The life of justification opened, or, A treatise grounded upon Gal. 2, II wherein the orthodox doctrine of justification by faith, & imputation of Christ's righteousness is clearly expounded, solidly confirmed, & learnedly vindicated from the various objections of its adversaries, whereunto are subjoined some arguments against universal redemption / by that faithful and learned servant of Jesus Christ Mr. John Broun ...

CHAP. XIII.

M. Baxter's opinion, Concerning Imputation, examined.

THere being so frequent mention made, in Scripture, of Imputation of Righteousness; or of Righteousness Imputed; & of Christ's being our Righteousness; or of our being Righteousness, or Righteous in Him, & the like, many, that even plead much against the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, maintained by the orthodox, must yet yeeld to it, in some sense or other; at least in such a sense, as may, in their ap∣prehensions, not cross their other Hypotheses & Dogmes: Yea & sometimes grant this Imputation in that sense, at least in words, which overthroweth or weakeneth all their Disputations to the contrary. Schlightingius, in de∣fence of Socinus against Meisnerus pag. 250. will grant, That Christ's Righ∣teousness may be called & accounted ours, in so far, as it redoundeth to our good & righteousness, & is the cause of our justification. And Bellarmin, will also say (de just. lib. 2. cap. 10.) That Christ is said to be our Righteousness, because He satisfied the father for us; & so giveth & communicateth that Satisfaction to us, when He justifieth us, that it may be said to be our Satisfaction & Righ∣teousness.

Mr. Baxter, though he seemeth not satisfied with what is commonly hold by the Orthodox, anent the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ; yet will not professe himself an Enemie to all Imputation; but on the contrary, saith, he owneth it in a right sense: And it is true, men have their own liberty, in expressing their sense & meaning of Truths; & where there seemeth to be some considerable difference, as to words & expressions; yet there may be little, or none upon the matter. And it is not good, I confess, to make real differences of these, that are but verbal; nor is it good to be so tenacious of our own expressions, as to exaggerat the expressions of others, whose meaning may be good, because not complying with our own, in all points,

Let us therefore enquire after Mr. Baxter's sense, & see wherein he really differeth from us, in this matter. In his late Treatise of justifying Righ∣teousness against D. Tully. The first part (as the Title page sheweth) is of Imputed Righteousness, opening & defending the true Sense, & confuting the fal∣se. Here then belike we shall finde his meaning, as to this question.

In his preface to this book, he giveth us his sense, in these words, That Righteousness is imputed to us, that is, we are accounted Righteous, because for the merites of Christ's total fulfulling the conditions of his Mediatorial Covenant with the Father, by His Habitual Holiness, His Actual perfect Obedience, & His Sacrifice, or Sati••factory Suffering for our sins, in our stead, freely without any merite, or conditional act of mans, God hath made an act of oblivion & Deed of Gift, pardoning all sin, justifying & Adopting & giving Right to the Spirit &

Life eternally to every one, that beleevingh accepteth Christ, & the gifts with, & by, & from Him; & when we accept them, they are all ours by vertue of this purchased Covenant-gift. But this, I Judge, cannot give satisfaction, for upon the grant of the Act of Oblivion, (as he calleth it) which, in his judgment, is extended to all Mankind, no man in particular can be cal∣led or accounted Righteous, or have Righteousness imputed to him, mo∣re than another; & so upon this account, all are equally Righteous, & have equally Christ's Righteousness imputed to them, that is, no man hath it. As for these Effects, pardon, justification, Adoption, & Right to the Spirit & to Life, they cannot be called the Righteousness of Christ; no more than the Effect can be called the cause: And though they become ours, when we accept them, or rather when we accept of Christ; yet upon that account meerly, it can not be said, that the Righteousness of Christ is im∣puted to us, & no otherwayes: for that is nothing but the Socinian Con∣cession formerly mentioned, & it cannot Satisfie the orthodox. The que∣stin is about the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, & the Answer given is concerning the Effects thereof given to us; But these Effects are not the Righteousness of Christ; nor are they to be called a Righteousness; nor are they in Scripture so called, unless we say with Ioh. Goodwin, that Righteous∣ness Imputed is nothing but free justification. Yea these Effects must presuppose a Righteousness in the persons receiving them, either Inherently, or by way of Impu••ation: for God will justifie no man, or declare no man to be Righteous, who is not Righteous: And concerning this Righteousness is our question: And Mr. Baxter giveth us nothing here for this, unless it be our beleeving: & this is that which Servetus, Socinians & Arminians say.

In opposition to this, which he calleth a short & plaine explication of Chri∣stianity, he setteth down what others say, as necessary to go in to our Chri∣stianity; & so tels us, that according to them, we must say, That Christ was habitually & actually perfectly Holy & obedient, imputatively in our particu∣lar persons; & thath each one of us did perfectly fulfill that Law, which requi∣reth perfect habites & act: in and by Christ imputatively; and yet did also in & by him suffer ourselves imputatively for not fulfilling it, & imputatively did oursel∣ves both satisfie God's justice, and merite heaven; and that we have ourselves im∣putatively a Righteousness of Perfect holiness & obedience, as sinless; & must be justified by the Law of Innocency, or works, as having ourselves imputatively ful∣filled it in Christ. And that this is our sole-righteousness: & that faith it self is not imputed to us for Righteousness, no not a meer particular subordinat Righteousness, answering the conditional part of the new justifying Covenant, as necessary to our participation of Christ, & His freely given Righteousness. As touching the lat∣ter part of this discourse, about the Imputation of Faith, & its being cal∣led our particular subordinat Righteousness, it is true, Several of the Or∣thodox have appeared against it, & we shall also speak our judgment of it hereafter. But as to the former part (which is only pertinent to our purpo∣se now in hand) I know not, if ever any Orthodox person uttered his min∣de, after this manner: Yea, I wote not, if Antinomians themselves have at any time expressed themselves, in all points, as is here set down. But

be it so, that they have thus expressed their meaning, & that these expres∣sions, here set down, are not meer Consequences & Inferences, drawn by Mr. Baxter himself, from their opinions & assertions: yet Mr. Baxter cannot but know, that the Orthodox are against them, in these assertions, as well as he: & to me it appeareth no faire, to set down these words, as containing that opinion, which all must hold, who cannot fully embrace Mr. Baxter's owne judgment; as if there were no Medium betwixt the Soci∣nian or Arminian judgment, on the one hand, & the Antinomian opinion on the other hand; whileas he cannot but know the contrary. Nether is this a ••••t & sure way to cleare up the true sense of the Imputation of Christ's Righ∣teousness, at least, that sense, which we owne.

In the Book pag. 24. he againe setteth down his own judgment, or sense of Imputation, which he taketh to be the true healing middle way; Part whereof is as followeth. That as Christ suffered in our stead, that we might not suffer, and obeyed in our Nature, that perfection of obedience might not be ne∣cessary to our justification; and this in the person of a Mediator and Sponsor, for us sinners; but not so in our persons, as that we truely, in a moral or civil sence, did all this in and by him: Even so God reputeth the thing to be, as it is, and so far Imputeth Christ's Righteousness and Merites and Satisfaction to us, as that it is reputed by Him the true Meritorious Cause of our justification; & that for it God maketh a Covenant of Grace, in which he freely giveth Christ, pardon and life to all that accept the gift, as it is; so that the Accepters are by this Cove∣nant and Gift, as surely justified and Saved by Christ's Righteousness, as if they had obeyed and satisfied themselves. Not that Christ meriteth, that we shall have grace to fulfill the Law ourselves, and stand before God in a Righteous∣ness of our own, which will answere the Law of works, and justify us; but that the Conditions of the Gíft, in the Covenant of Grace, being performed by every pe∣nitent Beleever, that Covenant doth pardon all their sins (as God's Instrument) and giveth them a Right to life eternal for Christ's merites. As to this though it may seem faire & a far advancement: yet I shall crave leave to say these few things against it.

1. When he saith, That Christ suffered in our stead, I would know, in whose stead it was? Whether it was in the stead of some select persons, or in stead of all? If in the stead of some select persons only, then these select persons, must have another Interest, in the death of Christ, than all others; & it being done in their stead, must needs be accepted in their behalfe, as it was undergone for them, & in their stead & place: & if it be accepted in their behalfe, they must necessarily be freed from Suffering, after God's Methode; & that upon the account of Christ's Suffering in their stead; and if so, must not that Suffering of Christ, in a Law-sense, be accounted theirs, and imputed unto them, & they as really & effectually freed from what they were under, and obnoxious to, & made partakers of was purchased there∣by, as if they had suffered all that, in their own persons? If it be in stead of all, then all must, upon the account of it, be delivered from Suffering, which cannot be said; or not one shall be delivered from Suffering, meerly upon the account of it, but upon the account of some other thing Inter∣veening,

which he calleth, in the following words, the New Covenant, & the performance of the Conditions thereof: And if so, all Christ's Suffer∣ings in our stead, will be but a Suffering for our good, as say the Socinians.

2. When he saith, That we might not suffer, is that meaned eventually viz. That none of us should ever be put to suffer the penalty? or is it only meaned potentially, that is, that it might be possible, that we should not suffer? If the former be said, then either all of us shall be saved, or the us must be restricked to the Elect. If the Latter be said, then this dying in our stead, is really but a dying for our good, which the Socinians grant.

3. When he saith, & obeyed in our Nature, this, in our Nature, must either be the some with in our stead, which he mentioned before; or some thing different, if the same, then it seemes, when he said, Christ suffered in our stead, his meaning only was, that Christ suffered in our Nature. And will not all Socinians grant, that Christ Suffered thus in our stead, that is, in our Nature? If different, I would know, why he putteth such a difference be∣twixt Christ's Suffering and His obeying, seing both belonged to that Law (as he speaketh in the foregoing words) which was His Covenant Conditi∣ons; and both were Satisfactory and Meritorious, though the one more primarily Satisfactory, & the other more primarily meritorious?

4. When he saith, That Christ obeyed in our Nature, that perfection of obe∣dience might not be necessary to our justification, I would ask, if this end did, or could flow from, or follow upon Christ's Obedience, meerly because it was performed in our Nature? Had we no other Interest, or ground of In∣terest in it, or in Him, but that it was performed in our Nature? or did all the Benefite & Advantage, that we received, or are to receive there∣by, flow from it meerly upon this account, that it was performed in our Nature?

5. As to this end of Christ's obeying viz. that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification, I suppose his meaning is, that this perfe∣ction of obedience might not be required of us, in order to justification: but yet he doth not say (as he should) that this was our debt; and that Christ paid this perfect obedience as our debt, in order to life: for if he shall say this, then it will follow, that this payment must, in Law-sense, be impu∣ted to those, for whom it was paid. How ever these words do plainely insinuat, that howbeit Christ obeyed in our Nature: that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification; yet notwithstanding an Imperfect Obedience might be accounted necessary to our justification; and thus the New Covenant be supposed to be of the same kind and Spece with the old; and Christ be supposed to have obeyed, only that the termes of the Old Covenant might be abated, as to the rigour of perfection of obe∣dience required.

6. That Christ Obeyed and Suffered in the person of a Mediator & Spon∣sor, (as he saith) that is, that person God-Man, who was Mediator and Sponsor, did obey & suffer, is very true; but notwithstanding hereof, yea so much the rather, he obeyed and suffered, as a Publick Person, that is, for others, and not for Himself personally considered. And therefore tho∣se,

for whom He thus Obeyed and Suffered, must, in a just and consequent sense, be accounted as Obeying & Suffering in Him, that is, there was such a Relation betwixt this Mediator, or Surety, and those, for whom He was a Mediator and Surety (in the purpose & designe of God appointing Christ hereunto, & in the purpose & designe of Christ undertaking, and actually performing what He undertook) as gave them fundamentally an∣other Interest in His Obedience & Suffering, then others had, or could ha∣ve, to & for whom He was no Mediator & Sponsor.

7. Whence Christ may be said to have Obeyed and Suffered legally, in the person of, and as representing others; that is, in the construction of the Law & Law-giver, not for Himself, but for others, in whose Law-place He did substitute Himself, undertaking their debt, in order to their Redemption. And though Beleevers, who now come to have an actual Interest in Christ, cannot be said to have done all this in and by Him, that is, as by their delegat and Servant (as Mr. Baxter else where expresseth it) yet they may be said to have done it in and by Him, Civilly, juridically or legally, as the debtor is by Law said to have Satisfied the Creditor, in and by the Surety, who yet physically paid the debt by himself only, but le∣gally in the person of the debtor, the debtor and Surety being in Law-con∣sideration, but as one person, in so far as, they concurre in, and are both obliged by, one and the same Obligation; just as the heir succeding in jus defuncti, is eatenus repute & said to be una & eadem persona with him; when∣ce it is evident, that one payment made by either must be accounted as ma∣de by both, and doth in effect dissolve the whole obligation; and the con∣sequently the debtor is as effectually & justly absolved from all charge or dan∣ger of Law, upon the account of that debt, as if he had paid the money out of his own purse. But whether the terme of Morally, or Civilly, or Legally, or the like, be most apposite, is of no great weight to occasione a debate, especially seing the thing it self is so well known to all, who know what it is to have a friend paying their debt, or Satisfying the Creditor for them, and in their behalfe; and thereupon bringing them out of prison. Though I know, the case of pecuniary debts doth not in all things quadra∣te with our case; yet it is sufficient to explicat what we are now upon.

8. We grant, That God reputeth the thing to be, as it is; and therefore it is very true, that God reputeth Christ to have obeyed and suffered, as being in the Law-place of others, and as making Satisfaction for them; and them, for whom He satisfied, to be in another manner in Him, than any others whatever.

9. He addeth, & so far imputeth Christ's Righteousness, as that it is repu∣ted by Him, the true Meritorious cause of our justification. But it was reputed and estimate so to be, before this Imputation; for it was accepted as such: therefore Imputation must denote something more, than this Reputation, even a reckoning of it (as it were) now upon their Scoce, and accounting it theirs, or them to have a full, special and actual Interest therein, in or∣der to their justification and absolution from the charge of guilt and death brought in against them, whereby they are accounted and reckoned to be

Righteous, because of that Imputation, & therefor pronounced such in justification: so that now it is the objectum formal••, or the ratio formales ob∣jectiva of our justification.

10. When he addeth & that for it God maketh a Covenant of Grace, if those words mean, that in this also Christ's Righteousness is said to be imputed, then, it seemeth, it is equally imputed unto all Adam's poste••ity: for with him, all are comprehended within this Covenant. But this were as much as to say, it is imputed to none in particular. Moreover, it may be thought that this is explicative of what went immediatly before: & so Christ's righ∣teousness shall be repute the true Meritorius Cause of our justification, in that it was the Meritorious cause of the Covenant of Grace: now hereby the immediat ground of justification will be the Gospel-righteousness, he spea∣keth of, that is our performance of the conditions of the New Covenant of Grace; & Christ's Merites, Satisfaction & Righteousness shall be only a remote ground. But we shall show hereafter, how groundless it to say. That Christ procured the New Covenant by His Merites & Satisfaction.

11. He saith, in which (i.e. Covenant of Grace) He freely giveth Christ, pardon & Life, to all that accept the gift, as it is. That all these are hold∣forth in the Covenant, & that such as receive Christ, receive pardon and Life, is true. But what is that, to accept the gift, as it is? & what is mea∣ned by this gift?

12. He addeth, so that the accepters are by this Covenant & Gift as surely justi∣fied and saved by Christ's Righteousness, as if they had obeyed & Satisfied themselves. But this is not by vertue of any immediat of that Righteousness unto them, whereby they are looked upon as Righteous in the sight of God; but by ver∣tue of faith, whereby the gift is accepted, that is offered in the Covenant, which faith is indeed immediatly imputed to them according to him, & reputed their Gospel-righteousness, & they thereupon are reputed Righ∣teous, & so justified, as such: for the Righteousness of Christ is only im∣puted, in that it is reputed the meritorious cause of the New Covenant.

13. Though Christ hath not merited, that we shall have grace to ful∣fill the Law ourselves &c. Yet he will say, that Christ hath merited, that faith shall be the Condition of the New Covenant, & consequently, that we may stand before God, even as the great Law giver, & so before His Law also, in that Gospel-righteousness (as he calleth it) of our own, which will justifie us.

14. In end, when he saith, the Covenant of grace doth pardon & give right to Life for Christ's Merites, I suppose (because of what is already observed) it is only upon the account that Christ's Me••ites have purchased this Covenant; & not because they become our Immediat Righteousness, whereupon we are justified & have pardon: & he should rather say, conforme to what went before, that this Covenant doth Pardon & give Right to Life, for faith, our Gospel-righteousness, the condition thereof.

These are my Exceptions against this supposed healing middle way; & the grounds why I cannot acquiesce therein, as the right way. He tels us againe pag. 45. Note 3. That it is ordinarily agreed by Protestants, that Christ's

Righteousness is imputed to us, in the same sence, as our sins are said to be impu∣ted to Him. And to this I also heartily acquiesce; & hence inferie. That as Christ was made sin by that Imputation, so we are made righteous by ver∣tue of this Imputation: as our sins were laid on Him (as the sins of the peo∣ple were laid on the scape goat, the type) so His Righteousness is put on us, as He came in our Law-place, so we come in His: As our sins imputed to Him were the immediat procuring cause of His stripes & punishment or suffering; so His Righteousness imputed to us is the Immediat procuring cause of our justification &c. As Christ was repute legally or juridically, though not inherently, a sinner, because of this Imputation of our sins to Him, & therefore dealt with, punished & chastened, as if He had been a real sinner, because He stood in our Law-place; to His Righteousness being imputed to us, we are repute legally & juridically, though not inherently; Righteous, & thereupon are dealt with, justified & accepted &c. as if we had been really Righreous, because now standing in His Law-place. So that if Mr. Baxter will stand to this, that ordinarily protestants agree unto, I am fully Satisfied: & had he done so from the beginning, many of his dis∣courses would have been forborne: And whether he, or others who owne what protestants agree unto, be to be reckoned among the self conceited wranglers, as he speaketh in the following page, indifferent men may judge: & I conceive, if he would yet stand to this, he should alter that, which he gave us, in the fore-mentioned words, as the only healing middle way; For that middle way (as he calleth it) giveth us a far other sheme, than can be drawn out of this, wherein protestants are commonly agreed as is ob∣vious.

He tels us Chap. 2. (where he cometh to state the question) pag. 51. that we must distinguish of Imputation, & giveth us six senses thereof; five whe∣reof are such, as I know not, if even Antinomians did owne them. They are these. 1. To repute us personally to have been the Agents of Christ't Acts, the Subjects of His Habites & passion, in a physical sense. I know not, who in their wits would affirme this: & to me, it is not a fit way to end, or clear con∣troversies, to raise so much dust needlesly, & imagine senses out of our owne heads, as if they were owned & maintained by some, what is the 2? Or to repute the same formal relation of Righteousness, which was in Christ's Per∣son, to be in ours, as the Subject. But this is only a consequent of the foregoing 3. (saith he) or to repute us to have been the very Subjects of Christ's Habites & passion, & the Agents of His Acts, in a Political, or Moral sence (& not a phy∣sical) as a man payeth a, debt by a Servant, or attornay, ordelegate. If this be the only meaning of his Political & Moral sense, I suppose no man will owne it either: for no man will say, That Christ was our Servant, Attornay, or Delegate. The 4. is but a consequent of this; and consequently, (saith he) to repute a double formal Righteousness to result from the said habites, acts & passions, one to Christ, as the Natural Subject & Agent; & another to us, as the Moral, Political or reputed Subject & agent (& so His formal Righteousnese not to be im∣puted to us in it self, as ours, but another to result from the same matter. This is too Philosophical for me to owne, or follow. The 5, is, or else that we are

reputed both the agents & Subjects of the matter of His Righteousness, morally, & also of the formal Righteousness of Christ himself. All these are but the effuvia of a braine floteing & swimeing in ill digested Philosophical Notions & School dregs, & contribute nothing to the clearing of Gospel-Truth, which hath little or rather no affinity with aery Philosophical Notions, but tende ma∣nifestly to the darkening of the same. But now, when all these Philosophi∣cal Notions & Relations are at an end, & we can proceed no further, whe∣re is that Imputation, which is legal, & plaine to every ordinary Man viz whereby the Satisfaction made to a judge & Governour for a crime commit∣ted, by the delinquen'ts friend; or that payment & Satisfaction made to the creditor, for the debtor, by a friend Interposing, is in Law-sense ac∣counted the delinquent's & debtor's; & he as really & effectually delive∣vered out of prison therefore, as if he had made Satisfaction in his own pro∣per person, or had paid the summe out if his own Substance? If any Philo∣sopher, after Mr. Baxter's manner here, should, with such Philosophical Whimseyes, (I call them so, for they are no other in this case) laboure to disprove any such Imputation, & say, it must be in one of those five senses &c. would not any countrey man smille at this▪

But now let us see Mr. Baxter's sixt sense, wherein he granteth the Impu∣tation of Christ's Righteousness. Or else (saith he) by Imputation is meant here, that Christ being truely reputed to have taken on the Nature of sinful Man, & become an Head for all true Beleevers, in that undertaken Nature & office, in the person of a Mediator, to have fulfilled all the Law imposed upon him, by per∣fect Holiness & obedience, & offering himself on the cross a sacrifice for our sins, voluntarily suffering in our stead, as if He had been a sinner (guilty of all our sins) as soon as we beleeve, we are pardoned, Iustified, Adopted, for the sa∣ke & Merites of this Holiness, obedience & Penal Satisfaction of Christ with as full demonstration of divine Iustice, at least, & more full Demonstration of His wisdom & Mercy, than if we had suffered our selves what our sinnes deserved (that is, been damned) or had never sinned. And so Righteousness is imputed to us, that is, we are accounted or reputed Righteous (not in relation to the Precept, that is, innocent or sinless, but in relation to the Retribution, that is, such as ha∣ve right to impunity & Life) because Christ's foresaid perfect Holiness, Obe∣dience & Satisfaction, meritedour pardon & Adoption and the Spirit; or merited the New Covenant, by which, as an Instrument, Pardon, justification & A∣doption are given to Beleevers, and the Spirit to be given to Sanctifie them; and when we beleeve, we are justly reputed such, as have right to all these purcha∣sed gifts.

As to this I shall only note a few things (1.) Christ's fulfilling of the Law imposed on Him, doth not hinder, but that He paid our debt, & so came in our Law-place, & substitute Himself in our room, to do what we should have done & to suffer what we should have suffered according to the Law, in all the essentials & Substantials of that punishment: for had He not done this, He could not be said to have suffered in our stead: for he only suffereth in the room & stead of another, who suffereth what that other should have suffered. If one be condemned to suffer death, another that suffereth only

Imprisonment for his delivery, cannot be said to suffer in this stead, but one∣ly for his cause & good, as the Socinians say, Christ suffered for us. (2.) Christ not only suffered in our stead, as if he had been a sinner & guilty, but as sinner legally & juridically guilty, having sins imputed to Him, though He was most free of all sin inherently, and knew it not: & the reason is manifest; for otherwayes Divine justice should not have shined forth in His sufferings, it being no Demonstration of justice to punish one, who neither inherently, nor Imputatively & legally, is or can be accounted & reputed a sinner. (3.) Wee cannot, with right, be reputed Righteous, except we be either inherently righteous, or righteous by Imputation; & so legally, juridically, & in Law-sense righteous, by vertue of the Imputation of the Surety-righteousness of Christ, our Sponsor. (4.) Righteousness must pro∣perly respect the Commands & Prohibitions of the Law, & but seconda∣rily the Retribution, if not most Improperly; as unrighteousness is in re∣ference to the Law, as commanding or forbidding, & very improperly at∣tributed to any in reference to the punishment threatned. And therefore, if we be accounted Righteousness, it must be in relation to the precept, at least, in the first place: Nor can we be accounted Righteous, in reference to the Retribution, that is, have a Right to Impunity & life, in the sight of God, who judgeth & reputeth according to equity & right, unless we be first accounted Righteous, in reference to the precept; for this is the only just & legal foundation of the other. (5.) Upon this it doth not follow that we are Innocent or sinless inherently, far less, that we never trans∣gressed; but on the contrary, it clearly saith, that we were sinners; but now are legally, or juridically innocent & sinless by the Imputation of the side jussorie Righteousness of Christ; & therefore are not obnoxious to the penalty, or to punishment; but have right to Impunity & life. (6.) When he speaketh of what Christ merited, he expresseth himself dubiously, not being positively clear, whether Christ merited our pardon &c. or the New Covenant: & the disjunctive particle Or, saith He did not merite both, in his judgment: but before, we heard him plainly affirming, that Christ me∣rited the New Covenant, & consequently He did not purchase pardon, A∣doption & the Spirit to any immediatly, but only mediatly, in purchasing the Covenant, which promiseth these to such, as performe the Conditions thereof. (7.) By this way, Beleevers are repute such, as have right to all these purchased gifts, not immediatly by vertue of Christ's Merites & righ∣teousness, imputed to them & bestowed upon them, but by vertue of their being inherently Righteous with that Gospel-righteousness, faith, which is the potestative Condition of the Covenant, & is now imputed to them, & accounted their Righteousness, according to his judgment.

Speaking afterward pag. 55. of Christ, as an Head & Root, he tels us, that He was no Natural Root or Head; which is undeniable; Yet He was a Super-Natural & Political Head. But he saith, He was not actually such an Head to the Redeemed, when He obeyed and suffered; but as an Head by Aptitu∣de, office, power & Vertue. Ans. It is true, as to such, as were not then Beleevers, He was not a Supernatural Head actually, that is, by communi∣cating

actually Physical and supernatural influences of Spiritual life: Yet He was, as to all given to Him, actually a Political Head, or an Head in a Po∣litical sense, that is, by God's Appointment, and His own voluntary un∣dertaking, He obeyed & Suffered for them, & in their stead; paying their debt answering for all that the justice & the Law did require of them, and so purchasing all Grace & Glory for them, to be certainely bestowed in due time. In this respect, that must be denied, which he addeth (n. 12.) Therefore they were not Christ's members Political, when He obeyed & dyed: for they may as well be said, to have been then His members Political, as so∣me, not yet within the sold, but that were to be brought in, & were to hear His voice, were by Himself called His sheep Ioh. 10: 16. Whence, I pray, come the I••fluences, whereby they are made to beleeve, if not from Him, as their Political-head, or Surety-head, standing ingaged for them? But possibly the ambiguous use of the word Political may occasione his mis∣take here.

A Natural Head (saith he n. 14.) being but a part of a person, what it doth, the Person doth. But seing a contracted Head and all the members of his Body con∣tracted, or Politick, are every one a distinct person, it followeth not, that each per∣son did really, or reputatively what the head did. Nay, it is a good consequence, that if he did it, as an head, they did it not (numerically) as head or members. Ans. Passing the Impropriety of the expression contracted head, whereby, it is like, he meanes a Conventional Head. I say, Though a Conventional Head and all the members of that Body, be every one a distinct person Phy∣sically; Yet considered as such, they are all but one person Politically & in Law-sense: & so in Law-sense & Politically (as all lawyers know, & even Men of Common sense can acknowbedge) every distinct Physical person is supposed to have done what their Political Head & Representative hath do∣ne, as such. And though it be a good consequence, that if the Head did it, as an Head, they in their in their Physical persons did it not: Yet it were a ridi∣culous Consequence, to say, They therefore, as Political Members of that Political conventional body, did it not viz Politically (not Physically, or nu∣merically.

Christ (saith he n. 15.) suffered & obeyed in the Person of the Mediator, be∣tween God & Man, & as a subject to the Law of Mediation. Ans. Though He suffered in the Physical Person of the Mediator; Yet because Suffering & o∣beying as a Mediator & Surety. He Suffered & obeyed, as a Political Head, & in a Political person. (2.) Though He was Subject to the Law of Media∣tion; Yet by vertue of that same Law of Mediation, He was subject to the Law, under which we were, both as to its Duty & Penalty: for Suffering & obeying, as a Mediator & Surety, He, in Suffering & obeying, did pay out debt, for He came into our Law-place.

Christ may be said (saith he n. 16.) to suffer, in the person of a sinner, as it meaneth His own person, reputed & used as a sinner, by His persecutors; & as He was one, who stood before God, as Undertaker, to suffer for mans sins. Ans. Seing He was one, who stood before God, as an Undertaker for sinners; & not only to suffer for mans sin, did he not suffer as a sinner (not inherently, but) legally & juri∣dically?

and did He not represent and stand in the room of sinners, as their Political Head & Representative? These things can not be handsomly, with any shew of reason, contradicted, or denied. Nay, himself addeth (n. 17. pag. 56.) that Christ suffered in the place & stead of sinners, that they might be d••livered, though in the Person a Sponsor. Whence we see, that though He suffered in the person of a Sponsor. Physically taken; Yet He suffered in the person of others, Politically & legally, because He suffered as a Spon∣sor, in their stead, that they might certainely & eventually be delivered, & not possibly only.

But then (n. 18.) he cometh to an Accomodation, saying, When we are agreed that the person of the Sponsor & of every particular sinner are diverse (if the word Person be here understood in a Physical, or Numerical sense, & the word sinners be understood of the Elect only, I agree) and that Christ had not suffered, if we had not sinned: (true) & that he as a Sponser, suffered in our stead, & so bore the punishment; which not He, but we deserved (adde also, & obeyed, & I agree: If any will here, in stead of a Mediator, or Sponsor, call Him our Representative, & say, that He suffered even in all our persons reputati∣vely, not simpliciter, but secundum quid, & in tantum only, that is, not representing our persons simply & in all respects, & to all ends, but only so far as to be a Sacrifice for our sins, and suffer in our place and stead, what He suffered, we take this to be but lis de nomine. And why is not His obeying also added? But againe, if He suffered, as a Mediator & Sponsor, in our place & stead, He must needs have been our Political-Representative, according as we use to speak and understand these termes; & so must have suffered in all our per∣sons reputatively, so far as was necessary to our Redemption & Salvation, & for more we enquire not. And seing this is what the orthodox assert, Mr. Baxter is much to be blamed, for troubling the church so long by his opposi∣tion hereunto, & his own new Notions.

He proceedeth (n. 19.) Christ did not suffer, strictly, simply, absolutly, in the person of any one Elect sinner, much less in the millions of Persons of them all in Law-sense, or in God's esteem; God did not esteem Christ to be, Naturally, or as an absolute Representer, david, Manasseh, Paul, & every such other sinner, but only a Mediator, that suffered in their stead. Ans. Till we understand what is meant by these termes, Strickly, Simply & Absolutly, we cannot know well what to say to this. We grant, He suffered in the person of no Elect sin∣ner, so as to become David, Manasseh &c. Yet, when He suffered in their stead, as Mediator & Surety, both in Law-sense, & in God's esteem, He did represent them; & did & suffered what He did & suffered, as a Surety for them, & as representing their Persons, in a Law-sense & Politically, simply & absolutely, to all ends necessary for their Redemption & Sal∣vation.

He addeth (n. 20.) God did make Christ to be sin for us, that is, a Sacrifice for our sins, & one that by man was reputed, & by God & Man was used, as sin∣ners are & deserve to be. Ans. Christ could not be made a Sacrific for sin, till He had the guilt of sin laid upon Him by Imputation, as the Sacrifices of old had typically. His being reputed such, & handled as such by man, is of no

consideration here: And by God He could not be used, as a sinner, or as sinners are & deserve to be, unless our sins had been first caused to meet upon Him, & imputed to Him, to the end, He might properly be said to Suffer & become a Sacrifice for sin. We say with him (n. 23.) that God did not sup∣pose or repute Christ to have committed all, or any of the sins, which we all com∣mitted; Nor to have had all the wickedness in His Nature which was in ours; nor to have deserved what we did deserve; nor did in this proper sense impute our sins to Christ. For indeed this had not been in a prope sense, to impute our sins to Him, but plainly to confound His Physical person with ours; & to speak thus, I should account to be horrid blasphemy: Yet it may be & must be said, that Christ, being made sin for us, & made to suffer for sin, in the room of sinners, had their sins laid upon Him; & so, was a sinner, not Inherently but legally by Imputation; that is, had the guilt of our sins, in order to punishment, imputed to Him, & He put to suffer for that guilt, or because a sinner by Imputation. And when the Scripture saith, that God made Christ sin for us 2 Cor. 5: 21. & Laid on Him the iniquity of us all, Esai. 55: 6. It is as emphatick (& to me more) as to say, God did impu∣te our sin to Christ, which he some-way excepteth against (n. 23. pag. 57.)

He addeth (n. 26. pag. 58.) Though Christ suffered in our stead, and in a large sence, to certaine uses, and in some respects, as the Representer, or in the persons of Sinners: yet did He not so far represent their persons, in His habitual Holiness and actual obedience, (no not in the obedience of His Suffering) as He did in the Suffering it self. He obeyed not in the person of a sinner, much less of millions of sinners, which were to say, in the person of sinners, he never sinned. He suffered to save us from suffering; but He obeyed not to save us from obeying, but to bring us to obedience: yet His perfection of obedience had this end, that per∣fect obedience might not be necessary in us to our justification and Salvation. Ans. Seing Christ was appointed Mediator & Sponsor to take on mans debt and come in his Law-place, what reason can be given, why He should not, as well be said to represent them, in the paying of the one part of that debt, as in the paying of the other? We were under the Law and obliged to per∣forme perfect obedience, in order to the obtaining of the reward promised; and because of sin we were under the Curse. Now when the Surety come to pay our whole debt, He did as much, and as well represent us, in paying of and in performing obedience, as in Suffering. And why may we not say, that He obeyed in the juridical and Law person of a sinner, as well as that He suffered? Though I should not use such improper and un∣usual expressions, as Mr. Baxter here doth; yet I must tell him, That Christ's obeying in the person of a sinner, saith no more than that, He being the person representing sinners, His obeying was and is repute, in Law-sense, their obeying. He Suffered, it is true, to save us from suffering of the Curse of the Law; But Mr. Baxter will not say, that He suffered to save us from all Suffering: He obeyed, it is true, to bring us to obedience, as He died also for that end, that we might haue the Sanctifying Spirit bestow∣ed upon us: yet notwithstanding He obeyed to save us from obeying viz. after that manner, that we were obliged to obey under the old Covenant,

that is to obey perfectly, or never enjoy the crown, and to obey for that end, that we might enjoy the crown, as the legal reward of and due debt for our labour. And seing Mr. Baxter granteth in the following words, that Christ's perfect obedience had this end, that perfect obedience might not be necessary in us to our justification; why may he not say, that to cer∣taine uses, and in some respects, Christ obeyed, to save us from obeying? Or why will he not say, that He obeyed for us, that we, who could not obey of our selves, might be repute to have obeyed perfectly in Him? This is all we desire.

He saith next (n. 27.) It was not we our selves, who did perfectly obey, or were perfectly holy, or suffered for sin, in the person of Christ, or by Him: nor did me (naturally, or morally) merite our own Salvation by obeying in Christ: nor did we satisfie God's justice for our sins, nor purchase pardon or Salvation to ourselves, by our suffering in and by Christ. Ans. However, Christ doing all this for us, as our Sponsor and Surety, we are so taken-in in a Law-sense, that the same is imputed unto us, and we enjoy the fruits thereof, pardon and Salvation; no less than if we had done and suffered all in our own physi∣cal persons.

As to what he saith (n. 29, 30.) it is nothing to the purpose (and there∣fore I shall not set down his words) for we are not here speaking of Relations and Accidents, physically, or metaphysicall rather considered, which can∣not pass from one Subject to another: nor do we speak of Christ, while speaking of the Imputation of His Righteousness, physically considered, but politically & legally, as a Sponsor and Surety some way representing us. I assent to him, that the meaning of this Imputation is not, That we ourselves, in person, truely had the habites, which Christ had, and did all that Christ did, and suffered all that he suffered, as by an Instrument, or legal Representer of our persons, in all this, meaning that we in our physical persons should have do∣ne all this, by Him, as our physical Instrument. But why He addeth he∣re, or legal Representer, unless he meane thereby that which elsewhere he hath expressed to be, as our delegat, or Servant, I know not. And how∣ever it seemeth not to me appositely here annexed, if ingenuous and plaine dealing be designed. But there is another sense, in which he will yeeld to Imputation, & he thinks there cannot be a third. Let us hear what this other sense is.

That Christ's Satisfaction (saith he) Righteousness and the Habites, Acts & Sufferings, in which it lay, are imputed to us, & made ours, not rigidly in the very thing it self, but in the effects and benefites. Ans. But if he shall yeeld to no other Imputation, than this, he shall grant no Imputation: for that Imputation, as to effects, is no Imputation at all: unless the meritorious cause be imputed, in order to the receiving of these Effects, there is no∣thing imputed; for they Effects are never said to be imputed. There is there∣fore a Third sense, wherein neither Christ's Righteousness, that is, His Habites, Acts & Sufferings are said to be physically translated, and put in us, or upon us; nor are they said to be Imputed to us meerly in their Effects; as Socinians say; but wherein Christ's Surety-righteousness, consisting in His

Obedience & Suffering, is in a Law-sense, made over to beleevers, & put upon their score, & now accounted theirs; & they, because thereof, accounted Righteous, legally and juridically; and have therefore the Effects bestowed on them. This being so obvious, I wonder that Mr. Baxter cannot see it. When a debtor is lying in prison, for debt, and a friend cometh & Sa∣tisfieth the creditor for him by paying the summe, in his place & stead; the Law doth not impute that payment to the debtor meerly in the effects; but imputeth the payment it self, not in its Physical acceptation, as if it judged that he was the man, that in his own Physical person, told the money with his own hands, & brought it out of his own purse, as the other did, but) in its legal force, vertue, & efficary, unto him, & accounted him, in this Legal sense, to be no more a debter unto the creditor; & therefore one that hath right to his liberty, & must therefore be set free from prison. So, in our case, the Righteousness of Christ, in a legal sense, as to its efficary & vertue, is made over to the Beleever, & he thereupon is accounted Righ∣teous, and no more a debtor, and therefore free of the Penalty. Further, Al∣though he say, that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us in the Effects; Yet he knoweth, that that is (in his judgment) but very remotely; and that real∣ly these effects are more proximely the effects of Faith, which he calleth our Gospel-righteousness; and that the Immediat effect and product of Christ's Righteousness is the New Covenant; and this New Covenant being made with all Mankind (as he thinketh) Christ's Righteousnes is, in this immediat Effect, imputed to all flesh, Reprobat, as well as Elect. And this is, in part, cleared from the words Immediatly following, when he saith, In as much, as we are as really pardoned, justified, Adopted by them, as the Meritorious Cause by the Instrumentality of the Covenants Donation, as if we ourselves had done & suffered all that Christ did. For this Instrumentality of the Covenant includeth the performance of the Condition thereof, i. e. faith; & this Faith is properly imputed for Righteousness, as he saith: And the∣refore, as the Covenant is the Effect of the merites of Christ; so pardon and Salvation must be the Effects of Faith; and the Effects of Christ's Righ∣teousness only, in that he did procure the Covenant, which conveyeth these to us, upon Condition of our performing of this faith, which is therefore called, by him, our Gospel-Righteousness.

He giveth us next foure wayes (n. 31. pag. 60.) wherein the Lord is said to be our Righteousness (an Expression that doth emphatically & more than sufficiently express the meaning of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness) 1. In that (saith he) He is the meritorious cause of the pardon of all our sins, & our full justification, Adoption & Right to glory: & by His Satisfaction and Merites only our justification by the Covenant of Grace, against the Curse of the Law works, is purchased. Ans. He cannot be said, by him, to be the Meri∣torious Cause of pardon, &c. But in as far as He is the Meritorious cause of the Covenant, in which these benefites are promised, upon Condition of faith, our Gospel-righteousness, which properly and only is our Impu∣ted Righteousness, according to him; and so Christ is our Righteousness, in meriting that faith shall be repute our Gospel-righteousness in order to

our obtaining of Pardon and Right to glory. But moreover, where is our Righteousness? For Pardon is no Righteousness; neither is justification, Adoption, or Right to Glory properly a Righteousness; But do presuppo∣se a Righteousness, after which we are enquiring, and cannot finde that Christ is made to be that to us; and consequently, either faith must be it, or there is none.

The other senses are 2. In that He is the legislator, Testator & donor of our Pardon & justification by this new Covenant. 3. In that He is the Head of Influx, King & Intercessour, by whom the Spirit is given to Sanctifie us to God, & cause us sincerely performe the Conditions of the Iustifying Covenant. 4. In that He i•• the righteous judge & justifier of Beleevers by sentence of judgment. Ans. All these three will make the Father to be our Righteousness, as well as the Son: for He is legislator; He draweth to the Son & sendeth the Spirit to Sanctifie us, & He judgeth by the Son & justifieth. (2.) But none of these, nor all of these give us the true Import of that glorious Name, according to the true scope of the place Ier. 23: 6. of which we have spoken above.

In like manner (n. 32.) he giveth us four senses of these words, we are made the Righteousness of God in Him. The 1. is, In that, as he was used like a sinner for us (But not esteemed one by God) so we are used like innocent persons, so far as to be saved by Him. Ans. As He was used by God like a sinner, so was He legally accounted a sinner, otherwise God would not have used Him as a sinner. Therefore if we be used like innocent persons, we must be in God's esteem, legally & juridically innocent, through Christ's Righteous∣ness imputed; & so must be saved by Him. The 2. is, In that through His Merites, & upon our union with Him, when we beleeve & consent to Hi•• Co∣venant, we are pardoned & justified, & so made Righteous really, that is such, as are not to be condemned, but glorified. Ans As I said, neither pardon, nor justification maketh us Righteous, but suppose us to be Righteous; and the∣refore, in justification we are declared & pronounced Righteous, & the∣reupon pardoned. Moreover, all our Righteousness, that we have, in or∣der to justification & pardon, is, according to Mr. Baxter, our Faith, which is, & is reputed to be, our Gospel Righteousness; & is said to be proper∣ly Imputed to us: & thus Christ suffered in our stead, that our faith might be accounted our Righteousness. Though pardon will take away condem∣nation yet (as we have cleared above) more must be had, in order to Glorification. His 3. & 4. are. In that the divine Nature & Inherent Righteous∣ness are for His merites. In that God's justice & holiness, truth, wisdom & mercy are all wonderfully Demonstrated, in this way of Pardoning & justifying of sinners by Christ. Ans. This last hath no ground, as the sense of the words; And as for the. 3. Before he make it the sense of the place. 2 Cor. 5: 21. he must say, That Christ was a sinner inherently (which were blasphemy) for o∣therwayes that beautiful correspondence, that is betwixt the First & the Last part of the verse, must be laid a side, contrary to the manifest scope of the place.

He tels us (n. 36. pag. 61.) It is an errour, contrary to the scope of the Go∣spel, to say, that the Law of Works, or of Innocency, doth justifie us, as per∣formed

either by our selves, or by Christ: for that Law condemneth & curseth us; & we are not efficiently justified by it, but from, or against it. Ans. I shall not say, that we are justified by the Law of works efficiently; yet I hope, Mr. Baxter will not say, that upon the fall, that Law, or Covenant was qui∣te abolished & annulled; & if it was only disp••nsed with, in order to the admitting of a Surety, which it did not provide▪ or give place to, in its primitive Institution, we may saifly say, That it must be satisfied both as to the commands, & as to the penalty, ere we can escape wrath & obtaine Life: for this Law said (as himself confesseth pag. 63.) Obey Perfectly & Live, sinne & dye. And though it condemne & curse us sinners; Yet it hath nothing to say against our Surety; nor against any clothed with His Su∣rety-righteousness, whereby all the demands of this Law and Covenant were Satisfied.

Hence he inferreth (n. 37.) Therefore, we have no Righteousness, in Re∣ality, or Reputation formally ours, which consisteth in a conformity to the precepti∣ve part of the Law of Innocency: we are not reputed Innocent; But only a Righ∣teousness, which consisteth in Pardon of all sin, & right to Life (with sincere per∣formance of the condition of the Covenant of Grace, that is, true faith) Ans. If by formally ours, he mean Inherently ours, I grant what he here saith: but I deny it, if by formally ours, he meane that, by which we may be denomi∣nated formally Righteous: for by Imputation we have a Righteousness, whereby we are formally righteous, legally & Juridically; & this Righ∣teousness must needs consist in conformity to the Lawes commands. It is true, we are not repute inherently Innocent; Yet we are repute non-sin∣ners legally; & hence cometh our Pardon & Right to Life, which of it self is no Righteousness, but the Result of a Righteousness. So that with him Beleevers have no Righteousness, in order to justification, but faith, the Gospel Righteousness, as was said above, & this he saith here in effect, & yet more plainely & fully pag. 64.

He addeth (n. 38. pag. 62.) our Pardon puts not away our guilt of fact or fault, but our guilt of and obligation to punishment. God doth not repute us such, as never∣sinned, or such, as by our Innocency merited heaven; but such as are not to be damned but to beglorified, because pardoned & Adopted, through the Satisfaction & merites of Christ. Ans. Though pardon, as pardon, will do no more, than he here granteth; Yet Righteousness & justification presupposing Righteousness will take away the Reatum culpae; not as if it would make us such as never sinned, for that is Impossible; but because by Righteousness imputed, we are now re∣puted sinless Legally, that is, not guilty of the fact in order to punishment, & this must be, that we may not only not be damned, but may be glorifeed, according to the Constitution, that said, Obey perfectly & live. And though now every pardoned man shall be glorified; Yet that is not meerly and for∣mally upon the account of Pardon; but because no man is pardoned, till he have the compleet Righteousness of Christ, consisting in obedience and i•• Suffering, imputed to him, whereby beside pardon, he obtaineth a right to glory.

He cometh to cleare the matter of Imputation of Christ's Righteouss, by

the Imputation of Adam's sin, which is a good Medium, the Apostle going before us herein Rom. 5. And though he saith somethings (n. 41. p. 65.) wherewith I am not Satisfied, yet I passe, because not much to our present purpose, & come to (n. 42. p. 66.) where he saith, As Adam was an head by Nature, & therefore conveyed guilt by Natural Generation: so Christ is a Head (not by nature, but) by Sacred contract, & therefore conveyeth right to pardon. Adoption and Salvation, not by Generation, but by Contract, or Donation. So that what was to be Naturally in Adam, seminally and virtually, though not personally in existence; even that it is, in order to our benefite by Him, to be in Christ by contract, or the New Covenant, virtually, though not in personal exi∣stence, when the Covenant was made. Ans. As Adam was an Head by Nature, so was he by Covenant; and as Christ is an head by Covenant, so is He an Head by supernatural Influences, and conveyeth His blessings by Regenera∣tion, as well as by Covenant; And therefore what was to be Naturally in Adam, seminally and virtually, though not personally in existence, that is, to be in Christ by supernatural Regeneration virtually. And as his Effects of Adam's fall are conveyed by Natural generation, so that we are made parta∣kers thereof actually, by actual partaking of our Natural being; so the Ef∣fects of Christ's Righteousness are conveyed by Spiritual Regeneration, & we are actually made partakers thereof, when we partake of this Spiritual being.

He proceedeth (n.43.) They therefore that look upon justification, or Righ∣teousness, as coming to us immediatly by Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us, without the Instrumental Intervention, and conveyance or Collation by this deed of Gift, or Covenant, do confound themselves, by confounding and overlooking the causes of justification. That which Christ did by His merites, was to procure the New Covenant. Ans. Though the Instrumental Intervention of a Covenant be ac∣knowledged; Yet Righteousness must come to us immediatly by Imputa∣tion of Christ's Righteousness; For His Righteousness imputed is our Righ∣teousness, and is only that Righteousness, whereby we become formally Righteous in order to justification. The difference lyeth here betwixt us: Mr. Baxter thinketh, tha•• Christ's Righteousness is imputed, in that it pur∣chased the New Covenant (and consequently is euqlly imputed to all; for the Covenant, with him, is equally made with all) and in and through the new Covenant, which conveyeth pardon and life to such, as performe the conditions thereof, i.e. beleeve, & so are inherently Righteous, these be∣nefites are bestowed; & so Christ's Righteousness is not the immediat ground of our justification and Right to Glory; but our own Personal Righteousness, Faith, called our Gospel-righteousness: Christ's Righteousness is only the immediat ground of the Covenant, being the Meritorious cause thereof; & the immediat ground, whereupon our faith is so far advanced. But our judgment is, that though Christ convey the blessings purchased covenant∣wayes, yet the Covenant it self is not purchased by His Merites; & the way of conveyance is this, that He first by His Spirit worketh the soul up to faith in Christ, & then communicateth Christ & His Righteousness unto the be∣leever; & upon that immediat ground of Christ's Imputed Surety-righ∣teousness,

whereupon they become Righteous, in the sight of God, they are justified, pardoned & receive a right to the Crown. And though the difference here may appear to be but small, yet to me it is such, that by Mr. Baxter's way, the whole frame of the Gospel is changed; & such, as hold it, do in my judgment, not only confound, but alter the causes of justifi∣cation. If that, which Christ did by His Merites, was to procure the New Covenant, what was there in Adam, that can be said to answere this, or hold correspondence with it? With us, the Parallel runneth smoothly and clearly, thus. As by vertue of first Covenant, whereof Adam was the head, engaging for all his Natural Posterity, so soon as they partake of Nature, & thereby become actual members of that Political Body, partake of Adam's guilt, or breach of the Covenant, which is imputed to them; & there upon share of the consequences thereof, as immediatly resulting therefrom, to wit, the corruption of the whole Nature, Privative & positive, wrath & the curse &c. This himself asserteth pag. 34. So by vertue of the Second Covenant, whereof Christ, the Second Adam is Head, engaging for all His Spiritual posterity, they, so soon as they come to partake of His spiritual Nature, & so become members of His mystical body (which is by a Phisi∣cal, supernatural operation, conveyed morally and Covenant wayes, ac∣cording to the Good pleasure of His will, & according to His wisdom, who doth all things well & wisely) are made partakers of Christ's Righteousness, which is imputed unto them; & thereupon do share of the Consequences, which do immediatly result theref••om, viz. of justification, pardon, Adop∣tion & Right to Glory.

He addeth (n. 44.) Though the person of the Mediator be not really, or repu∣tatively, the very person of each sinner (nor so many persons as there are sinners, or beleevers) yet it doth belong to the person of the Mediator, so far (limitedly) to bear the person of a sinner, and to stand in the place of the persons of all sinners, as to bear the punishment they deserved, & to suffer for their sins. Ans. We do not imagine, that the Physical pe••son of the Mediator is, either really or repu∣tatively, the Physical person of each sinner. It is enough for us to say, that the Mediator is an Head, Surety & publick person; and so, that He & Be∣leevers are one legally and juridically. And we judge also, that it belongeth to the person of the Mediator, being Surety, to Satifie for the whole debt of these, for whom He is Surety: & therefore must not only so far stand in the place of sinners, as to Suffer for their sins, & bear the punishment they deserved; But also give that perfect obedience, which they were obliged unto, and were not able to performe, or pay.

He granteth (n. 45. pag. 67.) that Morally it may be said, that Christ's Righteousness was given to us, in that the thing purchased by it was given to us, as the money, given for the ransome of the Captive, may besaid mo∣rally to be given to the captive, though Physically it begiven to the Con∣querour. But neither this similitude, not yet the other, of a mans being said to give anothe•• so much money, when he giveth him the land, bought the∣rewith, do not come home to the point in hand: for there is a neer & closs union betwixt Christ & Beleevers, which union is not supposed in these ca∣ses.

Next Christ was in our Law-place, and undertook to do what He did, as our Surety; neither is this supposed in the cases proposed; & againe, the benefite here following viz. Justification &c. doth presuppose us to be Righ∣teous, & consequently we must have a Righteousness imputed, because we have none of our owne; for we may not admit Faith to that high dignity. We have mentioned more apposite & fit Similitudes above.

I cannot assent to what he saith (n. 47. pag. 68.] That Christ is less impro∣perly said to have represented all mankind, as newly fallen in Adam, in a general sense, for the purchasing of the universal gift of pardon & life, called the New Covenant, than to have represented, in his perfect holiness and sufferings, every be∣leever, considered as from his first being to his death. For of His representing all mankind newly fallen in Adam, I read not in the Scriptures: nor yet of His purchasing the New Covenant. Whether these be not additions to the word of God, let Mr. Baxter (who oft chargeth others herewith) consi∣der. Nor do I know, what Scripture warranteth him to say. pag. 69. That Christ, the second Adam, is in a sort, the root of Man, as Man, as He is the Redeemer of Nature it self from destruction; Nor what truth can be in it, unless he think to play upon the word, in a sort.

He seemeth to come neerer us, when he saith (n. 48. p. 70.) The summe of all lyeth, in applying the distinction of giving Christ's Righteousness, as such in it self, & as a Cause of our Righteousness, or in the causality of it; as our sin is not reputed Christ's sin in it self, and in the culpability of it (for then it must needs make Christ odious to God) but in its causality of punishment. So Christ's material or formal Righteousness is not by God reputed to be properly and absolutely our own in it self as such, but the causality of it, as it produceth such & such effects, Ans. How Christ's Righteousness should be the cause of our Righteousness, if we speak properly, I know not; for we are here speaking of Righteous∣ness, in order to justification, & in this case, I know no other Righteous∣ness, but Christ's Surety-righteousness, imputed to us, and bestowed upon us: & it is improper to say, that Christ's Righteousness is the cause of it self, as given to us. But it may be, he meaneth, that it is the cause of our Faith; & this I grant to be true, but I deny, that this faith is our Righteousnese, whereupon we are justified, or the ratio formalis objectiva of our justifications. When we mention the Imputing of Christ's Righteous∣ness, we mean the Righteousness of Christ it self, not Physically, but le∣gally & juridically, & that is its worth or legal causality; not as it produ∣ceth, but in order that it may produce such Effects. Our sin is reputed Christ's legally, in its demerite of punishment, or in its reatus culpae, that He might be legally thereby reus culpae and yet He was not odious to God, because it was not His Inherently, but only legally & by Imputation.

Mr. Baxter in his following Chap. 3. fearing, that by all that he had said, he had not made the state of the controversie plaine enough to the unexerci∣sed Reader, goeth over it againe, in a shorter way, that he may make it as plaine, as possibly he can. And yet, I judge, (such is my dulness) that he never made the matter more obscure, at least, to the Unexercised Reader, nor possibly could, than he hath done here; for if any man, how under∣standing

so ever shall understand his Expressions, let be the matter by them, that is not very well versed both in Aristotles Logicks or Metaphysicks, and the termes thereof, and in justinian's Lawes and the termes thereof, I am far deceived. He that would understand this plaine discovery of the Que∣stion, must understand what Relations are; what Reatus culpae & poenae; what poena damni & sensus; what cessante capacitate Subdut, what pro-legal Righ∣teousness; what quoad valorem & quoad ordinem conferendi, & rationem com∣parativam, What is Terminus & fundamentum in relations; what is Titulus & fundamentum juris; what causa fundamenti & donationis, & the like: And if all Unexercised Readers shall be able to understand this, I doubt: And sure I am, many a poor soul, that understands nothing of these termes, gets grace of God to understand the thing, better than all this explication (how plaine so ever it be called) shall ever make him do. And if this be the plainest way, that Mr. Baxter can chose to make us understand this so neces∣sary and fundamental a truth, I shall never choose him for my Teacher, as to this. It could therefore tend o no edification, at least unto his Unex∣perienced Readers, (whose edification, I judge, should be sought by us all, in handling of this matter) to fall upon any examination of, or debate with him about what he hath here said, seing it would necessarily end in a debate about logical and Law termes; which I shall rather leave to others, who have delight therein. And beside, the matter it self, delivered by him in more plaine & intelligible termes, (as I judge) both to exercised & more unexercised Readers, is already examined.

Notwithstanding (as we have seen) his opinion be different from what the orthodox do commonly hold, in this question; yet Chap 4. he stateth the question, against which he purposeth to disput, so as he may be sure, none of these will oppose him: yea and it may be doubted, if Antinomians themselves will contradict him; for thus he proposeth what he denieth. That God did so impute Christ's Righteousness to us, as to repute, or account us to have been holy with all that habitual holiness, which was in Christ, or to have done all that He did, in obedience to His Father, or in fulfilling the Law; or to have suf∣fered all that He suffered, & to have made Satisfaction for our sins, & merited our own Salvation & justification in & by Christ; or that He was, did, suffered & merited all this strickly in the person of every sinner, that is saved. Or that Christ's very individual Righteousness, material or formal, is so made ours in a strick sense, as that we are Proprietors, Subjects or Agents of the very thing it self simply and absolutely, as it is distinct from the effects; or that Christ's individual formal Righteousness is made our formal personal Righteousness; or that, as to the Effects, we have any such Righteousness imputed to us, as formally ours, which consisteth in perfect Habitual and Actual conformity to the Law of Innocency; that is, that we are reputed perfectly holy and sinless, and such as shall be justified by the Law of Innocency, which saith, perfectly obey and live, or sin & dye. And the more to secure himself from all opposition from the orthodox, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 proposeth this Law (which is but equitable) to all that will answere him (I suppose he meaneth the Arguments that there follow) that he must keep to his words, & not alter the sense by leaving any out. I shall therefore be

none of his Opposites here on these termes, but shall consider what he saith elsewhere.