Christ alone exalted in Dr. Crisp's sermons partly confirmed in answering Mr. Daniel Williams's preface to his Gospel truth stated, by alledging testimonies from Scripture and the doctrine of the Church of England, in the Book of homilies establish'd by law and other orthodox authorities : shewing how he hath wronged as well the truth as the said doctor in the great point of justification by the Neonomian doctrine / humbly offer'd by S.C., an unworthy son of the said doctor, author of a book entituled, Christ made sin, reflected on by Mr. Williams.

Christ alone Exalted IN Dr Crisp's Sermons, Partly Confirmed in Answer to Mr. Williams Preface to his Gos∣pel Truth stated and Vindicated, by Comparing some of his unfair Accusations of the said Doctor, with the Scripture, and the Doctrine of the Gospel, Established by Law in the Homilies, &c.

WHEN Peter who seemed to be a Pillar was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the Face, because he was to be blamed, saith the Apostle, Gal. 2.9, 10. And if an Apostle who seemed a Pillar, might Err in Ceremo∣nies, and be blamed; so may our seeming Pillars some of them Err in Substance, conjoyning our Gospel Holiness with Christs Righteousness, and be blamed. Now I perceiving what I suppose will appear a great Error in the Preface of Mr. Williams to his Arraignment of Gospel Truths in Dr. Crisp's Sermons, and sup∣posing none will mind the Preface, that design to Answer the Book, but pass it over as a Cursory Discourse: I think it not ungrateful to studious Christians to ani∣madvert on the brief Systems of Religion, which Mr. Williams hath there given the World, in opposition not so much to Dr. Crisp as to the plain express Scripture, and the sound sense thereof, held out by the great Orthodox Divines that were Staunch against A••minianism upon our first coming out of Popery, when Zeal for Christ alone in Salvation was warm. Wherein I beseech the Lord so to guide my Thoughts and Pen that I may mind only his Glory in and through our Lord Jesus. The Meek he will guide in Judgment, which meekness I beg of the Lord; though a Golden Calf of Mans Gospel Holiness to be set up in the place of Christs Righteousness, would pro∣voke a Moses. Yet I hope to retain as well Meekness as Integrity till I die. It is be∣yond all doubt, Man, since the Devil deceived him (that upon eating he should be as God,) doth think with himself, he can (tho' dead) do something which is proper only to God; that is, he can quicken his own dead Soul; he can Convert himself, he can be a God to himself; hereupon there is a great Outcry against any that assert, That our Lord Jesus Christ is all in all in the Salvation of poor Sinners; and Dr. Crisps Sermons, because fuller than ordinary of the free Grace of God in Jesus Christ, are singled out to be battered, and with them the Gospel of our Salvation is run down into terms utterly Forreign to the Scripture, and because the Doctor adheres and sticks close to the Scripture terms, of our being dead, dead, dead in sins, and our sins, our very sins, Christ bare in his Body on the Tree, as the Apostles Peter and Paul expresly say, he is exclaimed against: And that this great Champion might appear compleatly armed in opposing Dr. Crisp, he puts on the great shield of

being solicited to this Work by several worthy Ministers, and that this may appear true, he hath emblazoned his honour in this great Atchievement, by the Hands of several indeed worthy Ministers, who are most of them in my Experience eminent Servants of our Lord Jesus; however their Zeal for Gospel Holiness, may have been im∣posed upon to countenance Mr. Williams making Christ's Righteousness to be our Gos∣pel Holiness: Though I have a great honour for all those of them whom I know, yet I suppose they will not think themselves dishonoured to say, I think most of them were imposed upon in getting their subscribing to what they never throughly examined I am sure one of them tho' next the first, yet nulli secundus for a sweet Christian Spirit among them said a few Weeks before Dr, Crisps Sermons were re∣printed, to an Eminent Mininister in a great Company, If Dr. Crisp be an Antino∣mian, so am I, and I am sure he said in a Sermon December 12. 1669. We are first made active by Christ, in order to his bringing us to God, and September 24. 7. 1672. Christ hath brought the Law to its end, it hath no more to require be is the abolishing end the Law is quite out of doors, as to justify, plant a Crab-Tree in the best Soil, it brings forth crabs till planted in Christ, so that there must be Ʋnion to Christ, by Gods planting us in Christ before any good Fruit. So this Gentleman, and so Doctor Crisp in his Faith, the Fruit of Union, contrary to Mr. Williams; and yet this excellent person is by Mr. Williams Art, taught to say with the rest. We judge our Reverend Brother hath in all that is material, fully and rightly stated the Truths and Errors mentioned as such, and do account he hath in this work, done considerable Service to the Church of Christ; and so will I say, when by it he hath ingaged Able Pens to vindicate the truth from Sophistical Glosses; that he hath done considerable service against his will. I reckon this Preface is the marrow of his Book, and I shall begin with as great a point as any I know of in the Bible, next to the Deity of the Lord Jesus, and yet 'tis that which is the chief Fruit of his Deity, which is his Righteousness as God-Man made ours by Faith; by Mr. Williams his treating this, he discovers his whole Soul concerning Justification that great Article, stantis vel cadentis Ecclesi••••, of the standing and falling of that Church that holds it, as Luther said, in that a little Leven here leveneth the whole lump. Here Mr. Williams hath made very bold with the expres∣sion of the Apostle Paul, in Phil. 3.9. That I may be found in him not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law, but that which is through the Faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by Faith; here Mr. Williams, instead of extolling this righteousness of Christ, and the rich Grace of God to impute this to us, he runs Counter to the stream of the Gospel, and dashes to pieces all the comfort that thou∣sands have found in this Scripture, as signifying Christs Righteousness, our cloathing before God, and gives his Romish gloss upon it in these words: I exclude not this Righteousness (Christs imputed) when I affirm that the Righteousness of God Phil. 3.9. Prin∣cipally intends the Gospel Holiness of a Person Justifyed by Christs Righteousness, which in plain Words is this, When I Daniel Williams say in the preceding words, his Righte∣ousness imputed is the cause for which we are justifyed and saved, when we do an∣swer the Gospel Rule; now I explain the answering the Gospel Rule, and how we make this Righteousness of Christ the cause for which we are saved, that is, I do affirm or positively declare without any suspicion of being accounted a self Justiciary, that the righteousness of God, which the Apostle accounted all his Righteousness but dung for, and which he saith is the righteousness through the Faith of Christ, and the righteousness of God by Faith: This I assume; for the honour of Mans Righte∣ousness to concur with Christs imputed Righteousness; that this Expression of the Apostle intends, yea, it principally intends the Gospel Holiness of a person Justified by Christs righteousness, that is to say, though the Apostle expresly saith, 'tis not my own Righteousness, yet I will make the Apostle mean 'tis my own Holiness, tho' the Apostle calls it the righteousness through the Faith of Christ. I affirm 'tis the Holiness of the person justified, and though I do not exclude Christs Righteousness, (in Words) yet I affirm 'tis Gospel Holiness that the Apostle intends. If this be not a plain contradicting the Apostle, and making the Apostle contradict himself, then

nothing can do so: The Apostle saith, T'is not mine own Righteousness; 'tis (saith Mr. Williams) my Gospel Holiness; this is to say and unsay, it is not, and yet it is: I pray what great difference between my Righteousness and my Gospel Holiness, the Apostle would not for a World be sound in his Righteousness of any sort but in Christ, and yet Mr. Williams saith, the Apostle would be found in his Gospel Holi∣ness. I believe Mr. W. consulted few Protestant Divines in that affirmation, for here he goes diametrically opposite to the current stream of them of which hereafter, and against the very direct words of the Apostle, in which he laboured to bring forth his meaning; the Holy Spirit by the Apostle uses much pains and skill to free the truth from Mr. W. his interpretation of a sinners or Saints being found in his own righteousness or holiness, by varying the expressions, thereby explaining the truth of our righteousness, not having any thing to do in our Justification, or standing at Gods bar either in our Consciences, or at the great day, but Mr. Williams with a bold stroke of his Pen, flatly opposes it, the Apostle saith, that the righteousness he would be found in, is that which is through the Faith of Christ: How can this be Mr. Williams his Gospel Holiness?* 1.1 The Faith of Jesus is Faith in the righteousness of Christ, who is the Lord our Righteousness; and the Apostle, lest he should not be fully understood, he explains what this (through the Faith of Christ) is, he saith plainly, 'tis the righteousness of God; and lest we should mistake here, and turn this righteousness of God, this righteousness through the Faith of Christ, which is the righteousness of God, to our Gospel Holiness with the Arminians or with Grotius, and Mr Williams; he explains it farther, and saith, 'tis the righteousness of God by Faith, as much as to say, 'tis that Righteousness which Christ as God, wrought out for us, who is made of God to us righteousness, and which is made ours by Faith. But though these 4 Bars be laid in the way: 1. Not my own righteousness.

2. But that through the Faith of Christ.

3. Plainly (not Gospel Holiness) but the righteousness of God.

4. And this Righteousness of God ours by Faith; yet this Gentleman takes a Run and leaps over them all, with a confidence most bold, dashes out all the Apostles sense, and saith, I affirm it principally intends Gospel Holiness, than which nothing can be a more shameless im∣posing on the plain Word of God (I conceive) and a corrupting of it, which he doth by his confident affir∣mation; that the righteousness of God, ours by Faith, is a persons own Gospel Holiness, he may as well af∣firm that being justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus, is, being justified by our Gospel Holiness.

The Gospel of Salvation by Jesus, would stand on ticklish terms, and soon be lost, if a few more such bold Attempts as this against the righteousness of God, ours by Faith, be allowed, but the Gates of Hell shall never be able to overthrow this Truth, that the righteousness of God there is Christs righteousness believed on to Justification, and not our Gospel Holiness. We must not lose such a glorious Star out of the Firmament of the Scriptures; nay, I may say 'tis the Sun, for take this Mr. Williams, and take all the Bible away; for I would as soon hope to be Justifyed by the Turkish Alkoran as by my Gospel Holiness, nay, it must not come in for a share, or have any concurrence as to causality, for a little Leven, in this case will leven the whole Lump.

O the Cloud of Witnesses that have from this Text of Phil. 3.9. made many

comfortable Conclusions that this righteousness of God, by Faith, is the imputed righteousness of Christ received by Faith.

O the famous Dr. Tuckny, how would he have shamed that Man that should have enervated this Text on which he preacht many Sermons, lately Printed con∣trary to Mr. Williams Exposition.

O the rich streams of Gospel Grace, that flowed from solid Dr. Jacomb. at Tun∣bridge in June 1686. In six Sermons on this Text, which I took from his Lips, all contrary to this puddle of Gospel Holiness. Hundreds of these I pass, and shall cite a few Passages out of older times, as the Faith of our Protestant Forefathers, not to be ravisht from us by Mr. Williams, tho' he had a hundred Vouchers for his ser∣ving the Church.

First, our Composers of the Homilies in King Edward the Sixth's time, which is the Doctrine of the Church of England, Confirmed by many Acts of Parliament; they quote Bazil a Greek Father, in fol. 16. of the Homily of Salvation on this very Text, Phil. 3.9. This is (saith Bazil) a perfect rejoycing in God when a Man advanceth not himself for his own righteousness, but acknowledgeth himself to lack true Justice and Righteousness, and to be Justified by the only Faith in Christ; and Paul doth glory in the contempt of his own righteousness, and he looketh for the righteousness of God by Faith, Phil. 3.

Here is not a word of our Gospel Holiness brought in, but a total contempt of his own righteousness; call it what you will, the righteousness of the Law or Gos∣pel holiness, if it be his own, 'tis contemned; and somewhat plainer, is Mr. Perkins on the same Text in fol. 659. Vol. 1. who saith thus; The Apostle Paul in desiring to be found not in his own righteousness, but in Christs, desired nothing else but that he might be accepted of God for Christs sake, and be esteemed righteous in his righteousness; and this very Obedience which is in Christ, and not in us, is the very matter of the Justice of the Gospel, and this is made ours by Faith; the Gospel requires not the conditions of Merit or of any work to be done on our parts, in the Case of Justification. Toletus writing on the Rom. 10.3. the not submitting to the righteousness of God, which is the same righteousness of God by Faith, as is in Phil. 3.9. he hath this expression upon it, and saith it is— Justitiam partam morte Christi quam Deus Credenti imputat & donat; and Pareus, saith 'tis Justitiam Christi, and Vatablus on Rom. 10.4. concerning Christs being the end of the Law for righteousness, saith, Ʋt qui credit in Deum reputetur Justus à Deo. perinde ac si totam legem impleverit, finis legis per se est ut ex ejus prestatione Justi∣ficentur homines, hunc finem lex obtinuit in solo Christo, qui legi penitus satisfecit & per Chri∣stum in nobis quoque obtinet quibus data ei legi satisfactio per fidem imputatur, thus Va∣••ablus: Gomarus gives in his Testimony very plainly against Gospel holiness, being the righteousness of God, and saith on Rom. 1. on the righteousness of God, revealed from faith to faith, in this Question, Quid sit justitia? non qua Deus Justus est sed ef∣fectivè quod à Deo data est: & Estius; Quâ nos revera in oculis ejus Justos facit: & Tirinus; Quâ nos Deus à Peccatis absolvit: And Zanchy on the Righteousness of God without the Law, Rom. 3.21. saith, Quomodo fides Justificat, assert fides justitiam non ef∣fectivé quasi habitualiter Justos efficiat, nec materialiter quasi ipsa sit illud quo justi cense∣mur, sed objectivè, quatenus in Christum, qui est Justitia nostra dirigitur, & organicè, quate∣nus Justitiam Christi nobis imputatam (fides) apprehendit. And on this very Text, Phil. 3.9. but the righteousness which is of God by Faith, Id est, Justitia quae est ex Deo quae tota penitus & omnibus suis partibus merum est Donum Dei gratuitum, venit haec Justi∣tia è Caelo unde cadit Super fidem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 non dicit hic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quasi fides prout opus est nostrum, vel sit pars hujus Justitia, vel illud promereatur, sed tantum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Thus these Worthies on this Text agree with Dr. Goodwin who saith p 40. of Election, which righteousness by Faith to be Christs Righteousness, all sound Protestants profess, wherein they are as far from saying the righteousness of God, by faith, is our Gospel holiness, as that it is our Gospel unholiness. I suppose it might easily be shewn whence Mr. Williams had this unsound Interpretation of this glorious Text, even from Grotius, as he from the Mother of Harlots, Rome, who Joyns mans works

with Christs for Justification. But methinks every true Lover of the Lord Jesus, and honourer of him with his Righteousness made ours, should rise in Arms against such an Exposition of this Text, and say, Sir, I would rather the Pen though Steel, should be thrust into the Ball of my right Eye, than thus to pierce again the side of the Lord Jesus, and let his righteousness run waste, while 'tis joyned so corruptly with our Holiness. But what need the suffrage of these Worthies be called in to oppose this ex∣position, they may as well be called in to say White is not Black, and black not white, for 'tis positively against the express word of God, and such an Interpretation is to make the Word a Nose of soft Wax, to turn it which way one will; the Spirit of God saith expresly, 'tis the righteousness of God by Faith, that is, 'tis the righteousness of him who is God blessed for ever, and 'tis ours by Faith. No, saith this bold Pen, 'tis our Gospel Holiness, that is, 'tis our conformity to all the Rules of the Gospel. From such Divinity the Lord Deliver us.

By this preface it may be guessed how he will attack the free Grace of God, set forth in the Gospel, and held up to the light by Dr. C. ex pede Herculem, ex ungue Le∣onem.

This is the first part of the proof of his opposing Dr. C. in order to bring in our righteousness to concur with Christs in our Justification, by his perverting the Text in calling the righteousness of God by Faith our Gospel Holiness which is near a kin to the Quakers Light within, being their Christ; so if our Gospel Holiness be the righ∣teousness of God, then 'tis our Christ, for Christ is called by Thomas his God, and by the Apostle Paul, he is made of God our Righteousness, and by Mr. Williams this Christ our righteousness, is our Gospel Holiness.

So that by this Clew or Thread at the entrance into his Book, we are led into the Mystery of his laying so great Blame on Dr. C. for renouncing all our Righteousness in the matter of Justification before God. But to trace him from the beginning, he enters on the Stage with so much heat against Errors of his own forming, that he forgets himself, and the first dash in his Preface is a trip of nonsense, making his beginning to sound as if it were his ending, saying, the Revival of those Errors, whereas he had named no Errors before; but Zeal and his Passion puts and begins on these Errors, which hath no reference, and instead of saying the Errors which I have proved against Dr. C. he saith, the revival of these Errors: Well, what will the revival of these Errors (in the air) do? they must not only exclude that Ministry as Legal, which is most apt in its Nature, and by Christs Ordination, to convert Souls, but also renders Ʋnity amongst Chri∣stians a thing impossible: But what if they be found sound Gospel Truths, what you take for Errors, then the Ministry excluded as Legal, will be found not very apt in its nature to Convert Souls, and not of Christs Ordination so to do: Whether they be Errors or no, will be seen when Examined; in the mean time, this ex∣pression looks like Legal and Ungospel, to say the Ministry he pretends to hath an aptness in its own nature to convert Souls; and is Forreign to the Apostle's ac∣count, he gives of converting Souls, for the Gospel it self preacht by the Apostles themselves, had no aptness in its Nature to convert Souls, nay, it was so far from that in its own nature, that it became a savour of Death to the non Elect; the Apostle did not Preach a deal of trumpery qualifications must be found in Men to prepare them to true Conversion, but he preacht Christ Crucified, to the Jews a stumbling Block, and to the Greeks Foolishness, but to them which are called both Jews and Greeks, Christ the Power of God, 1 Cor. 1.25. and in 2 Cor. 2.16. the A∣postle saith, We are of God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that Perish, to the one, the savour of Death to Death. Where is the aptness of the Gos∣pel in its own nature to convert Souls, when you find it is the occasion of stumb∣ling, and is a Savour of death, where there doth not go forth the same Almigh∣ty Power with it, as raised up Christ, and now though the Apostles preaching was far from having any thing in its own nature, of aptness to convert Souls, yet a hu∣man Invented way of Preaching the Gospel with threats and promises, you say is apt, nay 'tis most apt in its Nature to convert Souls; what doth this tend to but

the taking off the effectual Irresistible Grace of God in calling some by the same word which hardens others; I fear the conversion that is wrought by the natural aptness of a certain Ministry, is only a Conversion to a natural Religion, not to that which is from above. Well, you say your Ministry is not only apt in its na∣ture, but by Christs Ordination to convert Souls: If it be by Christs Ordination, it must have a tendency to what Christ hath ordained it for, but the Ministry of Christs Ordination is not to set up any thing in Man to convert him, unless dead∣ness in a Man is a Qualification to make him live; he saith the Dead shall hear the Voice of the Son of God and live, and you who were dead in sins, hath he quickned; you may tell a dead Man of many Qualifications that be necessary to make him live, but 'tis all in vain, till Christ by his Omnipotent Power say the word, and with the word speaks life: But this aptness of a Mini∣stry in its nature, and then hooking in Christs Ordination of it without any Proof, shews we must take things for granted, because you say it, though the Scripture say just the contrary, in saying, When thou wast in thy blood, I said to thee, live, Ezek. 16. What Threats and Promises were here, what aptness in denouncing the Ter∣rors of the Law, when even the Promises of the Gospel have not a natural aptness till Christ speaks the word, and say, Lazarus come forth.

The other side ignorantly set up the Name of Christ and Free Grace. (he says) 'Twould be good Manners first to prove 'tis done ignorantly, and next it would help your cause to prove that the Name of Christ, and free Grace, are not of more value in the Case than your Promises and Threats. O have a care of a fling at the Name of Christ, for by Faith in his Name, the Apostle made the Cripple to go.

This is set up against the Government of Christ and the rule of Judgment, D. W. No, 'tis set up by the Authority of the Apostle, who desired to know nothing among the Corinthians but Christ and him Crucifyed, not a rag of Mens Righteousness to cover the least speck, would the Apostle know. As for the Government of Christ, he needs none of your stating.

I believe many Abettors of these mistakes are honestly Zealous for the honour of Free Grace, M. W. Again, he comes with his these mistakes before he names any, so posi∣tive in his Nonsense through Zeal of Opposition is he, they are honestly zealous: But if they be in the right, as will appear if the Word of God be right, then 'tis to be feared the Opposer will not be honestly a Dictator, and to calumniate be∣fore he prove, is no sign of over much modesty, nor discretion. If he had said, I suppose the Reader will find Dr. C. guilty of mistakes by the following Discourse, he might have acquitted himself of modesty. But presently these Errors and these Mistakes without a tittle of Proof requires a reproof; he taught his venerable Vouchers, Dr. B. &c. modestly to say, he hath rightly stated the Truths and Errors men∣tioned, not these Errors, and these mistakes; they may be rightly stated, and yet come far short of being sufficiently proved; and whereas they modestly say, they account he hath in this work done considerable service to the Church of Christ. I am of their mind too, by many considerable Pens being engaged in answering it, and will say what an excellent Christian told me, I bless God with all my heart every day I rise for the op∣pposing Dr. C's. Doctrine at Pinners Hall, for it hath occasioned the light to break forth more gloriously thereby: in illustrating and confirming what was opposed. I suppose they refer'd to the Reverend Mr. Coles Discourses.

They have not light sufficient to see how God hath provided for this (honour of Free Grace) in his Rectoral distribution of benefits by a Gospel Rule, Mr. W. If he had said they have not confidence sufficient to prescribe God a Rule as some others have; I had agreed; but for light: Let us to the Law and Testimony, when we come to the point; but this Rectoral Distribution is the business, Men have coyned an Office for God, they prescribe him a model of Government; he must distribute Benefits by a Gospel Rule, but this Gospel Rule is of their own Scheme, whereas the A∣postle said to the Jaylor reeking in his sin, going about to kill himself, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved; this Rectoral Distribution must have been by

threats and Promises, you Jailor, what have you to do with the Free Grace of God in Christ, sure you have heard of Dr. C. Doctrine, that Christ saves the worst Sin∣ner that comes to him by believing; no, hold a while, the Apostle Paul runs too fast, he hath made abundance of such Antinomians as Dr. C. stay a little, consider, have you gracious Qualifications? Have you wept and mourned, and given full proof of your Humiliation, Godly Sorrow, Repentance, and the like? Don't tell us these are the Fruits of Faith, and follow Faith, but when you have found these, then come to us for Comfort; shew us your Gospel Holiness, and then we can tell you, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved.

Many of our Ablest Pens were engaged against these Errors, as Mr. Gataker, &c. The Provincial Synod at London. As for Able Pens, God gives various Light, and if Paul and Barnabas contended, much likelyer for Mr. Gataker and Dr. C. but 'tis easier refuting a dead Man than a living one, for one cannot answer what the other opposes: Peter and Paul contended, but Free Grace Paul was too hard for Legal Peter, who complyed too far, Gal, 2.11. and so at last will Dr. Crisp's Doctrine be to those, that as it were bring in somewhat with Christs righteousness for Justifica∣tion. As for the provincial Synod that opposed by Name Doctor Crisp, I fear much of their Spirit is in those that pretend to moderation, while they oppose this Doctrine, they were for bloody Bonners Argument against Dr. C. Fire and Faggot it would have come to. I remember I went when a Boy to Prison, to see an Emi∣nent Christian whom that Synod had secured there for promoting the Publishing Doctor Crisp his Works; a rare way of Rectoral Distribution of Benefits by a Gos∣pel Rule, and were Power in the hands of those several worthy Ministers that Doctor Williams saith, oft solicited him to engage in this Work, I question not but they would at length prevail with him, as well to imprison Doctor Crisp his Defenders, as to aver those things to be Errors, that he hath not proved so.

We are engaged in a new Opposition, to the grief of such as perceive the tendency of these Principles. Here's new Nonsense in the great Champion for Man's Righteous∣ness to fit him for Christ's; heres a these without naming any; well, and what are we engaged in? Truly 'tis to grieve such as consider these things. To the grief of such as perceive the tendency of these Principles, we are ingaged in a new Opposition (he saith) and I am of his mind, he or they that assisted him, did ingage therein to the grief of such as saw the tendency of the Principles he opposed.

But to take his meaning if it can be hit, 'tis thus, to their grief we are by them engaged in a new opposition; but will it not be more to their grief to find your Opposition is to the Truth, which by your opposing will be more radiant.

I believe many abettors of these Notions, have grace to preserve their minds and Practices from their Influence, D. W. Here's great Concession, first these Errors, then these mistakes, and now, these Notions, at last I hope it will be these pure streams of Gospel Grace; I perceive your Eyes begin to dazle by long poring on the Truth, the Lord grant a clear sight; you believe the Abettors have Grace? O blessed be God that gives to the most unworthy.

But they ought to consider that the generality of Mankind have no such Antidote, D. W. That is, the generality of Mankind have not Grace to preserve them from the in∣fluence of Errors and mistakes: I doubt so too, but methinks this word, the gene∣rality of Mankind not having such an Antidote, savours as if the generality of Mankind had some Antidote, or, as the Arminian says, all have still sufficient by na∣ture if they would improve it to preserve them: O how apt are we to refer somewhat of good to the generality of mankind, whereas in truth not only the generality have not Antidotes to keep them, but the contrary is most true, no man whatsoever unconverted hath any Antidote to keep himself from the Poyson of any Error ever broached.

I must encounter another Plunder, I see, and pick out the meaning. Who can wonder at the general abatement of Humble walking, when so many affirm, I sins are not to be feared, D. W. I have heard of fearing God by every Christian, and Christ saith,

I'll tell you whom you shall fear, but I never heard of fearing sins, or a complaine that sins are not feared. The Pagans do fear the Black Devil they say, lest he should do them hurt, but never any Christian I think had any such reverence in him toward sin, probably he means, many affirm they ought not to be afraid to commit sin, if he mean so, he was unhappy in his expressing himself, and he would do well to cite some of his many that say so; as for Dr. Crisp I suppose he will not offer at it, though his words look very uncharitable that way, which the Dr. flatly denies fol. 510. and saith, Let me not be mistaken: I do not say we must not be afraid to sin, but they need not be afraid of their sins. But as to his meaning that no Believer ought to fear any hurt can be done him by his sin, as Dr. Crisp his as∣sertion, when he quotes any thing of Dr. Crisps tending that way. I will prepare for an Answer, in the mean time. I suppose he will not deny, but God often turns that which seems most dreadful to be most beneficial, as the Small Pox to Cure a Consumption, so sin the worst of Evils, to the advancing God's glory and best of goods; but he wont say Dr. Crisp taught that, therefore we ought to sin that Grace may abound, an old objection of Satan answered by the Apostle; and Dr. Crisp in his Sermon 8. Christian Liberty no Licentious Doctrine.

God hath no more to lay to the Charge of the wickedest Man if he be Elected, than he hath to lay to the Charge of a Saint in glory, M. Williams in his Charge. This harsh Expression when compared with the Scriptures, quoted by Dr. Crisp, will be better reconciled to our Spirits, than that Christ the Holy Jesus in his most perfect state of most perfect holiness, as God the Father is Holy, was made sin and a Curse, and yet God blessed for ever, is it more astonishing, that a Sinner in his blood, in his highest Sins, as Manasseh, should be lookt upon in Christ as chosen in him loved in him from all Eternity to all Eternity, and look'd on by God in Christs righteous∣ness, should have nothing to be laid to his Charge; is this more harsh, than for Christ in his most compleat holiness to be lookt on by God to be a Curse for us? Dr. Crisp will be found not to have spoken of sinners as in themselves; but as lookt on in Christ, and then the time of being in blood, was a time of Love. And a little Charity in D. Williams might have lead, not to make a scare-crow of such an Expression, but if the Apostles Opposers fetch'd wrong conclusions from his Blessed premises of Free Grace, so it will be to the end of the World by self Justi∣tiaries, but of this in its more proper place. Again,

The Elect are not governed by fear or hope, M. W. charge. No, why should they be governed by any but their Lord Jesus, who is both their fear and hope. For the Laws of Christ have no promises nor threats to rule them by, W. This is a most false Charge, for Dr. Crisp owns they are under the Law to Christ, and inforces it, and saith expresly in fol. 561. Do not mistake me, I have no thoughts as if Wrath and Ven∣geance were not to be preached, and made known even to Believers, yea Beloved, wrath and Vengeance is to be made known to them, and that as the Deserts of sin, and as the means to keep Men from sin. Now doth it not look like Malice for any to assert so gross an untruth, as to say, so 'tis affirmed by those he opposes, meaning D. Crisp. That they are not under impressions of rewards or punishments as motives to Duty, or preservatives a∣gainst sin, W. Can any thing be a clearer Proof of falsehood if not malice than this? And it may be at least 100 such Expressions as this, to desist from sin by motives of Rewards, and sometimes of Punishment. But report, and we will report, and I must own 'tis marvellous to me, that so many worthy Divines should take upon trust Mr. Williams Assertions out of Dr. Crisp, and not compare them with the Book, especially such a liberal charge as his, that Believers are not under impres∣sions as aforementioned, and then in his next Paragraph to say, to the best of my knowledge, I have in nothing misrepresented Dr. Crisps Opinions. Whereas to the best of my Knowledge, he hath not only forged Opinions on him as this last; but hath asserted plain falsities against him, for which I will go but to his first charge in his Book in Fol. 1. where he saith as the Error of Dr. Crisp. that Dr. Crisp saith, The Elect are at no time of their lives under the Wrath of God, nor are they subject to con¦demnation,

if they should dye before they believe, whereas there is not one word in the Quotation of Doctor C. that he saith, they are not subject to Condemnation, if the die before they believe. So that that is forged by Mr. Williams, as the first grand Error, and all the rest will seem like it. Now if he be false in his first Charge compared with his Quotation; any unbyast person will believe he is much more so in the following Charges, but thus it pleases God to suffer prejudice to blind him, that any inquirer into his Book, may Judge of his Veracity by the first dash of his Pen, and so seeing that unsincere, may reject the whole, as not worth looking into, but of this more in its place.

Next let us see how he dresses up a Scheam for Doctor Crisp, wherein if he be not very wary, he must expect to be tript, for 'twill be found dangerous for Mr. Williams to represent him but in his own words; this then I take to be his Charge in general, for he saith, Dr. Crisp his Scheme is this, (but I say 'tis Mr. Ws. for him) That by Gods meer Electing Decree, all saving blessings are by Divine Obligation made ours, and nothing more is needful to our title to these Blessings, that on the Cross all the sins of the Elect were transferred to Christ, and ceased ever after to be theirs, that at the first moment of Conception, a Title to all those decreed Blessings is personally applyed to the Elect, and they invested actually therein; hence the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in any of these Blessings, nor ought they to intend the least good to themselves, in what they do, sin can do them no harm, because it is none of theirs, nor can God afflict them for any sin; and all the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the Dethroning of Christ, enervating his Laws, and pleadings, obstructing the great Designs of Redemption, opposing the very scope of the Gospel, and the Ministry of Christ and his Pro∣phets and Apostles. Here's the Charge, gratis Dictum, and the Consequences of it: It can't be immagined the Rancour that Prejudice will make; the Preaching up of Christ, and Free-Grace through him, is the Dethroning Christ; what could Malice say worse? Is crying up the King for our Deliverer, from Popery and Tyranny, a dethroning him? Just so is crying up our Salvation only by Christ, without a con∣currence of our Works, a dethroning him; in considering this Scheme, so far I take it for granted that Mr. Williams looks on it in the whole and every part of it to be false Doctrine, by the contrary to which we may draw a Scheme of Mr. Wil∣liams. Thus, that by Gods Decree, no Blessing belongs to us, and that on the Cross all the sins of the Elect were not transferred to Christ, that at Conception a Title to Blessings is not applyed. But as it is not fair to urge upon him any thing that he doth not plainly assert, so I wave fixing this on him, and only touch on what may be true and what not in this Scheme.

First, 'Tis not true that Doctor Crisp saith, that by Gods meer Electing Decree, all saving Blessings are ours by Divine Obligation, and a bare denyal is sufficient, where he brings no Proof, and I ground it upon that word meer, for Dr. Crisp no where severs the Election of the Father from the Redemption of the Son, either in Co∣venant or actual Performance, For God blesseth with all Spiritual Blessings in Hea∣venly places, according as he hath chosen us in him; and this is more proof for what Mr. Williams advances as an Error, than he hath brought or can bring to make it an Error, to say by God's Decree, all Blessings are ours, so that this is a frivo∣lous and false Charge; 'tis frivolous, because the sum of the Charge is a Truth, and 'tis false, because Dr. Crisp never asserted 'tis by meer Election; but I fear, Mr. Williams to avoid running too high in the glorifying God for absolute Electing all his fore-Ordained ones in Christ to Salvation, and all that occurs to it: He I fear leaves Election as a thing to depend much on our own wills, whether it shall take place or no, not but that our Wills must be brought over by Gods making us a willing People, but still the Election obtains, and God Elected to the means as well as the end, and will accomplish both.

The next Charge is that Doctor Crisp in the Scheme made for him, holds that,

Nothing more is needful to our Title to these Blessings, but God's meer Electing Decree; If he means nothing needful as to Evidence of the Title, then he wrongs the Dr. who in many places makes Faith the grand Evidence under the Holy Spirit, and a Holy Conversation necessary, but if he means by nothing more needful to our Title but Gods Decree, taking in the redemption by Christ, which Dr. Crisp never severs, then I hope Mr. Williams is of the same mind, or he sets up something with Christ, and I would fain know why an Estate in Heaven setled in the Counsel of peace from all Eternity, between the Father, Son and Spirit, on the Children that should be begotten in time by God, and be born of God, John 1.13. should not be a sufficient Title of an indeseizable Inheritance to all the Elect as an Estate in Land setled upon Marriage, should be sufficient for the Heir 'tis setled upon, without that Heirs doing any thing in order to make it sure more than when he comes to Age to enter upon it.

The next is, That on the Cross all the sins of the Elect were transferred to Christ. If this be the grand Error, then the Prophet Esay must be called to account for it, with the Apostle Peter, The Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, who in his own Body bare our sins on the Tree. 'Tis admirable strange the bold front of humane reasoning to oppose the most plain express Scriptures in the Bible; the sins of the Apostle and those he wrote to were committed several years after Christ was cruci∣fyed, and yet he saith Christ bare them on the Tree, If Men will fight against plain Scripture, and cry, 'tis dethroning Christ to urge the truth thereof, then fare∣well the Gospel. But to expostulate a little, either our sins were laid on Christ then or never, for Christ suffers no more, and if they be laid on him now, or when a sinner is converted, then Christ must come down again, and suffer, or sin could not be expiated, but sure 'tis somewhat else Mr. Williams means, as that sin was never laid on Christ, but that when Christ died, he suffered for this end, that if we live a good life, repent and believe the Gospel, we shall be saved; but grant that (which can never be granted, for no man can do one good Act, without true saving Faith in Christ, a sacrifice for his sins,) what becomes of our sins, if Christ did not bear them on the Tree, they must lye some where, for they cannot be laid on Christ now, then they must lye on the Sinner, which would have sent him to Hell presently, but he purged away sin by the Sacrifice of himself, which he could not do, if they were not on him when he was on the Cross, when he became that Sacrifice God forbid that Mr. Williams by his Gospel Truth stated, should call us to a new Gospel, as he would by making it an Error, to say, that the sins of the Elect were on Christ upon the Cross.

His next is of smaller moment, but to be taken notice of, viz. 'Tis one part of his Scheme of Dr. Crisps Errors, that he holds, that at the first moment of Conception, a Title to all those decreed Blessings, is personally applyed to the Elect, and they invested actually therein. Sure this is no horrid Blasphemy, since God saith of Jacob and E∣sau before they had done good or Evil, being yet unborn, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated, and Jeremy being sanctifyed in the Womb, Jer. 1.5. It must be before he had done much good, sure an Heir of Glory is as soon an Heir to it as an Heir of a Kingdom; and if a young King should be married but one Night and die the next Morning; if that Kingdom was purely Hereditary, the States of that Kingdom would not suffer the Widdow Queen to Marry again, 'till they see whether she proved with Child or no, and if she prove with Child, and that Child be born, I would fain know when that Child began to be an heir, it must be at the first moment of his Conception, or not at all. But some Men will hardly allow God the Prerogative, to give Titles to his Heirs as they will allow a Man to do, by a settlement on Marriage; they will grant that a King may go to Jail, and choose out the worst Offender there, and save him, but God may not without Faith foreseen choose Vessels of Glory to himself, and make them Heirs as soon as they have a Being.

Hence the Elect have nothing to do in order to an interest in those Blessings. Mr. Williams. This Assertion is both right and wrong, as it may be taken, for if by having no∣thing to do in order to an interest, if Mr. Williams means that Dr. Crisp asserts the Elect have nothing to do in order to original right and Interest by Election of the Father, be∣fore the World, then he is in the wrong, when he charges Dr. C. with an Error in hold∣ing with the Apostle, that there was Grace given in Christ Jesus before the World began, 2 Tim. 1.9. For in that respect the Elect have no more to do in order to an Interest in those Blessings, than an Heir to an Estate setled on him before he was born, hath to do to gain him an Interest therein, and accordingly the Apostle is plain in Ephes. 1.3. He hath blessed us with all Spiritual Blessings, according as he chose us in him before the foundation of the World, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, even as he chose us in Christ, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and according to his own grace given to us be∣fore the World began; if he blessed with all blessings, even as he choose us, and if he gave his own grace to us before the times of Ages, sure then those so chosen, and so endowed with grace before time have nothing to do to get an original right or interest in those Blessings, that were then given to, them and afterwards bestowed by God upon them, no more than the Law coming 430 years after the Promise to Abraham had to do to obtain or evacuate the Promise.

But if Mr. Williams means that Dr. Crisp holds, That the Elect have nothing to do in order to the applying their Interest in these Blessings, then he is in the right, and Dr. Crisp wrong, when Mr. Williams proves it on the Dr. But he doth the Dr. wrong in so charging him, for there are whole Sermons of the Doctors to the con∣trary, and particularly the 17th. of Vol. 2. Of the assurance of Faith in P. 486 where∣in he saith from Acts 13.39. You shall see there how necessarily it must be received, that Faith gives Interest in the priviledges of Christ. These are the very words in flat contra∣diction to what Mr. Williams Charges him with, when he saith, Dr. Crisp holds the E∣lect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in those Blessings, where this pas∣sage of the Dr. may convince Mr. Williams of a false Accusation and Slander, con∣trary to the ninth Command, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy Neighbour, But saith the Wise man, who can stand before Envy. I hope those eminent Di∣vines that favoured his Book, will desire their Names may not stand to his Pre∣face, lest they be brought in to savour this false Charge; Dr. Crisp goes on upon that Text, Acts 13, 39. By this man is Preached to you forgiviness of sins, and whosoever believeth on him, he is justifyed from all things from which he could not be Justifyed by the Law of Moses; from which text the Doctor treating not of original right, or in∣terest in the Blessings, but of the Application or Evidence hereof, he saith farther in fol. 486. thus; out of this Text I argue thus, If there be Justification where there is Believing, this believing is a proof of Justification. If therefore thou dost believe this is a certain Truth, thou art Justified it is an undeniable Argument, because that the Apostle doth affix Justification to believing. Here by the way, besides this assertion being a proof that Mr. Williams hath done amiss in saying the Doctors Scheme is that the Elect have nothing to do &c. which his saying justification is affixt to believing confutes; this saying also reflects on another very false and gross charge in the very first page of his Book, where he saith, Dr. Crisp holds the Elect are not sub∣ject to Condemnation if they dye before they believe, which as it is impossible they should, so the Doctor never asserted they could, and this saying of his that Faith gives Interest in the Priviledges of Christ, and Justification is affixt to believing, shews that it was against the Doctors Sentiments, to hold that Elect persons could die before they believe, or that he ever said, If they should so die, there was no Condem∣nation. But for once, I would suppose the purpose of God concerning the Elect, to be Created in Christ Jesus, to good Works, should be frustrate, and the Elect never should come to actual Faith, and so never come to do a truly good Work. Now I would ask any sober found Protestant, if he should allow such an impo∣sibility for Argument sake, as that God's purpose in this last case could be frust∣rate,

which of these two Assertions he would take for the more false, either, that an Elect Person chosen in Christ from all Eternity, and given to Christ, and grace given him in Christ, and accordingly dyed for by Christ (according to the Com∣pact and Council of peace, and this Elect person dying in unbelief) is saved, that so the grand contrivance of God, and the precious blood of the Son of God, be not frustrate: Or this Assertion, that such an Elect person dying in unbelief is damn'd, because the word of Truth must be fulfilled, That he that believes not is condemned; far be it from any Christian to affirm either, but of the two false positions, I should be apt to think the first is not the worst, because of the Eternal design of the Father and Son, to save all the Elect given in Election to Christ.

The next Charge, Nor ought they to intend the least good to themselves in what they do. This is high, General and Universal, like the Confidence of a Man, with his drawn Sword against a Thistle; here I could have you, and there I could have you, though this be not of the Essence of Faith, the not intending good to our selves in what we do, and he would make the Doctor preach marvellous self-denyal herein, as not intending the least good in our doing, yet here lies a snare, for doubt∣less, if he means this to be an Error, then it may be he means that the Doctor holds that the Elect must do what they do, not with intent to procure the good of Gods reconciliation to them. If that be the Doctors Error, it is also of all Protestants, that are Orthodox, if he means that the Error is that the Doctor holds the Elect are not to do with intent to get the good of Pleasing, honouring and glorifying God, he mightily wrongs the Doctor, witness his Sermons on Titus 2.11, 12 Grace teaches to deny Ungodliness. What good he means, no man can reach without his unfolding, but the charge must be high and general, though thereby Mr. Williams lays himself too open for a Friend to take the Advantage he might, and thereby might give him the unmannerly word of speaking untruth against the Doctor, I will not say a Lye; will Mr. Williams say the Doctor holds the Elect ought not to intend the least good to themselves, in what they do; what will he say then to those expres∣sions of the Doctors in fol. 141. Our Righteousness serves as a real way to manifest our thank∣fulness to God. Secondly, There is this usefulness in our righteousness, namely that we may serve our Generation. That Men may be drawn on to glorifie God, and we must shine before men in a Godly Conversation. Thirdly, Our Righteousness is useful as it is the Ordinance of God, wherein be will make good those things which before he hath promised. Now how can Mr. Williams say, the Dr. holds this don't intend the least good, when the Dr. ••••ith here, that by their righteousness they walk in Gods Ordinance wherein he will make good his Promises; is not Eying the making good of Promises, or intend∣ing some good, but unless we intend the good of our Righteousness or Gospel-Holiness to be meant by Gods Righteousness, ours by Faith, as Mr. Williams asserts the Apostle intended on Phil. 3.9. Our doing is by him accounted the not intend∣ing the least good to our selves; what can't we intend good to our selves, in Fast∣ing, Praying, Relieving the Necessitous, walking in all Godliness and Honesty, un∣less this must come in with Christs imputed Righteousness for our Justification?

Next the Doctor holds, saith Mr. Williams Sin can do them no harm, because it is not theirs. If he mean that sin cannot hinder them from Heaven at last, then he rather wrongs himself by holding it can, than the Dr. for holding it cannot, for God hath cast them all into the depth of the Sea, and saith, I will remember them no more; if so, they cannot do much hurt. If Mr. Williams, means that the Doctor holds there is no Evil in sin to an Elect Person; then he is a false Accuser again, for the Dr. acknowledges evil in sin, when he saith fol. 4••0. If you would come to see the Evil of sin, and to see it that it may be a Bridle to restrain you from sin; now in this sense the Dr. owns hurt in sin, and prescribes a way so to see it, as to be kept from it, and that is, in the next words, look upon Christ, if you would see the evil in sin; if he mean by sin can do them no harm, in his accusing the Doctor, that the Dr.

holds that sin cannot do them the harm of making their Services stink in God's Nostrils, then he falsely accuses the Doctor also, who saith in fol. 404 sin is agrava∣ted much in Esaiah 1. When you make many Prayers, I will not hear, because your hands are full of Blood; here are expressions to aggravate sin, that it makes all our Prayers and Sacrifices loathsome in his Presence, God hateth it in me and in thee. Now will Mr. Williams have the Confidence to say in general, that this is the Scheme of Doctor Crisp, that sin can do the Elect no harm, whereas the Doctor saith plainly, that sin makes all our Sacrifices and Prayers loathsome in Gods Presence; is it no harm to have our Prayers loathed of God? Sure Mr. Williams would think this a great harm done him by sin, if his wronging the dead by a false general charge, should fly in his Face, and make loathsom his Prayers to the Lord, till he repent and obtain the washing of it from his Conscience, by Faith in the Blood of Christ.

Again, if Mr. Williams mean that Doctor Crisp, in saying sin could do him no harm, holds it so in general, that in no sense it can hurt him, and that it is not a sting and terrour to the Conscience even of a Believer, while his Faith is unactive and under a Cloud, he wrongs him, for he saith in fol. 512. The Torments of Hell is the merit of the least sin in the World. I speak not to Extenuate any sin, such as look upon these sins as uncancelled, So long these sins may work an horror and trembling in Persons; and Mr. Williams will not say but this is harm to a poor Souls peace and comfort, and this Dr. Crisp holds, nay, he saith in fol. 513. Before Men come to see the light of the Gos∣pel of Christ, their sins stare in their Faces, seeming to spit fire at them; and is this no harm, and this is to the Elect till they believe, so that this is no good charge of Mr. Wil∣liams. But if Mr. Williams mean 'tis an error of Dr. Crisp to say, there is no sin the People of God commit, can possibly do them any hurt, if it be taken in the sense the Doctor expresses calling it real hurt, in fol. 510. This may be matter of debate, but will doubtless issue on the Doctors side, or rather on the Apostle Paul's who saith, all things work toge∣ther for good to them that love God. If so, then the Affliction that the Lord chastens withal for sin, doth not argue that sin brings a real hurt: If sin could do real hurt to a Believer, such as to take away his Title to Heaven, or cause him totally to fall from Grace, then Christ did not for ever by one Sacrifice of himself, save us and wash us from our sins, in his Blood, and perfect those that are sanctified, but if he did make an end of sin, and brought in everlasting righteousness, for all that the Father gave him, then he having purged our sins by himself on the Cross, nailing them there, never to be able to rise in Condemnation to those that are in Christ; then this stingless Serpent, sin, will never do real hurt to Believers, as the Doctor saith. But if Mr. Williams mean, that sin doth hurt even Believers, because it brings natural death, the Wages of sin being Death to Believers, yet the sting of that being taken out by our Lord Jesus, that is so far from real hurt, that it is the Inlet to Eternal glory; and if that be hurt, the Lord grant Mr. Williams and I may be so hurt, or rather Blessed with it in our exits.

Several other such hurts come by sin, not from its own Nature, but from Gods Or∣dination, as that where sin abounds, grace much more abounds (not that any should think sin the less dreadful and terrible) and as sin hath reigned to death, so Grace reigns to eternal Life by Jesus Christ our Lord, and yet still sin is to be avoided as the greatest, horridest evil in the World; but notwithstanding this, the Apostle encourageth poor Souls when they do fall into sin, not to be afraid of their sins, but to flie for Refuge to the Mercy-Seat, the hope, sure and stedfast, set before them, saying, if a∣ny man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, and thus I hope this grand Cavil is evaporated, and that it appears groundless for any to think Dr. Crisp had slight thoughts of sin, when he saith, it cannot do a Believer a∣ny real hurt, yet he saith, the Torments of Hell is the merit of the least sin, and they will work an horrour and trembling till we see them Cancelled.

The next is, Nor can God afflict them for any sin, saith Mr. Williams against the Doctor;

This expression is no where quoted, but inferred from the Doctor, and it is put here contrary to the Doctor's sense, in which he speaks of Affliction, and seems harsh; Mr. Williams might see that what the Dr. saith, is spoken by way of punishment, that all the Afflictions that God lays on his People, are in love, and not by way of punish∣ment for their sins, seeing their sins were laid on the Lord Jesus, and he bare them and all punishment due for them, and if those that scruple saying, Christ bare the very sins of the Elect, will yet allow he bare the punishment for them, sure then they must grant that God doth not lay affliction on his People by way of punish∣ment; God saith, indeed you only have I known, therefore will I punish you for your Ini∣quities, but this cannot be taken properly for punishment, unless Men will make God worse than the foolish Servant, who made him a hard Master; viz. an unjust Op∣pressor, to punish sins on his Son, and to punish them also on the sinner; and be∣sides, that affliction which a man bears in this life, be it never so great, is so far from punishment proper for sin, the least of which deserves, as Doctor Crisp saith, eternal Hell Torments, that it is not so much as a flea-biting compared with a stab at the Heart, but I take the ground why persons will call afflictions on God's Children pu∣nishments for sin, is on this double account. First, they would make God an easie, tender-hearted Judge, that will commute Penance, and for a great Crime, as every sin is, he will take a small amends as a little temporal Affliction, and next they will be as kind to our Lord Jesus Christ, and reckon he bears the less if the sinner bear part with him; but without any mincing, this must be owned that all afflic∣tions on Gods people are in love; all I love, I rebuke and chasten, and 'tis for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness, and it is fatherly to deter from sin. I do not mean that sin hath no hand in many Afflictions, for as the Apostle said of the disorderly Corinthians, for that cause many were sick and weak: But what the Dr. insisted on, was, that Affliction for sin was not proper punishment, but pure love to their Souls, though I cannot see but afflictions are a Fruit or effect of sin in many, yet I may, not from thence conclude, that those Afflictions are from Wrath in the Father, or for punishmenr proper on the Child, but the effects of a Fatherly love, for if ye be without Chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye Bastards, and not Sons, so that this Exception against the Doctor is a small one, but because it hath some seeming harshness, to say God doth not afflict the E∣lect for sin, therefore it must be hookt in to fill up the Charge, though the Charge in the Preface be varying and harsher, then it seems Mr. Williams could lay in his Book, for there is no such word as nor can God afflict them for any sin.

Mr. Williams having laid the Charge, in the next words he comes with a deadly thunder-clap, conclusion full of Indignation, saying, All the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Christ, which if true, then say I, let his memory for ever perish, and his Posterity be blasted, as to this World. But if this Charge look like sublimated malice, every candid Reader, will say, Mr. Williams, for charging falsely with High Treason, (a great admirer and advancer of the Lord Jesus Christ, with dethroning him) deserves not a stab, no nor an outragious word from his Po∣sterity, or the lovers of the Doctor's memory. But the Answer of the Angel to the Devil, The Lord rebuke thee, Satan, is not this a Brand pluckt out of the Fire, Zech. 3.2. How can any thing but that which looks like Canker'd Venom against Free Grace. Charge him or his Doctrine point blank with no less than Dethroning Christ, when every Sermon tends chiefly to the Exalting Christ, and Christ alone, under the Fa∣ther, in opposition to the grand Idol, or Christ of self Justitiaries setting up mans righteousness. If the whole stream and almost every Page of his Book, flows with mighty zeal for Christ, and jealousie of Joyning any thing with Christ in our salva∣tion, for f••ar of robbing Christ of any of the honour and Glory due to him. If this be dethroning Christ, I wish Mr. Williams would so dethrone him in every Ser∣mon, and that all that name the dear and blessed name of Christ, would so dethrone

him, Then we should not have the righteousness of Christ by faith called our Gos∣pel Holiness: I would ask the greatest Enemy that is to Justification only by the blood of Jesus, who is the dethroner of Christ, Dr. Crisp, who in all his Sermons is for Christ alone exalted, Crying out none but Christ, none but Christ, to the ra∣vishing the Hearts of thousands of lovers of Christ. Or Mr. Williams who sets up a rectoral Government for the Lord, for saving sinners in a sapiential way, joyning our Gospel Holiness with Christ's imputed Righteousness, nay, in plain terms, boldly affirming that the righteousness of God by Faith, which the Apostle just before had called the Righteousness of Christ, Phil. 3.9. That this is a Believers Gospel Ho∣liness. Mr. Williams cannot have the confidence to say Dr. Crisp was for dethroning the Christ the Son of the most high, the Christ the eternal Son of God made man But in truth he was for dethroning Mr. Williams Christ, of Phil. 3, 9. that is, Mans Gospel Holiness from getting in the Throne of the true Christ, the ever blessed Son of God, for justification of a sinner, or to have any thing to do therein, he was for Gospel holiness in Doctrine and practice as much as any Person living, keeping it in its due place; a Friend of the Bridegroom, but not a Co-partner with the Bride∣groom, and as eminent Mr. Christopher Fowler, said twenty and twenty times (so in effect, say the Doctors Sremons) I would not for this Room full of Gold open my mouth against Evangelical holiness, or true holiness, one grain of it being more worth than all the World, but hold, it must not sit on the Throne with Christ: It is a good Hand-maid to wait on the Queen, but it is not to lye in Bed with the Queen, or in effect, our Gospel Holiness must not affront the Lord Jesus Christ, to take his Crown and dignity from him: Now in any impartial mind, it may easily be judged who is the Dethroner of Christ. O whether will Passion and Prejudice lead men, and how will it blind them, when their Conscience cannot but tell them, that they themselves come short of him in Exalting Christ, they cry out against others that are of a far more eleva∣ted strain in the honouring the Lord Jesus. O you dethrone Christ, because you do too much magnifie him in opposition to Gospel Holiness, coming in for any share in our salvation.

This is his first link in the Chain dethroning Christ, as much as to say, I'll lay load enough, but the first stroak shall do his business, the Dr. Opinions have been to the dethroning Christ, would any one but such as Solomon speaks of, who casteth a∣bout Firebrands, Arrows and Death, Prov. 26.18. have uttered such language with∣out one tittle of proof, without saying I have proved his Opinions Dethrone Christ, or I am of Opinion his Notions tend to dethrone Christ; none of this softness is in his Iron strain, but point blank, all his Opinions follow in a Chain, to the De∣throning Christ, his preaching that Christ is the only way, is dethroning Christ, his Preaching Man's Righteousness, is the grand Idol, is dethroning Christ. Any one may guess 'tis the rubbing that Sore makes such out-cry: O you dethrone Christ, when you unhorse Men from their own righteousness: But if for every idle word, that men shall speak, they shall give an Account, can they think they shall not al∣so for every false uncharitable charge they give, in accusing a grand Asserter of the Alone Rights of the Lord Jesus in the matter of our Salvation, to be in that very thing, a Dethroner of the Lord Jesus. What shall be done to thee, thou false Tongue. Psal. 120.3. I hope the Lord will incline such Arguers not to adhere to their own Arguments, but fling down their strong Reasonings, and submit to the alone righ∣teousness of God for Salvation without our Gospel Holiness sharing in it, being o∣vercome by the Almighty overpowering sweet drawing of the Spirit, and cry be∣fore it be too late, as Julian did, Vicisti Galilae, thou hast overcome me, O Ga∣lilean by thy Blood and Spirit, freely given to me for my righteousness and Life, to ascribe all the glory to thee, none to my Gospel Holiness, this is all the harm I wish and pray for the uncharitable censurer of Dr. C. for, for that he had by his O∣pinions dethroned Christ, cujus contrarium.

The next is, Enervating his Laws and Pleadings: This flows from the other, if Christ be dethroned his Laws must be enervated, But if Christ alone is exalted, his Holy and Pure word is established, as the Dr. often asserts from the Apostle; do we make void the Law by Faith, nay we establish it by bringing in Christ fulfilling the Law for us, and writing it in our Hearts, as holy just and good, teaching us by his Spirit, to deny all ungodliness, as in the Sermons on that Text. Dr. Crisp shews; 'tis not the exalting the Blood of Christ, that Enervates the Laws of God and Christ, but 'tis the making our Righteousness which is every jot defiled to stand in the place of the abrogated Moral Law; to say that in regard we are not able to fulfill the mo∣ral Law, God accepts of our Evangelical Righteousness, that is, our own Gospel Ho∣liness, and so making it in some sense a Co-partner with Christs Righteousness, de∣nying it in words, but establishing it in deed; this is the real enervating Christs Laws, else how comes the righteousness of God by Faith, Phil. 3.9. to be called Gospel Holiness? I am sure the Righteousness of God by Faith justifies a Believer, and if this Righteousness of God be our Gospel Holiness, then our Gospel Holiness justifies a Believer, and this they will bring it to at last, or they say nothing.

Obstructing the great Design of Redemption: A virulent Charge, but unless obstructing man's Righteousness from eclipsing Christ's Righteousness be the Crime, nothing of this can be laid to the Drs. Charge, how inconsistent is this Charge with the great cry a∣gainst him, that Christ saves the worst of sinners that come to him, even when in their blood and filth which he freely asserts, and yet presses not to live in sin, but to glo∣rifie God in all holy Conversation. If by the design of Redemption Mr. williams means that we are redeemed or created in Christ Jesus, to good Works, and Charges the Dr. to obstruct that design, what can be more contrary than that in the Doctors Sermons, when he saith, fol. 556. The belief of this, (that Free Grace a∣bounds) doth certainly and effectually teach and produce an hatred of sin, and a love of ho∣liness, and in fol. 557. If there be any such, (as say, let us sin that Grace may abound) let me deal plainly with them, for my part I must account them the greatest Monsters upon the Face of the Earth; the greatest Enemies to the Church that ever were, and I say of such dishonourers of the Church, and disturbers of the Consciences of Gods People, that they are Carnal, Sensual, and Devilish; they are the greatest Enemies to the Free Grace of God, and the greatest Subverters of the Power and Purity of the Gospel, and the greatest hinderers of the Course of it under Heaven: No persons in the World do so wound the sides of Christ as he who doth profess the Gospel, and yet live Wickedly, and if there be any such here, let me tell them their Faith is no better than the Faith of Devils, for they believe and tremble, and that Christ will have a heavier reckoning, and account for such when they come to Judgment, than for any Persons under Heaven besides. Now can Mr. Williams in cold blood say this Doctrine obstructs the design of Redemption; that this opposes the scope of the Gospel.

Next he Apoligizes for the Doctor, That he had not entertained these Opinions, if he had considered that God's Electing Decree is no legal grant, nor a formal promise to us. I suppose it may be gathered that the Doctor considered God's electing Decree as much as his Opposer, when the Dr. lays all the stress of Mans happiness upon the absoluteness and irreversibleness of it, and if others had as great an honour for the veracity and stedfastness of those Mountains of Brass, they would not make mens Salvation that are elected so uncertain a thing as many do.

As for the Decree not being a legal grant, Mr. Williams hath erected a new term of Art, what he means I know not, but if he means 'tis a grant not good in Law, or that 'tis such a grant as no man can plead at the Barr of God, either in our own Conscience, or at the great day of Judgment, to say, Lord thou hast elected me, therefore I must be saved. This I suppose I may flatly deny, and say (provided I know my Election, as the Apostle saith, 1 Thes. 1.4. Knowing Brethren your Election

or as Christ bids us rejoyce that your Names are written in the Book of Life, when this comes to be known) it may be pleaded, or else there would be little ground of joy in it, and it may be pleaded as a grant good in Law, for the discharge of every one to whom it belongs, not that the Dr. or any considerate Christian is for Election going alone without Justification, and Sanctifica∣tion, no not in Children in the Womb that are Elected and die there. So that though Election be not a formal promise, yet in this sense it must be a legal grant, or a grant good in Law: But there may be a snare in Mr. Williams his electing Decree: If he means God's decreeing to El••ct, that's one thing, and God's act of Election that's another; 'tis the last I insist on, I cannot reach what he means by electing Decree, but God's act of Election, or God's actual choosing us in Christ, before the Foundation of the World, carries in it the Vertue of a legal grant, or it is a frustrable Election which it is abominable to say of Gods act, and yet some mens laying the stress of all Mens Salvation upon mans Holiness, must reduce Gods election to.

The Decree includes the means and the end] granted most freely, yea more than Mr. Williams saith, for the Decree not only includes the means and the end, but the means is as well of the essence of the Decree as the end is, which I suspect Mr. Williams denies, for he saith in the next words, willing the first in order to the last, that is, God wills the means in order to the end; or God wills sanctification in order to Salvation. But if by only willing the means, he doth not make it a decreeing the means, he falls short of the truth, and makes election not infallible, for God is spoken of often in Scripture, of willing things to be done which are not done, as, How often would I have gathered you, and you would not; if he means only such a willing the means which Men may fru∣strate by not complying with his will, then the Decree of the end which is e∣ternal salvation that must fail, and so God's Election is made a conditional one and not absolute; that is, God Elected such and such to eternal Life, if they would repent and believe, and obey the Gospel, and not that he Elected them, that they should repent and believe and obey the Gospel, and this repenting and believing is left to the freedom of mans will, so that God may be frustrate of his whole decree by their so stating Election; and I thought it would come to that at last, so that with Mr. Williams, God's Electing Decree is only to the end Salvation, and he wills the means Sanctification, which will of God is rejected or obeyed, as man's Free-will resists or complies with the motives of∣fered to it; and If Mr. Williams thinks the Dr. did not thus consider God's Election, and therefore was led into false Opinions, he bewrays his own mis∣apprehension of Election, and doth not at all invalidate the Drs. Positions con∣cerning the Elect. His next words which he asserts concerning Election, seem to make good my former suspicion that he makes Gods Election de∣pend on man's will, and for not considering which he blames the Dr. and they are these.

And as it (the Decree) puts nothing in present being, so it barrs not God as a Governour to fix a connexion between benefits and Duties by his revealed will. Here must be a great mistake of this learned and acute Gentleman, in saying God's Decree puts nothing in present being; what, the Decree puts nothing in pre∣sent being? sure the Decree puts somewhat in present being, the Decree puts the Decree in present being, and is God's eternal unalterable Decree, which the Father and Son and Spirit delighted in during all eternity past, and will in all Eternity to come, is this vanisht into nothing in present being? I may say God's Decree is so far from putting nothing into present Being, that it puts all things into past, present, and future being, for if God be one Eternal act, and all things past, present, and to come are ever in being in his Eye or know∣ledge,

so he puts every thing into present being with himself, to be manifest in their proper Seasons according to his eternal purpose which he purposed in himself, Ephes. 1.11. And accordingly the Election of Sons to glory is in pre∣sent being when there are such Sons in being.

This putting nothing into being by God's Election, is the way these Men take to evaporate God's Election into Man's Election; 'tis not God doth ab∣solutely Elect any Man to salvation (except the man Christ, I hope they grant that) but man Elects himself to Salvation, and then Election hath put somewhat in∣to present being: But though Mr. Williams say of Election, it puts nothing into present being, I hope all Orthodox Protestants will say that Election hath put the Elect into an happy state; for Election hath obtained, though the rest are blinded, and nothing can be laid to the charge of God's Elect, and they are loved with an everlasting love; and is God's love nothing in present being? So it bars not God as a Governour to fix a connexion between Benefits and Duties. No, but it bars man from framing a Model for God, and from making God's Righteousness to be Mans Gospel Holiness, and it ba••s man from putting in any leven into the lump of being Justifyed freely by his Grace, through the Redemption that is in Jesus, it bars man from ploughing with an Ox, an Ass, and from wearing a Linsey Wolsey Garment, and from putting new Wine in∣to old Bottles, and from thinking a Branch can bring sorth any good Grapes, except it be first in the Vine the Lord Jesus, there being no gathering Grapes of Thorns, or Figs of Thistles, or any good work from any Soul, till he is in Christ, and though there is a blessed Connexion of Benefits and Duties, yet no good Duty is done till the Benefit of being united to Christ be first bestowed by God; God fixes a Connexion, 'tis true, he makes the Tree good first, and then the Fruit good, and this was eternally in the Decree, but man must not fix the connexion by making Duties Procurers of Benefits, or making Gospel threats and promises to have in their own Nature a tendency to Convert Souls, without the Operation of the Holy Spirit.

Mr. Williams saith, If the Doctor had animadverted that Christs sufferings were the foundation of our Pardon, but not formally our Pardon: This intimates that the Dr. saith Christs sufferings were formally our Pardon. I can shew how far our great Reformers went beyond Mr. Williams in asserting the vertue of the sufferings of Christ in the Pardon of sin, which if Mr. Williams had consulted, he would not have reflected as he doth on the Dr. they say in the Doctrine of the Church of England, that which is tantamount to a formal pardon in Christs Sufferings, they do not amuse the World with Mr. Williams his Rectoral di∣stribution, that he allows to God in pardoning sinners, upon account of their being found in their Gospel Holiness, joyning Faith and Holiness together, as they entitle to Gospel Benefits, which Benefits he saith, are not from the confor∣mity of Faith and Holiness, &c. to the Precept, but from their Conformity to the rule of the Promise, and so plunging poor Souls in his deeps, and amazing them with his rules and Connexions: But these Homilists give a certain sound of the Gospel, and say upon the Sermon of the Passion, of Good Fryday fol. 177 Such favour did he purchase by his Death of his heavenly Father for us, that for the merit thereof, we are now fully in Gods grace again, and clearly discharged from our sin. These are plain wholsome intelligible Gospel Truths, such as suit with the Doctors Testimony, they are not Bombasted with, If we continue to repent and be∣lieve to our Death, then our Evangelical Righteousness shall justifie us at the great day from Satans Charge of unbelief: But, they speak home against all Arminianism, and say that by the merit of his death, we are in Gods grace again, nay we are now in God's grace and that fully, (not we shall be) and we are discharged from sin, nay, we are clearly discharged from sin, and in the

next words they put it home, and say to the confounding all the mincers of the vertue of the death of Christ as to the pardon of sin, thus, No tongue surely is able to express the worthiness of this so precious a death, For in this standeth the continual pardon of our daily Offences. Had such a passage as this been found in the Notes taken from Doctor Crisp that there is a continual pardon standing, firm in the death of Christ, of our present daily Offences, this would be ac∣counted dethroning Christ by giving more honour to him, than some distinguish∣ers can allow, or if Reverend Mr. Cole had said, that in Christs death stands the Pardon of our daily offences, nay, there stands a continual Pardon, and this mentioned without naming Faith and Repentance, but be our Offences what they may be, there stands a continual pardon if we be Christians indeed, say these holy Reformers, this had been Dangerous Doctrine, as an eminent Divine said of as harmless expressions of his as these in Pinners Hall: I wish those wor∣thy Gentlemen who are so exceptious against the freeness of God's Grace in and through Christ, and must eke it out by our Gospel Holiness, would seri∣ously consider in the simplicity of the Gospel Spirit of these Homilists, such ex∣pressions as these of theirs, before they pass their hard Censures of crying de∣throning Christ, enervating his Laws, because some who may be clearer than themselves, Preach we are justified freely by his Grace through the redemp∣tion that is in Jesus without any thing of Mans works cooperating therein or thereto; nothing can be plainer than these Reformers newly come out of the School Terms of Popish justification, for renouncing every thing in man to have any concurrence into our Pardon: But now the simplicity of the Gospel must be lost by some Mens Distinction of our Pardon by Christs death, his sufferings were not our formal Pardon, but the foundation of it.

I believe none of his Publishers of Free-Grace, too freely, ever said Christs sufferings were the formal Pardon of a sinner, it being perfect Nonsense, but I hope they may say his sufferings were a real Expiation of the sins of all the Elect, without offending most of the Subscribers to Mr. Williams his Book, else how could the Apostle say, by one offering he for ever perfected those that are sanctified, and he loved us, and washed us from our sins in his blood, having made peace by the Blood of his Cross.

But in regard plain Scriptures will not go down but Christ's Righteousness must be our Gospel Holiness, I proceed with the Testimony of those blessed maintainers of the absolute irreversible vertue of the sufferings of Christ, which sufferings contained in them the daily pardon of our offences, and yet these I hope Mr. Williams will not say have laid down Doctrines to the dethroning Christ, though the same with Dr. Crisp; they say, in the same Passion Sermon, in fol. 177. In this (Death of Christ) resteth our Justification. How? Sure Arch-Bishop Cranmer, and Bishop Ridley, and you famous Martyrs, you will be Anti∣nomians by and by, have a care Mr. Williams do not see this, he'll get 49 and 49 and more, if the Press be not in too much haste to subscribe a Paper to countenance his accusing you for enervating Christs Laws; what, our justifica∣tion rest in Christs death? what justified in the sight of God (who calleth things that are not as though they were, Rom. 4.17. before we believe? Sure either you are mistaken, or Mr. Williams must retract his black Titles he hath given to this Doctrine; however, Mr. Williams take it, the Doctrine is good, stands firm, is allowed, nay, commanded by many Acts of Parliament to be read, and by Queen Elizabeths Letter, to be read again and again, by all Parsons, Vicars and Curates, that our justification resteth in the Death of Christ, and if so, having the Apostle Paul on my side, Being Justified by his blood, Rom. 5.9. and the Apostle John, Who washed us from our sins in his Blood, and our Sta∣tute Law, and the Queens Letter to the Bishops, that our Justification resteth in

his Death, I will oppose it against all Gospel Mincers, though 1000 times 49, and will say that on God's part, all the Elect were justifyed when Christ died, or rather rose again for our justification, that is, for the Declaration of it, tho' on man's part, no man is personally justified, 'till Christ come, and unite him∣self to him, and work Faith in him, which is always accompanied with all o∣ther Graces in Faith, the Seed and Root planted by Christ with himself, in the Soul; the Homilists go on for the farther ascertaining the benefits that ac∣crew to the Elect in the Death of Christ, and say, In this (death) we be al∣lowed, how will Mr. Williams and his Friends take this? In this we be allow∣ed; will they say, in Christs death there is only a Foundation for Pardon, or a Foundation for our being allowed? O 'tis much more doubtless; 'tis thus, we now are allowed or accepted in that death of his, that death had such an efficacy, that we being justified by it, are allowed or accepted in it; he don't say we are accepted for it, or allowed for it, but in it, we are allowed in it; God looks on nothing else but that Death of his Son in which he allows or accepts of those Sheep his Son dyed for; and that this is the meaning the next words shew, they saying, In this is purchased the everlasting Health of our Souls: Ay, saith Mr. Williams, now they lean on my side, Christ purchased this for them, that is to say, provided they repent, believe, walk holy; no, 'tis not with that connexion, tho' God works all those Graces where Christs death is imputed. But they say everlasting Health is purchased, and it is in this death of Christ, there, 'tis firmly fixt on that unmoveable Rock, without mention∣ing any previous Qualifications as terms or conditions to concur to our Title, for the Title is freely given in the Purchase, and the Qualifications are wrought by the Purchaser, all of Grace; and as sure as he laid down his life for his Sheep, so surely they shall come to him, the Father drawing: But without any limitation to any Condition, 'tis asserted plainly by above 49 of these holy Reformers, that in this (Death of Christ) (I say in it, which is more than by it) in this is purchased the everlasting health of our Souls, and we may not think that Christ will lose his Purchase, he having paid the Price; Salvation is sure and secure without any Ifs and Ands, and connexions and distributions, as their next words plainly say, Yea, there is none other thing, (than the death of Christ) that can be named under Heaven, to save our Souls, but this only work of Christs precious Offering of his Body upon the Altar of the Cross. Here are words without Sophisticating connexions, saving our Souls is the thing aimed at; now say they, he hath not only purchased it, so will say most Arminians, but nothing else out the Death of Christ saves us, name what you will, name Repenting, Believing, Gospel-Holiness, blessed graces, all, but what have they to do with Salvation? they are found in the Subjects saved, they being the free gift of God; but as for Salvation, as for the everlasting Health of our Souls, that was wrought out long before our complying with the Gospel rule, and made firm to all the Seed, the foundation of God standing sure, this work was over; and so allowed) by these great men) when Christ died, and so well and effectually done, that nothing can be named under Heaven to have any thing to do in saving our Souls but this Death of Christ, tho' I grant many things tend to the manifesting of it to us, and making us meet for it, as Faith and Holiness, being the things that must and will accompany Salvation.

Are you for works, for Conditions? 'Tis this only work (say they) saves our souls, Christs precious offering of his Body upon the Altar of the Cross, then and upon that Altar the material Cross on which our Lord Jesus hung and di∣ed, upon that the work of saving our Souls was finished, when he cryed out, it is finished; so that here is more than a Foundation for pardon, for here is Justification, nay more than Justification, here is everlasting Health and Salva∣tion

of our Souls, wrought upon the Cross of Christ 1657 years ago, or there∣abouts; this was good Divinity in our great Grand-Father's days, and in Dr Crisps Eyes and Lips, that our Justification and Salvation was really, actually in Christs Death, as they say, and so confirmed by every Parliament that ever Confirmed the Book of Common Prayer; but now a poor sinners salvation must be tortured with our personal holiness, coming in with an as it were, as the Apostle saith, Rom. 9.32. that is to say, with our inherent Righteousness, concurring, complying with conformity to Gospel Rule under threats and pro∣mises, or else we are for the Dethroning Christ, for enervating his Laws, and the Rabble that know nothing of either Justification or Sanctification, shall be let loose upon asserters of Free Grace, by Mr. Williams crying out, O these be men against Gospel Holiness, when their Opposers know in their Conscience, there is such a strain of Holiness all along in Dr. Crisps Book, that though it be against the grain, they cannot but own they believe him a holy Person, and well they may, if they compare his Sermons on Free Grace, teaching to deny Ungodliness, with his other Sermons on our sins laid upon Christ, in the last side of which Vol. fol. 444. the Dr. saith, For my own part I abhor no∣thing in the World so much as this, namely, a licentious undertaking to continue in a∣ny sin, because that such fulness of Grace hath abounded; and I shall recommend to them (if any such be here) the reading of the Epistle of Jude, where they may see the fearful wrath of God upon such persons as abuse the Grace of God to sin: O Beloved, let not the love of the Lord God, in Jesus Christ thus manifested, be so basely requi∣ted at your hands, seeing the Lord hath so freely loved you, and given Christ to you, that you might be to the Praise of the Glory of his Grace in a Godly and Chri∣stian Conversation whereunto you are Ordained, for you are Created in Christ Jesus to good Works, that you should walk in them: and I beseech you always to remember that you cannot answer the free love of God toward you, any other way, but by shew∣ing it in a fruitful Conversation in the World, and considering that one end, for which the Lord did redeem you, was, that you might be a peculiar people to himself zealous of good Works, Titus 2.24. Thus ends the third Volume. To stop the mouths of Gain-sayers, especially Mr. Williams, who accuses the Dr. to be for Licentious Doctrine; but because our holiness must not come in to concur to our Justification, this is to enervate Christs Laws.

But to our purpose again, The Homily saith, as to the respect Christs suf∣ferings have to the Pardon of our sins, though his sufferings be not a formal pardon, as saith Mr. Williams, as a piece of nonsense charged upon Dr. Crisp, yet his Sufferings are, tant-amount to a Pardon in the Account of those holy compilers of the Homilies, who say in fol. 178. His Passion is the Ransom and whole amends for our sin. If so, then with submission, I may say this whole amends for sin, is in the Eye of a just and gracious God tant-amount to a Pardon, for God cannot but acquit where amends is made, though the Person acquitted is never the better for it as to his Conscience, till he believe in the Lord Jesus; no more than a Criminal in New-gate condemned for Treason, is the more at peace in his mind, when his Friend hath got a Pardon for him, in his Pocket, till he see it or believes it; but will any man in his senses say this Criminal is not really benefited by the Pardon his Friend got him, till he see and plead this Pardon, much less may Mr. Williams say, that an Elect person is not benefited by the Justification by Christs Resurrection, be∣cause 'tis not applyed to him till believing.

They go on in fol. 185. and say, Christ being perfect God, and the Son of God, gave his Body to be bruised and broken on the Cross for our sins; this Mr. Williams will grant, but they go on and say, our Saviour Christ hath delivered us from sin, this Mr. Williams must temper with ifs and Connexions; they proceed, Yet

not so that we shall be free from committing sin, but so that it shall not be imputed to our Condemnation: So they have allowed a benefit to Believers, before they be∣lieve, though Mr. Williams questions it, and affirm Christ on the Cross deliver∣ed from sin, bearing it away, so as it shall not be imputed to them, and whe∣ther this be not more than a bare foundation of our Pardon, it being a real making amends for sin; a real justification, a real saving our Souls in these great mens account, and in the Nations account; let Mr. Williams ponder, and not conclude that Dr. Crisp entertained these Opinions which dethrone Christ, as he calls it, by not animadverting that Christs sufferings were barely a foun∣dation of pardon, and let him muse what his vilifying this Doctrine of the Church of Englamd will amount to.

To proceed, he saith, that the sins of the Elect, They are not forgiven immedi∣ately upon, nor meerly by his enduring those sufferings; this is directly contrary to the Doctrine in the Homily, 177. which saith, In this death of Christ, standeth our continual Pardon. I hope he will allow that Christ did put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself, because God saith it without any Trope, or Ifs or Con∣nexions, Heb. 9.26. Also he will allow that before Christ sat on the right hand of God, he purged our sins by himself, Heb. 1.3. And that at the end of seventy Weeks he made an end of sin, and brought in everlasting righte∣ousness, Dan. 9.24. and bare our sins in his Body, and was the Lamb of God that took away the sins of the World. John 1.29. If so that sins be satisfyed for, and if put away, and if purged and made an end of and born away, and took away, then what will remain to be forgiven? even nothing; and yet still neither the Dr. or any I know of, hold that the Conscience of a sinner is ac∣quitted hereby, or at all by Christs death, till Christ be applyed by Faith, with all his Benefits to the Soul; so that though with Mr. Williams our sins be not forgiven immediately upon Christs death, as pertaining to the Consci∣ence of the Elect sinner dyed for, yet by Mr. Williams leave, God is not so hard a Creditor to keep the Debt upon Record, when he is satisfied for it, and when 'tis blotted out by the Blood of Christ, sure he will allow that in the Court of Heaven the Book is crost, and no debt appears against the Elect af∣ter Christ made payment; sure this will not be gainsaid but by those who de∣ny Christs satisfaction, which many will nibble at, tho' 'tis too plain Popery, to say downright that Christ did not make full satisfaction to God by his Death, for the sins of all the Elect.

Sins are not forgiven meerly by his enduring Sufferings, W. What, is our Gos∣pel Holiness to help our Faith; Holiness? &c. Yes, for saith he, There were to intervene a Gospel Promise of pardon, the work of the Spirit for a Conformity to the rule of the Promise, in the person to be pardoned, and a Judicial act of Pardon by that promise on the Person thus conformed to the Rule thereof; here's a tedious les∣son for a poor terrified Soul to get by heart, when the Spirit of God hath convinced him of his miserable condition by sin, when he cries to a Gospel Mi∣nister, good Sir, for the Lords sake, tell me how I may get a pardon into my Bosom; I have heard, may he say, God saith, there is forgiveness with him, 'tis now ready by him, that he may be feared. I have heard that when the Jaylor cryed out, What shall I do to be saved, The Apostle bid him only believe in the Lord Je∣sus, and thou shalt be saved: I have heard and read that in Ephes. 1. and Col. 1. the Apostle saith in him we have Redemption through his Blood, forgiving of sins, so that as soon as I have him by faith, I have forgiveness, and I am bid to fly for Refuge to the hope that is set before me, which I take to be Jesus my City of Refuge and not my Gospel Holiness: Now good Sir, may this poor Soul say, what shall I do under the load of my sins? may I take the Apostles words, and Christs call, Come to me, and you shall find rest for your Souls, as soon as ever you find your selves weary and heavy laden; or must I stay

till I find by a long seven or ten or 38 years lying at the Pool, searching if I can find Mr. Williams draught agree with me, that I have attained to a full compleat answering the Rule of the Gospel, which he calls conformity to the rule of the promise? Must I stay till I can understand Mr. Williams School terms of a Judicial Act of Pardon by that promise to the Person thus conform∣ed to the Rule; that is to say, must I stay till I can love my Enemies, they being my Neighbours as well as my self, till I can turn my left Cheek pati∣ently to him, that smites me on my right, till I can, having two Coats, give one to him that hath none, till I can hate Father, Mother, sell all and follow Christ, and in every thing conform to Gospel Rule; in a word, till I am perfect as my Father which is in Heaven is perfect, before I may dare believe my sins are forgiven? Or may I satisfie my self with Dr. Crisps quotation, Look to me and be ye saved, as the Serpent was only lookt to for healing? I say if a poor Soul should put this to a Gospel Minister, would he not answer, the plain short Scripture way is best, hearken to Jesus, saying, come take the Water of Life freely, this is the work of God, that ye believe in him the Father hath sent. If you have me you have Life, as many as receive me, that is, believe on my Name, are Sons of God. As for Mr. Williams distinctions, Connexions, Ju∣dicial act of Pardon, he may please the Schools with them, but there is more nourishing food in one cal•• of Christ, Come to me, come, come, buy Wine, milk and honey without money, without price, in such a promise well prest, than in a thousand of Mr. Williams distinctions.

Next I must attack an odd expression savouring of God's dispensing with the breach of his righteous Law without satisfaction, which is the back door of Arminianism, wherein creeps in mans free will, and his good works concur∣ring to his salvation; the expression which I cannot digest, is this, Mr. W. saith, a continuance in a state of death with a bar to the blessing are not threatned (in the Gospel) against every degree of sin, as the Covenant of Works did. This is Mr. Williams sense of the Gospel, and its differing from the Law or Covenant of Works, viz. the Law condemned for every sin, but there are some degrees of sin, the Gospel allows, or doth not threaten Death for, which I suppose with∣out wronging him, I may instance thus: The Law condemned a Man for kil∣ling his Brother, and for hating his Brother, and for ill will to his Brother; but the Gospel hath compounded the matter, and made God reconcileable through Faith in Christ, for a mans murdering his Brother, but God will take no notice of a man's ill will to his Brother, that degree of sin there is no threatning of Death for; if this be his sense, I take it to be far wide of the Apostles sense, when he said the blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin, that is to say, there is as real need of the vertue of the blood of Christ to cleanse from a vain thought as from murder, though I do not say both are alike hei∣nous, yet both need the blood of Christ to wash them away, or there is no standing Justified at God's Bar. Oh we should have a care of letting this poy∣son down, that any sin can be pardoned but by the blood of Christ cleansing it, for he that is guilty of one sin is guilty of all; so that to say there is any degree of sin under the Gospel against which death is not threatned will a∣mount in the conclusion, to render the blood of Christ not needful to take a∣way that degree of sin: O sin, sin, how small soever, must not be so treated, for if the grain of Mustard seed, small faith, but true, will grow to a great Tree, and reach to Heaven; this grane of Henbane, the smallest degree of sin, if not accounted for in the Gospel by the blood of Christ, will grow to a vast depth even the Regions of darkness and Hell.

Upon this dangerous position of Mr. Williams, That a continuance in a state of death and a bar to the Blessing, are not threatned against every degree of

sin, as the Covenant of works did, Mr. Williams propounds a splendid question, Can any doubt this to be the grace of the Gospel Promise: O profound grace of the Gospel promise, it doth not bar from blessing, nor continue in a state of death, for every degree of sin, a Heaven-born Soul, that lives day by day on the Blood and Flesh of Jesus, and feasts on the infinite love of God in Jesus, would have thought that an eminent Minister of the Gospel, a Gentleman of great parts, supported by some of the greatest names in our Israel, would hav•• thought that when Mr. Williams was rescuing the Lord Jesus (as he inti∣mates) from the dethroning Principles of Dr. Crisp (as he pleases to call them) and when he is bringing back the Lord Jesus to his Throne, one would think, I say, when Mr. Williams is celebrating the glory of the Grace of the Gospel pro∣mise, he should have called for the aid of the holy Spirit, to help him, and have said somewhat to this purpose: O the heighth and depth, O the superla∣tive Excellency of the Love of God in Christ, that he should love us, and wash us from our sins in his blood, that the blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin, that he hath blessed us with all spiritual Blessings in heavenly places in Christ. Thus our Lord Jesus is to be enthroned, though it comes too near Dr. Crisp his way of dethroning Christ, no, this is not his Clue or way to raise Monuments of Glory to our Blessed Lord, but thus he celebrates him by snip∣ing off a Lap of his Garment as David did Sauls; can any doubt but this (the not being in a state of Death for every degree of sin) is the grace of the Gospel promise: If he had said this is a grace of the Gospel, it had been a degree of modesty in Mr. Williams to the Gospel, though it were not a truth, but to say 'tis the Grace, and so the grace that none can doubt of it, this needs a remark, and the chief that I shall make, is, that I will beg of God, and now do, that I and Mr. Williams also may have the grace of the Gospel promise in a more full stream than that a continuance in a state of Death, and a bar to the blessing, are not threatned against every degree of sin, as the Covenant of works did; but that we may swim in the Rivers of infinite Love; that God chose us in Christ before the World, and gave us to the Lord Jesus, that no sin should pluck us out of his hand, and that by one offering he hath for ever perfected those that are sanctifyed, so that now there is no more con∣science of sin, because where sin abounds grace doth much more abound, and yet still for every sin and for every degree of sin we may not think our selves freed from Condemnation for it, by vertue of the Gospel promise relaxing the Covenant of Works, but I beg that he and I may for our cleansing our Con∣sciences from the least degree of sin, make use of the Apostles remedy. If any man sin (be it in any the least degree) we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous, who is the propitiation for our sins; ay that's the business, that's it we must trust to, he is the propitiation for our sins of sin in the least degree, it must have this participation, or wo unto us; this I implore of God in the name of Jesus, that I and Mr. Williams may by a daily ap∣plying to this propitiation, get our Consciences free from every degree of sin.

Before I leave this clause, I reflect that the greatest Grammarian may make blunders, which I note, that Mr. Williams in the next Edition may mend this, that so the World may not think Mr. Williams allows false Grammar, as this Clause gives suspicion, or I must go to School again: The false Grammar in this clause, is in these words, At the Covenant of Works did, which follows these words, And a continuance in a state of death, with a bar to the blessing, are not threatned against every degree of sin, as the Covenant of Works did, so that the sen∣tence in brief by Mr. Williams ordering runs thus, Death and a Bar are not threatned, as the Covenant of Works did, and if this be sense or Grammar, it must be by some Outlandish Figure and Rule, I suppose he means thus,

Death and the Bar are not threatned as in the Covenant of Works they were, and not as the Covenant of works did.

Mr. Williams next makes his Queries to confirm ••is assertion that every de∣gree of sin is not threatned under the Gospel with Death, and for confirma∣tion of it, saith, Doth it (the Gospel) promise Life to all men, however vile and impenitent they be: I confess this rimes like brains and stairs, he pro∣pounds that every degree of sin doth not bar the blessing of the Gospel, and Confirms it by this, the Gospel don't promise Life to the vilest and impeni∣tent. If it don't promise life to the vilest and impenitent, doth it follow that any degree of sin can be so small as not to deserve death under the Gospel? A strange Inference, and stranger Doctrine, as if he had said thus, there are some sins under the Gospel do not deserve death, because the Gospel doth not promise life to the vilest and most impenitent.

But to leave the Illogicalness of his Argument, I'll consider his Question as a positive Assertion single and by it self.

The Gospel doth not promise Life to all men, however vile and impenitent they be, saith Mr. Williams, and I never heard of any that ever said it did; that all men of all Nations, since the World began to the end of it, had pro∣mise of Life by the Gospel, and then Mr. Williams rambling Question supposes some such Universalians there are, but to help and amend the question it may be Mr. Williams intends thus; Doth the Gospel promise Life to all that hear it, however vile, &c. I answer, none that he opposes ever asserted it, as I see, they with every good Christian say it promises life to all that truly believe in the Lord Jesus, nay, it promises life to all the Elect, But the grand Question is still, if it promise Life to the Elect, however vile and im∣penitent they be; this I take to be Mr. Williams Question, now if he mean that the Gospel do not promise life to those that continue vile and impeni∣tent, to those that are never effectually called by the grace of God. I am satisfied he must fight with the Air, for none disputes him in that point, but if he mean that the Gospel doth not promise Life, to the chief of sinners, to th•• most vile and most impenitent, which cannot be worse than the chief of sinners, if they be elected chosen Vessels; if he asserts this he mis∣takes, but I will not question his Integrity to the Gospel in this point; I fear there lies somewhat at the Bottom that wi•••• ••••t bear the standard or touch∣stone of the word, that is, that God promises Life and Salvation, upon our repentance and growing from vile to good; for he doth not promise it to the vile and impenitent: If this be his meaning, that there is no promise of life to an Elect person till he return from vileness, and till he repent, this is as near Arminianism as four pence is to a groat, and as far from the scrip∣ture as the West is from the East, for that saith in Titus 1.2. In hope of Eternal life, which God that cannot lye promised before the World began, so that I conclude against Mr. Williams with the Apostle, that the Gospel promise was before the foundation of the World, for Life and Salvation to all the E∣lect according to the Promise of God, though they be the chief of sinners, however vile and impenitent they are, till the Gospel comes and turns them from darkness to light, from dumb Idols to serve the living God, and the Gospel promise when it first touches their Hearts by the Spirit of God, though it finds them so vile and impenitent it does not leave them so, but first puts in a new spiritual life and carries it on in sanctification more and more every day, and in this sense I give my Judgment, the Gospel promises life to all men that are Elected, that is, all that are by vertue of their Election effectu∣ally called, which promise was before the World began, this cannot be too much insisted it, because it is for the praise of the glory of his grace, and hath no tendency to lessen the true value of the blessed graces of Repen∣tance

and new obedience which flow from and do give life to the pro∣mise.

His next Question is, or doth it, (the Gospel) threaten damnation or a conti∣nuance of it on any true Penitent believing Godly man, because he is imperfect. This is as wild a question as the former, that was, doth the Gospel save all thus, doth it damn all, for what man lives and sins not? So that every true Pe∣nitent is imperfect, and this question needed not be askt, but only to insinu∣ate, that true Penitence believing and godliness come in equal sharers, in in∣tituling Men to salvation by Christ; that they go hand in hand to give an In∣terest in the promise, only Repentance must take the Right hand and go next the Wall, though the Apostle say, justified by Faith, we are saved by grace through Faith, yet Repentance and Godliness will crowd in for a little boast∣ing, though it rob Christ, whereas true faith gives him the glory of all, by be∣ing the hand that receives all from Christ.

In the next place, we have the yet most dangerous position for establishing our works in the business of our Salvation, in this long sentence to bring in a degree of obedience, a little finger we must have in the Pye; or it will not be well made; he brings it in thus, This change of the Sanction. (that is, of Life from Gospel Obedience instead of the Law Obedience) supposes the death of Christ, and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience, wherein God hath provided for his own glory, while he promises Life by forgiveness to imperfect man, and yet he insists on some degree of Obedience, to which of his meer grace he enableth us. Here's a long series or train to bring in a degree of Obedience, first the sanction is changed, this needs pondering; next this sup∣poses the death of Christ. O fit, what only supposes the death of Christ, is his death to have no better encomium upon it, one would think that glorious price and ransom of our redemption, should have been set off with a glorious title, as thus, this is owing to the infinite love and mercy of God, in the Unvalu∣able purchase by the blessed death of Christ. But repenting, believing, a god∣ly life, that must have the high praises, the Death of our blessed Lord Jesus must come off with a supposition; this supposes the Death of Christ, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the next place, it supposes the honouring the Law; and is that all, doth it not suppose the satisfying the Law? I find not a word of that, that Christs death satisfyed the Law: O there is care taken that string must not be harped upon, it would drown the sweet melody of some degrees of Obedience, and our re∣penting, believing, and godliness, which though excellent in their place, yet are not to eclips the glory of our Lord Jesus in becoming the end of the Law.

I must say 'tis a mean business to say Christs death honoured the Law, so Cranmers death honoured the Gospel, but Christs death to all sound Protestants, was the end of the Law, by his fulfilling our Righteousness; but there must come in with it some degree of our Obedience, this seems pretty broad com∣pounding the matter with God for the sin of man, Christ honoured the Law by his Obedience, yet God insists on some degree of our Obedience, this looks like a linsey woolsey Garment, but it must be laid aside, for it will not prove the wedding Garment, the Bridegroom will scorn that any of his Guests shall sit down with the glorious Garment of his righteousness, patcht up with the degrees of our Obedience. If the King should send a Garment for Mr. Wil∣liams to come to Court in and stand before him, I am confident he would wear that and that only, and not go about to clap a patch here and a patch there of his own Coat, much less will he do it to the Lord Jesus on serious thoughts, Wherein God hath provided for his own Glory: But it is but a mean provision, if Christ have only honoured the Law, and not fully satisfyed it, and

if our Obedience must come in with his Sons Obedience, can is be thought that our imperfect obedience provides for God's glory, by joyning it with Christs most perfect Obedience; God indeed hath provided well for his glo∣ry in mans Salvation only from his own free Grace through the Blood of Christ, but Mr. Williams makes but a slender providing for God's glory, while he leaves room for the flesh to glory in his presence by his own obedience, is this that no flesh may glory in his sight. But Mr. Williams takes care to prevent that (he'll say) by the last clause, that God of his men grace enables us to this our Obedi∣ence. I answer, not in the least doth this take off from glorying, for though 'tis Gods grace inables to Obedience, yet the Obedience is still our work, and the Scripture saith plainly, not of works, lest any boast.

Every breath I breath, is of God's grace, and if God should enable me to speak for two hours together to the King Lords, and Commons in Parlia∣ment, so as to perswade them to imploy none but those that truely fear God in any place of trust, should I not be apt to applaud my self, though I should still own the ability and efficacy to perswade them was of God, how much more will any poor Creature boast if his Obedience hath any hand in the salvation of his Soul? O that we could cry, grace, grace, not to us but to thy name be the praise, and as for our Obedience, cry all our righteousness is as filthy Raggs, and so let us set the Crown on the head of our Lord Jesus, say continually To the King; eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever, for his being all in all, Author and finisher, Alpha and Omega, in our Salvation.

He promises Life by forgiveness to imperfect Man, This is the next step to bring in some degree of our obedience, but a false step, if by promising Life, by for∣giveness he excludes Christs satisfying Gods Justice, as that which leads to for∣giveness, of which there is not a word in this Paragraph, and doth God pro∣mise life barely by forgiveness, this is a sorry and nonsensical account of mans Re∣demption, and Salvation.

And yet he insists on some degree of Obediences, saith Mr. Williams. Here comes the great master wheel by which our Salvation is secured, Christs death is supposed, the Law hath honour by Christs Obedience, life is promised, but yet God insists in our Obedience, at least on some degree of it. That God insists on our obedi∣ence, and on more than some degree of it, must be owned by all, for God insists on our being holy as he is holy; God insists on our loving him with all our heart; God insists that we be blameless and unreproveable in his sight; this is more than some degree of Obedience, and it is our duty doubtless to endeavour to be perfect, as our Father which is in Heaven is perfect. But this hath nothing to do in our obtaining Life, and is not such an Obedience, as Mr. Williams saith God insists on: He is more easie in his terms to poor sinners, than to run it so high; well, what is it God insists on? he in effect, told us before, 'tis a true penitent believing Godly Man, this God insists on▪ this is his some degree of Obedience, that God insists on, while he promises Life by forgiveness, and is this the true Interpretation of these Texts, While•• we were Enemies, we were reconciled, and, he justifies the Ungodly, but from such glosses I desire to be delivered.

Well, we must be true Penitent; we must have Faith that Christ honoured the Law, and we must be Godly persons, that is, we must walk in all god∣liness and honesty, or we be not godly persons, and when that is done then we may come to God and say, Lord we have done what thou com∣mandest, we repent, believe, and are Godly, though we are not perfect, yet we are truly penitent, believing and Godly, 〈…〉〈…〉

life; if this be nor dividing shares with the Lord Jesus, in the honour of sal∣vation, what is? No mortal man will say that our perfect Obedience must come in toward our justification, there being no such thing in the World, and to say that Christ merited that our imperfect Obedience should be accepted for perfect, is to say Christs death was needless, for God might as well have saved the honour of his Righteousness and justice, when Man had broken his Law, by an absolute Forgiveness, without Christs death, as to make his death of no more value, than to purchase that our lame Obedience should pass for firm, perfect Obedience? But God is Just in Justifying, God hath received full, compleat satisfaction from the Lord Jesus, and now saith, Come take the Water of Life freely, and by a Holy Con∣versation, glorifie me and do good to your selves and others.

I pass by examining his next cloudy expression, in these words, viz. This (life on some degree of our Obedience) the Covenant of Redemption secures to the Elect, tho the grant therein is pleadable only by Christ, as the Stipulating Party for us, and our personal claim depends on the Gospel Covenant wherein Christ is Mediator; which is liable enough to Exception, for his saying Gods grant is not pleadable by us, but only by Christ, whereby Mr. Williams makes way to bring in the Gospel Covenant of our degree of our Obedi∣ence, before we can claim any thing of Christ as Mediator; this I pass, and If come to his plain downright opposing the way of Salvation, accord∣ing as it is delivered us by the Apostle, by holy Martyrs, by the Homi∣lists, by famous Divines, besides Dr. Crisp, which follows, in these unscriptu∣ral words of Mr. Williams his Gospel Sanction, saith he, determins as certain a Rule as happiness and misery, as the Law of Works did, though it be not the same 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it fixeth true repentance and Faith unfeigned to be the terms of Pardon, so when it pro∣miseth Heaven to the sincerely holy persevering Believer, it fixeth sincere Holiness and Perseverance in Faith as the terms of Possessing Heaven. Hence the Ʋse of Faith, ho∣liness, &c. to those benefits is not from their conformity to the Precept, but their con∣formity to the rule of the Promise.

This long Paragraph of the Gospel Sanction of Mr. Williams his drawing, I take to be as clearly opposite to the Apostle Paul, as Arminius was to our Re∣formed Orthodox Divines, for Mr. Williams his Faith, Holiness, and the bottom∣less boundless, endless, &c. are brought in as the terms of possessing Heaven, and not only so, for that they might be as fruits of Union to Christ, but they are so, the terms as they are a Conformity to the Rule of the Promise, even as the Law of works was to the Rule of the Precept, that is, as the Law of works required a perfect Obedience in Conformity to the Precept for obtain∣ing Life. So the Gospel Sanction requires Faith, Holiness, &c. in conformity to the promise for obtaining Life, which in our ordinary Dialect is, that what perfect Obedience obtained under the Law, that imperfect Faith and holiness, &c. doth under the Gospel, which in plain terms is, Christ hath purchased that our Faith, Holiness, perseverance in new obedience under the Gospel, should pass instead of perfect Obedience under the Law, which is as diame∣trically opposite to the Apostles, not of Works, lest any boast, as East is to West, and though Mr. Williams say, these are not Works of the Law, yet they are works and good works, and such as if brought in for answering the Gospel Sanction, as perfect works did the Law, is the homest stab to the true Gospel that ever was printed by any Arminian, for there is not a tittle in all the Gospel that our Faith and holiness are so, our terms of happiness in confor∣mity to the Rule of the Promise, as obedience to the Law of works was in conformity to the Rule of the Precept; the Apostles sanction is quite other∣wise, he faith not by works of righteousness, but by his grace he hath saved

us, and not of works, lest any boast, if of works then grace is no more g•••••••• is not Faith a work, holiness is it not working; perseverance in Obedienc•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it not working? and must these come in to answer the Promise, as perfect Obedience answered the Law? What becomes then of Christs Obedience for us, to answer the Law? 'tis quite shut out of doors, and his Satisfaction too, by this Scheme and Sanction, this is so far from giving Christ the sole honour of being our perfect, compleat, alone, only Saviour, Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption, that it quite excludes him in every part of Salvation, but only his making way that we should save our selves, his obtain∣ing by his Life and Death, imputed to us, that God would be so kind to us, and unjust to himself, that our Faith, Holiness, &c. should answer the promise as unsinning Obedience should have answered the Law; this is making God a very cheat to himself, to set up a pure holy Law, the perfect Copy of his will, and mans breach of it should be made up by our imperfect, weak faith and holiness; which hath no more proportion to the infinitely holy Law, than a brass Farthing hath to a World full of Diamonds, nor so much; and yet so easie a Merchant this Doctrine would make God, by making our pretended confor∣mity to the Promise to answer the enjoyned perfect conformity to the Law. But because those of this Opinion cannot for shame bring it in to stand alone, that our Conformity to the Promise should answer instead of obedience to the law, therefore they bring in Christ to purchase this priviledge, that is, that Christ purchased that God should cheat his holiness and righteousness with a sham of Mens invention, whereas the Doctrine of the Gospel is, that God is just, and the justifier of those that believe in Jesus, who in our stead fulfilled all righteousness, for us and so became the end of the Law for righteousness sake.

And that our Faith and Holiness with the unmeasurable, &c. have nothing to do in our justification or Salvation, as a conformity to the Gospel Promise, even as perfect obedience had in conformity to the Precept (or Covenant of works) I shall shew farther by the opinion of sound Orthodox Writers, and begin with that famous Martyr in Scotland, burned Anno 1532. for adhering to salvation by Jesus Christ without works, in his Treatise set forth by Mr. John Frith an Eng∣lish Martyr in the same Cause Burned in 1533. he hath these Expressions, viz. No man∣ner of works make us right wise, and no works make us unright wise; if any evil works make us unrighteous, then the contrary works should make us righteous, the proof is we believe that a man shall be justifyed without works, Rom. 3. and we believe in Jesus Christ that we may be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the deeds of the Law, good works make not a good man, nor evil works an evil Man, but a good man bringeth forth good works, and an evil man evil works, good Fruit makes not the Tree good, nor evil Fruit the Tree evil, but a good Tree beareth good Fruit, and an evil Tree evil fruit: If works make us neither righteous nor unrighteous, then thou wilt say it maketh no matter what we do. I answer, if thou do evil it is a sure Argument thou art evil, and wantest Faith; if thou do good it is a sure Argument thou art good and hast Faith. Here is no sophistication of Faith, Holiness, Obedience, &c. answering the Rule of the Gospel promise as perfect Obedience answered the Law, and moreover he gives the reason why we are so saved by Christ, Because, saith he, Thou madest the fault and he suffered the pain, and that for the love he had for thee before thou wast born; now sith he was punished for thee, thou shalt not be punished: Finally he hath delivered thee from Condemnation, all evil, and desireth nought of thee (mark that) but that thou wilt acknowledge what he hath done for thee, and bear it in mind, and help others for his sake, as he hath helped thee for nought: Thou wilt say, Shall we then do no good deeds? I say not so, but I say we should do no good works for the intent to get the In∣heritance of Heaven, or the remission of sin. Thus this blessed Martyr asserted the Gospel, in these truths worth laying down ones life for; but I hope none will

be put to lay down their life for asserting our imperfect Obedience, answers the Gospel, as Adams perfect Obedience, If he had had it, would have answer∣ed the Law, for any to die upon such a point, would be to be a Martyr for his own Righteousness, not for asserting Christs; now comes Mr. Frith, and gives his Observations as full of Antinomianism as his Author Mr. Hamilton, or as Dr. Crisp, and just such an Antinomian as the A. Paul was, and saith; Therefore wheresoever any question or doubt ariseth of Salvation, or our justifying before God, there the Law and All good Works must be utterly excluded and stand apart, that grace may appear free, the Promise simple, and that Faith may stand alone, which faith alone with∣out Law or Works, worketh to every Man particularly his Salvation through meer promise and the free grace of God; this word particularly I add for the particular certifying of eve∣ry Mans heart privately, and particularly that believeth in Christ, so Faith is the instru∣mental Cause by which every Man applyeth the Body of Christ, particularly to his own Salvation, so that in the action and office of Justification, both Law and Works (all good Works above) be here utterly secluded and exempted, as things having nothing to do in this behalf: The reason is this, for seeing that all our Redemption universally springeth only from the body of the Son of God Crucified, then is there nothing that can stand us in stead, but that only wherewith this body of Christ is apprehended, now for so much as neither the Law nor Works, but Faith only is the thing that apprehendeth the Body and death of Christ, therefore Faith only is that matter which Justifieth every Soul before God, through the strength of that Object, which it doth apprehend, for the Object only of our Faith is the body of Christ; like as the brazen Serpent was the other only of the Israelites looking by the strength of which Object, through the promise of God immediately proceeded health to the Beholders, so the Body of Christ being the Object of our Faith, striketh righteousness to our Souls. Thus far Mr. Frith.

Here's good, sound, strong, home-spun Divinity, that came from the heart of an early English Martyr in the days of Hen. VIII. It came not from Rome or Amster∣dam, or Poland, and because the Book of our blessed Martyrs is in few hands, I'll transcribe some more of Mr. Frith's contrariety to our new way of stating Gospel Truth, hoping it may tend to the establishing Souls, whom the Sophistry of some Men may amuse with their Connexions of, &c. to Faith and Holiness in the bu∣siness of pardon of sin, to which Mr. Frith saith, as follows, In a Christian mans life there's the Law, there's Repentance, there is Hope, Charity, all which in mans Life and Doctrine are joyned, and yet in the action of justifying there is nothing else in man that hath any Part or Place but only Faith apprehending the Object, which is the bo∣dy of Christ Jesus for us Crucified, in whom consisteth all the worthiness of our Salva∣tion by Faith, that is, by our apprehending and receiving of him, according as it is written, John 1. Whosoever received him, he gave them Power to be made the Sons of God even all such as believed in his Name.

For so much therefore as the Truth of the Scripture in express words hath included our Salvation in Faith only, we are enforced necessarily to Exclude all other causes and Means in our Justification, and to make this difference between the Law and Gospel between Faith and Works, affirming with the Scripture and Word of God, that the Law condemneth us, our Works, (of all sorts) do not avail us, and that Faith in Christ doth only justifie us, and this ought diligently to be learned of all Christians, especially in all conflicts of Conscience between the Law and the Gospel, Faith and Works, Grace and Merits, Promise and Condition, Gods Free Election and Mans free Will, so that the light of the Free grace of God in our Salvation, may appear to all Consciences to the Im∣mortal glory of Gods holy Name, Amen.

Thus said this blessed Servant of the Lord Jesus, and this he sealed with his Blood, and this was good Doctrine in those days among the Reformed, this was thought worthy to be inserted in our famous Book of Martyrs, and approved by the whole Body of Christians in the Nation, and not scandalized as the same

expressions are in Dr. Crisp's Sermons. I would fain know what more stabbing words can be said against Mr. Williams Thesis or Position, than both Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Frith have insisted on, No manner of Works make us right wise, and no works make us unright-wise, and all good Works must be utterly excluded, and stand apart, that grace may appear free: Now are not Repentance, Holiness, new Obedience, per∣severance, and Mr. Williams his &c. Good works, yet they must stand apart, and be far from such a Conformity to the Rule of the Promise in our salvation, as Perfect Obedience was to the Rule of the Precept. O, that God would teach Men to, lower their high towering Opinions of our Holiness, concurring to our Salvation, and cry Grace, grace to all, from the Foundation to th•• Top-stone, still not of works (though this galls proud Flesh) lest any boast.

For a farther satisfaction in this great point, let us see what our great Men presently after the down-fall of Popery in this Nation, have said as to our works in the matter of Salvation. The Homilists say in fol. 27. All good Works spring from Faith, and cannot be done without Faith; then I argue if they spring from Faith, and that we are justifyed by Faith, then good works have no hand in our Justification, because that is over, in order of nature, before a good work sprung up, then what have we to do with Mr. Williams Gospel Obedience con∣forming to the Promise in order to pardon? The Homilists say farther, from those words, without me you can do nothing. That what work is done without Faith is sin, and without Faith all done of us is dead, and Austin saith, fol. 31. Whether thou will or no, that work that comes not of Faith is naught: There is one work in which is all good Works, that's Faith, This is the Work of God to believe in him; so that Christ called Faith the work of God, and as soon as a man hath Faith, anon he shall flourish in good Works. Thus Holy Austin was for Faith alone, without the Trum∣pery of our Obedience with, &c. in order to pardon. Mr. W. fixeth Repen∣tance and Faith with Holiness, &c. to be the Terms of Pardon. How far this, &c, goes, it may be Mr. Williams may tell us in the next Edition, or by the Athenian Mercury, but for the consolation of humble Enquirers into the truth, I'll tell them what our Homilists say of this great grace of Repentance which Mr. W. puts before Faith, and which he makes one of the terms of Pardon with his &c. in fol. 258. these Homilists say, We must return to the Lord, yea to him alone, and never rest till we have taken bold upon him, but this must be done by Faith, and he himself in his Gospel doth cry out, I am the way, the Truth and the Life, there∣fore they are greatly deceived, who preach, Repentance without Christ. (so that with the Homilists 'tis first Christs ours by Faith, then Repentance,) they that think they have done much of themselves towards Repentance, are so much more the farther from God. This is not like our new Gospel Truth stated, that a man without saving Faith in Jesus, may repent of his sins, yet say the Homilists, but 'tis such a Repentance, as Judas's, such as puts him farther from God, and in fol. 263. they confirm their Doctrine of no sound Repentance without Faith in Jesus, the way to it, and say, We must beware, we in no wise imagin we can re∣pent aright hy our own strength, for this must be verifyed in all Men, without me, you can do nothing. Mr. W. will say he owns that Christ enables us to repent, 'tis true, but doth he own a Man is in Christ, believes in Christ, before he repent, if he do not own that, then he comes not up to the Text, where Christ speak∣ing of all his to the Branches, in him, he saith upon that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, without me, or out of me you can do nothing, you cannot repent or do new Obedi∣ence if not a branch in me by Faith.

Again, in fol. 268 they say, They that preach Repentance, without a lively Faith in our Saviour. Jesus Christ, do teach Judas his Repentance: It is evident, tho' we be never so earnestly Sorry for our sins acknowledge and confess them, all these are but means to bring us to utter despair, except we do stedfastly believe that God our heavenly

Father will for his Son Jesus Christ's sake pardon and forgive us our Offences. To them I add the Testimony of as great a Scholar, and as sound a Protestant as Mr. Williams who above 100 years ago gave a better account of Faith and Holiness than Mr. W. doth, and that is Mr. Perkins, no Antinomian who saith in fol. 236. The law promises life to him that performs Obedience perfect, The Gospel promises Salvation to him that doth no∣thing in the cause of his Salvation, but only Believes in Christ; yet not for this Faith, or for any work else, but for the merit of Christ. this is a big word; what, do no∣thing in the cause of Salvation but believe? no, nothing, saith Mr. Perkins, and before Mr. Williams can confute him, he must prove Christs Righteousness ours by Faith, is meant of our Gospel Holiness; that is, God saith 'tis Christ's Righteousness, but he means quite otherwise, viz. 'tis our Gospel Holiness. Mr. Perkins is in good earnest that we are to do nothing for Salvation but believe and answer several Objections as follow.

Objection 4th. (saith Mr. Perkins) To believe is a work, therefore one work is commanded in the Gospel, and is necessary to Salvation. Answer. The Gospel considers not Faith as a Vertue or Work, but as a Hand to apprehend Christ, for Faith doth not Cause or effect or procure our Justification and Salvation but as the Beggars Hand receives them, being wholly wrought and given of God, and in fol. 247 he saith, we must first be Justified before we can do a good work, and in fol. 287. Paul teaches that works set up as Causes of Salvation with Christ make void the grace of God: And is not this making them causes of Salvation with Christ, to say Christ purchased this Grace, that our Sincere Obedience, Faith, Holiness, Perseverance, should be accepted to answer the rule of the Gospel Promise for pardon.

Well doth Mr. Perkins proceed to reject our Righteousness in the matter of Salva∣tion, and Saith in fol. 955 of vol. 1st. A mans Conscience must in some sort be settled touch∣ing his reconciliation with God, before he can begin to Repent, wherefore Justification and Sanctification in order of Nature, go before Repentance, but if we respect time, (then) Grace and Repentance are together.

This is intelligible Doctrine, and strenuous for the advancement of Christ a∣lone and the same in effect as Mr. Perkins had asserted, contrary to Mr. Williams in fol. 84. Saying, From Sanctification Repentance is derived, because no man can earnestly repent except he denying himself, do hate sin, and embrace Righteousness, this no man can perform; but such an one as is in the sight of God regenerate and Justi∣fied and indued with true Faith, and regarding the Order of Nature it follows Faith and Justification. O these are strong battering Rams against setting up mans Righ∣teousness, and in fol. 468. he gives account, whence this new Doctrine of re∣pentance having a hand in our Salvation, comes, viz. from Rome, and saith thus — The Church of Rome hath Corrupted the Antient Doctrine of Repentance (saying) That a Sinner hath in him a Natural disposition which being stir'd up by God's preventing Grace, he may, and can work together with Gods Spirit in his own Repentance: But indeed all our Repentance is to be ascribed to Gods grace wholly, Eph. 2.4. The Soul of man is not weak but stark dead in sin, and therefore it can no more prepare it self to repentance than the body being dead in the Grave can dispose it self to the last Resurrection.

O these are weighty words, and O that they might prevail in the hand of the Spirit of God to weaken mans apprehensions of something practicable in and by himself in order to bring about his Salvation, that so we might all put our Mouths in the dust, and give glory to God, for of him and through him, (es∣pecially in the matter of our Salvation) and to him be all things to whom be glory in the Churches for ever; thus much for Mr. W. Sanction of the Gospel, giving pardon on our Conformity to the Rule of the Promise.

In the next place Mr. W. asserts a profound benefit by Gospel grace, and yet it carries Poyson in it I fear, Hence by Gospel grace there is a great difference

between imperfect Faith and utter Ʋnbelief. The Poyson in the head of this Snake, I fear is, that this imperfect Faith is intended to be the upshot of Gospel Grace.

A little to descant upon this, I would offer; That if so mean a Lover of the Lord Jesus as I am, should have been telling the World the benefit of Gospel Grace, I should have flown a little higher in celebrating the Love of God therein, than to say by it, imperfect Faith differs greatly from utter Ʋnbelief; which without Gospel Grace any Child of four Years Old, will grant, That can tell there is a great difference between a little mess of Milk and none at all. I should have said, By Gospel Grace there is a great difference between our Lord Jesus freely given us, and with him all things, even himself, to be our Wis∣dom, Righteousness, &c. And being slaves of Satan, sold under sin, without this gospel grace, I should have invited the World to rejoyce in this Benefit by Gos∣pel Grace, That Christ was made sin for us, that he might be made righteous∣ness to us, or become the Lord our Righteousness: And that by Gospel Grace, God com••s to justify the Ungodly, to save Sinners, of whom the Apostle saith, He was chief, and a Pattern of them who should afterward believe to everlasting life; this is right gospel grace, worthy of the Father, Son, and Spirit, to give, Purchase, and Communicate. I should scarce have flamm'd the World off with such a dead Carcass of Divinity, as to say, If you look for the glorious Pri∣viledge and Benefit of Gospel Grace, which the Father, Son, and Spirit, have been contriving, and rejoycing in from all Eternity, and which the Eternal Blessed Son of God, took Man's Nature for, and for which he was under the Curse of God, and died, for which all the Angels and Saints of God for ever adore him: It was, that this should be published. That there is by the Gospel Grace a great difference between imperfect Faith and utter Unbelief, or which is much at one, between an Essentiality and a Nullity, between something and nothing; there is so great difference as is between Heaven and Hell; and this difference is eternal, and so would have been without any thing of the Gos∣pel. I suppose Mr. W. means, though he is unhappy in not expressing it, that by Gospel Grace, imperfect Faith is accepted for perfect Obedience, that is to say, if it be joyned with sincere Holiness, true Repentance, and Perseverance, &c. but this is still wide from the mark of Gospel Grace; for the Apostle saith, It brings Salvation, and teaches Godliness.

But Mr. W. will make the World amends, it may be hoped, in the next Bene∣fit by Gospel Grace, which take as follows: By gospel grace there is a great difference between sincere Holiness and formal Profaneness or Wickedness; one would wonder how gospel grace comes to be hookt into this Difference, which all the World would own to be infinitely different without any grace of God in the Gospel. Did our Lord Jesus shed his Blood for this Notion to be asserted? which was as true without any grace of the gospel, as with it; but it may be he means that by gospel grace there is a Purchase made, that sincere Holi∣ness shall stand instead of perfect Holiness, which Wickedness could not do: And this he must mean or nothing, and if he means this, he perfectly over∣throws the gospel, and if he do not mean it, he abuses the World with an Amusement. The next is, True Love to God and prevailing Enmity. There is by Gospel Grace (he saith) great difference between these. But this is another great mistake, which I am confident he will he ashamed to own: What hath the gospel to do to make this great difference? By the law is the Knowledge of sin, and the gospel shews grace; but to say the gospel makes this difference, is to roh God of the Holiness of his righteous Law. But supposing this Non∣sense to be current Divinity with some, that by gospel Grace there is great difference between God and the Devil, or Love to God, and prevailing Enmi∣ty:

What is this to the point Mr. Williams is labouring to make good, that there is to be a Conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the person to be pardon∣ed; for proof of which, he saith, There is great difference between Love of God and prevailing Enmity. Would he have his meaning to be, that love of God is conforming to the Rule of the Promise, therefore an ingredient to Pardon, which Enmity is not. I answer, Love of God is as much conforming to the Rule of the Law as of Gospel grace; and so his Argument faces; had he said, the Law com∣mands us to love God, and the Gospel promiseth to write this Law in our hearts, though not as an ingredient to our Pardon, there might be some Edification by it; but to assert, there is a difference between these two, which was ever so, is of no more force for his Argument, than to say, Black and White differ, or I and Doctor C. d••ffer. His next is like the three former Differences, viz. by Gospel grace there is a great difference between in perfect spiritual Duties and Re∣bellious Negle••ts. Now he hath spun a fine Thread; heres the end of his Gos∣pel grace; it hath made this difference; and would not this difference have been, if we had never heard of the Gospel? What Riches of grace is this in Mr. Williams's gospel! the sum whereof is, It hath made a difference between Faith and Unbelief, Holiness and Profaneness, Love and Enmity, Duty and Re∣bellion. O what Encomiums must the World raise to such a Discoverer of that which Nature, without either Law or Gospel, teaches every man! But some hidden Treasure must lye under this Rubbish of Divinity; 'tis not for no∣thing, that Gospel grace is dignified with procuring these four Blessings: there∣fore Mr. W. must mean that Conformity to the Rule of the Promise, is in our im∣perfect Faith, sincere Holiness, love of God and spiritual Duties; and these are the Conditions on which the gospel promiseth pardon; now how correspon∣dent Mr. Williams gospel is to the Prophet Isaiah's Account, the world may judge from Isaiah 43.25. I even I am he that blotteth out thy Transgressions, for mine own sake. This is the Rule for Pardon, in the sense of Doctor Crisp, and of all that love the Lord Jesus, for obtaining this gospel grace, and for those that differ, I beseech the Lord to open their Eyes, and subdue their Hearts to the simplicity of the gospel, that they may lay down their strong Reasonings, which indeed are foolishness not only with God, but to every Child of seven Years old, that hath learnt his Assemblies Catechism. But now I think on't, Mr. Wil∣liams hath slur'd that by his new unsound one; come we next to his Conclusion of his great point of our Conformity to the Rule, in order to obtain pardon, wherein he saith thus, God in dispensing of gospel promised Blessings, doth judicially determine a conformity to THIS Rule of the Promise. We must observe that decisive word this Rule, no gospel Blessing, without a Conformity to this Rule, that is, the four Pillars of his Babel; to build Pardon upon, our imperfect Faith, our sincere Holiness, our love of God, our spiritual Duties, which include every Precept, Counsel, and Direction in the Bible; as much as to say, Stand by, blessed Jesus, I have heard of thy pretious Blood, a Ransom; I have heard of thy saving to the uttermost all that come to God by thee; I have heard of thy passing by, when poor Sinners lay in their Blood dead in Sins, and saying, Live; I have heard, thou didst say, Publicans and Harlots go into the Kingdom of God before you Pha∣risees, that justify your selves, M••••h. 21.3••. But there is risen up in this last Age, a Generation of strong Reasoners, that say, Our formal Pardon is not in thy Blood, but we must get it, as it were by the VVorks of the Law, by Faith, Ho∣liness, Perseverance, Love, Spiritual Duties; and this Doctrine, O Jesus, I must ad∣here to, or I shall be accounted a Dethroner of thee, and an enervater of thy Laws, though there is not one word either in the Law or Gospel, that enjoyns these as Conditions to obtain Pardon. But thy Righteousness is by them interpreted to be our gospel Holiness; and upon this they ground our obtaining Pardon, not by

the one work of the Law, Thou shalt love the Lord with all thine heart, but by the many works of the gospel. O that ever mens Learning and Parts, should be so vitiated as to decry the simplicity of the Truth, as it is in Jesus! Be∣lieve in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved; set up their Scheme of a gospel Promise of Pardon, upon a Conformity to this prescribed Rule of Du∣ties innumerable, besides Repentance, Faith, Love, sincere Holiness, Perseverance, Obedience; and when all this is mentioned, there comes in a boundless, &c. O to the Law, and to the Testimonies, let tis say, which directs us plainly, Look to me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the Earth, come unto me, and ye shalt find rest for your Souls.

After all this Pudder Mr. Williams comes to himself, and also Doctor Crisp, and though he had been setting up his Connexions and Conformity in Faith, Holiness, Obedience, &c. At last he comes to Bellarmins's Tutissimum, to the Sheet Anchor, To the alone true Gospel way of Salvation, true uniting Faith in Christ. I was in an Amazement to find, that God extorted this Confession from him after his long Deviation, That true uniting Faith was the Wedding Garment. This is like a Minister of the gospel of our Lord Jesus, if he can stay here; but alas! the next Page throws this good Mist down; however, we will make much of this; for here he Centers with the choicest Christians, when he saith thus, God upon a View of his guests, he cast out him that had not on the Wedding Garment, viz. true uniting Faith. Then I, quaere, What's become of the Long Bed-Roll of Spiritual Duties, Faith, Love, Repentance, Holiness, Obedience, &c. If true uniting Faith be the Wedding garment, sure this Wedding garment was not worn without Pardon of Sins, through the Blood of Christ, washing them off from this guest; if this were by true uniting Faith, and nothing else, was lookt after by the Master of the Feast, but that his Guests owned him by wearing him their Righteousness by Faith; then avoid the Scheme of our holy Performances from having any thing to do in our being admitted to fit with the King at his round Table.

But what shall we say, unstable as water Reuben was; no sooner hath Mr. Williams writ clear gospel, that nothing but true uniting Faith kept a Man from being cast out; but the next Clause brings in persevering Holiness, with the Train of all spiritual Duties, to give admittance to the wise Virgins; so that one while we are justified by Faith, another while by persevering Holiness. If you are to go to the Wedding Feast, you are to put on true uniting Faith: If you are to enter with the Bridegroom to the Marriage, then 'tis the Spirit of grace, and persevering Holiness gains you admittance; these are his words, As by keep∣ing out the foolish Virgins, for not having Oyl in their Lamps, viz. the Spirit of grace, and persevering Holiness; so by admitting the wise Virgins, he judicially declared, they had a Spirit of grace and persevering Holiness. Here's not one word of Faith, or of Christ, or of his Righteousness; for these poor Virgins to get into the Wed∣ding House by; not one syllable of being justified by Faith: But according to his sense, they said to Christ, Lord, we have the Spirit of grace, and persevering Holiness; we have prophesied in thy Name against too much exalting Free Grace; we have done many wonderful Works; we have persevered in our Holiness till thy coming. But will Christ give them admission on this Plea of a Spirit of grace, and ho∣liness, without a word of Faith in our Lord Jesus? No sure, he will say, I know you not, you would not know me to be your Righteousness: You come in your gospel Holiness; I know you not.

This is to make the gospel yea and nay. 'Tis yea to day, true uniting Faith gains admittance to day, 'tis nay to morrow; now persevering Holiness doth it. This is giving an uncertain Sound; whereas the Promises are the

same to day, yesterday, and for ever, and all, yea, and Amen, in Christ Jesus; If true Faith be the Wedding Garment, our wearing Christs Righteousness, the same true Faith is that which receives the Oyl into our Vessels, the blood or righteousness of Jesus, ours by Faith, or the Spirit of Life, which is in Christ Jesus, Rom 8.2. This Christ dwelling in our Hearts by Faith, Christ dwelling in us by the holy Spirit, is the true Oyl that the Wise Virgins gain admittance by.

His next Clause is, the advancing into our Justification God's terms of forgiving, adopting, glorifying as Rector, by believing, &c. This, &c. hath a great hand in forgiving, I suppose it wonderful to every Judicious R••ader, that a Gentleman of great Parts and sense should blend the Gospel thus, as to make the Gospel Blessings to be disperst by God, with regard to our being Believers, &c. that is, to our being Believers, and performing all the Duties prescribed in the Gospel; he puts it only God hath a regard to it, but the plain English must be, God doth so regard our performing this Act of believing, &c. and that till death, and not only so, but all other Gospel Duties, that if we do not perform them, God dispenses no gospel Blessing, so that we are still under a Covenant of Works, but let us see the true lineaments of this new Gospel, which is in these words of Mr. Williams. Thus, Can any think that Forgiving, Adopting, Glorifying, or the conveyance of every other promised Benefit, given on Gods terms are not Judicial acts of God as Rector; if so, doth he dispense these blindly and promiscuously, without any regard to our being Believers, &c. or no? I suppose Mr. W. will be accounted more hold than becomes him, to insinuate that God dispenses his Blessings blindly, if he do not bestow them in his way, upon his terms of our being Believers, &c. O that men were humble, and in pretend∣ing to oppose Dr. Crisp they did not speak indecently of God, by calling him a blind giver of Benefits, if he give them not according to our prescriptions of his rectoral Government: God gives freely, God gives before we have done good or Evil; God shews mercy, because he will shew mercy; God saves the chief of sinners in the Career of sin; God therefore speaks comfortably, be∣cause Israel went after her Lovers, and pardons sin because it is great; his ways in shewing mercy, are past finding out, justifying the Ungodly, and not calling the Righteous; and yet God dispenses not blindly and promiscu∣ously, though he do not do it in Mr. W. way of having some regard to our being Believers, Repenters, Perseverers, &c. Vain man would be wiser than God, when God saith, Not for your sakes do I this, be it known unto you, but for mine holy Names sake, which ye have prophaned among the Heathen. Will Mr. W. be so bold as to think God dispenses his Blessings blindly, because he doth not give them on those terms he hath prescribed; We see Gods terms, here are for his Names sake which they prophaned; prophaning Gods Name was all that God had regard to on their part, it was his own holy name was his only inducement, his holy, free, gratious Covenant in which his holy name was engaged, not our be∣ing believers, Perseverers in spiritual Duties, &c.

The like ground God looks at and regards in his delivering Israel in Deut. 7.7. not their being more excellent than other People, but his own love of them, The Lord did not set his love upon you, and ch••se you, because you were more than o∣ther people, for you were the fewest of all People, but because the Lord loved you, these are Gods Terms, he loved and chose because he loved: Sure Mr. Williams will not say God had regard to their holiness in dispensing his bl••ssings to them, before the gospel shined in its lustre through our Lord Jesus, and must God be charged with blind promiscuous dispensing blessings now under clear gospel light, if he now shew mercy in a soveraign way of grace to gross sinners, without regard to any good they do, while he suffer the Righteous in their own Eyes to perish in their own righteousness. O let us not prescribe rules

and terms to God for his bestowing mercy, but thankfully accept his grace and mercy in our Lord Jesus, freely given, because he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens. Well, but Mr. W. will confirm his Position, and that by Scripture too, though strained thus, With respect to what's above declared, the gospel is called a Law of Faith, a law of liberty: It is true, the gospel is called in opposition to the Law of works, a Law of Faith, but I think in the stream of the whole Bible, David could not find a fitter stone to sling into the Head of this great Goliath, mans righteousness to joyn with Christs than this Scripture; Mr. Williams is setting up a righteousness of Works or gospel Holiness, for ushering in pardon, and to prove it, saith the gospel is called a Law of Faith, but let us see how 'tis so called in Rom. 3.26, 27. To declare his righteousness that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus, where is boasting then? it is excluded, by what Law, of Works? Nay, but by the law of Faith. Here the Apostle setly and solemnly treats of excluding works, and of our being justified by Faith without works of all sorts, and positively as∣serts, God is just in justifying the Believer; God could not be just in justifying according to the Arminian way, for our imperfect holiness, or having any regard to it in the matter of Justifying, but God is just in justifying a Be∣liever, because the Believer hath a perfect compleat righteousness of Christ put upon him to answer the Law by, and God looking upon him compleat in Christ, is just in Justifying him. The Apostle having laid this ground work to damn all self-righteousness or works, even Faith as a work in the matter of Justification; he comes and makes a challenge directly against Mr. Williams's Doctrine, of our sincere holiness concurring to pardon, and saith where is boasting then? Where are all these great Advancers of mans righteousness, which tends to boasting? and he gives the stabbing answer, It is excluded: God hath not lest the least Crevice for it to enter by, 'tis wholly excluded, 'tis shut out from ever having any thing to do in our salvation; yet may one say, 'tis shut out by the Law of Works, the old Moral Law, do and live; we grant that, but there is a gospel holiness will let in boasting again; I must re∣pent, believe, be sincerely holy, and persevere therein all my days, and God hath regard to this in my Justification: no, no, 'tis wholly shut out, there is to be no boasting, and 'tis shut out by the law of Faith, by that Faith I just now mentioned; all you have to do in the point of Justification is, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved. Do these Men seek a Law? here's the Law, this is his Commandment, that you believe in the name of the Lord Jesus, John 3.23. when they said, What shall we do that we might work the works of God, Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe in him whom he hath sent, so the Apostle here, do you seek, a Law that excludes from boasting, I'll tell. you the Law, 'tis the law of Faith to believe on him that is just, and the justifier of the Ungodly upon his believing, and yet this Mr. W. brings for confirmation of his sincere holiness, that God regards in his giving pardon. But thus it pleaseth God to confound the wise by quo∣ting a Text in order to adulterate it, when in the Issue, no Text is more sharp upon him.

A farther Confirmation of his setting up works for concurring to pardon, is in the next words thus. And it (the gospel) specially insists on that sincerity of grace and holiness, which the rule of the Promise makes necessary in its description of the Person, whom it makes partaker of its included Benefit; sure never was the free grace and love of God to Man so fetter'd and obscured, by dark expressions; had any Sophister industriously set himself to vitiate the true meaning of Gods Love in these words, God so loved the World, that he gave his only beloved Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlast∣ing

life; he could not possibly, I think have done it worse, than to explain hem in Mr. W. expressions, of the gospel insisting on grace, and that sincere, and on holiness; and that such as the rule of the Promise makes necessary, and that rule of the Promise is in its description of the Person to be benefited by it, which description must needs be the whole word of God, and when this person hath all that holiness that we find the word of God recommends, then this person by this rule with this holiness, is partaker of an included benefit. God of his rich mercy pour out his Spirit and grant his Servants may be in∣abled to deliver his clear plain Scripture offers of life and Salvation by Jesus Christ, with clearer Evidence than this, Is this the way of confuting Dr. C. who asserts Gospel Grace in plain Gospel Terms; That Christ came to seek and save the lost, that he seeks and finds his lost sheep, and brings them home upon his Shoulders, that he carries the Lambs in his Arms, and gently leads those with young, and instead of such Soul-saving encouragements, to poor sin∣ners, to put them off with our grace and holiness, and not a word of Gods sa∣ving them in Christ, but our coming up to the rule which the promise makes necessary? And who shall be able to say, when he hath done all, that he comes up to Mr. Williams rule of believing, &c. his Obedience, &c. his persevering, &c. from such stating of Gospel Truth, O Lord deliver thy People.

Now we come to the Use Mr. Williams makes of his premises of salvation, from our conformity to Gospel rule of new obedience, &c. which he summs up in few words, viz. And the main of our Ministry consists in pressing men to An∣swer the Rule of the Gospel Promise. But the main of the Apostles was, to know nothing but Christ and him crucified, and to press men to be found in him, and so Mr. W. once did when he preach'd that Christ indured the utmost, God ba∣ted him nothing, the atonement was so compleat that God can demand no other from Christ, or from any Soul this Atonement is applyed to. This he deduced from this Doctrine, The reconciling of sinners to God is effected by the concurring influence of the Priestly and Kingly Office of Christ. Well then, Christ hath effected this recon∣ciliation; what remains for poor man to do, but accept it and be thankful, not to come in with his Gospel Holiness, for God to have regard to in our re∣conciliation to God. But it seems this stream of Gospel grace must not run so clear, now in his Book; here must be conformity to Gospel Rule, before we have any benefit by Christ, which consists in Repentance, Faith, &c. to all the rest, and now this is prest, and the main of our Ministry consists in this, whereas the main of the Apostles, was to beseech Men to be reconciled to God, because God was in Christ, and when upon the Cross, reconciling the world to himself, when by one Offering he for ever perfected the Work, and cryed out, it is finished; and then after Union, after engrafting into Christ; after being in a blessed state of Salvation, secured so as never to fall away, then the Apostle presses to walk worthy of this Gospel, of this free Salvation by Jesus Christ.

Mr. Williams proceeds, viz. We call men to be reconciled to God, upon which we know God will be at peace with them. This I thought it would come to at last, First, we must come to God and be reconciled to him, and then God will be at peace with us, which is just contrary to the Apostle, when we were Enemies, we were reconciled, Rom. 5.10. But when Men will be pampering with our holiness, for God to look to in our acceptance in Christ, they will fall into a Covenant of Works, and call it Gospel Grace, that our works are accepted, in order to our Justification and Salvation; we must first be recon∣ciled to God, saith Mr. W. that is, we must first comply with the gospel rule, of not only Faith, but Holiness, Repentance, and perseverance in new Obe∣dience, and having thus brought our selves to that reconciled posture, then

God will be at peace; is this fulfilling Christs commission, Go Preach the gos∣pel to every Creature, he that believeth shall be saved? Is this proclaiming the acceptable year of the Lord, When thou wast in thy Blood, I said to thee, Live, and for mine own Name sake, I will remember their sins no more? God waits to be gracious, knocking at the Door of poor sinners hearts, crying, Open to me, let me come in, I bring my Supper, I bring my Son, only let him in, only receive him by Faith, God don't say, my Son and I will be at peace with you after you have washt you and made your selves clean; but he comes to tell you he loved you and washt you from your sins in his blood on the Cross, and you that believe in me are the Persons: I was reconciled to you then, and am come now to offer it to you, and beseech you to be reconciled to me: Thus with these words of his first love, he draws poor sinners to be reconciled to him, and do not damp their Comforts by telling them, I will be at peace, if you be reconciled to me, but revives their hearts by tel∣ling them that the peace is already wrought in God and for sinners, by Christ at his death, for that he made peace by the Blood of his Cross and by him reconciled all to himself, Col. 1.20. Christ did not stay till we were recon∣ciled to him, as Mr. W. seems to intimate, when he calls men to be reconci∣led to God, upon which he knows, God will be at peace with them. This I take to be setting the Cart before the Horse, to invite Men to be reconciled thereby, to get God to be at peace, whereas the sweet heavenly strain of the gospel is, Come, for all things are ready, come to Jesus who is already made of God, to you that come, Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption, who is the Author and finisher of your Faith. O Jesus, thus draw and we will run after thee, and thus he hath drawn thousands by the Prophets, and A∣postles preaching, and his faithful Servants after him, to come to God, and to holy Obedience in Love, whereas the legal drawing, of walking holily, and then God will be at peace, keeps poor Souls in perpetual doubts, and works the Soul but to a Spirit of Bondage.

Next comes the Top-stone of this New system of gospel Truth, which looks as if it were hewed and squared at Rome, with only a little Varnish at Am∣sterdam, viz. These things (Gods promising life by forgiveness, and yee insisting on some Degree of Obedience) will help thy Conceptions, still remembring that the merit of Christ are the cause of this gospel Ordination. Can any spiritual inlightned mind read this, and not blush for Mr. W. and think he is hard put to it to support his cause, of laying our salvation on our gospel holiness joyned with Christs righteous∣ness, when he flies to such an Assertion as the Papists have been forced to forsake, being beaten out of that Trench by our great Divines: That Christ merited, that we should merit, this they asserted, but found it would not hold water, therefore Bellarmin flies to his Tutissimum, and saith in his Book de Justif. l. 5. ch. 7. pro. 3. Propter incertitudinem propriae Justitiae & periculum inanis gloriae, Tutissimum est totam fiduciam in sola Dei misericordia & benignitate reponere. Because of the uncer∣tainty of our own righteousness, and the danger of vain glory, it is safest to put all our trust in the alone mercy and bounty of God. Here the Jesuit flies from the gospel Ordination that Christ merited, that God should have regard to our gospel ho∣liness, and our conformity to gospel Rule, for obtaining gospel promise; this chimed well with him in his long arguments for Justification by works, but up∣on his review of his strong reasons, he flies from it and betakes himself to Gods meer mercy and bounty, which must be in Christ, and so I hope the great opposer of Dr. Crisp will do.

But in regard this is so broad and wide a gap, to let in the whole body of self Justiciaries, with their good works to come in for sharing with Christ in salvation: I must make some opposition to it, both from Scripture and sound

Protestants. The merits of Christ, saith Mr. W. are the cause of this Ordination, that is, that our answering the gospel rule obtains us interest in the gospel Promise, or which is all one, Do and live; Christ merited that if we do we shall live, the only difference is the first doing and live, was perfect Obedience to the Law, and this doing and live of Mr. VV. is sincere obedience to the gospel in all its commands, counsels, &c. which every true Christian trembles to think on.

Is this the upshot of Christs Death, to merit, that our Gospel Obedience should be the ground of our obtaining Benefit by Christ; then I say again, it must come to this, that Christ merited that we should merit; for there can be no benefit to a Sinner, but by merit; Christ did not absolutely merit the Be∣nefit for us, say they, but merited that we doing so, and so, should obtain the Benefit; then our, doing so and so, must merit it; for it is injustice of God to himself, and his Righteous broken Law, to give a Sinner that deserves Hell any good, unless that good be merited: and this is left to the Sinner, to obtain by Gospel Obedience, which therefore, must of necessity be from me∣rit. So that here it must rest, or we make God unjust to himself, and so say, Christ purchas'd this, that we should do so, is Nonsense. Mr. Williams can hardly assoyle himself from this Charge, till he retract this Assertion, That the merits of Christ are the cause of that Gospel Ordination he had laid down. As for the Scriptures that oppose this Divinity, those already mentioned are abun∣dantly more than sufficient to throw down the House built on this Sandy Foundation, as that God so loved the World, that whosoever believes in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. Here is nothing required, but believing to ever∣lasting life. So the Apostle, Acts 16. Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved. Here's complying with no other Gospel Rule for Salvation, but belie∣ving in the Lord Jesus: To which I may add, the whole Stream of the New Testament, to come and take the Water of Life freely, Rev. 22. They that hunger and thirst after this Righteousness of Christ, they shall be filled. If God by his grace have begot a true hunger, a true desire after it, they shall have it, Come to me, if weary, if laden; cast your self on me, and you shall find rest for your Souls: But the great Scripture is, Not to him that worketh, not to him that thinks to obtain gospel Benefits, by complying with gospel Rule of walking in holy Obedience, to obtain pardon by it, but to him that believes on him that justifies the Ʋngodly. This Scripture is enough to confound the whole Scheme of the new fashion'd stating of gospel Truth: The Apostle states gospel Truth thus, Not to him that worketh; no Works at all must come in in the business of our Salvation, as concurring to it: Thus the Apostle held, saith Mr. Williams, This lets in Licentiousness; I have found a better way of star∣ing gospel Truth, that is, To him that worketh, to him that complies with gospel Rule, to him that is godly, not his Faith alone, but his Faith with sin∣cere Obedience: That is his gospel Holiness, which the Apostle intends, when he speaks of being found in the Righteousness of God by Faith: this gives right to gospel Benefits. O what heart touched with love to the Lord Jesus, and poor Souls, but must ake to see the gospel thus mangled, and the Crown upon our gospel Obedience, jointly with Christ! If this be not Evacuating, and Inva∣lidating the compleat Mediation and Atonement of the Lord Jesus, then what can do it? For he will not have any Co-workers with him for Justification and Salvation: Though by his Spirit he makes all his Regenerate ones Co-workers with him in the carrying on the Work of Sanctification.

Not to multiply Scriptures in a matter so strenuously contended against by the Apostle, of our Works, concurring to our Salvation. I shall only add at present, that great Text, 2 Tim. 1.9. who hath saved us, and called us, not ac∣cording

to our Works: Here's a perfect Renunciation of VVorks, even VVorks of all sorts, before Faith and after Faith: He don't say, VVho saved us not for our VVorks, but not according to our VVorks; our VVorks have no according∣ness in them to our Salvation; they have no concurrence in that point; they are left quite out: Here's no room for Gospel Obedience in complying with Gospel Rule to obtain life: No, not a word of that; 'tis so far from being for our Works, that 'tis not according to our works, God hath no regard to them in saving and calling. He hath saved: How? He saved by calling us: How is that? Did he not call us to Salvation, upon seeing us comply with the Gospel Rule? No, he saved us, and called us, not according to our Works. How then? Then, it is in a way that amazes the Scholastick World, a way that will not go down with the wise and prudent of this world. It is according to his grace (not our grace) according (I say) to his own grace given us in Christ, before the world began. O be amazed and confounded all that would state Gospel Truth any other way than God hath stated it, for the everlasting comfort of all those bles∣sed ones whom God hath shewed their Election to, by their effectual Call to come to Christ; he hath saved, 'tis already done, and that not according to humane stating Gospel Truth, not according to our Works, that way would leave us always under Suspitions and Jealousies to our dying day; but according to his ancient everlasting Love, and that given to us as lookt upon in Christ, when chosen in him before they had done good or evil, before the world began, that the pur∣pose of God according to Election, might stand: Here the Apostle leaves it, and so will I, as to Scripture Confutation of his Gospel Ordination; and because Mr. Williams may not say, This is but one Doctors Opinion, when he saith Doctor Crisp Dethrones Christ, by rejecting holy Works from concurring to Salvation, I shall spend some pains and time, begging it may be acceptable Service in the Lord, in shewing what several Servants of God of good Name, say to this point: I begin with Mr. Veale, a Gentleman not in the least inclining to Antinomians, in his Sermon against Merits, Morn. Lect. fol. 437. He shuts out gratious Works from ha∣ving any hand or concurrence in our Salvation, by this expression, viz. It is muche that he (God) doth not damn you for your good Works, seeing they are all defiled, and have something of Sin cleaving to them. What becomes of our Gospel Holi∣ness now, and sincere Obedience, in the case of Salvation? What, all good works sin! then they are dung. Well, but hath not Christ merited such a Gospel Ordination, as our answering the Gospel Rule of holy Obedience, though imperfect, it shall interest us in Gospel Blessings. To this Mr. Veale saith, in fol. 417. It is in vain to say, that Christ hath merited for the Saints a power of meriting; The Papists can never prove that Christ merited any such Power for Believers. It is really more for his honour to purchase all for them himself; but Mr. Williams will say, I do not say Christ merited, that we should merit; no, but he saith, Christ merited God should regard our works in Justification and in our Salvation: What's that, but coming in as it were by Works, not with a down-right rejecting of Christ, but with a side-wind bringing in our works. Christ merited that we should do something in our salvation: And what's that? In plain English, they give us a right to the Gospel Benefits, which in some sense is worse than down-right Popery, in as much as Popery makes our works meritorious of life, in that Christ hath put an infinite value on them by his merits, and so makes our works so valuable, as to compensate the Justice of God for our sins, and so still maintain the honour of God's Righteousness in forgiving sin on a valuable consideration of our works made, by Christ, meritorious of it: Whereas the middle way found out by some, makes God so gracious as by virtue of Christ's Mediation God accepts of imperfect defective gospel Holiness as perfect, for Christ's sake, and thereupon Forgives: How near this comes to Mr. W's. stating the gospel Ordination, may be easily be judged. Mr. Veale leaves Mr. Williams to stand by himself as to Gospel Holiness, giving an Interest in the Blessings, and saith 'tis only an evidence of Faith, and gives no Title, in fol. 421. Hope of Life (saith

he) may be helped on by Obedience and good Works, because they are an Evidence of his Faith, and so of his Interest in Christ; but there is a vast difference between a man's taking comfort in his Obedience, as the evidence of his Title to glory, and Trusting in it, as that which gives him Title.

I come next to Mr. Doelittle, fol. 195. of Morning Lecture, who gives an account of the Protestants and Papists Doctrine of Justification: First, he sums up the Apostles Doctrine of Justification, not to him that works, as D••vid describes the blessedness of the Man to whom the Lord imputes Righteousness, not imput∣ing their Trespasses to them; for he made him to be sin for us, that we might be the Righteousness of God: Then he quotes the Protestant Doctrine thus, We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our Works.

Those whom God effectually calls he freely justifies, not by infusing Righteousness into them [mark that against the Gospel Ordination of God's regarding our Holiness] but by pardoning their Sins, and by accounting and accepting their Persons as righteous, not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone, im∣puting the Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ to them, they receiving and resting on him and his Righteousness by Faith. I think nothing can be more opposite than this Account of Protestant Faith (where is not a word of our Holiness to Justificati∣on) and Mr. Williams's, which is made up of Gospel Obedience, Gospel Rule, Gospel Ordination of sincere Holiness, regarded by God in our Justification. This Protestant Doctrine he confirms by referring to a cloud of Witnesses a∣gainst our new Divinity, viz. The Helvetian Confession, the Bohemian, Gallican, Augustane, Belgick, Wittemberg, and Basil. Then follows the Popish Trent Justifica∣tion: Justification is not only forgiveness of sin, but also Sanctification of the sinner, whereby a Man of unjust is made just; (and Mr. Williams like this complying with gospel Rule, gives right to gospel Blessing,) The Papists, go on and say, the only formal Cause of Justification is the Righteousness of God, not wherewith be himself is righteou••, but whereby he makes us righteous. I know Mr. Williams in words denies our Sanctification to be a part of our Justification, but in the whole scope of his Argument, he makes our gospel Holiness to be lookt upon by God as ha∣ving a concurrence in our Justification; and this is his gospel Ordination, and in full conformity to the Popish Justification by God's Righteousness, whereby we are renewed: His last clause of the Popish Article about Justification suits extremely with Mr. Williams's fling at Doctor Crisp, as dethroning Christ for mak∣ing Christ the alone cause of our Salvation, without any thing of our works concurring: And thus saith the Council of Trent, If any one shall say, that a Man is justified by the s••le imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, or in the sole remission of sin, excluding grace and charity, which is shed abroad in their hearts, by the holy Spi∣rit, and is inherent in him, or that the grace whereby we are justified is only the sa∣vour of God; let him be accursed. This I take to be asserted by the Papists, in op∣position to the Protestant Doctrine; so that the Protestant Doctrine was what they accurst, and what Mr. Williams in effect accurseth, saying the holding it is de∣throning Christ: VVell then, the Papists curse those that say, a man is justi∣fied by the sole imputation of Christ's Righteousness, without any grace or chari∣ty. VVhat's become then of Mr. Williams's gospel Holiness, sincere Obedience, that God looks at in the gospel Rule, to obtain the gospel Promise; again, they curse those that say, our Justification is by the alone savour of God (or freely by his grace, Rom. 3.25.) VVhat doth Mr. Williams less, in falling foul on Doctor Crisp, and all that wholly exclude every thing of man in the business of Justificati∣on, and say, they enerv••te Christ's government, and open a door to all Licentious∣ness? Whereas the contrary is most true, that the grace of God appearing, teaches to deny all ungodliness. My next Opposer of Mr. W's Gospel Ordination, is a great maul to Arminianism; that is, the Learned, Pious Mr. Perkins, who saith in fol. 576 of Vol. 1. Thus the Papists say, Christ merited that our good Works merit: And answers, This is a dotage of their devising, for Christ merited pardon for sin impuation of his Righteousness, and Life eternal. And fol. 104. To say Christ merited that our works merit this takes away Christ's Intercession, &

I may add to say, our Holiness comes in toward our Justification doth the same. Mr. Perkins comes closer in Vol. 2 fol. 205. It may be objected (saith he) there is a co-operation of works and faith: I answer, That this co-operation is not in the Act of Justification, nor in the Work of our Salvation, but in the manifestation of the truth and sincerity of our Faith, and for the de∣claration of this, Faith and Works jointly concur. Here then is a pestilent and damnable Doct∣rine of the Papists, when they teach Justification by the Wo••ks of the Law. And what is it to teach Justification by the Works of the Gospel, which never had a Promise of Justi∣fication to it, whereas the Works of the Law once had before Adam's Fall. In Fol. 236. He turns perfect Antimonian, with our Homilists, if some men may censure him, and saith thus, The Gospel promises Life to him that doth nothing in the cause of his Salvation, but on∣ly Believes in Christ. This is dangerous Doctrine in Doctor Crisp, because it spoils Mr. W's Gospel Ordination of Works and Faith going together in Justification, but hath for this 100 years been good sound Doctrine in Perkins, and the Homilies too. He proceeds in fol. 237. and saith thus, Believing and doing are opposed in the Article of our Justification. —In our good Conversation, they agree, Faith goes before, and doing follows; but in the Work of Justification, they are as Fire and Water. This is a fatal stroke to the new Gospel Ordination, and a full concurrence with Dr. Crisp, though Mr. Wil∣liams call this a dethroning Christ.

Mr. Perkins could not expect to be taken for an Oracle, so that by his ipse Dixit, that every one should receive his Positions, tho' he grounded them on plain Scrip∣ture, therefore he strengthens his Assertion by the sayings of the Fathers, with which I farther oppose Mr. W's. Gospel Ordination, and confirm Dr. C. in fol. 537. Mr. Perkins saith, The Fathers do hold Faith only to be requisite to Justifi∣cation, even without the Works of Grace. Chrysostom saith, in Hom. 7. in Cap. 3. Rom. What is the Law of Faith? (saith he) To be saved by Grace; here he shew∣eth the Power of God, in that he not only saved us, and that without use of any works, exacting only Faith of us. And Theodoret on Eph. 2. We have not believed of our own accord, but came being called, and when we are come, he doth not exact Purity, and Innocency of Life, but hath Pardoned our sins, accepting of Faith only. And Basil Ser. de hum. This it is to glory in the Lord, when a man is not puffed up with his own righteousness, but acknowledgeth himself destitute of all true righteousness, and Justified by Faith alone in Jesus Christ. They are justifyed before God, saith Ambrose, on Rom. 4. Without any labour, or Toyl, by only Faith, no Works of Penitence being hereto required, but only that they believe. This Cloud of Witnes∣ses, is enough to cover and wholly extinguish the Gospel Ordination of Mr. Williams, without any Comment on them.

Mr. Williams next Assertion is a Chip of the same block, thus; His (Christs) Righteousness imputed, is the cause for which we are Justified when we do answer the Gospel Rule. Here's no mincing the matter, of bringing in our Sanctifica∣tion into our Justification, for Mr. Williams tells us plainly what our answering the Gospel Rule is, viz. Some degrees of Obedience, Repentance, Love, imper∣fect Faith, Persevering, &c. Thus while in words he pretends to separate San∣ctification from Justification, yet here he really joyns them and confounds them, making our justification to be by Christs Righteousness imputed when we are holy; when we be sanctifyed, inferring that it is not till then, and not only so, but that that is the Condition of our justification: Is this the Apostles justi∣fying the Ungodly, to be justified when we answer Mr. Williams Gospel Rule? Whereas the Gospel makes no such Rule as he lays down of our sincere Obe∣dience, concurring to justification, or God's having regard to our Gospel Ho∣liness, which is Mr. Williams own word: I will not stand to refell this, but do aver nothing can be clearer to me than this, that by this expression we are justified when we answer that Gospel Rule which Mr. Williams laid down, there is a downright mingling our Sanctification with our justification, which the Apostle strenuously denies; 'Tis not of Works, only of Faith, that it might be by grace, not Gods grace in us, working holiness, but his grace to us in Christ.

The next is that which is the ground work of all Mr▪ W•••• building 〈…〉〈…〉

that glorious Text which I so often have harped upon, and which I must again say somewhat to now in its course, for that I am not able to bear that such an outwork should treacherously be delivered up, and say that this Text in Phil. 3.9. Is allowed by all sound Protestants, to be meant, as 'tis said that the Righteousness of God that the Apostle desired to be found in by Faith is only the imputed Righteousness of Christ, and not at all concerns our Gos∣pel Holiness; nay, this Gospel Holiness, thus put in the room of Christs Righte∣ousness, is a term Foreign to Scripture Language, and is brought in to jostle out Gospel Grace. 'Tis Holiness we are to walk in, but 'tis Grace we are to be saved by, which grace is this, that the Rig••••••••••ness of Christ is made ours; wrought out by Christ for us, and imput•••••• 〈…〉〈…〉 to us without any thing of that which men call our Gospel Holin•••••• 〈…〉〈…〉 to do therein: Now if the Church of God will be content to lose 〈…〉〈…〉 ••f Phil. 3.9. and suffer a Disputer to make this breach in our Bank ag•••••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Popish Sea of Justification by Gospel Holiness, all the rest of our Banks and ••arriers will soon be run down; Then they that hunger and thirst after Righteousness, shall be filled; must be interpreted of our Gospel Holiness. If we be hungry for holiness in conformi∣ty to Gospel Rule, our Souls shall be filled with eternal happiness, and then if we take to us the Brest Plate of Righteousness, that is, a holy walking with God, that will defend us from all Temptations of the Devil; as for Faith in Christ, that must come after our own Righteousness by this Doctrine, whereas the Apostle in that place Eph. 6. Brings in that Breast Plate as our chief, first piece of Armour after Truth, when the Soul is enlightned with the knowledge of God's love, to give Jesus Christ for us. The first thing he doth, is, he puts on Christ's Righteousness as his Breast-Plate: Alas if the Soul puts on his own Righteousness, the Devil's Darts would soon pierce through it, but every sen∣sible Soul will say, with Job, Though I were righteous, yet would I not answer, I would make Supplication to my Judg. I suppose Job had as much to say for his close holy walking with God as any that now call for Gospel Holiness, to make us partakers of Christ's purchase, yet he renounces all, and saith farther, for the confounding our new Grotian Divinity, If I wash my self with Snow Wa∣ter; (of the best Gospel Holiness that ever meer Man had) and make my hands never so clean (with close walking with God) yet shalt thou plunge me in the Ditch. (of self Condemnation and eternal misery) and mine own Cloaths (of self righte∣ousness) shall abhor me. O what clear gospel grace had this good man acquain∣tance with, when he flies from all the trash of his being clean, to make way for his justification, and betakes himself to his Days-Man, his Redeemer, who though he had not actually taken flesh, yet was then living, and living as his Redeemer, For I know that my Redeemer liveth, though he slay me, I will trust in him: If I justifie my self (with my close walking or Gospel Holiness, in part or in the whole) mine own mouth would condemn me, nay, though I were perfect yet would I not know my Soul. Here was a right gospel Spirit, like the Apostle Paul, concerning the Law blameless, yet, my Righteousness is Dung; so Job, If I be righ∣teous, I will not lift up mine head, Job. 10.15. I will not glory in my Breast-Plate of mine own Righteousness.

Again, if with Mr. Williams the Righteousness of Christ by Faith be our own gospel Holiness, why may not Esa. 45.24. In him have I Righteousness and strength, he our gospel Holiness too, and Jer. 23.6. Jehovah our Righteousness be the same, and then, Have not submitted to the Righteousness of God, Rom. 10.3. shall have the same usage, and mainly intend our Gospel Holiness, though the Apostle brings it in, in opposition to our own righteousness: But blessed be God, if Mr. W. or an Angel should undermine these Foundations of a sinner's salvation, yet on this Rock God will build his Church, that Christ was made sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him. I say in him, not in our gospel holiness, and if on this foundation any man builds hay and stubble, (as our gospel holiness compared with Christs Righteousness) his work shall be

burnt and he shall suffer loss, but he himself shall be saved so as by fire, it being a dangerous thing to mingle our gospel holiness with Christs Righte∣ousness. Again, if Christ Righteousness, Phil. 3.9. be our gospel Holiness, Mr. W. may as well say, by the Righteousness of one the free gift came upon all Men, to justification of life, Rom. 5.18. doth principally intend, not so much the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us as the gospel holiness of every one of us.

If we give this Inch, he may take an Ell, but we are bid earnestly to con∣tend for the Faith once delivered to the Saints, of which this is as great a part as any I know next the Deity of our Lord Jesus; therefore we must not part with it to let in a sham Model of Schematical Divinity of God's regard∣ing our holiness as a ground to justify us, we complying with the Gospel Rule of sincere Obedience to qualify us for Christs Righteousness to be Imputed to us.

By this unsavory gloss of Mr. W. any Judicious Person may see how unmeet he is to Arraign, and by his Arguments, to come in Evidence against the Do∣ctrine delivered by Dr. C. If he would have convinced him, he must do it with stronger and better Reasons than Human, even with opposite Scriptures, if his Bible have any such as are repugnant to the plain force of express Scriptures, that the Dr. insisted on, such as the Lord laid on him the Iniquity of us all, to prove sin really translated on Christ, and the Children being yet unborn, having done nei∣ther Good nor Evil, he said, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated, to prove that God loves us, and imputes the Righteousness of Christ to his Elect, with∣out respect of good or Evil done by them: But he having no Scriptures to overthrow those Maxims, he may not think to do it with plausible Sophistry of the suitableness of it to God's holiness, to justifie none but the Holy, when the Scripture saith expresly, he Justifies the Ungodly, and so I beseech the Lord to do to him as well as to my self, else woe unto us.

Next comes the exact Copy of Paul a Pharisee, thus; The grace of God is hereby stated as free as is consistent with his Government, or rather, I may say, as free as is consistent with Justification, partly by Works, and partly by grace; I wonder that any man should say, none need the riches of grace more than I, as he doth in the next words, and yet tell the World a little before that Gods Government, and Rectoral distribution of rewards and punishments, require our complying with Gospel Rule in some degrees of Obedience, and the Gospel San∣ction fixeth sincere holiness and perseverance in Faith, as the terms of pos∣sessing Heaven, and so by bringing in our Gospel Holiness into our justificati∣on, totally make void the grace of God, and then in effect this is all the grace that I need; that when I have persevered in the Gospel Rule, I may tell God now I have done what thou requirest; now Heaven is due to me, for Christ hath purchased this Gospel Ordination. O that God would un-horse lofty Spi∣rits, and make us cry out, (with the poor Publican, smiting on our Breasts,) Lord be merciful to me a sinner, not Lord be merciful to me a complyer in Gos∣pel Holiness; if I could hear him say so, it would be with me an Argument that he thought he needed the Riches of grace, but the Righteous need not grace, for he came not to call the Righteous, but sinners. Is this the only grace you will allow God to glory in, that when men have lived sincerely ho∣ly all their days, then they may come to God and say, I demand my Penny I have laboured for; I crave Heaven, for Christ dyed for this end that I should save my self by my Evangelical righteousness, and this is consistent with thy Rectoral distribution of Rewards and Punishments, viz. rewards to the holy, and punishments to the unholy; as for Christs Righteousness and my justification, by that, I must name it for fashion sake, but my darling Holiness with perse∣verance, are the terms of possessing Heaven? To which our Lord Jesus hath al∣ready answered, and so will to every Self-Justitiary, as in Matth. 21.31. Veri∣ly I say unto you, that the Publicans and the Harlots go into the Kingdom of God be∣fore

you. When the holy Pharisee comes with his, God I thank thee I am not as other Men; I am none of those sinners that trust to be saved, by the meer grace of God, in the merits of Christ: I am none of St. Pauls Antinomians, who said, those that are of the Law are accursed: I fast twice a week, I give Alms, I have sincere Obedience, I have Gospel holiness, I hope I shall scape well. Then the poor Publican, the poor self-condemned sinner cries, Grace, grace, unclean, unclean, I am a chief sinner; I fly for refuge to the Hope set before me, the blood of Christ only, to free me from my sins; sure this Man will go down justified rather than the other, and such a sort of justi∣fication I beg of God for my Soul, and that Mr. W. that saith he needs the riches of grace, and the more because he brings in gospel holiness to concur with Christs Righteousness in Justification: I hope and pray he may seek the Publicans, and not the Pharisees justification, and leave Gods rectoral distribu∣tion to his own holy determinations in his Word, Come ye blessed, and go ye cur∣sed, as they were chosen before the foundation of the World, or past by in Gods eternal Decree, yet still the chosen were chose to Faith and holiness, tho' not as those Terms which give a right to Heaven.

Mr. W. goes on thus, Reader note that in this ••ook I speak of the Adult, and not Infants, and why Infants saved one way and Adult another; if Infants be sanctifyed in the Womb, by infusing the new Nature, what is that but the seed of Faith, and all grace in Christ? and if so, he not they saved as the A∣dult, though their grace shine not out; must Infants be saved by the merits of Christ alone, but not so the Adult, who must have Gospel holiness to Joyn with Christs righteousness, for God to have some regard to in their Salvation? If this be his meaning then the Garments of Infants must be all of pure fine white Linnen, and of those grown to 15 or 20, it must be Linsey Wolsey, the warp of Linnen, and Woof of the Wollen of gospel holiness, and so Infants may be buried in Linnen and the others in Flannel; this is the recto∣ral distribution of threats and promises, not according to Gods way, he that be∣lieveth shall be saved, and he that believeth not is condemned: But the Adult that is sincerely holy, God is so just as to save him, and he that thinks to be saved only by Faith in the Lord Jesus, bringing forth fruits of Holiness, is an Antinomian, dethrones Christ, enervates his Laws, he must be exposed to scorn.

Mr. W. proceeds, Thou must expect to take up my fall sense by a view of several Chapters, and not only one, because sundry Chapters refer to the same points, more or less: We use to say that which is sawce for a Goose is sawce for a Gander, but 'tis too common for men to look through red angry Spectacles on the Authors they oppose, but would have their own writings lookt on in green ones; would it not have been becoming Mr. W. to have dealt with the Dr. as he thou's his Reader to do by him, to take up his full sense, by a view of several chap∣ters, then he would not have charged the Dr. with enervating Christs Laws, by pleading the free justification of sinners without works: if he had compa∣red his Sermons on Esa. 53. with those on Titus, of denying ungodliness: Is not our Lords Rule good here? What you would that Men should do to you, do ye the same to them. If Mr. W. would have People compare one part of his Book with the other, 'tis equal he should have done so by the Dr. which would have taken off a great part of his Acrimony in making the Dr. a Dethroner of Christ.

His next look's invidious, and is a clear contradiction to his last desire of comparing one part with another, for he puts a sense by force on the Doctor thus, and forget not (saith Mr. Williams) that though the Dr. oft in his Book speaks of Men as Believers, yet every thing is true of the Elect, viz. They have as much Title to saving Blessings, only they do not know it; this was his Judgment. Here by head and shoulders he brings in this as the Drs. judgment of the Elect, with∣out one Tittle of Proof; forget not this, that whatever the Doctor saith of sa∣ving Blessings that Believers have a title to, he means it of the Elect; this 〈…〉〈…〉

Well, but what if that be forc'd on the Dr. as his judgment, that all saving Blessings belong to the Elect tho' before believing they do not know it? How much more is this than what Mr. Williams grants in fol. 39. in saying Christ merited for all the Elect, that they should certainly partake of the saving bene∣fits of his Righteousness? Where is the Drs. enervating Christs Laws, if this was his judgment? Doth not this Correspond with that of the Apostle, Eph. 1. He raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places, in Christ Jesus, do••h not this evince that all the Elect were raised up with Christ, and do now sit with him in Heaven, being in his Heart as the twelve Tribes were upon Arons Breast-Plate when he went into the Holy of Holies: Are they not in the Heart of Christ, and doth he not pray for those that God gave to him? if so, then all saving Blessings belong to them, only the Doctor had not the happiness to word it to please Mr. W. therefore is quarrell'd at.

But next, he sweetens all, and having broken the Doctors Head, gives him a Plaister thus, I have carefully avoided any Reflection on Revere••d Dr. Crisp, whom I believe a Holy Man: For which respect I return many thanks, and bless God for fulfilling his word, that when a mans ways please the Lord, he makes his Enemies at peace with him: But may I not wonder that those that have utter∣ed so great Invectives, that he was for dethroning Christ, should yet be convinc'd from the strain of his writings, that he was a Holy Man. This is a∣greeable to what treatment he met with in the Heat of Peoples flocking by thousands to hear him, which he was much maligned for, yet there was not a man of all his detractors that ever charged him with the least immorality or indecency, or neglect of exactest holiness, though there was scarce ever seen a wrinkle in his Brow, he being chearful in Conversation, even to admiration; yet as solemnly devout in the Worship of God on Lords days, and Fast days, as the greatest legalist, so that his Enemies gave him his due Character for exact holiness. But now for Mr. W. to say, Dr. C. was holy, and Reverend Dr. C. and but a few Lines before to say, all the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Christ, &c. seems strange, but without doubt it is from a mighty over-ruling Providence of God, not only out of the mouths of Babes and Sucklings, the unlearned to perfect praise to his Name, but to still the Enemy and Avenger, Mat. 11. Ps. 8. Not only do the simple, Celebrate the Praises of God, for the opening the Rich Mercies of Free-Grace by the Dr. but the Learned that seem to be his Enemies, and come out against him with Venge∣ance, God doth still them; nay, after high reproach he engages them to acknow∣ledge this Dethroner of Christ, I believe was a holy Man; this is like Bellarming, prop∣ter incertitudinem, tutissimum est, &c. 'Tis absolute Sovereign grace in Christ, nothing in us that saves us when all is done.

Before I leave Mr. W. in this good temper, I hope it may be useful as well for set∣ling the wavering, as confirming the sound: To quote a passage or two I met with occasionally, out of unquestionable Authority for Orthodoxy in the Faith, for a suf∣frage to Dr. Crisp in what he is opposed by Mr. W. and that is out of the Reverend Dr. Harris of Hanwell, an eminent member of the famous Assembly of Divines An∣no 1652. I begin with his asserting, That Christ sustained the Person of a sinner: This is a grand charge against Dr. C. that Christ was a reputed sinner, but this eminent Dr. H. makes no scruple to Assert it roundly, without any ambiguity, and saith di∣rectly in his Sermon, called, Absaloms Funeral, in fol. 215 Christ he stood in our room, and sustained the Person of a sinner, though in himself sinless, could not he though he was the Heir and first born, escape until his Blood was shed, and flesh rent, and Soul pou∣red forth as an Offering? Then make good that thou art in Christ, and (so) a new Creature, or else take thy leave of all hope and comfort: I add, if this were not true, that Christ sustained the Person of a sinner, how could God punish him, or how could the Apostle say to the seven Churches, He loved us, and washed us from our sins, in his Blood; sure those us were in Christ when he shed his Blood, and i•• his own Person as head, he sus∣tained

them and all other sinners that he shed his Blood for, else, how were they Crucified with him, and raised with him, and made sit with him in Heavenly pla∣ces; now because Reason and Philosophy cannot fathom this, shall we reject plain Scripture, and say, that the Elect have no interest in Christ, till they believe, though God say plainly, grace was given them in Christ before the World was, and they were chosen in him before the World.

Dr. H. gives his Testimony against the new sort of Divinity, which may look better from him than Dr. Crisp, and may reconcile to his Doctrine, or rather Christs, that nothing must come in of ours to joyn with Christ for Justification: and saith in fol. 36. from Rom. 8.1. No Condemnation to those in Christ, the Do∣ctrines of later Editions (Arminians) drive mostly at this, to wrest you from your Estate in Christ,—hence the superadding of our Righteousness to Christs, ad Corroborandum, look to your standing, find all your Hopes, Joys, Life in him alone, owe to him all Wisdom, Righte∣ousness, Sanctification, Redemption and Salvation. This is far from the New Scheme of Gospel Ordination of Christs purchasing that Faith, Holiness, &c. have their use in Gospel Benefits, from their Conformity to the Rule of the Promise, not of the Precept; this taking us off from our superadded Righteousness, ad corroborandum, to strengthen our Title, clearly evinces, that he was not for Faith and holiness gi∣ving a Title; no, Faith can only receive it, and Holiness Evidence it.

Dr. H. answers for Dr. C. as being charged that if God acts us in beleiving and, God beleives, and God repents, and saith in fol. 64. Not only the power but the Act too is from God, Phil. 2. He works in us to will and to do, if it be thus (say the Jesuits and others) then Man shall not be master of his own Acts, then God shall be said to repent and believe, Man shall do nothing, but all shall be resolved unto God. Answ. May not Man be said to understand, though God do powerfully inlighten, so also to hate, love, &c. They (the Jesuits) yield that God worketh upon the Ʋnderstanding, and the Affections, and yet man understands and affects; and why should not the same be true of the Will? Secondly, God first works all things in us, and then by us; he prevents and acts us, and then we work under God. Object. This takes off all endeavour; nay, this quickens our Care and endeavour, if St. Paul may be heard, Phil 2.13. Therefore we must work out all, because we depend on God for all, saith, the Apostle, neither doth God only work in his People a power of willing, but the very Act also, and indeed the acting of the will of man is more than giving him a power only to will.

The Covenant of grace is this, be content to accept of anothers Obedience, and to lay hold of the Righteousness of Christ for Justification, (he soars as high as Dr. C.) and saith, there is nothing required of us more than this, to disclaim our selves, and to make Christ alone our Teacher, our head, and all-sufficient Saviour, (nay in fol. 35. he is clear and saith) What can we do toward the getting of a new Heart? Answ. Man can∣not concur to the renewing of himself as a Cause or an Agent.

If this be good Divinity in Dr. H. and the Assembly of Divines, why should it be quarrel'd at in Dr. C. Would it not be more becoming the greatness of Mr. W's Spirit, to have encountred the Assembly in these particulars, than Dr. C. yea doubtless: But there was a new Scheme to be erected, and this would more ea∣sily obtain against a single Person, than the established Religion of the Nation, which in the chiefest points objected against Dr. C. concurs with him; yea, after all, when Mr. W. finds by the strong Proofs brought against him, that his Scheme will not take, he betakes himself to the Substance of what he Objects against the Dr. as in time may be made evident; in the mean time, I humbly conceive, I have made it appear, that his Preface hath not only wronged the Dr. but the truth which I doubt not but in a great measure he sees.

Thus begging of the Lord, that some glory may rise to his Name by some few hours investigating the Truth: I conclude as well for Mr. W. and all that desire the Truth as it is in Jesus, may take place, as for my self, let the Words of my Mouth, and the Meditation of my Heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, Tzuri ve Goeli, my Rock, and my Redeemer.

Amen.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  By Faith, Noah being warned, &c. became Heir of the righteousness which is by Faith; which shews us, that Noah had in those dealings of God with him, the very same righteousness for the Object of his Faith, which our Gospel now proposeth to us, and which our Faith lays hold upon. Which the same Apostle stiles the Righteousness of God, and the Righteousness of Christ, which is by Faith, Phil. 3.9. Which Righteousness for Justi∣fication he more setly treateth of, in Rom. 3.21. But now the Righteousness of God with∣out the Law is manifested, even the Righteousness of God, which is by Faith of Jesus Christ: He witnessed of that Righteousness which is by Faith, as it hath Christ for its Object; this all sound Protest∣ants do profess. Goodwin of Elect. fol. 40.