: Here the great God the Lord of Hosts doth, as it were, set himself in battel array against Christ; but what doth Christ now? Doth he make resistance? doth he redeem his Captives from the Law by force [...]? No; though he were equal with God, though he were God's Fellow (as here the Lord calls him) yet he made it not a prey or a robbery to be equal with God, so as to hold it fast, and stand it out, but gave way; he knew what he had undertaken, to re­deem Captives indeed, but it was from under the Law, the righteous and holy and pure law of God, and this must not be violated, this must not be re­sisted. He had to do with his Father, and there [Page 306]must be no resisting him; The Cup which my Father hath given me shall I not drink it? John 18.11. Though he were God's Fellow, though he were equal to God, as it is Phil. 2.6, 7, 8. Yet he made himself of no reputation, he laid aside his equality, took upon him the form of a Servant, and hum [...]ed himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross: And this was the utmost that the Law could do to him; here the Law ended it's rage, the Law brought Christ to the Cross, and when he ascended the Cross, he bare our sins in his own body, 1 Pet. 2.24 and being as yet under the Law, (for the Law pressed him with our sins) he carried up the Law (as Sampson did the gates of the City upon his shoulders, Judges 16.3.) he carried up the Law upon the Cross, & he nailed the Law to the Cross, (both Moral and Ceremonial) as to all it's con­demning power, as to all that wherein it was a gainst us, wherein it was contrary unto us, he answer­it fully, cancelled it, and left it behinde him upon the Cross to this very day. Christ came down a­gain, but the Law could never come down since. Col 2.14. Blotting out the hand-writing of Ordinances that was AGAINST US, THAT WAS CON­TRARY UNTO US, and took it out of the way, [...]ailing it to his Cross. Now this was the manner of Christ's enervating the Law, and leaving it with­out strength, or obligation upon us to punishment, as the expression is, Rom 76. [...], the Law is made of no strength against us, so it might be rendred, though the Translation is this, we are delivered fram the Law, the Law can hold us captives no longer, it is made a weak, and a vain thing to us, having spent all it's rage & fury upon Christ; for the Law could do no more then it did [Page 307]upon Christ; what can the Law do more to a debtor, nay to any malefactor, then arrest him, bring him to trial and execution? and all this the Law, did upon Christ, as our surety, and so left no strength, or vigour in it self against those whose Surety he was.

The Law when it fell upon us it left us with­out strength, Rom. 5.6. When we were yet without strength in due time Christ died for the ungodly; but when Christ comes to deal with the Law, he leaves the Law without strength; nay, though he offered no affront or violence to the Law, yet he left it for dead, as it is Rom. 7 6. Now we are delivered from the Law, THAT BEING DEAD WHEREIN WE WERE HELD. The Law that fell upon us when we were weak was taken by the Captain of our salvation, and left for dead; nay, he made it suffer the same death that it put him to. The Law nailed Christ to the Cross, and Christ nailed the Law to the Cross, and all this without violence or affront offered to the Law, it being but naturally consequent upon what the Law did first to Christ; for if the Law set upon Christ as our Surety, and do the utmost to him that it can, it must needs follow that it hath no strength left against those for whom he un­dertook, and so must die and expire by the same death that our Saviour dyed, it being nailed to the Cross, which is but a sigurative expression.

And yet I shall carry the Allegory a little fur­ther, herein still following the Apostle Paul, Is it any wonder now, is it any unreasonable thing, now that the Law is dead, and taken out of the way, that we should be married to another hus­band? that we should reckon our selves to be [Page 308]no longer under the Law. The woman which hath an husband (saith the Apostle, Rom. 7.23.) is bound by the Law to her husband so long as he liveth, but if the husband be dead she is loosed from the Law of her husband; So then, if while her husband liveth she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband be dead, she is free from that Law, so that she is no adulteress though she be married to ano­ther man, ver. 4. Wherefore my brethren, ye also are become dead to the Law, or the Law is become dead to you, BY THE BODY OF CHRIST, that ye should be warried to another, even to him that is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. The Law is every soul's first Husband, & since the fall, & so every one's actual sin, the Law is an intolerable husband, there is no living with it, it so sets on guilt & presseth the soul w ^th terrors; nay, instead of producing good works, (the natural fruit of this Marriage-relation of the Soul to the Law whilest in innocency) it now produceth all manner of lusts, according to the 5. ver. of that 7. chap. When we were in the flesh, the MOTIONS OF SINS WHICH WERE BY THE LAW did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. Now God, in much mercy to mankinde, finding that if the Law and the con­science or soul of man keep together, his crea­ture will be lost, and himself lose those fruits of good works which the soul was first created for, he provides another husband for the soul which is Jesus Christ; only Christ must redeem his Spouse from that tyrannical Husband which now it lives with, else the Soul shall be but an Adulteress to pretend marriage to Christ, that is, the way of grace, whilest the Law can make [Page 309]a just claim to her as a wife, which it might have done as long as it lived. The man­ner of the rescue I have before declared, it was by suffering and yielding to the Law, yet so as in it the Law destroyed it self, and then is it lawfull for the Soul, that was before wife to the Law, to be married to another husband, and who so fit as he that redeemed her? Now the Soul shall have it's forbearance under failings, which the Law would not endure, and God shall have a kindly and ingenuous Service; there will be fruits unto God: and this is the passage from Works to Faith, from the Law to Grace.

I though the Law (saith the Apostle) am dead to the Law, that I might live to God, Gal. 2.19. that is, through what the Law hath done to Christ it hath nothing to do with me. But now we are de­livered from the Law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the Letter, Rom. 7.6.

One Scripture more to this purpose, it is Rom. 8.1. & 23.4. There is therefore now no condemnation to ohem which are in Christ Jesus (who are married to Christ and have accepted the terms of the Gospel) who walk not after the Flesh, but after the Spirit; for the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Je­sus hath made me free from the Law of sin and death: this chiefly relates to sanctification, that the in­ward law or power of corruption, which was occasionally and accidentally strenghtned by the Law of God, was now broken by that in­ward power, spirit, and life which is conveyed by the Gospel of Christ, and is called the spirit of life which is in Christ Jesus, ver. 3. for what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, [Page 310](that is, it could neither justifie nor sanctifie) both these did God bring to pass by sending his Son in the likeness of sinfull flesh, when for sin, that is, Christ's making himself a Sin-offering, & so an­swering the Law, God condemned Christ in the flesh: that is, destroyed it, both in the guilt and power of it, out of us that were sinners; so it follows, that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit; that is, that the Law might no longer accuse us being answered by our Saviour, and that we might attain to that which is the chief designe of the Law, to wit, righteousness and holiness, which if we had continued under the Law we could never have attained unto.

What so common now with the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romanes, as to tell them, that now they are not under the Law, but under grace by this means, namely, the BODY OF CHRIST offered; and that therefore there shall be no con­demnation, and that therefore sin shall not have domi­nion over them, which are the two great effects of the death of Christ, though the first chiefly be­longs to that subject which I am upon; viz. Ju­stification?

Having given now all these things in an alle­gorical and mystical dress, (yet herein only fol­lowing the Apostle) I shall deliver the same thing somewhat plainly, and so conclude this first particular.

The summe of all this is, Man was made ho­ly, had a Law to live by, to which there was a threatning annexed, In the day thou eatest thou shalt die the death, or shalt surely die This threat­ning (I take it) is due by the Law to & intended against all sins, accor­ding to that of the Apostle, The wages of sin is death, Ro. 6.23. spea­king of sin indefinit­ly, besides wise Adam might have committed any other sin and not have dyed.. Man did eat, and so was to die, death accordingly entred by [Page 311]this sin into the world, that is a natural death, and for eternal death hereafter, and the spiri­tual death of the soul here, which consist's in ali­enations from God; (both which all men at age are obnoxious unto being sinners, as for chil­dren, I neither affirm nor deny any thing) the Lord in mercy designing to deliver men from, provided a Saviour, who should first live a per­fect life, that so he might be the more acce­ptable Sacrifice; and his terms of saving men must be these, that he must freely offer himself up to God a Sacrifice for our sins, give his life a ransome, &c. and though the Father loved him all the while (as I cannot admit that the Father was really angry with Christ, or that he tasted the Fathers wrath, for God could never be angry with one that never displeased him) yet undertaking such a load as our sins, the Fa­ther would deal with him much like as with a sinner, leave him to men and devils upon the Cross, and with-draw the light of his counte­nance, which forced those sad out-cryes upon the Cross. Now upon condition of Christ's per­forming this great service (which was, as I veri­ly believe, the chiefest designe of his coming into the world, for this cause came I to this hour, John 12.27. though there were divers other great designes of his coming) I say upon condi­tion of performing this great service the great God of heaven would reckon that his word of threatning was fulfilled, and the holiness of his Law satisfied in this eminent signification of his displeasure against sin shewn upon his own Son, (whom he would not spare when he had taken our sins upon him) and for ever after would [Page 312]grant this new and living way of Justification unto the world, THAT WHOSOEVER SHOULD BELIEVE AND OBEY SIN­CEREEY should be justified and saved; and that for all such, they should be no longer under the Law for their Justification, but under Grace. And I can understand no other sense of the Law's being dead, and Grace it's reigning through righteousness unto eternal life by Je­sus Christ.

I shall only need to minde one thing before I go off from this particular, The sub­jects of the great Priviledge of freedom from the Law. and that is the sub­jects of this priviledge of freedom from the Law. And they are only so many as put them­selves upon the way of believing for Justifica­tion; all others are really under the Law still; When we were in the flesh the motions of sins which were by the Law did work in our members, &c. Rom. 7.5. All that are in the flesh are under the Law still; But now (saith the Apostle) we are delivered from the Law, that being dead wherein we were held. The Law was alive before to their conscience, whilest they were in the flesh, and out of Christ, but now the Law was become dead to them; which plainly argues that the Law is dead or a­live to men in the condemning power of it, ac­cording to the state that a man is in, either of sin or holiness: So Rom. 6.14. For sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the Law but un­der Grace; plainly implying, that if they were under the Law sin would have dominion over them, an also that if sin had dominion over them, it were a plain signe that they were under the law. This being a great truth in this mat­ter, That all that are not serving God in the way of [Page 313]faith are under the law; for that the law is the na­tural way which a man is born under, and the way of faith and grace a superadded dispensati­on upon consideration of the death of Christ for all those that should believe and obey sin­cerely; therefore, till they get into the way of believing, they must be in that state which men are naturally born under, that is, under the law. I shall conclude this particular with a pas­sage about Dr Preston, I have heard it affirmed by one that was contemporary with Dr Preston in Cambridge, a person of credit and worth, that he heard him preach to this purpose, That Christ dyed to make this Proposition true, that, WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH SHALL BE SAVED. Now this I suppose is full to the pur­pose for proof of what I am upon, That Christ dyed to buy a people off from the law, that they might be justified by faith; he dyed to buy those off from the law that should prove belie­vers; as for all others he leaves them to the law still. For Christ did not dye to get the law an­nihilated, or made utterly void; Do we make void the law? God forbid, saith the Apostle, Rom. 3.31. but he laid down his life for HIS SHEEP, and to save HIS PEOPLE from their sins; he bought them off from the law, such as St Paul, I through the law am dead to the law; but not for wicked men, that is, such, as continue so, they shall finde the law alive to them, and full char­ged with wrath against them; it being nothing else but the holy will of the great God, unto which all his creatures owe an exact confor­mity.

Now by what hath been said, I suppose is [Page 314]plainly and fully proved that which I made my first assertion, viz. That Christ Jesus in his own person here upon earth underlook and answer­ed the law for all believers, so that they may be justified, for any accusation that the law hath to charge them with; and thus they come under grace and into this easier and sweeter way of Justification in a comly manner, the law being honourably taken off; So that now God may be just, that is, mercifull (saith Dr Hammond upon the place) and the justifier of every one that be­lieves in Jesus, Rom. 3 24, 25, 26. He may now ju­stifie the ungodly, Rom. 4.5. which by the law, if that had not been taken off by Christ, he could not (I think) have done. Methinks what I have said should be a clear proof of this assertion, see­ing I have not only proved that it is so, but shewn out of the Scripture the very manner how the law was taken off.

All that I can apprehend to remain any whit doubtful or questionable is this, How doth it appear that what Christ did in suffering under the law, being under the curse, &c. did reach to the times that were before Christ's coming into the world? it may be easily conceived how it makes clear way for our Justification by faith, who have lived since his death; for if he bare our sins, the law will not charge them upon us; if he dyed for us, or in our stead, we are not by the law to die; if Christ were sacrificed for us as our Passover, we need not fear (if we have the Gospel-conditions of Covenant-relation to God in Christ) but the destroying law will pass over us; see how the word Passover comes from passing over, Exod. 12.21, 23, 27. But how doth [Page 315]it appear that this death of Christ had this in­fluence upon the times of the Old Testament, to bring in the way of Justification by faith to them? for that you have asserted that the way of Justification by faith hath been in all ages, both before the law, and under the law, as well as now in the dayes of the Gospel, and that none was ever justified in any other way. Now how were they taken off from the law and brought under Justification by faith? or how doth it appear that the death of Christ was the foundation of this way of Justification by faith even to them? And unto the assoiling of this difficulty I shall now address my self, that is to the proof of my second assertion, which was this. What was done by Christ, viz. Asser­tion. his under­taking and answering the law, was done for all ages of the Church; and so it was, and is the great foundation of that Justification by faith, which the Apostle Paul contends to have been the only way of Justification in all ages. And for proof of this I offer these things to conside­ration:

1. The Saines in all ages before the death of Christ had this way of Grace then as well as we have it now (that I have proved at large in the beginning of this Treatise) there­fore whence had it they but from this death of Christ which was certainly to follow at a prefixt time?

If it be said they had their way of Grace purely from the goodness of God, I oppose, 1. That if so many thousands vvere saved before by meer grace vvithout the consideration of a Saviour, vvhy had not the Lord continued the same grace unto the end of the vvorld, vvhich [Page 316]we see he hath not continued? Why are the vouch­safements of Gods Grace in pardon of two such quite different kinds, so as to save his people for 4000. years without a Saviour, and the rest by a Saviour! Nay, to save them without a Saviour, whom yet he had by multitudes of Promises, Pro­phesies and Prefigurations made to hope for a Sa­viour!

2dly, If the Lord could in a consistency with his veracity in threatning death to sin, pardon sin without either the sinners death or his sureties, and that the law would be (so) well enough contented and satisfied, why would the Lord put our Saviour to so much trouble in suffering a death which he might as well have escaped, and which he so earn­estly desired, if it were possible, that he might es­cape, and all this to take off the Law from being our Head and Husband?

3dly, It is said expresly, That the Covenant was confirmed to Abraham of God in Christ, Gal. 3.17. which methinks must necessarily imply thus much, that the consideration of Christ went into the con­firmation of this Covenant, whether Abraham or any of the Saints under the Old-Testament knew it or no, as it is plain Abraham did; He rejoiced to see my day, and saw it and was glad, John 8.56. Now this Covenant with Abraham is that which the A­postle doth mightily insist upon, to prove Justifica­tion by Faith to be antecedent to the giving of the Law, and therefore not to be nulled by the com­ing of the Law; and yet this Covenant was con­firmed of God in Christ, that is, as I think, was sounded upon this consideration, that Christ should aftervvards come into the World, and pay that price vvhich God vvould accept for the re­demption of all believers 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3, 4. All the Fathers did drink of the some spiritual drink, for the drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them; and that rock was Christ..

[Page 317]Again 4thly, Christ is said to be the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the World, Rev. 13.8. vvhich to me signifies thus much, that though he vvere not actually slain, yet he vvas reckoned by God as slain then, and so God vvas attoned for all the Saints of all ages ensuing; or to follovv the o­ther reading of the Words in Rev. 13.8. so that from the foundation of the world, should refer to the vvriting the Saints Names in the Lamb's Book of Life, and not to the Lamb's being slain, this vvill make more for my purpose; for if they that vvere elected from the foundation of the World, vvere all enrolled in the Lambs Book of life, hovv should this come to pass, but because they were all to be re­deemed to God by the Lambs blood? And if this opinion of personal Election be true, that Scripture vvould serve to countenance this interpretation, vvhich vve have, Eph. 1.4. According as he hath cho­sen us in him (that is Christ) before the foundation of the world, ver. 5. Having predestinated us unto the a­doption of children by Jesus Christ, &c. And me­thinks Mr. Biddle, who (in a late Book of his which he calls, An Essay to the explaining of the Revelati­ons, pag. 64.) lays so much weight upon this pas­sage in Rev. 13.8. for proof of personal Election, (as to say, That this alone in his judgement seemeth sufficient to decide the so much agitated Controversie about Predestination) might very well have gone one step further in his alteration of his mind, by acknowledging the reason why all the Elect should be said to be written in the Lamb's Book of life to be this, namely, Because he was to pay the price of their Redemption, as the most proper and pleasing Sacrifice for sins that ever was offered up to God. But to proceed, as Christ was slain in Divine de­signation [Page 318]and acceptation from the beginning of the world, (for I shall take liberty to follow that reading) so when he came into the world to be slain actually, 4 it is said to be in the fulness of time, Gal. 4 4, 5. WHEN THE FULNESS OF TIME was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, &c. Time went with this great birth of the Saviour of the World, near 4000. years, and then it was time Christ should be sent into the world to pay that debt which through the forbearance of God had been contracting for so long a space of time.

But 5thly, 5 for a pertinent and concluding Scri­pture-proof, I shall insist a little upon Heb. 9.24, 25. 26. For Christ is not entred into the holy place; made with hands, which are the figures of the true, but into Heaven it self, there to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the High-Priest entereth into the holy place every year, with blood of others, (for then must he often have suffered SINCE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD) but now ONCE IN THE END OF THE WORLD hath he appeared to put away fins by the sacri­fice of himself. Here are several differences w ^ch the Author of this Epistle observes betwixt Christ out High-Priest, & the High-Priest under the law, who was the most eminent type of Christ. The High-Priest under the law entred into the holy places made with hands; ours into heaven it self. The High-Priest under the law entred into the holy place often, that is, though but once in the year, yet every year once, which is often in many years, ours but once in all. Again, the High-Priest entred with the blood of o­thers. ours by his own blood, or the sacrifice of him­self. But yet herein there is a correspondence be­tween our High-Priest, and the legal High-Priest, [Page 319]that as theirs went into the holy of Holies once in the end of the year for to make reconciliation for the sins of the year past so our High-Priest entred into Heaven with his own blood, ONCE IN THE END OF THE WORLD, to make attonement for the sins of the ages past: I think there is this allusion in the words once in the end of the world, for that the High-Priest offered but once in the year, ver. 7 of this chap. ours once in all, and their once was in the end of the year, nay about the same di­stance of time from the years end as our Saviour from the worlds end, as is to be seen Lev. 16.29. it was in the seventh moneth, seven bearing the same proportion to 12 (or very near it) that 4 doth to 7. taking it for granted that the world should last but about 7000 years: therefore I would infer this allusion to be in the words, that as theirs want, &c. Besides, there is that in this Scripture which will enforce this Analogy of the end of the year to the fore-past year, and the end of the world to the fore-past ages, and it is this; That if our Sa­viour through the excellency of his person and of­fering, had not had this high honor from God that his once offering should serve instead of offering a hundred times over, which the Priests under the law were fain to do, and yet could never hereby purge away sin as to the Conscience: I say, if this once offering of our Saviour had not bin so highly acceptable to God as it was, he must (as the High-Priests did offer often) have suffered often since the foundation of the world, if he would have obtained pardon of sins for those for whom he obtained it; he must have come into the World, and suffered once a year, or once in an age, or else at the end of some certain term of years prefixed to him by his Father. This is the argumentation of the holy Pen­man [Page 320]of the Epistle to the Heb. ch 9 25. Dr Ham­mond in his Par. u­pon these words, For then must he often have suffe­red since the foun­dation of the world, hath it thus, For then he should from time to time ever since the BE­GIN­NING the world have dyed many times. Now up­on what ground doth this argumentation proceed, other then this, That when he suffered and offered himself, it was as a propitiation to God for the sins of all the ages since the Foundation of the World? For else whence would it follow at all, though our Saviour should have been ranked by his Father a­mongst the common High-Priests, & his offering of himself no more accepted for pardon, than their of­fering the blood of Buls & Goats was: I say, whence would it follow that he must have offered himself often since the foundation of the World (which certainly respects the ages past) if he was not at all to make attonement for the sins of those past ages? The Author of that Epistle would rather have said (if he had not gone upon this supposition, that Christ offered for the sins of the ages past before his suffering, but had onely thought that he offered for the ages to come after his suffering) I say, he would rather have expressed himself thus: If out High-Priest Jesus Christ had not been accepted for us under the Gospel, more highly than the legal High-Priests were for their people under the law, he must often offer as they did SINCE his first of­fering: he must come and suffer death once in the year, and then be raised to offer himself to God: or at least once in an age or some set-period of time; and this he must do to the end of the World; he would never have expressed himself thus; then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world. But whereas now the Apostle loo [...]ing upon the world as it were at an end, or drawing to­wards its end, (for suppose the World last 70 o [...] years, yet after 4000. years the Skale of Time is turned, and Time in its declining) he speaks of the world, and the continuance of it, as you would do [Page 321]of a year and the continuance of it, & faith he as the High Priest amongst the Jews, did enter into the Holy of Holies once in the end of the year for to make an atonement for the sins of the year past, so hath our Saviour once in the end of the world appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Again, for I have somewhat yet further which this phrase now once in the end of the world will afford us, and that is this, That indeed, though it be true (and I think I have sufficiently proved it above) that this death & offering of Christ frees US from sin that live after it as well as THOSE that went afore it; yet I verily believe that his death hath a more obvious respect to them that lived in the ages before he suffered than to us who came into the world after he suffered, though it hath indeed an influence upon us too; and the reason is this, for that the use of a Sacrifice is to make atone­ment for sin after it is committed. When did you ever read of a Sacrifice for sins slain and offered before the sin was committed? The Sacrifices that should be made thus, would rather look like a bribing the Deity to get liberty to sin, then to make atonement for sin. Therefore all the parti­cular Sacrifices that were appointed, they were appointed to be used after the legal uncleanness was contracted; and accordingly the High Priest that went but once into the Holy of Holyes, it was at the end of the year not at the beginning of the year. And thus our Saviour being to take a­way the sins of the world, John 1.29. he came once in the end of the world to take away sin; so that his appearing thus in the end of the world seems more plainly to respect the ages past, than the ages which were to come; and I verily be­lieve, if Christ had dyed only for the sins of those [Page 322]ages that have been since his death, or shall be yet to the end of the world, he would have forborn his death till the end of the world, or the times that were near it, from this very reason of decen­cy, That it is not proper to offer Sacrifice for sin till the sin be committed; it rather looks like the dispensation to sin than making atonement for sin.

But now that Christ was to dye for the sins of all the Saints in all ages before him, and that he stayed till the fulness of time, even till the decli­ning of time towards its end, (there being so ma­ny transgressions already committed that were to be removed out of the way) it was no uncomely thing at all that our Saviour should come and die, and offer himself to God when he did, though the value of the same Sacrifice was to reach all ages af­ter to the world's end; and that especially, for that there were many other ends of his coming, be­sides the offering himself thus to God; he was to take upon him the Mediatorial Kingdome, Several o­ther ends of Christs coming besides offering himself a Sacrifice for sin. to set up a spiritual Worship of God, by pulling down all the Jewish Ceremonies, making Jew and Gen­tile one, and revealing all the mysteries that were concealed in Moses his dispensation; nay, his ve­ry Sacrifice is one of the greatest Mysteries of all, by which we are informed of God's performing his threatnings, that the threatnings of heaven are not as claps of thunder without a thunder-bolt in them; we see God's hatred of sin, punishing it so severely in his own Son; we see God's love to the world, that he would give his Son for the life of it, though he gave him up to the death, we have in his life a pattern of perfect holiness, which is more than all precepts alone; and we see in our Saviour an instance of the Resurrection & heavenly glory; [Page 323]& all these things have been of mighty instruction to the Saints of all ages since the death of Christ, If this phrase, the end of the world, should be under­stood of the end of the Iewish state, this will not at all pre­judice my ieference from it, that Christs death had respect unto the ages be­fore his coming, but rather strengthen it. & will be to all Saints unto the end of the world; and therefore I say, these other great ends of his coming being considered, there is no undecency at all in his coming so early in the end of the world, and offering a Sacrifice that should serve for many ages that were then to come. It was at the end of the world that he came, and therefore might very well serve for those fewer succeeding ages, though it had the first respect unto the ages going be­fore.

In the sixth and last place, I shall bring plain Scripture to prove that Christ dyed for the Saints of the ages that were past before his death. There are two Scriptures that speak to this purpose; the first that I shall name is in that 9th of the He­brews, the chapter out of which I have been argu­ing, ver. 15. And for this cause he (speaking of Christ) is the Mediatour of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the trans­gressions that were under the First Testament they which are called, &c. Here it is said that Christ by the means of his death redeemed or expiated the transgressions that were under the First Testa­ment, therefore he dyed for the fins of those that lived under the Old Testament. But I shall deal so faithfully with my Reader as to acquaint him with another interpretation (which is not contem­ptible) that others give of these words, and that is this, That our Saviour Christ, the Mediator of the New Testament or Covenant, by his most ex­cellent Offering redeemed and expiated those sins which could not be expiated by any Sacrifices that were appointed under the First Covenant, accor­ding [Page 324]to that in Acts 13.39. By him (speaking of Christ) all that believe are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses. There being in Moses no Sacrifices for a­dulteries, thefts, murthers, &c. whereas in the Christian Religion there is pardon for all sorts of sinners by means of the death of Christ, if they have but the Gospel-conditions of pardon. So that this interpretation makes the place to speak of the kindes of sins, and not of the individual or particular sins which were committed under the first Covenant, that Christ by the means of his death hath made redemption of those kinde of fins which there was no redemption for under the first Covenant: But I have something to ask of those that make this interpretation yet taking it for pas­sable, and it is this; I would fain know if any of those sins were pardoned under the Old Testament which here are said to be redeemed by Christ for his followers; if they say they were not, then all that committed any such kinde of sins were dam­ned for ever, which was untrue, witness David and Manasseh: if they were pardoned, as they were, then either they were expiated by some Sacrifice, or they were not; if those that own this interpre­tation say they were not expiated by some Sacri­fice, and yet pardoned, I oppose, (not to mention that great argument again. That they could not be pardoned without expiation in any consistency with the veracity of God in his threatning) this seems a strange rarity in the dealings of God with us, that under the New Testament no sin is par­doned but what is expiated by the death of Christ, and yet under the Old Testament, (which was cer­tainly a dispensation more severe than ours) there [Page 325]the greatest sins should be pardoned without the intervention of any Sacrifice; nay, what a strange thing was it in their very dispensation that legal uncleannesses (such as Leprosie and Issues, &c. must be purged by sacrifice See Lev. 14, 15. chapters. yet the greatest sins of all should be pardoned without a sacrifice; if therefore those great sins of Murther, Adultery, Witchcraft, Idolatry, &c. were pardoned by expiation, it must be by this death of Christ to ensue in the end of the world, for there was no sacrifice so much as appointed for these sins; & those that were appointed could never reach to the purging and cleansing of the conscience, they only purged the flesh from a fleshly uncleanness, Heb 9.13. the blood of Christ a­lone hitherto hath had a virtue in it to cleanse the conscience; therefore I conclude, that the blood of Christ made expiation even for those individual sins for which there was no expiatory sacrifice ap­pointed under the Old Testament.

But to let pass that Scripture, what will be said to that in Rom. 3.25, 26. where we have these words, Whom (speaking of Christ) God hath set forth (or fore-ordained, as it is in the margin) to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the REMISSION OF SINS THAT ARE PAST, through the forbearance of God, to declare (I say) AT THIS TIME his righ­teousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus? Now I suppose there may be this sense contained in these words, That God in the dayes of the Gospel hath set forth clearly what that is by which he was alwayes pro­pitiated and atoned for sins, even those sins that were fore-past and fore-committed in the dayes [Page 326]of his forbearance and long-suffering, that is, the darker times of the world, which times we have otherwise expressed in Acts 17.30. to be the dayes of ignorance which God winked at, (they were the dayes of God's forbearance) it was and is the blood of Christ, by which God alone alwaies was, and still is propitiated for sins; only then it was not so well known, but now God hath declared [...], in the Acts it is [...], that the fore­past sins, the [...], as well as these that are committed under the Gospel, were all redeemed and expiated by the blood of Christ. As for any other sense that is given of these words, I finde it only this, That the sins that are past should be meant of the sins of a man's life past, before he comes to believe; which is a good honest sense, for it is very true, That when a man comes to believe in Christ and in his blood, all the sins of his past life shall be forgiven him: but that this is not meant by the [...], sins that are past, seems clear to me from that term of opposition, [...], at this time, which is certainly meant of the times of the Gospel, in opposition to a former time in which those sins past were committed, and therefore that former time was the time before the Gospel-dayes: which observation is strengthened by that parallel place in the Acts, where [...] is opposed in the very same case to the times of Ignorance and Forbea­rance which God winked at. I have now finished my proof of the second Assertion, and so I have done with what I thought necessary to adde by way of Appendix to the former treatise, the de­signe of which was to shew how the great busi­ness of Justification came to be transferred from [Page 327]Works to Grace, from the Law to Faith; in which (I must needs say) I reckon is contained the most: considerable piece of Gospel-mystery in the whole Book of God. The Lord give Me & thee (Reader) a spirit of Illumination rightly to understand it and rellish it. I come now to the Uses of the whole Discourse fore-going; and here I need not be so large as otherwise I might be, having inserted ap­plications in several places of the body of the Discourse; & for that the very Discourse it self is altogether practical, but most especially, for that the chief end of the Discourse was the discovery of Legality, and this I have so done my endeavour unto in the characters and their applications, that I shall have nothing at all of that to do in the Uses. Yet something I shall adde by way of ap­plication: And first of all,

Is it so (as I have above evinced) that the Law was our natural way of Justification which we were born under, Use of Inso ma­tion. that we had all made our selves obnoxious to the wrath and curse of it, that that had seised of us as Prisoners and M [...]lefactors, and that yet notvvithstanding all this we are all of us now either under the tender of Grace, or in the state of Grace & Favour vvith God, & all this in a comly and honourable vvay for the Lavv. Then this gives us matter of Information of or rather Admiration at the several Attributes of Goodness, Wisedom and Holiness in God. I shall be as brief as I may be in this Use, because these things are obvious.

But here is certainly eminent goodness and grace to mankinde shevvn in this vvonderfull change of Justification from Works to Faith, Of the grace and goodness of God in this Go­spel-way. What? that vvhen vve had undone our selves as [Page 328]to the Law, had not only weakened our ovvn strengths (when we were weak Christ died for the un­godly) but weakened the Law it self (for the Law was made weak through our Flesh) so as it could not justifie us, that then the Lord should not only seek out a vvay to support us from falling and sinking, but set us into a better, a more easie, and more glorious vvay of salvation than we vvere in before; this is a wonder of Grace and Mercy.

1. For the glory of this way; When an earthly Adam had betrayed all his trust for his posterity, and undone us, that then vve should have a se­cond Adam, who is the Lord from heaven, and vvho is infinitely to be preferred before the first, vve have a glorious representation of him in his similitude unto and dissimilitude from the first Adam, in Rom. 5. from the 14. ver. to the end.

2. For the easiness of this way; That vvhen we had made (not found) the Lavv, not only diffi­cult but impossible to be kept by us, so that the going about to fulfill that novv would be like climbing up to heaven, descending dovvn to hell, and getting up again, nay raising a Savi­our thence, or like compassing the vvhole world, that instead of this novv vve should have a vvay set before us so plain, That wayfaring men though fooles shall not erre therein, Esay 38.5. so near us that vve need not go out of our selves for it, (if I may so express it) the word is nigh thee even in thine heart and in thy mouth that thou mayest do it, even the word of Faith, Rom. 10.8. so easie that vve may run in it; I will run the way of thy Comman­dements, Psal. 119.32. His Commandements are not grievous, 1 John 5.3. My yoke is easie and my bur-then [Page 329]is light, Math. 11.29, 30. This way of salva­tion is so easie to every honest soul, that it is but Ask and have, seek and finde, knock and it shall be opened, Math. 7.7. And Rom. 10.13. Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved: though this easiness be not found by wicked men, Knowledge is easie TO HIM THAT UN­DERST ANDETH, and to him only, Prov. 14.6. Neither is it easie to us without the assistances of the Spirit, but these assistances are at hand to good men, and therefore the way of Gospel-Justification and Salvation is wonderfull easie and delightsom; and this is a very great argu­ment of the goodness of God.

If God had proposed the highest difficulties imaginable, and made it our duty to overcome them, if we would obtain the Crown of Glory proposed to us, we should have had no reason to complain; but when he hath taken us off from a difficult, nay an impossible way, (though once the true way) that we were upon, and set us up­on an easier way, that that is pleasant and de­lightsom, and still proposeth the same or a grea­ter reward, this is grace and mercy indeed, here are riches of Mercies. Mic. 6.8. He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good: and what doth the Lord REQUIRE of thee, but to do justly, and to love mer­cy, and to walk humbly with thy God? What canst thou do less? What wouldst thou do else? Thy very work is reward enough, and yet thou shalt have a reward infinitely more glorious than thy work deserves.

Besides, in this way the holiness of God, Of the Holiness of God. that is, his hatred of and displeasure against sin is made very illustrious; in that his Law must be [Page 330]taken off honourably before the way of Grace must enter. I am sure this is so for us under the Gospel, and if under the Old Testament men were saved another way, I should think it very strange: but of this above.

Lastly, Of the Wisedom of God. (not to mention the power of God dis­covered in this way in the Miracles of Christ & his Apostles, raising Christ from the dead, &c.) The Wisedom of God is exceedingly manifested in this way of Gospel-Justification. I shall shew how it appears from what hath been said by & by: A little proof first that so it is this the Apostle Paul often insists upon: God hath made Christ un­to us Wisedom and Righteousness; unto them which are called Christ the Wisdom of God, and the Power of God, 1 Cor. 1.24, 30. The Gospel is called the Wisedom of God in a Mystery, even the hidden wisedom. Eph. 1.6, 7, 8. In whom (that is, Christ) we have redem­ption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of his GRACE, WHEREIN he hath abounded towards us in all wisedom and prudence. One place more, it is Col. 2.3. In whom, (speaking of Christ) are hid all the treasures of Wisedom and Know­ledge; That is, (saith Dr Hammond, paraphra­sing the second and third verses) ‘In this course which hath more obscurely been taken by God the Father under the Old Testament (and therefore in the second verse is called The My­stery of God the Father) and more clearly now by God in Christ under the New (and there­fore called The Mystery of Christ) to bring sin­ners to salvation; in this course is wrapt up all the depth of divine Wisedom imaginable.’

That there is great wisedom shewn herein is usually demonstrated thus, which is a good [Page 331]way, that herein the wisedom of God in saving flnners by Jesus Christ discovers it self, in that so many Attributes are honoured altogether, the Mercy, Holiness, and Power of God. I shall instance further only in this, that certainly the Wisedom of God as well as his Grace doth mightily appear in this way, for that herein God hath graciously accommodated himself to the reason and nature of a man, and hath ta­ken that course, Hos. 11.3, 4. of saving men in this way of Grace, which is most likely to pre­vail; I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by the armes, I drew them with cords of a man with bands of love, and I was to them as they that take off the yoke on their jawes, and I laid meat unto them. This Scripture may well be applyed to Gods way of saving men upon Gospel terms; he takes off the yoke of the Law from our jawes, sets meat before us, whereas the Law afforded us nothing but stones instead of bread, and for fish gave us scorpions. The Lord here draws us with the cords of a man and with the bands of Love; in that true winning way which is suited to the nature of a man. Thou hast destroyed thy self (saith the Lord to a poor soul) but in me is thine help, [...]os 13.9. Thou art weak, relye [...]pon me who am the Rock of Ages; if thou hast committed sins, repent and turn unto mee and they shall be forgiven thee, only thou must set thy self faithfully to obey my commands; and whereas thou failest through weakness, I am ready to pardon, and now that thou maist have life upon these terms, upon these rational terms, Cast away from you all your transgressions whereby ye have trans­gressed, and make yee a new heart and a new spirit, for [Page 332]why will ye dye O house of Israel; for I have no plea­sure in the death of him that dyeth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn your selves and live yee, Ezek. 18.31, 32. The Lord obviates all the objections that we can make; if we say it is hard to walk with God in the obedience to his commands, he promiseth strength; if we say, But what if I should fail in such and such instances of obedi­ence? why (saith the Lord) whilest there re­mains a sincerity I will pardon; if any man doth sin, wee have an Advocate with the Father, 1 John 2.1.

Thus the way of God in the Gospel is highly rational; there is a variety of strong arguments in the way of Grace, especially in the Gospel dispensation, to perswade our faith, and as ma­ny to perswade our obedience. Dr Moor in his Mystery of Godliness makes mention of and in­sifts upon seven several Gospel-powers, by which the Gospel becomes effectual to the bringing of man into a state of salvation, and so as certainly of justification, all which he reckons up pag. 392, sect. 2. the two first he makes, ‘The evidence that we are to be inwardly and really righte­ous; and not only so, but in an extraordinary manner; the five last are, the promise of the Spirit through Christ's intercession, the exam­ple of Christ, the meditation on his Passion, on his Resurrection and Ascension, and on the last Judgment. Most of which (as it is evident) work morally, that is, upon a man's reason; and he tells us, p. 410. ad sin.’ ‘That God in his infinite Wisedom hath traced out such a me­thod in Christian Religion as is most accom­modate to gain souls to himself.’ And this [Page 333]certainly all those Divines will acknowledge that are for conversion to be ordinarily effected by moral suasion; for though the Holy Ghost himself should represent the arguments to our souls which we are to be moved by, yet if it be only represented in order to prevailing upon us in a way of perswasion, it is only the reason of a man that is to close with them, and therefore they will never prevail except they be accom­modated and suited to a man's reason; nay, the more lively and truly they are represented unto a man's soul, the less affecting will they be by how much the less rational they are. And what Dr Moor afferts of the Christian Religion, that it is so accommodated to man's nature to prevail upon it, hath been alwaies true in the way of grace and faith in that measure in which it was at any time intelligible. And therefore for these men that speak against reason in Reli­gion, they do but go about to unman us whilest they pretend to make us Christians; and they rob God of the glory of his Wisedom, the ho­nour of which, as it is given by us, cannot be o­therwise rightly and acceptably ascribed, then as we understand how this Wisedom discovers it self in the several designes and effects of it; which understanding is by no other faculty in us but that of our Reason, though it need be e­levated and strengthened by the spirit of God in such acts of our understanding. The Wisedom of God therefore in this Gospel-way of Justifi­cation is very conspicuous, not only in that God hath in this way made many Attributes illustri­ous together, but in that the way it self is such as is most apposite to attain the end; viz. to ju­stifie [Page 334]men, which is the highest commendation of the prudence of any designe. Let us there­fore be perswaded to admire the Wisedom and Prudence wherein God hath abounded towards us in this way of Faith, which certainly if we studyed more, we should be abundantly more affected with, even from our own convictions of the wisedom of it, and made to cry out with the Apostle Paul, [...], O the depth of the riches both of the Wisedom and Knowledg of God! how un­searchable are his judgments, and his wayes past find­ing out! Rom. 11.33.

2. Use of Informa­tion; of the per­versness of man. This discourse informs us of the strange un­reasonable perversness of the sons of men, That when God hath, in so much mercy and wise­dom, found out and appointed such a glorious easie way of saving sinners, they should yet ge­nerally dislike this way, and take to a more ig­noble way, to wit, their own righteousness, and an impossible way, to wit, the keeping of the Law, which I have proved above at large that they do; and it acquaints us with the strange infa­tuations which pride leads us into, for that is by the Apostle chiefly glanced at as the reason of so many mens adhering to the way of Works, because they would establish their own righteous­ness, which they prefer far before the righteous­ess of God, that is, that righteousness which he hath sufficiently manifested he will alone ac­cept. They that are for the Law are for boasting and glorying, & this humour of self-confidence and fleshly boasting doth so besot them, that they run upon the most absurd and irrational designs in the whole world; but of this enough above.

[Page 335]3. Use of Consola­tion. There is great matter of consolation which offers it self unto us from what hath been discoursed above. Is it so, that the Lord hath remitted of the rigour of his Law, nay, that he hath taken off the Law wholly from requiring an account of those that are married unto Christ, as being their Husband no longer? Is the condition of Justification altered from un­erring obedience to faith and sincerity in obe­dience? then here is comfort for all faithfull sincere hearts. Art thou honest to God? hast thou no Delilah in thy bosome? art thou faith­ful to the interest of Christ and his Saints? thou art safe, thou art secure; it is not necessary that thou be in the highest form of Christians; 'tis true it were well if thou wert there, and it is thy duty to endeavour it, but it is not absolutely necessary to thy being a Saint or in favour with God.

There are of all sorts and sizes, See more of this pag. 202, 203. above of all ranks and ages that are accepted with God. There are babes, and young men, and strong men, and fa­thers; there are lambs, and there are sheep that are with young; only without sincerity, without a lively faith they cannot be so much as Christ's little ones. Now this is a matter of comfort which we may often reflect upon; it is ready at hand unto us. Art thou in any distress or trouble at any time, either from without, from men; or from within, by the bufferings of Satan? turn in presently upon thy soul, and examine, see how thou hast lived, and what thy present frame of heart is. 2 Cor. 1.12. Our rejoicing is this, the te­stimony of our conscience, that IN SIMPLICITY & GODLY SINCERITY, not with fleshly wisedom, [Page 336]but by the grace of God we have had our conversation in the world. Now if thou hast such a testimony as this from thine own conscience, thou maist conclude thou art in the favour of God, and that therefore all things shall work together unto thee for good; but herein do not deceive thy self with an imagined honesty of heart to God, as many do, but deal faithfully with thy self in the exa­mination whether thou have a sincerity or no. If I should here give all the marks of sincerity that I could finde throughout the Scripture, I should not be impertinent in so doing, but yet seeing that hath been done well by many, I shall forbear; I shall only say this, that if thou settest thy self any boundary or stint to thy attain­ments in holiness, short of perfection thou art so far insincere; or if thou avoidest any opportu­nity (which thou canst by any means certainly understand to be an opportunity) of honouring God, thou art so far insincere. Lastly, if thou gi­vest way to sin in the little degrees or appearan­ces of it, thou art so far insincere; and if the interest of the flesh or of the world prevail in thy heart above the interest of God and Christ, thou art altogether infincere, whatever good desire; and good affections thou maist have in thy heart.

I might here mention the other more princi­pal condition of Gospel-justification, viz. Faith, and bid thee if thou wouldest have comfort en­quire if thou have faith; this St James tells thee how thou mayest know whether thou hast it o [...] no, even by thy works; thou maist discover it both unto thy self and others by these. Jam. 2.18. Shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will [Page 337]shew thee my faith by my works. For though I af­firm that the Apostle James doth not speak only in that Chapter of the demonstration of Faith by Works (but also of real Justification before God by Works, as they are a part of the condi­tion of Gospel-justification, according to the 14. ver. of that Chap. If a man say he hath faith and not works, SHALL FAITH SAVE HIM?) yet it is certain that he speaks there also of the demonstration of Faith by Works; and both these designes (I think) may be as we under­stood in that chap. of James, as in the 24 of Mat. we may understand our Saviour speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the World.

But instead of giving marks and signes of true faith, I shall rather proceed to an use of Exhortation unto the high and frequent exer­cise of Faith, which when we are engaged in, we shall have marks and signes enough to disco­ver our faith by.

In the next place therefore I come to an use of Exhortation. Use, of Exhorta­tion. Is it so that Faith is made the great and principal condition of our Justificati­on? that Faith bears so great a stroke in the bu­siness of Gospel-justification, that the whole way should receive denomination from it [...] (Rom. 4.14. If they which are of the Law be heires, FAITH is made void) Is the righteousness of God in the Gospel said to be revealed from faith to faith? Is the Gospel-righteousness called the righteous­ness of faith? nay, is faith it self accepted as our righteousness? then let this provoke us to the constant lively exercise of all the various & excellent acts of Faith, Let us do as all the [Page 338]Saints of old have done, and if it be possible let us out-do them in believing. By faith (saith saith the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews) the Elders obtained a good report, so he begins the chap. ver. 2. These all (saith he) obtained a good re­port through faith, so he ends it, ver. 39. What that great good report which they obtained was, he tells you ver. 33, 34, 35. Through faith they subdu­ed Kingdomes, wrought righteousness, obtained promi­ses, stopped the mouthes of Lions, quenched the vio­lence of fire; &c.

My first motive that I shall begin with to quicken this Exhortation shall be from the won­derfull things that faith hath wrought and can work. M [...]tive. Faith hath a virtue in it that hath wrought and can work wonderfull things. Witness but these three verses quoted, Heb. 11.33, 34.35. It was faith made the walls of Jericho fall down; by faith in prayer Elijah (that was otherwise a weak frail man as we are) stopped the bottles of heaven for three years and six moneths, that it rained not; and by faith again he opened these bottles, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit, Jam. 5.17, 18. Faith enabled the Apo­stles to do miracles; when the Disciples could not cast out a devil of one that was possest, our Saviour tells them the reason was from their un­ [...]elief, and that if they had faith but as a grain of mustard seed, they should be able to say unto a moun­tain, Be removed hence into yonder place, and it shall remove, and nothing should be impossible to them, Mat. 17.19, 20. What then would a strong faith do, if a small faith would do so much? It was by faith that persons obtained miracles to be done for themselves and others, Math. 9.29, 30. Then tou­ched [Page 339]he their eyes, saying, According to your faith [...]e it unto you, and their eyes were opened: and in Math. 15.28. Jesus answered and said unto her, (the woman of Canaan) O woman great is thy faith, be it unto thee even as thou wilt; (a large grant indeed!) and her daughter (its said) was made whole from that very hour. This is commonly known by this name the Faith of Miracles; and is plainly exprest what it is, Mark 11.23. For verily I say unto you, that whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea, and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that these things which he saith shall come to pass, he shall have whatso­ever he saith. So again, 1 Cor. 13.2. If I had all faith so as to remove mountains.— Now if Faith will remove mountains, even all mountains of difficulties, and procure any thing from heaven that we need, who would not endeavour to be strong in faith, to be rich in faith? as the seve­ral expressions are, Rom. 4.20. Jam. 2 5.

2ly, Faith will serve all occasions whatsoever; Motive: (and no wonder if it will work all miraculous effects) therefore be rich in faith. In famine it will feed thee, as it did Elijah and the Widdow of Zareptha, 1 King. 17. and our Saviour in the Wilderness, who lived not by bread, but by the word of God for 40 dayes together, Math. 4.4. In pri­son it will enlarge thee, as it did Peter, Acts 12. or at least enlarge thy heart, as it did the hearts of Paul and Silas, Acts 16.25. If thy children, servants, friends are sick, it will heal them, Mat. 15.28. Mat. 8.6. Jam. 5.14, 15. There is no case but faith will reach it. We may oppose this shield to all the fiery darts of Satan, Eph 6.16 ABOVE ALL taking the shield of Faith, whereby we shall be [Page 340]able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. This I have spoken largely to above, and therefore shall not enlarge here.

Faith and that alone will free thy minde of all cares and burthens; Motive. Cast thy burthen upon the Lord and he shall sustain thee, Psal. 55.22. casting all your care upon him. for he careth for you, 1 Pet. 5 7. Now this is to be done onely by faith; who would not have a minde quiet and free from cares? and who can be carefull, when he really believes that the only wise and omnipo­tent Jehovah takes all his cares upon himself? This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith, 1 John 5.4.

4. This will quicken all thy graces; Motive. this you may see likewise above upon the last Question, There is no thriving Christian but a believing Christian.

This is the highest way of honouring God that can be taken; Motive. Abraham was strong in faith, and so gave glory to God; if thou doest not make it thy chiefest design in the world to honour God, thou art no Saint of God; now if thou wouldst study all the wayes imaginable to honour God, thou canst not do it so effectually as by this one onely way of believing. How is God known in the world in any way with such an honourable reflection as by men's trusting in him? To trust our own wit, and cōntrivance, and endeavours only in what we do, is as much as in us lyes to put God out of the world; I am sure it is a li­ving without God in the world; whereas trust­ing in him for all is the only advancing the Lord upon his Throne of Sovereignty & Good­ness.

[Page 341]This is the only way of pleasing God; Motive. With­out faith it is impossible to please God: for he that comes unto God must believe that he is a rewarder of all them that diligently seek him. Men cannot more highly displease God than to believe that he is not good, yea, that he is not good to ALL that diligently seek him (let them look to it that confine and set limits to his Goodness:) yea, God is so highly pleased that men should trust in him, that he hath made this the principal condition of the pardon of all our sins, and re­ceiving us into his special love and favour. A­braham was therefore called the FRIEND OF GOD, which is the highest honour in the whole world; by this Enoch obtained this testimony taat he PLEASED GOD, Heb. 11.5. which was an honourable testimony indeed. Yea, (to con­clude this Motive, and all the Motives in this Use) that the Lord might give us a testimony how highly he is pleased that we should trust in him, and how fain he would have us rely upon him, he hath at this time, [...], in these blessed dayes of the Gospel, set forth Christ a propitiation, to shew how ready he is to be re­conciled to all the world; in a word, one of the greatest ends of the oeconomy by Christ seems to be this, that in him representing his Father, being the express Image of his P [...]rson, yet partaking of Flesh and Blood like us, we might have a fit instrument and help, or mediate object for our faith to work upon: first upon him and by him, upon God himself, ac­cording to that place once already mentioned. 1 Pet. 1.21. Who by him (that is, Christ) do believe in God that raised him up from the dead, and gave him [Page 342]glory, that your faith and hope might be in God. I come now to the matter of the Exhortation it self.

Be exhorted therefore to be strong in faith, that is, in the acts of assent and the acts of affiance; for these (as I take it) are the two chief proper acts of faith, though after I have ended the Exhortation un­to these two, I shall give one notion of faith more under which we are to be exhorted to ex­ercise faith:

1. For Assent; so faith is taken, Isai. 53.1. Who hath believed our report? and Mark 1.15. Re­pent and believe the Gospel, that is, the doctrine of the Gospel; and (to mention but one place more) Rom. 14.23. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin; This noti­on of faith, viz. dogmati­cal faith, where the word faith signifies an act, is the most common notion of faith in the New Testa­ment. that is, (as the former part of the verse, he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith, carrieth it) whatsoever a man doth without a sound perswasion in his minde that it is lawfull to do it, he sinneth in that action. This is the first notion therefore of faith, namely, the assent to any Proposition, though more accurate­ly the assent to a testimony; but yet you see the Scripture-notion of faith is somewhat larger than that of the Schools, namely, the perswa­sion of or assent unto the truth of a Proposi­tion.

First therefore if thou wilt be rich in faith, be thou rich in truth, in thy assent unto truths, that is, truths in Religion; for though it be faith to believe there is such a place as Rome, or Con­stantinople, yet my designe confines me here to truths in Religion: Be thou rich therefore in assent to divine truths, and that, whether they [Page 343]be clear by the light of nature, or revelation; for assent to truths that are clear even by the light of Nature is called Faith by the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Heb. 11.6. where to believe that God is, (which certainly is clear by the light of Nature) is called Faith, as I have shewn above, pag. 291. I say, be rich in thy as­sent unto all truths as near as thou canst, whe­ther they be clear by the light of Nature or on­ly by Revelation. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisedom, Col. 3.16. So Christ shall dwell in your hearts by faith; for according to thy light and knowledge and assent unto truths, so will be thy heart, affections, and conversation: he that hath a large light may have a large heart; whereas those that have but a narrow light, and a scanty knowledge, can have but a lower and a more limited sphear and compass to act in for God. And if it happen (as often it doth) that they that know little yet do more than many that know a great deal; this comes not from any advantage of the honest man's ignorance, but from the folly and carelesness of those persons that are knowing, and their want of firm assent to the notions of truth which float in their brains. I am but a little care­full here of distin­guishing betwixt Knowledge & Assent, being con­fined with in the nar­row limits of an Use. Enlarge thy minde with knowledge, and thou gettest a larger field of a­ction and service than otherwise thou canst pos­sibly have: for thou must first know thy duty before thou canst do it rightly; for he that doth the best actions in the world, not knowing that they are good, pleaseth neither God nor man; they are only the actions of the man, they are not humane or manly actions, as the Schools distinguish. Yea, though thou dost a good a­ction, [Page 344]yet if thou doubtest whether it be good or no, thou sinnest in doing this good action; because, whatsoever is not of faith is sin. For this largeness of faith by assent, see that last chara­cter where I shew how we should endeavour to know much of Christ.

2. But then withall take this advice too in thy faith of assent, do not only endeavour to get a true light and perswasion of the truth and good­ness of things or actions, but get it as firmly rooted and as clear as ever thou canst, this will be a mighty advantage to thee; for if thou hast only a glimmering light, a little cloud will soon darken it; if thou gettest but a faint perswasion, a small objection will quickly turn it into doubt­ing: therefore get thy faith firmly built, that thou maist be firm and stable in thy faith and perswasion; Be not like children tossed to and fro with every winde of doctrine, Eph. 4.14. Be not chil­dren in understanding; in malice be ye children, but in understanding be ye men, 1 Cor. 14.20. I think we have sufficient experience in these times of of the sore evil of a weak perswasion about mat­ters of Religion, by the running up and down of so many from one party to another, till at last they have made shipwrack of their faith, (that is, saith doctrinal) as well as of their consciences, 1 Tim. 1.19.

3ly; As to this part of faith which lyes in assent, as we ought to endeavour that it be large and strong, so we must especially be wary that we fail not in our assent, and that a firm assent to those truths that are most important. Though it were to be wished, yet it cannot be expected, that all Saints should be so well ac­quainted [Page 345]with all truths, even those of less weight, as it may be justly expected their guid [...] should be; yet all must look to it that they be well establisht in foundation-truths, such as the Death of Christ and his Expiation of sins, the Resurrection of the body and the last Judg­ment; we must be sure to continue in this faith, grounded and settled, and not moved away from the hope of the Gospel, Col. 1.23. Rooted and built up in him (that is, Christ) and stablished in the faith as we have been taught, (that is, Faith doctrinal) e­specially in that great Foundation of Jesus Christ, Col. 2.7. And truly I think there hath been no greater weakening of our faith in foun­dation-truths than the multiplying of Funda­mentals; for taking off that weight and stress which we should lay upon those few fundamen­tals of the Faith of Christ that are really so, and laying it upon things non-funnamental, must needs make us unsettled from the foundation. So much for the first part of Faith which lyes in assent, and the directions about it.

2ly, For that part of Faith which lyes in Af­fiance. I need not quote many Scriptures to e­vince this notion of Faith, I shall give but one or two; John 14.1. Let not your heart be troubled; yee believe in God, believe also in mee, [...]: there is a credere Deo, which is to believe what the Lord sayes to be truth, and a credere in Deum, which is a resting and relying upon God, committing all my cares and concernments to him: He that believeth in the Son hath everlasting life, John 3.36. So that phrase of Scripture, (to cite no more places) of faith in the blood of Christ, Rom. 3.25. can be un­derstood [Page 346]of no other than some kinde of affi­ance; such as this, that for that blood sake the Lord is ready to be propitious to me if I have the Gospel-conditions of Justification: and in this sense (namely) of affiance, I have general­ly taken faith throughout this Treatise; and the reason is this, For that this is the end of a dog­matical faith or a faith of assent, and cannot be conceived without it, as that may without this; not that I think there can be a thorough dog­matical faith without this of Faith of affiance is known in the Old Testament by the name of trusting, as faith of Assent is known in the New Testament by the name of believing; it it also expressed by staying one's self, leaning upon confidence in God. See Ball of Faith, pag 24, 25, 26. who is large and clear upon it. Affiance: but yet, seeing one may conceive them apart, though they are never separated, I took the surest course in using the word Faith in this sense, namely, for the faith of Affiance, so including both una­voidably.

Look well therefore to this part of your faith, this makes use of all the truths and promises which you assent unto for true, and brings them down to your particular case: as now for in­stance; Doest thou assent to this for a truth, that God is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart? Psal. 73.1. why then do thou be­lieve for the Israel of God, that God will pre­serve it, and do it good, notwithstanding all the sufferings that are brought upon it; and do thou cleanse thy heart, and believe that God will be good to thee. The former ( viz. to believe the Promise true) is a faith of Assent, this a faith of Affiance; so again, for any particular [Page 347]trouble that the people of God may be under, or that thou maist be under, believe, and doubt not but God will with this trouble make a way to escape, that they and thou maist be able to bear it, and that it shall work for good. When thou prayest in any case of publick calamity, as of Famine, or of Pestilence, &c. thou must pray in faith, and then thou hast no other way but to apply general promises (which thou believest true by a faith of Assent) to the particular case by a faith of Affiance, so expecting the accom­plishment of them. When thou prayest for any sick person, or for thy self, upon any occa­sion, it is the general promise must give thee in­couragement to expect the mercy in the perfor­mance of it; which expectation certainly must be understood to be affiance, or at least some o­ther act than meerly assent to the promise as from God.

In this part of Faith therefore, namely Affi­ance, 1. Endeavour to be rich and abundant; 2. Be strong and intense. 1. Be abundant; ex­tend your faith as far as you can unto all the ca­ses of the Church, or any particular persons whose cases you may have occasion to know.

St Paul had upon him the care of all the Chur­ches, 2 Cor. 11.28. but think you he could sus­tain it without casting this care upon God by faith? See an act of faith for his beloved Romans, Rom. 16 20. God shall bruise or tread Satan under your feet shortly; and we finde how every Church to whom he wrote did partake of his most ardent prayers, (as we may see in the beginning of e­very Epistle) which without faith would have been utterly ineffectual. Nay, the Apostle Paul [Page 348]was of so noble a spirit, that he did not only interesse himself in the concernments of whole Churches, but of every particular person that he could come to know of, Who is offended, and I burn not? & could he ease himself of this trouble but by faith? Daniel he understood by books the number of the weeks wherein the Jews were to suffer Captivity, and the time of their Deliverance, and did he not adde prayers to his knowledge, and faith to his prayers? Dan. 9.2, 3. Was it not for his prayers of faith, looking towards Jerusa­lem, Dan. 6.10. that he was cast into the Lions Den? and did not the same faith that set him a praying, and opened his mouth, stop the mouthes of the Lions? Heb. 11.33.

Again, for faith for particular persons, I have often observed already, that the Centurion be­lieved for his Servant, the Woman of Canaan for her Daughter, the Palsie-man's friends for him, Abraham's servant for his Master's Son, Gen. 24.14. and it is said, The prayer of faith shall save the sick, Jam. 5.15. Therefore enlarge your faith and bowels of mercies for as many as you can.

2ly, Or if you cannot concern your faith so largely or universally as a Daniel, or a Paul might do, (as some men and some Saints are of a more noble spirit and faith than other men, then other Saints) yet be sure look to it, that whatever you do you mixe faith in the doing of it. Whether you pray for your selves, or others, for Churches or particular persons, you must pray in faith; if you hear the Word, you must mixe faith in the hearing of it; if thou art under temptations, & findest great weakness & infirmity, thou must glory in it by faith, that [Page 349]here is an opportunity for the power of Christ to rest upon thee: When I am weak (saith the Apostle) then am I strong; which could not be true in the same sense in which he was weak, but only thus, that when he was weak in himself, then he found Christ most ready at at hand to help him, as he explains himself in that Scripture, 2 Cor. 12.9, 10. If any of you lack wisedom let him ask it of God, saith the Apostle James, Jam. 1.5. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering, as it follows in ver 6. But I shall not need to instance in par­ticular cases wherein faith will stead us after so many reckoned together by the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, chap. 11.33, 34, 35: there are cases personal and national, in prosperity as victories, adversity as imprisonments, mockings, scour­gings, death; there are cases of Kings, Judges, Prophets, private men, and even of women; only in the general therefore be sure whatever you do, do it in faith, let your whole life be a life of faith; perhaps you may not have such a large sphear of action as some other more emi­nent Saints, you may not be of such a large soul as some others, but for what comes through your hands to do, it must be done in faith; in this we must all imitate the Apostle Paul, Gal. 2.20. The life that I now live in the flesh (saith he) I live by the faith of the Son of God, &c. the life that I live, the words are, [...], THAT WHICH I now live in the flesh, all this that I live, and wherein I may be said to live, is by th [...] faith of the Son of God. Mannage all thihe affairs, perform all thy actions in faith; whatsoever action thou hast to transact, whe­ther [Page 350]it be of a spiritual, or a more secular con­cernment, expect wisedom, and strength, and success from God.

And endeavour to be strong, intense, and vi­gorous in all the actions of thy faith, as it is said Abraham was, Rom. 4.20. and or a direction here­in, that your faith may be strong as Abraham's was, take the course that he did; if there be great difficulties appear in the way that thou art in, yet knowing that thou art in Gods way, look away from the difficulties that offer them­selves, and consult only with the power and goodness & faithfulness of God, and this shield of Faith (which above all the pieces of our spi­ritual armour we are cautioned to make use of) will quench all the fiery darts of discouraging temptations. Abraham was put upon as difficult acts of faith as ever any man was, and if he would have considered all difficulties, he might easily have been discouraged; but it is said, He CONSIDERED NOT his own body now dead, nor yet the deadness of Sarah's womb, ver. 19. and therefore staggered not at the promise through unbelief.

The third Notion in which Faith is taken in Scripture, Faith ta­ken for fidelity or faithful­ness to God. and in which thou art to be exhorted to the exercise of faith, is that of Fidelity or Faithfulness to God, as it stands opposed to wave­ring and unfixedness of heart in the profession of his name and Gospel; thus it is taken in James 15.6. If any of you lack wisedom, let him ask of God who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering: If a man think to receive any thing [Page 351]of God, (wisedom or any such thing) let him ask in faith. What is this faith? It is not meant of a particular certain expectation of that which we ask, for that is understood in the phrase think to receive, ver. 7. but it is meant of trustiness and fixedness of heart to God without wavering, as all the three verses 6, 7, 8. carry it; for he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed: A double-minded man is unstable in all his wayes; now this double-mindedness and wa­vering cannot be meant of the want only of a certain expectation of that particular thing which we ask in prayer; for though we should be wanting in this particular and sin in it, yet it would not follow, that we were unstable in all our wayes, that we were like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed, or that we were double-minded, for that is a word that plainly signifies hypocrisie. Besides, as I have intimated, it is plainly said in the 7 verse, that such a man that is a waverer, a double-minded man, must not think to receive any thing of the Lord; now if double-mindedness and wavering here, which are made the opposites of faith, were taken for misdoubt­ing to receive that thing which we pray for; the paraphrase would be thus, Let not him that doubteth whether he shall receive his petition think to receive his petition, which were need­less admiration; for that while he doubteth whether he shall receive what he prayes for, he cannot think he shall receive it. But now there is a full and strong sense in the other expositi­on, That if a man pray for wisedom, or for any other thing, & at the same time is unfixed in his [Page 352]heart to the profession of the name and Gospel of Christ (as it is known many of the Jews, to whom the Apostle James directs this Ep stle, were) let not that man think to receive any thing of the Lord. If thou expectest or but de­sirest that the Lord should hear thy prayer at any time, do thou come to him with thorough purpose of heart to cleave close to him; do not bring with thee an heart and an heart, a double mind into his presence; for he hates a lukewarm soul, that is neither for God nor for the world, worse than he doth one that is stark cold, Rev. 3.15, 16. if thou comest with such an instability, wavering, and unfixedness of heart to God, never think to receive any thing from him; thou maist pray and pray thy heart out, and do by thy self as Baal's Priests did by themselves to make their God to hear them, 1 Kings 18.26, 28. but thou shalt not be heard.

And what the Apostle James saith here in the matter of Prayer, I may say in the matter of faith of Assent and Affiance, both before menti­oned, That though you had the largest & stron­gest assent to divine truths that ever any in the world had, or as the Apostle makes the supposi­tion, 1 Cor. 13.2. Though you had the gift of Pro­phesie, and understood all Mysteries and all Knowledge; you, though for affiance you had ALL FAITH (that is, saith Dr Hammond, the highest degree of that faith by which Miracles are wrought) so as to remove mountains; nay, I will adde, though thou hadst the strongest affiance and trust in the mercies of God for the pardon of sins that ever any man had, yet imagine all this but separated [Page 353]from that integrity and honesty of faith which is here required in this place of James, and it is all worth nothing. Thou must be a man fixed to God in thy resolutions to walk with him and serve him, or else never think to fasten upon any of his promises, nor to receive any answer to thy prayers.

Here you see is a notion of faith which signi­fies sincerity, or faithfulness; and this Conradus Bergius Professor at Breme in his Praxis Catholica, pag. 15, 16, 17. asserts and proves to be the first notion of Faith, pag. 17. Ad hanc quidem fidei sig­nificationem, qua fidelitatem significat, omnes caeterae revocari possunt; that is, Unto this signification or notion of faith wherein it signifies Fidelity or Faithfulness, all the other significations of faith may be reduced. Yet because (as the same Au­thor acknowledgeth in the same page) Assensio, quam adhibemus dicenti, ita usu invaluit pro significa­tione fidei, ut propria habeatur, nihilque cedat illi quae ex prima impositione videtur descendere; that is, Assent to the authority and truth of the speaker is so commonly used to express the notion of faith, that it is taken for the most proper noti­on of faith, as also for that fiducia or affiance ad differentiam sicque ad dignitatem & consequenter ad essentiam fidei pertinet, as the same Author speaks, pag. 44. that is, affiance or trust belongs to the difference and so to the definition and consequently to the essence of faith, for this reason that the firm assent to any testimo­ny, even that of God himself, requires an affection in him that assents; and there­fore is Faith defined (as he saith) by Pa­raus, [Page 354]assensum fiducialem, a fiducial assent. I say, for these reasons, from the notation of the word partly, but especially for that, (though this fi­delity and faithfulness be a Scripture-notion of faith, as is to be seen in this place of James, yet) it is rarely used in this sense in the Scripture; I have taken faith as justifying in that sense as it signifies assent or affiance, & chiefly for affiance, for the reasons given above, pag. 346. But however having urged the practice of faith, as you see from the Scripture in this 3 Notion likewise (w ^ch Bergius sayes is the first) as it signifies Sincerity or Fide­lity, I shall not need to make any new exhorta­tion (which otherwise I should be engaged to do from the fore-going discourse) unto sincerity or sincere obedience, which is the other part of the condition of Gospel justification. I might adde as a great particular of the Exhortation to the exercise of faith, that you must be sure to exer­cise frequent and vigorous acts upon Christ and his blood; but of this I have spoken at large in the last Character.

To conclude therefore this use, and so the whole Treatise, if thou be rich in knowledge, and firm in thy assent unto divine truths, copi­ous and strong in acts of affiance upon the di­vine power and goodness exhibited in the gra­cious promises of the Word, and to this addest, or rather makest to precede a sincerity of heart in the service of God; that is, in summe, if thou be a great believer, (thou mayest not perhaps work Miracles, but) thou shalt be a wonderful Christian, and shalt be able to do greater things than it was to do Miracles when [Page 355]they were in use, for wicked men could work Miracles, Math. 7.22. Thou shalt be eminently usefull unto the Church, to thy Friends and Re­lations & Acquaintance, & unto thine own soul; thou shalt be fit to stand in the gap upon all oc­casions for others; & for thy self, thou shalt free thy mind of all thy cares, all thy businesses shall succeed; thou shalt have all thy graces flourishing & vigorous; thou shalt by thy frequent actings of faith in prayer at last get such liberty of access to the throne of Grace, such fellowship and communion with the Father and the Son as to be unto God and Christ in the quality of a Friend, as Abraham was, Jam. 2.23. which we know occasioned intimate communications from God to him as well as from him to God. Gen. 18.17. Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do? So our Saviour saith to his Disci­ples; Henceforth I call you not servants but friends, for the servant knoweth not what his Lord doth, John 15.15. The secret of the Lord, both of his Cove­nant and Providence shall be with thee, Psal. 25.14. In a word, be but much in the exercise of faith, and you shall need but little more to enquire into your selves what evidences you have of the favour of God to you, than one at noon-day needs evidence that the Sun shines; be but much in believing, and ordinarily (I speak not of extraordinary dispensations) ye shall have joy unspeakable and full of glory, 1 Pet. 1.8. this you may see at large above in the third Character, pag 187. But I do not pretend here in the nar­row compass of a Use to speak to all that may be said of the life of Faith, either to the kindes [Page 356]of its acts, the blessed effects of it, all the cases about it, motives to it, or directions in it, this would fill a large Treatise; See Ball of the Life of Faith. I shall conclude all with that of the Psalmist 37.3. Trust in the Lord and do good; be large and firme in thy assent to divine truths, be strong and vigorous in thy acts of Trust and Affiance, and be faithfull to thy God, and thou shalt dwell in the Land, and verily thou shalt be fed; verily thou shalt be ju­stified, verily thou shalt be saved.