Chapter 19: The Place of Evangelical Works in the New Covenant

It's a grave and weighty question to rid marches between the two Covenants in their conditions, the one requiring the obedience of works, the other faith. It's not to be said that for fifteen hundred years no man did doubt of the necessity of good works. Paul proposes the objections of the Antinomians, Shall we sin and continue in sin, that grace may abound? (Romans 6:1). This they spoke through the occasion of what he taught, chapter 5. Some have said they are hurtful, because we abuse them, some arbitrary and indifferent, because they are not necessary to justification. O! what proneness in us to suck out of the doctrine of free grace poison, how naturally to desire there were no law against treason, because the Prince pardons. All sin is virtually atheism, to wish the existence of a law, and so of a just holy and unchangeable God were not, and we can hardly believe this. And 2. what rising of heart and carnal reason is there against the first acts of providence, why, and what necessity was there to make a law to forbid the eating of an apple, God foreseeing that from there should come the ruin and endless damnation of all. It had been good God had never created such a tree. 2. That the eating thereof had never been forbidden. 3. That it had never had such a name, as the tree of knowledge, for it deceived Eve. 4. That God had not given free-will to Adam. 5. That he had given him confirming grace in the first moment of creation. But,

Observe 1. Satan started first the dispute concerning the equity of the law, and that we are disciples of and apprentices to Satan, when we toss and racket arguments in our carnal heart-logic against the holy law of God (Genesis 3:2), and make the heart a ferry boat to carry messengers and devilish thoughts here and there, in questioning the goodness of the law, and the acts of providence. Therefore it is speaking grace, to close with the sweetness not only of the law written in the heart, and these inbred principles of honesty and truth, to hurt none, to obey God, (for Satan raised not the first dispute about these) but with all the judgments and testimonies of God, as David (Psalm 119:127-128, verse 86). All your commandments are faithful (1 Samuel 12:7). Stand still that I may reason with you of all the righteous acts of the Lord. It's a mind like Christ's that has a heart prejudiced at no one command by another, and is sweetly befriended with all that God commands (Matthew 3:15). It becomes us to fulfill all righteousness, and O! how sweet to have no heart quarrel, but a sweet stooping of soul to, and an adoring of God in all providences, and acts or decrees he has concluded or done in time or from eternity. These draw deep in the decree of Reprobation, God had a hateful design against me. 2. The Gospel is an untrue and fabulous dispensation. What a spirit is Galenus who reproaches Moses because he teaches not that God works ever and by necessity of nature, what is most good for the creature. And that Prince who said, that if he had been counselor to God in the time of the Creation, many things should have been created in a better order and state than they were. Let the man be remembered who called the Gospel a fable, and the spirits who reproach the Scripture as inky wisdom. 1. A bare dead form, bare flesh, etc., and weak ones under desertion, who feed upon reports and lying news from Satan, God hated me before time, and carries on a design of eternal ruin to me, therefore I have no right to hear, to pray, to eat, to sleep. 2. Yet the necessity of good works is asserted by Luther, the Augsburg Confession and Apology, Article 20: our teachers teach, etc., that evangelical works are necessary, not to merit, but by the will and commandment of God. Calvin calls them inferior causes of the possession of our salvation. The dispute began upon occasion of the book called Interim, Anno 1568, and in the Colloquy at Altenburg, Melanchthon and the Divines of Wittenberg assented to the necessity of good works, but the followers of Flacius Illyricus dissented. The authors of the book of Concord condemn those of Flacius's way, and deny a necessity of efficiency in works to deserve salvation, but yield a necessity of their presence, that the work of salvation be not hindered.

3. These distinctions are necessary. 1. There is a right to Gospel life eternal. And 2. there is actual possession of life eternal.

2. There is a twofold right: one by the purchase of merit, and the paid ransom of blood; there is a secondary right by promise — every promise gives a right in a manner — but it is improper.

3. There is a promise of life formally federal. 2. There is a promise of life consequenter federal.

4. There is an order of things, one going before the other as the antecedent and the consequent, and in order of cause and effect.

5. Law-obedience does much differ from Gospel-obedience, as law-commands from Gospel-commands.

6. God sent his Son to justify persons, but not to justify works, not to make inherent obedience perfect or our righteousness before God.

Assertion 1. If the new Covenant be considered strictly and formally in its essence, he that believes whether his faith be weak or strong is justified and saved (John 3:18, 36; John 5:24; Acts 15:9-11; Romans 3:16; Romans 4:1-5; Romans 5:1), for faith justifies as lively faith, and not as great or small. Otherwise none should be justified and saved but the strong believer, whereas Christ died for the weak in the faith (Romans 14).

Hence Mr. Sibbes excellently: Know that in the Covenant of Grace God requires the truth of grace, not any certain measure, and a spark of fire is as well fire as the whole element thereof. We must look to grace in the spark as well as the whole flame. All have not the like strong, yet the like precious faith, whereby they lay hold and put on the perfect righteousness of Christ. A weak hand may receive a rich jewel, a few grapes will show that the plant is a vine not a thorn. There is a room in heaven for you who judge yourself; for the number of lambs, and babes weak in the faith in this Kingdom do far exceed the number of the strong and aged in Christ; for the Scripture names the whole flock, little ones, babes, his sheep, they are not a flock of fathers and strong ones.

Assertion 2. There is a right to life by promise: he that believes shall be saved. Promissio facit jus, & creat debitum: Godliness has the promise of this life, and of that which is to come; and because a promise as a promise cannot create an equality between the work and the wages, as is proven, this is an improper right, and not proper debt, and takes not away the nature of a free gift. This is no consequence at all: the performing of the condition of the Covenant of Works does justify Adam by Law-works, so as he is no sinner, has fulfilled the Law, has right to life eternal; therefore, to believe to the end, and fulfill to the end, and fulfill the condition of the Covenant of Grace does justify the believer, by Evangelical works, make him no sinner, but a perfect fulfiller of the Covenant of Grace, and one who has due right by working to life eternal. Certainly then, first, doing Evangelical gives us as good right to eternal life, without the price and ransom of blood, as doing legal gives to the same life. Second, when we sin and fall in atrocious offenses, adulteries, parricide, robbing, we have as good right to justification by works, and life eternal by Evangelical works, suppose he be a robber all his life, as was the repenting thief, as Adam, suppose he had perfectly fulfilled the Law. Now though believing be the condition of the Covenant of Grace, it is of a far other nature than perfect doing, to the end, and constant fulfilling of the whole Law, in thought, word, and deed with all the heart, and the soul and mind, and all the strength. For there is no sin here, and so no place for punishing justice, or wrath; none can so believe, but he sins and so deserves everlasting wrath. If it be said, that by the Covenant of Works he does deserve it, but not by the Covenant of Grace, for Christ has merited to him life eternal. Answer 1. We speak now of the right that a believer has by Evangelical works to justification and life, as contradistinguished from the merits of Christ; this opinion says that a man is justified by Evangelical doing, because God has made the like promise, and the like right by promise, to doing Evangelical, that he made to Law-doing. If Christ's merits be added to qualify Evangelical works, to add to them the worth that they have, then Christ's merits must give life eternal by way of merit, or a virtue of meriting condignly to our Evangelical doing, as Papists say, and so Christ has made us saviors and redeemers of ourselves, and this is a right to life ex condigno more than Adam's most perfect Law-obedience had. 2. The Covenant of Grace commanding faith, does by this opinion command all that the Law of Works does, but in an Evangelical way, that they be done sincerely: therefore, it must forbid all sin which the Law forbids; but the Law forbids not only unbelief, final unbelief, but all the works of the flesh. Also Christ must come [reconstructed: katalusai] to loosen and dissolve the Law, which he denies (Matthew 5); for if the Covenant of Grace condemns nothing but final unbelief, Christ in this Covenant must dissolve the Law; but Christ says, he that breaks or teaches men to break these is the least of the Kingdom of God.

But there is another jus and right to life eternal, by which Christ dying has satisfied the Law, expiated our sins, restored as much and more glory to God by passive obedience, by his sufferings, as we had taken glory from God by our evil doing, and so merited to us life eternal. If any say abusing that place, (Revelation 22:14) that we obtain this [illegible] and right to the Tree of Life, and to Christ our life and everlasting glory (which is our only right, the only Charter of blood) by keeping the Commandments Evangelically; he must say that we first may keep the Commandments Evangelically before we have right to life, to Christ, and so before we believe. 2. That we merit Christ's right or merit by doing, and that by Evangelic works, we buy right to Christ and Christ's merits, and so Christ has not merited to us a jus and right and title to life everlasting by dying, and grace and a gracious right to do his Commandments by his death, but that we, by doing his Commandments, do earn and sweat for a right to Heaven, which is to say, that we by doing, merit and deserve the price of redemption, and that we merit Christ to ourselves, by doing, whereas it is he and he alone, that has merited to us grace and glory, and all title to Heaven. Not to say that a Charter of life from such a noble superior as Christ by the purchase of blood, and of such blood, the blood of God (Acts 20:28) is something better than to have eternal livelihood and freehold from our duty and slippery best works, which are polluted with sin, and by which, though we were Evangelically conscious to ourselves of nothing, yet should we not be therefore justified (1 Corinthians 4:4), for the righteousness in which is David's blessedness before Christ, and Abraham's before the Law, and ours under the Gospel, is in forgiving of iniquity, covering of sin, not imputing of sin (Romans 4:1-7). But in all the Scripture our sins are never said to be pardoned and not imputed to us, by our own most Evangelic doing, for we are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (Romans 3:24), not by the redemption that is in us, and are washed from our sins in his blood (Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; Matthew 26:28; Revelation 1:5) and sufferings, not by our Evangelic doings, and if such a case could stand, the martyrs, sure, might well be justified by their own blood, and since no pardoning, washing, Law-satisfying virtue, can be in faith, works, or our Evangelic deservings, they cannot justify us nor keep and occupy the chair of Christ. And the fault were the less, if our works were only called the way to the kingdom, not the cause of reigning, but they are called perfect, both in their nature, and conform to the rule, and also in order to the end, to justify us before God, and to save us. And if so, all in Christ may say, we have no sin, contrary to Scripture (James 3:2; 1 Kings 8:46; Ecclesiastes 7:20; Proverbs 20:9; James 2:10). Indeed though he that is guilty in one offends in all, yet in the sight of God, all flesh shall be justified, this way (Psalm 143:2). Nor can it be said that such works are perfectly conform to the Gospel, because the doers believing in the lowest degree fulfills the condition of the Gospel. But where it is said that the Gospel commands only faith in the lowest degree; Then the Centurion's faith, the faith of the woman of Canaan, and the greatest faith shall not be required in the Law. For the condition of the Covenant of Grace cannot (say they) be required in the Covenant of Works, and it is not required in the Gospel under the pain of sinning against the Covenant of Grace, and of damnation, for then all who have not faith in the highest degree should be damned, and violate and break the Covenant of Grace, contrary to the whole Gospel, which says that these who have weak faith are justified and saved, and so the greatest faith shall be will-worship and a work of supererogation. And because this way says that all and every one of mankind are under the Covenant of Grace, then 1. there shall be none living under the Law. 2. No Law, but only to believe in Christ, shall lay an obligation on any, Jews, Christians, under pain of wrath.

And if James be to prove that we are justified by works, and yet mean, that both faith and works concur as causes, though faith more principally, how can Paul deny that we are justified by works, if Peter and John jointly work a miracle and heal the cripple man, suppose the influence of John in the miracle be more, yet it is not to be denied, that Peter wrought the miracle. Nor does the Scripture say that we are more principally justified by faith, and less principally justified by works, but the places alleged for salvation by works (if works have a causative influence) specially (Matthew 25) speaks more for the preeminence of works. Nor does the Scripture insinuate anything of the first and second justification, or of growing in justification, in having our sins not imputed to us to our very day of death; and the question must be, (Romans 4) whether Abraham was justified by works done before circumcision, or not, (Romans 4) when as faith was not reckoned to Abraham, when he was in uncircumcision, and the blessedness of righteousness by faith comes both upon circumcision and uncircumcision, verse 9, and he had faith and righteousness and was in Christ and regenerated, when he was justified. Though some taught justification by the works of the ceremonial law, yet Paul (Galatians 3:10) states the question of works agreeable to the moral law, that are absolutely perfect, and must be done by grace. And Paul might justly in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians have excepted himself, David, Abraham, and all the regenerate, for they are justified by giving alms to the poor (Matthew 25) as was Rahab, by receiving and lodging the spies. The English Divines say, how could the Scripture conclude from Abraham's being justified by works, when he offered his Son Isaac, unless by works here we understand a working faith, the Apostle must mean the same by works, verse 21, that he means by faith, verse 23, for he cannot say verse 23 the Scripture was fulfilled (in Abraham's being justified in the work of offering his son, verse 21) which says, Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness: except it must be meant, that the work of offering his son Isaac was counted to him for righteousness. Now the letter of the text expressly verse 23 says that believing God was counted to Abraham for righteousness, then the work of offering his son must either be the believing declared by offering his son, and faith working by that act of offering, or if they be two sundry things, he must then say this in effect, Abraham was justified by the work of sacrificing, [reconstructed: verse 21], causatively before God, therefore, the Scripture is fulfilled, verse 23, and Abraham is justified by believing causatively before God, verse 23, which we cannot ascribe to the Apostle, according to their mind who make faith and works the two collateral and joint causes of justification before God: as if one would say Peter wrought the miracle, therefore, the Scripture is fulfilled that John wrought the miracle. So Abraham was justified by works, verse 21, therefore, Abraham was justified by faith, verse 23. 2. The faith which James debars from justification must be the faith, (James 2) by which Paul strongly proves, (Romans 3, Romans 4) we are justified without works. If faith and works concur as collateral causes in our justification before God, as the Papists contend; but the faith which James excludes from justification, is no faith at all. But only (1.) fair words to the hungry and naked, and giving them supply for no necessity either of hunger or nakedness, and which cannot save, and so is no faith, and so can have no saving influence with works to justify and save, but such is the faith which James excludes [illegible] verses 14, 15, the faith of Paul, saves, (Romans 4, Romans 5) purifies the heart (Acts 15:9). (2.) A dead faith is no saving and living faith, no more than a dead corpse is a living man, verse 17. (3.) A faith that cannot be shown to others in good works, as this verse 18, is no faith, for it has no motions of life. (4.) A faith of the same nature, with the faith of the devils, who believe and tremble, verse 19. (5.) A faith which a vain empty professor imagines to be a living faith, when it is dead, without works, as this verse 20, can have no joint influence of life to justify and save with good works; all which saving influences contrary to this, saving faith has.

2. It is to be observed that James makes mention of two sorts of faiths, chapter 2, which the adversary confounds. 1. All along, verses 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, he gives vivid characters of a dead painted faith, which is in [illegible] in the vain empty boaster, verse 20. 2. He shows us of a lively faith of Abraham, which wrought with his works, now it is a foolish error to make Abraham's faith, and the faith of believing Rahab of the same nature with the faith of the vain empty hypocrite, whose faith is nothing but fair words, and with the faith of devils. So the Papists, Lorinus, Estius, Stapleton, Mavochius, Bellarmine make it a hypocritical and dead faith, and lively faith as Abraham's was, a vital receiving of Christ and a believing the Lord, so as believing is counted for righteousness, to differ not in nature and essence from the faith of the devils, whereas in the faith of sound believers there is a godly submitting and leading captive of the understanding to the obedience of Christ, because it is the Lord that speaks, and so a receiving of the Word as the Word of God (2 Corinthians 10:5; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Matthew 22:32) which is not in the faith of devils. (3.) There is in it a receiving of Christ (John 1:11) a fiducial resting of the heart upon God in Christ. And the word [illegible] is to confide, to betake himself to a lurking place, where one may be safe from a storm (Psalm 2:12; Psalm 11:1; Psalm 31:2; Deuteronomy 32:37; Psalm 118:9; Judges 9:15) come and [illegible] under my shadow. And this is contradistinguished from the devils and hypocrites who cannot seek their lodging nor a hiding place against wrath in the Lord.

2. It is to lean and rest the body (2 Samuel 1:6): Saul leaned upon his spear, and by a metaphor it is to cast the burden upon the Lord (Isaiah 50:10; Psalm 55:22). Hence the word that notes a staff (2 Samuel 22:18; Isaiah 3): the Lord has broken the stay and the staff of bread (Isaiah 30:1), and this is to be done often, when there is no present duty to be done, nor any work required of us, but only a fiducial relying upon the Lord alone, as at the Red Sea Moses and the people were to lean upon JEHOVAH only, not to act, which cannot be said of the faith of Devils and Hypocrites. (3.) It is to look with delight and confidence (Isaiah 17:7), as oppressed servants (Psalm 123:1-2). (4.) There is a word that notes to be silent, not to speak, not to move (Joshua 10:12-13): the Sun was silent, it moved not. It notes a godly submission that the soul dare not speak against God (Psalm 37:7): rest in the Lord — [reconstructed: be subject to] JEHOVAH; LXX: sub ditus esto Domino (Psalm 62:6); from which faith teaches us to submit and hold our peace and lay the mouth in the dust, as a spirit daunted of God (Leviticus 10:3; Job 1:21; Lamentations 3:28; Ezekiel 16:63), which is far from Hypocrites. (5.) To believe is to cleave to God, from a root that signifies to adhere as things glued together with pitch or glue (Psalm 63:8; Joshua 23:8; Deuteronomy 11:22), so we become one Spirit with the Lord (2 Corinthians 3). (6.) It is a word of near adherence [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩] to lean firmly upon any with hope of security (2 Kings 18:5): have you leaned upon this reed? (Hosea 10:13; Psalm 13:6; Psalm 31:7; Deuteronomy 12:10): you shall dwell safely, confidently; it places the soul under the Rock of Omnipotence. (7.) It is to roll yourself upon God, and is borrowed from heavy bodies (Joshua 10:18): Roll great stones to the mouth of the cave (Genesis 29:3; Psalm 22:9): he trusted in the Lord, rolling himself on the Lord. Proverbs 16:3: commit your works to the Lord, and your thoughts shall be established. Cartwright says it is a metaphor from men who, being oppressed with a burden, transfer it off themselves upon one who is mightier and stronger: it is excellent when the heart rolls all its cares upon the Lord, and disburdens itself upon him. (8.) There is a word that notes to lean, to stay or establish, to strengthen (Isaiah 48:2; 2 Chronicles 32:8): the people rested themselves upon the word of Ezekiah (Song of Solomon 2:5): stay me with flagons (Psalm 71:6): I have leaned upon you from the womb, and it notes to draw near (Ezekiel 24:2), so it is to strengthen and make strong the heart that is trembling and shaking if it be not stayed upon God. And shall all these excellencies of faith be in the faith of Devils and Hypocrites? And therefore it is most absurd to make the faith of Abraham all one in nature with the faith of Devils and Hypocrites, and to make the difference only in having works, and no works, as if there were the same heart leaning, soul rolling, and cleaving to the Lord by faith in Abraham, and in Hypocrites and Devils who tremble.

3. That Scripture, Abraham believed and it was counted to him for righteousness: is not (Genesis 22) when he did justify himself by the work of sacrificing Isaac: but it is (Genesis 15:6), when the son of promise Isaac, a type of Christ, is promised to him. At which time there was no work at all required of Abraham, but only believing the promise, for what should Abraham act or do to further the fulfilling of that promise? For he believed that Gospel promise in the meantime, with a faith lively, and having with it as a concomitant a resolution to walk before God and be perfect. [⟨◊⟩] Then the text shall say, Genesis 15:6, Abraham resolved to be fruitful in good works when he heard the promise, and that resolution of good works was counted to him for righteousness — which is most violent.

4. Whoever are justified causally and in the sight of God by works, as James says, to them works are counted as the [reconstructed: formal] cause, for so James from Scripture, verse 23: Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness. Which says, by that faith he was declared just, or by that [reconstructed: faith] was justified, which was imputed to him for righteousness. But his believing, or his faith living and working like the body quickened with the Spirit, was counted to him for righteousness. Now unless it be yielded that James speaks of two faiths — one dead and empty, ascribed to the hypocrite (verse [reconstructed: 14], 15, 16), another lively and working, ascribed to Abraham (verse 23) — and unless it be denied that Abraham was [reconstructed: justified] (verse 23) not by that same faith, it must follow that Abraham's empty believing (verse 23) was that which was counted to him for righteousness (Genesis 15:6). But James cannot be so understood, for when he says the Scripture (Genesis 15:6) was [reconstructed: fulfilled] — for his faith in believing the promised seed (Genesis [reconstructed: 15]) — he shows that Abraham was justified by faith without [reconstructed: works], as Paul says in Romans 4. And when he says he was justified by [reconstructed: works] in offering his son (Genesis 22), he says he was [reconstructed: declared] just — not justified by the empty and idle faith of [reconstructed: the] hypocrites, but by a faith that did prove itself to be lively. So that James proves that we are not justified by a dead faith that neither has, nor can have, good works. As his adversaries said, Paul proves in Romans 4 that we are not justified and saved by works — that is, by our own inherent perfect righteousness — because in Romans 3, all have sinned, Jew and Gentile. Because Abraham would then boast as a perfect man, free of sin, and he would need no Redeemer; the law of works would save him, and so he would need neither remission of sins nor the non-imputation of iniquity. But there is a middle ground between these, and James says that to be justified by faith — by a metonymy of the effect — means by faith made known to be lively, not to the world only, but to one's own conscience. For if James should mean that we are justified by works properly as counted to us for righteousness, he could not say (verse 21) that Abraham was justified by works when he offered his son, and then infer (verse [reconstructed: 22]): you see that his faith wrought with his works. What faith? He had spoken of works (verse 21), not one word of Abraham's faith; yet he says, because Abraham was justified — that is, declared to be real, before God, to his own conscience and to others — his faith did work in a lively way, as real in and by his works, and you see that Abraham's faith (Genesis 15:6) was perfected by works (Genesis 22) when he offered his son. Now it was not [reconstructed: perfected] as touching the nature of it and the act of justifying, for [reconstructed: Paul] cites Genesis 15:6 to prove that Abraham was justified by [reconstructed: that] faith in believing the promise of the blessed seed — some 25 years (as others reckon 30 years) before he sacrificed Isaac (Genesis 22) — so that it must follow that Abraham was not justified by works, nor his [reconstructed: faith] perfect in its lively operations until he offered his son Isaac. But the contrary of this the Scripture tells us, for by faith he [reconstructed: left] his country (Hebrews 11:12), and by faith in believing the promise he was [reconstructed: justified] (Romans 4) many years before. Therefore these words, "you see that faith," must mean that his faith came out to view by his works.

But there are learned and godly Protestants who [reconstructed: hold] that James must speak of [reconstructed: j]ustification real and before God, and [reconstructed: not merely of] declared justification before men only? Answer: It is true, [reconstructed: without need] to name them. But these are subordinate: James speaks not of a faith only declared, nor of a justification only declared to the world, but of a declared justification that is real before God. 2. That is declared to the man himself, and to the world. And that James speaks of a justification before God, the text says: because he says (verse 14), "What can that faith profit?" — which is empty — he must mean, what can it profit before God, to save and justify? As the word in 1 Corinthians 13:3: "if I have not love, it profits me nothing" — before God. 2. Can that faith save him? (It is not well translated, leaving out the particle, in the new translation: "Can faith save him?") Then he must speak also of real faith, and so real salvation, and so of justification before God. 3. The examples of the justification of Abraham and of Rahab, which were real, must say something to the same purpose. 2. That he speaks of real justification to the man's own conscience as well as to the world is clear in the text also. For James speaks to the conscience and privacy of the man who says that he is justified and has faith (verse 18, 19): "You have faith, you believe" — the devils also believe. He would have the hypocrite examine his own conscience, and solidly know whether his faith and justification be real or not. And James awakens all visible professors in this Epistle (as John also does) to try whether his religion be true and solid, or vain — by Chapter 1, being a doer of the Word and not a hearer only (verses 23, 24); by visiting the fatherless (verse 27); by loving and respecting the poor that are godly as well as the rich (Chapter 2); by trying his faith whether it be dead or lively; by bridling the tongue (Chapter 3).

And therefore the Arminians and others do but lose their labour, who say James does not speak here of justification declared to the world, because the world cannot judge infallibly whether our works by which we are declared to be justified, are sincere or not. For first, we say that James does speak of justification declared to the world, for he speaks of real justification before God but as declared, not to the world only, but to the conscience also of the doer. Second, because the world cannot infallibly judge of our justification and works, therefore they cannot judge at all. It is a loose consequence: for we may declare ourselves to our own conscience and to others by our good works, that we are before God justified. Otherwise because men cannot see our good works, nor the principles from which they proceed, whether from saving faith or not, nor the ends for which they are, whether for the glory of God, or not, men should not glorify our heavenly Father — contrary to Matthew 5:16. Nor should the Gentiles glorify God in the day of visitation (as in 1 Peter 2:12) because they cannot infallibly [illegible] whether they be good works or not and done in faith and for God. Nor is Abraham declared to be justified because of a secret heart-intention to offer his son to God in the court of men (but in the court of his own conscience he may); yet his journeying to the place where he was to sacrifice his son, his building an altar, his laying on wood, his binding his son and stretching out his hand to kill him, may well declare him to be a justified man to the world and to men. Trelcatius, the Professors of Leyden, Calvin, Beza, Paraeus, indeed a Papist, Cajetan, has said well to this point. Not to add that Scripture shall never admit, that Abraham's and Rahab's sins were pardoned, their iniquities not imputed, and they delivered from condemnation, by the works of offering Isaac, receiving the spies, fighting the Lord's battles, suffering persecution of Saul. For James, if he says anything for this cause, that good works are the formal cause of our righteousness, our merits, and in the very place of the satisfaction of the blood shed by Christ, we shall so be formal causes not of the declaratory act of justifying (for that may be thought to be the Lord our Justifier's act) yet of our own justification, and so should we fight and run for the crown of inherent righteousness of works, as well as for the crown of life. And what Scripture is there for that? Third, a man shall be as just and sinless, as he may say, I have no sin, I am just: and in order to the covenant of grace, which forbids no sin (as some for this way do teach) but final unbelief, he no more needs forgiveness of sins and the blood of sprinkling, nor pardoning grace, than the elect angels, or Adam in the state of innocency — and to that, Proverbs 20:9, as to that, Ecclesiastes 7:20, 1 John 1. Who can say I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin? The man evangelically justified can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin. Fourth, nor does such a man pray, forgive me my sins, as I forgive, etc., for he is justified from all law-sins, who is inherently holy and evangelically just: and so the gospel is a new law which does not forbid all sins that the law forbids, and the man is not under sin, though he sin against the love of Christ. According to that, if you love me keep my commandments (John 14:15), so he once, before he die, believe. For the law (say the authors) forbids not unbelief, nor any evangelical unthankfulness against the law of a ransom-payer, which yet, I judge the law of nature and nations condemns: the covenant of grace forbids no sin, but final unbelief, and the believer cannot be guilty of that except he fall away.

Fifth, and it may justly be asked, whether the believer evangelically justified, who needs no grace of pardon of redemption from sin in order to the covenant of grace, needs the grace of renovation to keep him to believe, for he needs no pardon for the weakness of his final believing, for the smallest weak faith is a fulfilling of the covenant of grace. To these add, if James mean by [illegible] faith alone, verse 24, by which he says we are not justified, [illegible], no other than the dead faith, verse 20, and the faith which cannot save, the faith of fair words to the hungry and naked, when the vain man gives him nothing necessary for his body (verse 16), the faith without works (verse 17), the faith that cannot be shown to men (verse 18), such a faith as devils (verse 19), and vain hypocrites boast of (verse 20), then surely the conclusion is for us, and agreeable to the scope of James, verse 24: [illegible], you see then a man is justified before men and to himself, and so really declared before God, justified and saved by works as the fruits of saving faith, [illegible], and not by faith only which is dead and without works. For first, he cannot exclude saving and lively faith: for that believing God is counted to Abraham for righteousness, says James, verse 23, for then the conclusion should contradict the premises, and he should say, Abraham was justified by sound and lively believing. Therefore, we are not justified by only sound and lively believing. Second, the adversaries, Socinians, and Arminians, who by this text, say we are justified by works, know no gospel-faith, by which we are justified, but faith including essentially new obedience, the crucifying of the old man, the walking in the Spirit, and repentance; as elsewhere I cite. Therefore when James says we are not justified by faith only, he must mean a naked dead assent: as in the former verses; we are not justified; and that is it which we say: James denies not but says that Abraham believed (Genesis 15).

6. (It is only believing but lively and not dead, not a naked assent, which was counted to him for righteousness) and (Genesis 15), (Romans 4), he was thereby justified; and therefore Paul and James are well reconciled. And the faith here excluded must be a dead faith, not a lively faith and a true faith, as the body without the soul is a true body and has the nature of a true body, though it be no living body. So (say they) the faith that James excludes is a true faith, when as it is evident, it is no more true faith than the faith of devils and hypocrites. 3. It is false by the Papists' way and Arminians also, that we are not justified by faith only, which is a true and general assent to the Word of God, for they teach that in the first Justification, we are justified by faith only without works, as Paul proves, but in the second Justification when a man of just is made more just (say they) he is justified by works; as says James, chapter 2. Now by this they are forced to say, James speaks not of the first Justification, but of the second, but besides that the Scripture knows not two Justifications, James must deny that the unconverted hypocrites, and Rahab the harlot were justified by only faith, as Paul says, and it were most incongruous to teach unconverted ones who never knew the first Justification, how they were not justified in the second Justification. And if James be speaking of the nature and causes of the same Justification before God only, with Paul and not of the effects thereof, it were false that James says (with reverence to the holy Lord) that we are not justified by faith 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 without works, for Paul says it, and proves it strongly from the Scripture, and never insinuates that we are justified in a second Justification by works. And sure he should not have denied all the Jews, all the Gentiles, all the world (Romans 3:9, 19, 29, 30), David a man according to God's heart, and much in communion with God, when he penned the 32nd Psalm, and Abraham a believer and effectually called (Genesis 12), and justified, when he (Genesis 15:6) believed the promise of the seed (Romans 4), to be justified by works in their second, or their evangelical Justification.

Indeed when James says we are not justified 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 only, he must mean fidem solitariam, a faith solitary which has no works conveying it, as man sees not with eyes that are solitary and plucked out of the heart, and separated from hearing, smelling, and the senses, though faith, if true and properly so called (as they say this is) must justify as the eye sees only 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉, and the ear only, not the eye, hears, now this faith has a causative influence in Justification as well as works (if it be proper and true faith, as they say it is, as the body without the spirit has the nature of a body) and so James had no more ground for him to say, you see then that we are not justified by faith only, than to say, you see then that we are not justified by works only. For works separated from faith are no less dead works and cannot justify (1 Corinthians 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 5), than faith separated from works, and really pulled from them, as in a hypocrite, is a true faith. Obj. When James says that a man is justified by works, not by faith only, he makes faith and works concomitant in that procurement of Justification, and in that kind of causality, for he says not, as he is commonly interpreted (not by faith which is alone) but by faith only 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉. Ans. He is not more commonly, nor soundly and truly interpreted, he is not justified by faith which is alone, fide solitariâ, by dead faith. For solâ fide justificamur. Faith has the only virtue of justifying as an instrument, and so is the adverb 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 Solùm taken (Matthew 5:47): If you salute your brethren 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 only, what do you more than publicans? Where 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 notes duties only natural excluding these which only converts in a spiritual way can do (Matthew 8:8): Only say the word, 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 it clearly says that a command of omnipotency only in Christ could heal the sick servant; but yet that omnipotency is not really separated from justice, wisdom, mercy (Matthew 9:21): 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉 If I only touch him, I shall be whole. But the act of touching was conjoined with the act of hearing: Who has touched me? Yet the act of hearing had no causative influence in the drawing virtue out of Christ, but only the act of touching did extract the virtue, as Christ says (Luke 8:50), (Mark 5:36): Fear not, 〈in non-Latin alphabet〉, only believe, says Christ to the Ruler; can it be said, but this excludes works as touching the apprehending of the power and mercy of Christ in raising the dead damsel. And yet that believing was not solitary, but conjoined with love, reverence, submission, 35. So (Luke 8:50), (Matthew 21:19). And (Acts 3:16): The faith that is by Christ has given this cripple perfect soundness. (Hebrews 11:30): By faith the walls of Jericho fell. It were strange to say (by Peter's and John's good works and holiness, the cripple man was made whole) and (by good works the walls of Jericho fell) and yet there were good works, love, mercifulness, courage in the priests who compassed the walls of Jericho, and in Peter and John. Add to these that by good works we must more and more justify and pardon our own sins, and must more and more buy a right to the Tree of Life, as they teach, citing (Revelation 22:14), and more merit, ex pacto Euangelico, life eternal: and so our works and merits must be joint causes with the blood of Christ, and the Martyrs' blood and Christ's blood must have parallel and collateral influence with Christ's blood to buy right to the Tree of Life; Indeed and Paul already justified, even in the progress of that which is called his evangelical Justification (Philippians 3:9), would be in another condition: That I may be found in him not having my own righteousness which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. And why should Arminians and Socinians deny it to be Paul's own. For 1. it is inherent righteousness. 2. It is not infused as Papists say, but acquired as they teach. 3. It came (say they) from Paul's own free-will indifferent to will or not.

But how is the Scripture fulfilled in Abraham's believing (James 2:23)?

The Apostle spoke often of faith [in non-Latin alphabet] and believing, verse 14 twice, verse 17 once, verse 18 three times, verse 19 twice, verse 20 once, verse 22 twice, that is nine times, thereof emphatically, verse 23 by way of excellency the Scripture was then fulfilled — Abraham [in non-Latin alphabet] believed, and it was counted to him for righteousness, as it is written, Genesis 15:6, before God and man and to his own conscience, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar. That was real, visible and conspicuous believing and righteousness, to deny himself so far for God: for James is much for religion made known to a man's self, and to men, and has far other adversaries in the other extremity than Paul had, even the old Gnostics, who, in opposition to the Jews and Pharisees, laid aside the Law, doing of the Law (James 1:22-23), all works (James 2:14), all conscience of bridling the tongue (James 3:1-2), of peaceable and mortified living (James 4, James 5), and thought it godliness to hear the word in the assemblies (James 2:1-3), without love to the brethren, and to keep in their head a room, empty faith, and professed fair, and gave good words, but no garments to the naked (verse 14-15). And James had good cause to treat of a visible and declared faith, but yet not merely declared, but which was real and can save (verse 14), and of justification such, as that of Abraham and Rahab, as was sensible and real and not in a bare profession: for James speaks of a profiting and saving faith (James 2:14): What does it profit, etc.? Can faith save him? Another device is here alleged, of a formed faith animated with charity and that justifies (say Papists) and an unformed faith void of charity, and that, say they, does not justify: and the same way, but in other expressions, Arminians and Socinians teach, that to believe and do good works, and to repent and walk in all the commandments of Jesus Christ, is to believe, or complete formed and evangelical faith. But we distinguish them as the Scripture. It is true (Romans 4:9), faith is said to be imputed to Abraham for righteousness, and so verse 3, verse 5, but it is not meant of the act or work of believing, that was counted for Abraham's formal righteousness, there should so no room be left to the satisfaction of Christ, reckoned to be ours: if all the righteousness of God (Romans 10:3; 1 Corinthians 5:21; Philippians 3:9) should be turned over in an act of believing, mixed with much doubting and in our sinful obedience. And the Socinians have more reason for them to say, there is no necessity of any real satisfaction of blood paid for us, than the Arminians and Papists: for if our righteousness and inherent obedience may be of grace esteemed formal righteousness before God, by a free evangelical pact and an act of God's free will: the Lord might have esteemed the eating of an apple, or any act of obedience, our formal righteousness, and so Christ died in vain, to become our righteousness, where an act of a sinful man, or a deed of the Law, even the Law of faith is sufficient. What need is there for the shedding of the blood of God? Frustrà fit per plura, quod æquè benè potest fieri per pauciora. There is no need of real satisfaction.

2. Faith imputed does well bear the sense of the object that faith lays hold on, as our righteousness (Romans 3:21). Now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested. What righteousness of God? verse 22. Even the righteousness of God through faith of Jesus Christ to all. Now if the righteousness of God is manifested without one Law, to wit, of works, why not without another Law, of faith and of inherent Gospel-righteousness? And what need that Christ should die, if the act of believing should be that precious righteousness of God, and that according to the Law of faith? This by the way. As hope is put for the object hoped for? As (Romans 8:24) Hope that is seen is not hope, that is, the thing possessed, the salvation which we have in present possession, is not hoped for. (Colossians 1:5) For the hope's sake laid up in heaven, that is, the thing hoped for. For the grace of hope is not laid up in heaven. verse 27. Christ in you the hope of glory. So faith here put for the thing believed; so says the Martyr, my love is crucified, that is, Christ my loved or believed one is crucified: So by faith in his name is this man made whole. It were strange to say, by faith, and repentance, and mortification is this man made whole. And it must be said, if so be that faith includes repentance. Now Peter denies (Acts 3:12) this, why marvel you, as if we by our power and holiness had made this man to walk? It's not our holiness, but Jesus Christ has done it, even God, the God of Abraham, etc. verse 13. has done it: And yet, verse 16. faith in his Name has made him strong: That is, faith or believing in his Name, that is, in his Power, Authority, Godhead, has made him strong. Therefore, faith is put for the thing or righteousness believed: So (Hebrews 11) By faith the walls of Jericho fell, that is, by love the soul and form of faith, say Papists, and by repentance and new obedience, which is all one with faith, say Socinians, the walls of Jericho fell. So by faith they subdued kingdoms, stopped the mouths of lions. What influence real or physical had faith in slaying men, in refraining the hungry lions to eat Daniel? None at all: But thus the mighty God believed in by these men, subdued kingdoms, stopped the mouths of lions; if it be replied there is not alike reason of justifying faith, which is dead as touching the influence and causality to justify, as there is of the faith of miracles in these points; it is replied, there is every way the same reason: For as Abraham's dead faith, if it had been dead could no more have justified and saved him, than the hypocrite's dead faith can save and justify him, as James says (James 2:14-16). So could not these worthies recorded (Hebrews 11) have cast down the walls of Jericho, subdued kingdoms, stopped the mouths of lions by faith, if that faith had been as dead in its nature, as the faith of the vain Gnostic and hypocrite, who says to the brother [reconstructed: or] sister naked, depart in peace, be you warmed and filled, and yet gives him not these things that are needful to the body (James 2:15-16). And this we must say, except we admit that the fancied faith of the hypocrite can remove mountains, nor is it place to dispute whether reprobates as Judas have saving faith in working miracles, it is sure their faith of miracles cannot be a hypocritical faith such as is (James 2:14-16). (3.) The Scripture differentiates between faith and love, and faith and repentance. As 1. we are not once said to be justified by faith, but are never said to be justified by love, repentance, alms deeds. It's easy with an active engine to labor to prove how faith includes love: And so does hope and love include many other works and gifts of the Spirit, but the Holy Ghost distinguishes them. As (2.) by faith as from a saving principle, Abraham sojourned in the Land, by faith Noah built an Ark, Jacob blessed the sons of Joseph, Moses would not be called the Son of Pharaoh's daughter, yet to build an Ark is not to believe in God; we pray in faith, hear in faith, yet these are not the same.

(3.) (Mark 1:15) Repent and believe, (Acts 20:21) Testifying repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus, (Hebrews 6:1) Not laying the foundation of repentance from dead works, and faith toward God, (1 Timothy 1:5) Love and a good conscience and faith unfeigned, (Philippians 1:5) Love and faith, (1 Thessalonians 1:3) We thank God, remembering your work of faith, and labor of love, (Hebrews 6:10) Labor of love. verse 11. The full assurance of hope. verse 12. Faith and patience. We believe in Christ: but do we repent in Christ? 4. Faith is a leaning on God (Isaiah 10:20), (Isaiah 26:3), (Isaiah 50:10) love is not so. Faith is a coming to God by way of affiance (John 5:40), (Matthew 11:28), (John 6:37) a receiving of Christ (John 1:11) an eating of his flesh, and drinking of his blood (John 6:54-56) not any of these can be said of love, of repentance, of new obedience.

(4.) If to believe in Christ as Lord and Law-giver be formally (for effectively and practically we may with that learned and pious Doctor Preston say it is) a consenting to Christ's dominion and government over us to obey him (though to consent at the coronation and to swear an oath of loyalty to a King be widely different from obeying his laws) as unbelief is a rebellion against his government (Luke 19:17) then well may Adam, in the Covenant of Works, be said to be justified and saved by faith; for if to believe in God Redeemer, be to give ourselves to obey him as Lord Redeemer, and if this surrendering be the obedience of works by which we are justified and saved and perfectly righteous before God, upon the same reason to believe in God Law-giver and Creator in the Covenant of Works, and for Adam to surrender himself covenant ways, by a legal faith shall be the Law obedience of works by which Adam is justified and saved, and so he is saved by Law-faith, as we are by Gospel-faith.

And this is to be remembered, that for one to give himself to Christ as his Lord to be governed and commanded, and to be willing to obey him is neither formally faith (though it may be conjoined with believing) nor obedience, but an intention or purpose to obey. And 1. shall we then be justified by works, that is, by a purpose and intention to work? 2. There are in us May resolutions and purposes like May blossoms, that wither before harvest, as some are willing but not obedient (Isaiah 1:19). One says he will go work in his father's vineyard, it may be he purposes to work, but yet he works not (Matthew 21:30), nor is a practical purpose of heart to obey either obedience or faith formally.

5. If to be justified by faith in Christ as not only Jesus who saves, but as Lord who commands, then we are justified by love, for we are to love him not as Jesus only, but also as Lord (1 Corinthians 16:22; Ephesians 6:24), especially since all the works of the law come under the command of love (Matthew 22:37; Luke 7:27; Deuteronomy 6:5; Romans 13:8).

(6.) All these, your faith has saved you (Matthew 9; Luke 7), only believe, must be of this truth, your good works has saved you: only do good works. And it is strange that Paul says (Ephesians 2:8-9), By grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast. Nor could Paul make an opposition between grace and works (as in Romans 11:6) if the grace of believing and good works were one in the New Testament, for so we should be saved by works, and not by works. And Paul by an [illegible], takes that away. Indeed, but we are saved, that is, justified and delivered from obligation to wrath by the works of free grace. He answers, in fact, neither are we saved or justified by these works of grace as by means or causes. For we are first saved and justified before we can do good works, for good works are the fruits of free grace, since (verse 10) we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus (and so justified and saved in Christ Jesus) to good works, that we should walk in them. Indeed, Paul undeniably removes this doubt (1 Corinthians 4:4), I know nothing by myself (that is, by his grace I am free of such sins as bring condemnation, and so he must abound in works of grace) [illegible], yet thereby (and notwithstanding of all my inherent holiness by works of grace) I am not justified. (7.) There should be no ground of glorying and boasting more than this, by the Socinian and Arminian way, if we should be justified by works which come from free will not determined by any grace either habitual or actual which is merited by the death of Christ, but do proceed from pure free will which separates the believer from the non-believer: Then might we glory and boast that we are not in the debt of Christ or of his grace for that which is our formal righteousness before God, and so no flesh can say they are justified by grace, but that we are justified by nature the same way that Adam should have been justified without being beholden to Christ or to his death.

Assertion 3. There are not properly the same causes of the possession of life eternal, and of the righteousness of life eternal: the ransom of Christ's blood is only the cause of the right. For jus or right to life eternal is a legal and a moral thing, [reconstructed: ens] morale, and has a moral cause, as a man has right to such a city being the lord and owner thereof by birth, or money, or conquest, or by gift or grant of a prince or of the citizens themselves, but possession and enjoying the houses and rents of the city is a physical thing, ens Physicum, and has a physical cause, as eating, drinking, lodging, sleeping, wearing of clothes to defend the body from the cold. So the legal right a man has to the bread and lodging he has in an inn, but the physical causes, are hunger, appetite, bodily necessities so require and his pleasure to make use of such necessities. Hence the eating, drinking, may be physically good, and the right, jus legale, very bad, he may have no right to the bread, when he comes to it only by spoil and plunder. So the legal right, jus legale to life eternal is the ransom of blood that Christ paid, our Goel, our friend and kinsman, to make the inheritance ours; but that great (I may say) almost apostolic light, Mr. John Calvin says good works, are, as it were, the inferior causes of the possession of life. So simple possession is one thing, and [reconstructed: quo] jure aut titulo, but by what law-right he possesses, is another thing.

But 1. Good works are necessary, necessitate praecepti, by the command of God and promise (1 Thessalonians 4:4; 1 Corinthians 6:20; Ephesians 2:10; Matthew 28:20), and where it is said (1 Timothy 4:8), Godliness is profitable to all things, having the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. [illegible] the promise is opposed to the Law. And that is a strong argument (Galatians 3:18): [illegible] If the inheritance be of the Law, it is no more of promise, but God gave it to Abraham by promise, Covenant-promise: What is that to the Galatians and to us Gentiles? Much every way. For three notable points are therein. 1. The heavenly inheritance promised to the seed, to Christ and his (verse 16), not a poor earthly Canaan, as Socinians and Papists say, were promised to Abraham and his seed, except they say that an earthly Canaan was promised to Christ. 2. That Covenant-promise of a heavenly inheritance made to Abraham, the same is made to the believing Galatians, the Gentiles and their seed, else Paul says nothing for the doctrine of justification by faith to the Gentiles, contrary to the purpose of the Apostle. 3. There is an inheritance by Covenant-promise, a promise of eternal life made not to works as the price that buys the right: for, sure, then Christ must have died in vain. 3. Works are not necessary simply, necessitate medii: for then we must exclude all infants; But the necessity of a Precept infers a necessity of means ordinary to all capable of a command, that they do good, and sow to the Spirit, that they may reap of the Spirit life everlasting (Galatians 6:8). (3.) They are necessary for the glory of God (Matthew 5:16; 1 Peter 3:1-2; 1 Peter 2:12). (4.) They are necessary by the law of gratitude, which is common both to the Covenant of Works and of Grace, as we are debtors to God for being, so to God-incarnate as ransomed ones for everlasting life (1 Corinthians 6:20; Luke 1:75; 1 Peter 1:18) and eternal well-being.

But such as will have our works the formal cause of our justification, they put them in the chair of Christ's merit, and they must be meritorious as Adam's legal obedience should have been: indeed, but not, but by and of gracious estimation, God so esteeming them, say they. True: but, as is proven, neither was Adam's obedience meritorious, but by God's estimation: Indeed, and Calvin gives a power of meriting ex pacto to our works. But our works of grace are dyed and washed in Christ's blood, and justified that they may justify us. But the Scripture speaks nothing of justifying of works, or not imputing sin to our works. Antinomians dream of a freeing of both the person and works of a justified man from Law-obligation, and that is a way indeed to justify works of murder and adultery in David or any justified man from being sins against the Law of God: But because our works of grace have an intrinsic power of meriting and justifying communicated to them by the merits of Christ, they must be far more our formal righteousness before God, than Adam's righteousness was his justification and life before God. And if our works of grace have no power of merit or worth communicated to them from Christ's death, then must it follow, though Christ had never died, our works may have the same gracious esteem of God, the same power of meriting, of justifying and saving they now have. Indeed, and since Christ has redeemed us from our vain conversation (1 Peter 1:18) by his blood: Why but, as he has redeemed us from hell, and purchased salvation to us, by giving us grace by our own good works after conversion to redeem and justify and save ourselves, so he has redeemed us from our vain conversation (1 Peter 1:18) by giving us grace to do such works, before we be redeemed from our vain conversation, and before we be converted, as we may merit our conversion and redemption from our vain conversation? If it be said, he absolutely and without any condition that is required, on our part, by his blood redeems all, whom he has given his Son Christ to die for, from their vain conversation. 1. All mankind without exception (for by their way he has died for them all) must be redeemed from their vain conversation and converted: Nothing can be more false. 2. The Gospel to no purpose, and the Gospel-commands shall in vain crave obedience, or so much as the duty of hearing the Gospel, from such as are not yet redeemed from their vain conversation, or not yet converted: For that redemption is promised to them absolutely, without any condition required of them, says this way.

Objection: If works have a causative influence on the possession of glory, as working on wages, and fighting on victory, then must they have influence on just possession also: For possession, except it be just, is no possession, but usurpation.

Answer: Possession is essentially the enjoying of any thing pleasant, gainful, indeed or honest, whether the title be just or unjust. The title is accidental to the possession.

Objection 2: He that possesses the Crown, possesses the diamonds and precious stones and the worth of the Crown; Therefore he that possesses life, possesses the right and title to it.

Answer: True: but hence it follows not but possession and right to what we possess do differ in their nature. Nor do we properly possess the right of possession: for the right or title is modus rei, non res, the manner of and the due or the undue way of the possession thereof.

Objection 3: Is not possession of eternal life from Christ, as well as the title or right to the Crown from Him?

Answer: True, both are from Christ, but not the same way. Possession of the Crown is the enjoying thereof, and is from free grace, and we, as willing and sanctified agents, make use thereof: But Christ alone bought with his blood the title and right to it. And when he gave his life for the rightful and due possession of glory to us, we did contribute nothing either request or help to procure the title, and the grace to enter in to the possession by faith is the fruit also of free grace. Nor can it be denied but our good works, by which we enter into possession of the Crown, are also the fruit of Christ's death: but yet not so as there is any meritorious or federal power of deserving the possession communicated to our works; Only they are made by Christ's death the obliged way to the possession of life.

Objection 4: How then is there a promise of the life to come made to Godliness (1 Timothy 4:8)?

Answer: That promise is neither a promise of the Covenant of Works, for by the deeds of the Law no flesh can be saved: Nor is it a federal promise of the Covenant of Grace, strictly so called, except any would say that it is called a promise especially for faith, which is special godliness, and the acknowledging of the truth, which is according to godliness (Titus 1:1). And so a promise made to the godly in so far as he is in Christ by faith, and in Christ is the promise of life (2 Timothy 1:1). Nor, third, is the promise of a title and right, which is made to Christ our Ransom payer, made to our godliness, as if it did buy our right to life eternal, or were the price thereof. Fourth, life is promised to believers who work, not because they work. And fifth, the Lord in these only shows the order of bringing men to glory, not the causes of the right and title to glory, except we say the mowing of the first quarter of the meadow is the cause of the mowing of the second, because it makes way to the mowing of the second, and the mowing of the second quarter is a cause of the mowing of the third, and so forth, until all be mown. As, because God gives grace to work, to run, to use means, therefore he gives, of free grace, the crown of life in the possession thereof.

Objection: Adam's law-obedience should only have so, and by this way been the cause or way to the possession?

Answer: Not so; if Adam had perfected his obedience, he should have claimed life by right of sinless, federal merit, ex pacto, without suiting of it by any title of grace merited by Christ — not so we. It's true believers are called [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], worthy (Revelation 3), but that is legally in Christ the Head, not that the meritorious worth of Christ goes out of himself and renders our works intrinsically meritorious.