317 (327)
Chapter 25
Faith is not our Gospel Righteousness
Our
adversaries, to strengthen their assertion of the imputation of faith, in a
proper sense, to the exclusion of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ,
have two other positions which they own and maintain. One is that our faith or
our act of believing is the whole of our Gospel righteousness. The other is
that Christ hath procured that it should be so, by procuring the New Covenant,
whereof this faith is made the condition. To this last point we shall speak
something in the next chapter; and of the other here.
How
much Mr. Baxter doth contend for our faith being called and accounted our
Gospel righteousness, is known. The forenamed author
of the Discourse of the Two Covenants, is very
plain on page 48, &c where he is explaining what God’s counting Abraham’s
faith to him for righteousness is. There he tells us that he makes it to
signify thus much, to wit, that God, in a way of special grace, or by virtue
of a new law of grace and favor, which was established by God, in Christ
(Galatians 3: 17) that is, in reference to what Christ was to do and suffer, in
time then to come, did reckon his practical faith to him for righteousness,
that is, that which in the eye of that new law should pass in his estimation
for righteousness, subordinate to Christ’s righteousness, which procured this
grant or Law. And thereafter on page 40 he tells us, That it is an act
of God’s special favor, and by virtue of his new law of grace, that such a
faith as he hath described (that is, a faith taking in all Gospel
obedience, as we saw above,) comes to be reckoned or imputed to a man for
righteousness; and through God’s imputing it for righteousness, to stand a man
in the same, if not in a better stead, as to his eternal concerns, as a perfect
fulfilling of the original law from first to last would have done. Christ’s
righteousness being presupposed the only Meritorious
cause of this grant or covenant. Thereafter on page 50 he tells us, there
are two things which constitute and make up the righteousness of the law of
grace. First, that which consists in the forgiveness of sins, and second, the
righteousness of sincere obedience; and in reference to both, says he,
faith as practical is imputed to a man for righteousness, as it is that and all
that, which is required of him by the law of grace, to entitle him to the
righteousness which consists in remission of sins. And then as to the
second he says on page 52, That faith is
imputed for righteousness, which is practical or productive of sincere
obedience, without which property it is not a fulfilling of the law of grace, as
a condition of the promised
318 (328)
benefits, and consequently cannot justify a man, in the eye of
that law. For, as he adds, there
must be repentance, and forgiving men their injuries;
and faith must be such as works by love, and then he tells us, that
Abraham was justified by his works, James 2.
All
which abomination of doctrine, and perversion of the right ways of the Lord, we
are not here to examine. It is enough, in reference to the clearing of what is
now before us and under consideration; that we see here a plain delineation and
explication made of that Gospel, which Mr. Baxter said, this treatise would
lead us into the knowledge of: and which is the very same, upon the matter,
with that Gospel which Socinians and Arminians hold forth, joining herein with
Papists, as we saw in part towards the beginning of chapter eighteen. We shall
at this occasion trouble the reader with some more of their expressions, that
we may see that the doctrine which is now so cried up and followed after, is
nothing but old Socinianism and so, owned and professed by such, as do not
deserve to be called Christians. Socinus de Servat. lib.
4. c. 4, 7, 11. God justifies the ungodly, but now converted, penitent, and
after he has left off to be ungodly: the justified are not ungodly in
themselves, neither are they so called, yea they are not sinners, and which is
more, they do not now sin. And so faith and works, that is, obedience to the
commands of Christ, as the form of faith, doth justify us before God, and by
them through them (peilla, exillis)
he justifies us. Smalcius disp. 4. c. Frantzium.
Regeneration, all other good works, love, prayer, obedience, faith, charity,
&c. as so far from being effect of justification, that without them
justification can no way really exist, for God justifies no man, but him, who
is completely adorned with all these virtues —yea the study of good works and
walking before God were the cause (though not the chief) of the justification
of Noah, Abraham, and others, who are said to be justified by faith. Socinus ubi supra de Serv. lib. 1. c. 4 Faith doth not justify by
its proper virtue, but by the mercy and good will of God, who justifies such,
as do such a work, and imputes it for righteousness. With Paul, to have
righteousness imputed is nothing else, but to have faith imputed, and to be
accounted just. Faith is so imputed to us, as that because of faith, we,
howbeit guilty of much unrighteousness, are esteemed perfectly righteous, or
God so deals with us, as if we were perfectly righteous who can doubt that the
Apostle means no other thing than that we are not righteous before God, because
our works require that, as a due reward, but because it hath so seemed good to
the Lord, to take our faith in place of righteousness; so that we receive the
reward of grace, by which we are declared righteous before him. More might
be adduced for this end, as it might be shown also, how herein the Arminians
conspire with them against the orthodox. And as for the judgment of Papists, in
this point, it is likewise known.
It will
not be necessary that we insist, in disproving that, which hath been so much
witnessed against by the orthodox writing against Papists, Socinians, and
Arminians, upon these heads. It will suffice, I suppose, if we give a few
reasons, why we cannot acquiesce in the doctrine, proposed by the forenamed
author.
1.
Hereby works of obedience are exalted to the same place, and are allowed
319 (329)
the same force, influence and efficacy into
justification, with faith, whereby all the Apostle’s disputes for faith and
against works, and for faith as inconsistent with and exclusive of works, are
evacuated and rendered useless; so that the Apostle hath either not spoken to
the purpose, or hath not spoken truth: either of which is blasphemy. The
Apostle argues thus, we are justified by faith; therefore we are not justified
by works. This man reasons on the contrary, we are justified by faith,
therefore we are justified by works; because by a faith that includes works; as
if the Apostle had meant a faith that was dead, and had no affinity with works.
Hereby
he confounds all these duties, which are required of believers, or of such, as
are in covenant with God, with that which is solely required of them in order
to their first entering in covenant, or into a state of justification: as if
one should say, that all marriage duties, required of such as were already in
that marriage state, were conditions of entering into the marriage state.
3.
Hereby he confounds justification with glorification, making all that faith and
sincere obedience, which is required in order to actual salvation and
glorification, to be necessary before justification: And thereby must say, that
no man hath his sins pardoned, so long as he lives; but if he be sincerely
obedient, he is in the way to a pardon, and to justification. He cannot say,
that by a practical faith, he only means such a true and lively faith, as will
in due time produce these effects: for, as that will not consist with his
explication of that practical faith, so it would cross his whole design. The
just man in the eye of this new law, (as he says on page 49,) is
everyone that rightly believes, repents, and sincerely obeys, because that is
all that it requires of a man for his justification and salvation. Where we
see, that with him, justification and salvation go together, and have the same
conditions, and he that is just must be one that has met these conditions; and
if he is not just in the eye of that new law, his faith cannot be accounted to
him for righteousness, nor be justified.
4. The
man hereby confounds the two covenants, or gives us a new covenant of works,
instead of the covenant of grace; for this practical faith, which includes all
obedience, has the same place, force and efficacy in the new covenant, that
complete obedience had in the old. And this Gospel is but the old law of works,
only with this change, that whereas the old law required perfect
obedience to the end, in order to justification and salvation; this new
covenant of works requires sincere obedience to the end, in order to
justification and salvation: And so we are justified and saved as really by and
upon the account of our works, as Adam would have been, if he had continued in
obedience to the end; and this faith and sincere obedience is as really, and to
all ends and purposes, as effectually and formally our righteousness, as perfect
obedience would have been the righteousness of Adam: and thus the reward must
as really be reckoned to us of debt, and not of grace, as it would have been to
Adam, if he had stood: and as fair a ground is laid for us to boast and glory,
though not before God,
320 (330)
as had been for Adam, if he had continued to the end.
The evasion he has to make all this of grace, saying on pages 49 and 50, and
yet every believer’s justification will be all of grace, because the law by
which they are justified is wholly of grace, and was enacted in mere grace and
favor to undone man, is not able to help him. For it was wholly of
undeserved grace and love, that God did so far condescend to Adam, and to all
mankind in him, as to strike a covenant with him, a promise of such an ample
reward upon his performance of the condition of perfect obedience to the end;
and yet, notwithstanding this law was wholly of grace and was enacted in mere
grace and favor: for neither was the Lord necessitated thereunto; nor could
Adam say, he had deserved any such thing at God’s hand, the reward had been
reckoned to Adam, if he had stood, of debt, not simply and absolutely, but ex
pacto; by reason of the compact: So that we see, the cases run parallel and
the covenant is of the same nature and kind. The difference betwixt the power
granted to Adam, and now to man, to perform the conditions required, is with
him, the same upon the matter; for if man will go the length he can and may, he
may be sure of God’s help to convey him all the length he should; And what more
did Adam have? And as for the diversity of the conditions, which then were
perfect obedience, and now only sincere obedience, that can make no alteration
in he nature of the covenant: and besides, I see not, why this man cannot as
well say that if man now will go as far, as he may and can, by his own stock of
power, unto the performance of perfect obedience, God will certainly give him
his help to carry him forward; as he says, that if man will now go all the
length he can unto the performance of faith, repentance, and new sincere
obedience, God is ready and willing to contribute his help to carry him forward
thereunto.
5. He
confounds the right to, with the possession of life eternal, as
to their causes and antecedents; for as new and holy obedience is by us made
the way to the possession of the kingdom: so by him it is made the way or cause
of the right jus to the kingdom; for he requires it as antecedent to a
man’s justification and first being brought into a covenant state with God, when
he first receives the right to the inheritance; and thus the inheritance is
made to be of the law, and not of promise, contrary to Galatians 3: 18, for the
whole and sure right thereunto is had by obedience to the law, with him.
I shall
say no more to this here, because there is a sufficient confutation of this to
be found in Mr. Durham on Revelation, page 234, &c. where the digression is
handled, concerning the way of covenanting with God, and of a sinner
obtaining of justification before him. And in all such as write against
Papists and Socinians on this head.
But if
it be asked, may not faith be called our Gospel righteousness, and be said
to be imputed to believers, as such a righteousness, without any wrong done to
the righteousness of Christ, which keeps still its own place of being our legal
or pro legal righteousness? I answer, though it be true that faith is now
required of all that would be justified, yet I nowhere find that it is called
our Gospel righteousness; and I judge it not safe to admit
321 (331)
expressions, without warrant of
the word, in this tender matter; especially such expressions, as have a
manifest tendency to corrupt, rather than explicate the truth, in this
particular; as, I judge, will be found true of this expression; for howbeit be
said by the asserters thereof, that faith, is but a less principal and
subordinate righteousness; Yet in effect, according to their explication of the
whole doctrine (as may be seen by this Treatise last mentioned and
answered) it is made the principal and only righteousness, that is imputed to
us: for Christ’s righteousness, say they, is only imputed, as to its effects,
or in its causality. See Baxter against D. Tully, page 70, (just as Suarez said
de divin. gr. lib. 7. de Sanct.
hom. c. 7. § 39. cited by Mr. Rutherford Exercie
Apol. Exerc. 1. c. 2. page (mihi) 64. the merits
of Christ are not given to us, that we might be formally justified, but that
they may be a price wherewith we may buy a righteousness, whereby we may be
formally justified; as he who gives a price to another, whereby he may buy
cloths, is said to cloth him, not formally, but effectively, morally, as is
manifest:) And even as to these effects it depends wholly upon faith, and this faith
is only said to be properly imputed for our righteousness. And besides, they
tell us, that the righteousness of Christ is alike common to all, to the
reprobate as well, as to the elect, and so it can be properly imputed to none: And
as to its effective imputation (as Suarez calls it) or imputation, as to its
effects or in its causality (as others speak) after that it is offered and held
forth to all, and has the same common effects, unto all, until the condition be
performed, that depends wholly upon man’s performance of the condition; and as
to its antecedent effects, it is equally and absolutely imputed to all; that
is, it is imputed to none, but the effects thereof are equally made common to
all, in making salvation possible, and the condition to be faith, and the like:
And as to the special effects, (as they may be called) which depend on faith,
when one believes, and so fulfills the condition, he has thereby a Gospel
righteousness, or this faith of his is reckoned upon his score, for a Gospel
righteousness, and thereupon he receives pardon, justification, &c. Now let
any judge, whether or not these effects are not more the effects (at least more
immediately) of their own Gospel righteousness, than of Christ’s: for Christ by
all his righteousness did purchase these effects to all alike, and that
conditionally, and now they themselves by their own personal Gospel
righteousness of faith, do make an actual purchase of these effects, according
to the covenant, ex pacto. And to say, that Christ did by his merits
purchase the new covenant, doth but confirm, what I have now said, to wit, that
all that, which Christ procured, was, that all such, as should acquire a Gospel
righteousness of their own, should be justified, &c. And thus Christ died
to purchase a virtue and merit to our faith, and that to this end, it should
become a Gospel righteousness, whereby they might have whereof to boast and to
glory before men, at least. Hence we see that Christ’s righteousness might
rather be called the subservient and ours the principal. And further, (which
may justly make Christians abhor this opinion,) thus this poor convinced
sinner, pursued by justice for a broken law, is called to lean his whole weight
of acceptance with God, and found all his hope of
322 (332)
pardon and justification, upon his own faith, or
Gospel righteousness, as the only righteousness, wherewith he is to be covered,
and the only righteousness, which is imputed unto him; and not upon Christ and
his righteousness, for what Christ did or purchased was common to all, and had
only a conditional virtue, which the personal righteousness reduces into act, and
so must have a principal share of the glory; for as to what Christ did, Judas
had the same ground of thankfulness and praise, that Peter had, and Peter no
more than Judas; and thus Peter was to sing the song of praise for his
justification and pardon, unto his own personal faith and Gospel righteousness.
If this be not the native result of this doctrine, let any put it into practice
(which I shall be loath to advise) and try, whether thereby more of their
weight is laid on Christ, or on their own faith: And on the other hand, let any
serious and exercised Christian be enquired, and see if their practice agrees
with this doctrine.
If it
be said, that there is no such hazard, so long as faith is not considered here
as abstracted from its object Christ, but is considered with a respect
thereunto, I answer: (1.) We have seen, what a poor and general respect faith,
by some of our adversaries, is said to have to Christ, whereby it is made nothing
but a mere historical faith, and the author of the Discourse of the Two
Covenants, page 31, says, that even that faith, that had not the Messiah in
the promise, is imputed for righteousness. (2.) As for such as confess that
justifying faith hath a special respect to Christ and his righteousness, we
would know, whether it hath this respect, that it peculiarly gives refuge there
to the soul from the storm of wrath, and brings in thence Christ’s
righteousness, or carries the man out to it, that he may lean upon it, and
plead the same, as the only ground of his absolution from the sentence of the
Law? And if this be granted, then it is manifest, that the believer hath no
righteousness, but Christ’s surety righteousness, where withal he desires to
appear before God, and this is it alone, to which he leans, and through which
alone he hopes for pardon and acceptance, without the least reflecting act of
soul upon his own faith. (3.) But again if so, faith must stand alone, as
acting thus in a peculiar manner on Christ, which no other work is fitted to
do; and therefore faith and works must not be joined together; nor must faith
be considered, in this affair, as comprehending all obedience in it, as we see
they say. (4.) But when faith is made our Gospel righteousness, in whole, or in
part, howbeit they say, they consider faith, as acting on its object Christ;
yet it is manifest, that it is then considered with relation to its object, in
a physical, or metaphysical manner, as all acts (specified from their objects)
may and must be considered; but not in a theological sense, as required in the
Gospel, to bring in the surety-righteousness of Christ, and to lean the soul
thereupon, as its only righteousness: for when it is said to be our whole
Gospel righteousness, it is considered as a moral virtue, and as an act of
obedience in us, constituting us righteous in a formal sense, according to the
new law, which is hereby fully and in all points performed and obeyed; much
more, when works are joined with it, does it with works put on a far other
respect, than to be the hand receiving the atonement, and the gift of
righteousness.
323 (333)
But Mr.
Baxter says against Mr. Cartwright, page 179, In regard of that
justification, which is from the accusation of the law of works, I say faith is
but a condition, and no otherwise justifies, but because it is made that
condition by a new law, per legem remediantem, and we must be judged by that
law: therefore, when the case is, whether we have performed the conditions of
that new law, or not, then faith is materially that righteousness, by which we
must be justified, against all accusations of non-performance. Answer: (1.)
I doubt if such as never heard a report of Christ, shall be judged by the new
law; far less by it alone. (2.) God will not call in question a believer’s
faith, nor accuse him of non-performance. Nor will the Gospel, or new law do it;
so that the believer needs not plead his performance; in reference to a
justification at the tribunal of God. (3.) When faith is made a condition by a
new law, and thereby becomes the believer’s righteousness, this righteousness
is the condition, and is therefore a righteousness,
because made a condition, by that new law; yea and elsewhere ibid. page 106,
this righteousness is said to be complete and perfect, as all righteousness
must be: we see, what weight is laid upon it. And when there is no other
righteousness properly imputed to us, (for as for that imputation of Christ’s
righteousness, which he would yield to as the only sound sense, it is but what
Jesuits, Socinians, and Arminians yield to, and we cannot be satisfied with,)
who sees not, how this matter is framed so, as all the weight of the soul must
be laid upon this personal righteousness, especially when it is made another
sort of condition, than we can acknowledge it to be, as shall be seen
afterward; and when it is the immediate ground of our right to pardon,
justification, adoption, &c, for Christ’s purchase was (to him) general and
common, and no more for one, than for another, and to all conditionally.
If it
be said, What hazard is there, so long as Christ’s righteousness is held to
be that, which satisfies for the breach of the covenant of works, and is full
satisfaction to justice, and which has purchased the new covenant, and the new
easy terms; our righteousness, in performing the new easy terms, whereby we
come to have right to life and all the benefits purchased by Christ, is no way
prejudicial unto that, nor robs Christ’s satisfaction of the least of the glory
due to it. I answer: The hazard still continues, for hereby our Gospel
righteousness, be it faith alone, or faith and works together, is made the
immediate and sole ground of our right to the benefits; for what Christ did, was
general and common, and He, by what he did, made no particular purchase of any
good unto any, but procured the new covenant, and the new grant of life upon
the easy terms, alike unto all: the satisfaction, which he made unto the
Law-Giver for the breach of the old covenant, was not as a peculiar cautioner,
for any in particular, but was equally for all, and as much for the damned, as
for the saved; So that our rights to the benefits comes purely and wholly from
our performance of the new terms, which Christ is said to have purchased.
Therefore, though our personal righteousness hath no interest in purchasing the
new covenant, or in making satisfaction to justice, unto that end; yet justice
being now satisfied equally for all, and the new covenant being purchased
324 (334)
alike for all, our personal righteousness is that, which
must bear the glory of our interest in the benefits: and the obligation,
wherein we stand to Christ upon that account, is the same that others are under
who reap none of the benefits, which we reap by our new righteousness. And here
it is also manifest, that faith (if that should be made the Gospel
righteousness alone, without works) in order to justification of a sinner, is
not conceived to act upon Christ, as the Lord our Righteousness, that the soul
may put on his Surety-Righteousness and thereby answer all challenges of the
broken law: but it is conceived as our work, and as our performance of the new
conditions, and as such is rested upon, and leaned to; Whereby man, hath ground
of glorying before men, in himself, and not in the Lord alone, for all have
alike ground of glorying, upon that account, seeing what the Lord did was common
to all, and this new personal righteousness makes the difference.
But it
will be said, that Christ’s righteousness, being acknowledged to be our only
legal righteousness, whereby we answer the charge of the law, the asserting of
a Gospel righteousness, whereby we come to have an interest in that legal
righteousness, can do no prejudice. I answer, besides this making two distinct
righteousnesses, the one a means to obtain another, the one within us a price (ex
pacto) for the other without us; and all this in order to absolution from
one charge of the law brought in against the sinner: hereby, as to us, our
personal righteousness is really made our legal righteousness, because it is
made that righteousness, whereupon this man, and not the other who lacks it, is
freed from the charge of the law: for, according to this way, faith is not
employed to lay hold on Christ’s Surety-Righteousness, that by presenting that
Surety righteousness unto justice, the soul may escape the charge, but when the
charge of violation of the law of God is brought in against the sinner, his
only relief is his Gospel righteousness, which he presents, whereupon he pleads
for pardon and absolution, by virtue of the new covenant, which Christ hath
purchased; for should he allege the death and satisfaction of Christ that
should give no relief, because that was for all alike, and thereby the new
covenant was purchased where in the Gospel righteousness (whether Faith alone,
or Faith and New Obedience) was set down, as the condition; and therefore it
can stand him in no avail; but he must take refuge from wrath under the wings
of his own Gospel righteousness (for he hath no other) and thereupon rest
secure, and be confident of his absolution from all that the law could charge
against him. As, for example, if the Prince’s son should pay a valuable price,
given to the Prince, procure new terms and conditions to be proposed to a
company of condemned traitors lying in prison: if any one of these were
challenged for the old crime, and threatened with the execution of the sentence
past upon that account, it would be of no avail to him, to say, the Prince’s
son hath laid down a valuable price to buy me from death, because he knew, that
he did that for all the rest, in purchasing a new covenant, and new conditions;
but the first and sure course he would take, would be to present his
performance of the new conditions,
325 (335)
and say, The charge cannot reach me, because I have
performed the condition of the New Covenant, procured by the Prince’s son.
This I suppose is plain and clear, and this in our case, would be found to be
the only safe course, that poor challenged sinners would take, if they should
act according to the doctrine of our adversaries, to which, (as I said) I
should not dare to advise one or other. But really the Gospel way (which is
opposite to this) is plain and safe, if we have but so much humility, as to
comply therewith: and a difference may seem small, in the debate, which yet in
practice may prove great and of dangerous consequence.