Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…

CHAP. V. Whether Christ be the only Party in Covenant with God? and not Believers, or lapsed man?

P. I will not waste time in expounding or censuring other mens words: but as to the matter, is it not a most shameful thing, that a man of your profession and pretensions to knowledge, should confound those two Covenants which children should be taught in their Catechism to distinguish? By [a Covenant] here we mean, 1. A Covenant offered and imposed, which is also a Law: 2. A Covenant consented to and mutual. And now tell me, Quest. 1. Was it not a distinct Law that was made to us, from that which Christ was obliged by? I mean the Law of Grace and Faith? Was ⟨p. 246⟩Christ commanded to Repent of his sin? or accept a Saviour? or pray for pardon? or mortify his lusts? or trust another to reconcile him to God? or be Thankful for such mercies? or any such like Remedying means and duties for himself?

P. I will not waste time in expounding or censuring other mens words: but as to the matter, is it not a most shameful thing, that a man of your profession and pretensions to knowledge, should confound those two Covenants which children should be taught in their Catechism to distinguish? By [a Covenant] here we mean, 1. A Covenant offered and imposed, which is also a Law: 2. A Covenant consented to and mutual. And now tell me, Quest. 1. Was it not a distinct Law that was made to us, from that which Christ was obliged by? I mean the Law of Grace and Faith? Was ⟨p. 246⟩Christ commanded to Repent of his sin? or accept a Saviour? or pray for pardon? or mortifie his lusts? or trust another to reconcile him to God? or be Thankful for such mercies? or any such like Remedying means and duties for himself?

Lib. No: that must not be imagined.

P. Quest. 2. Is not all this commanded by the Law of Grace?

Lib. Yes: If it be a Law.

P. Quest. 3. Was not Christ under a Law, which bound him, 1. To obey all the precepts of nature perfectly without sin? 2. To obey all the Mosaical Law as far as he was capable? 3. To do all this a sa Mediator to reconcile God and man, And to dye for sinners, to work Miracles, to send out Apostles, to gather a Church, to intercede for us, and to present us Justified and perfect to his father? And are we obliged to do so too?

P. Quest. 3. Was not Christ under a Law, which bound him, 1. To obey all the precepts of nature perfectly without sin? 2. To obey all the Mosaical Law as far as he was capable? 3. To do all this a sa Mediator to reconcile God and man, And to dye for sinners, to work Miracles, to send out Apostles, to gather a Chruch, to intercede for us, and to present us Justified and perfect to his father? And are we obliged to do so too?

Lib. No one so imagineth.

P. Quest. 4. Did not Christ as a Covenanter undertake all this? And do we do so too? And do not we in Baptism our selves, consent and promise, to take God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for our Father, Saviour and Sanctifier, and to forsake the flesh, the world and the devil? Is it Christ only that is Baptized? Nay did Christ ever receive such a Baptism as this, to wash away his sins, and deliver him a pardon? Is it Christ or we that at Baptism make these promises to God? Is it to Christ or us that Christ himself saith, If thou believe and repent thou shalt be saved? Doth Christ as King make Laws and Covenants to bind himself only? Who seeth not, that hath any sense of Scripture matters, that The Mediators case, office and work is one, and ours another: that It is one Law that was given him, and another to us: yea, that which seemeth the same was another, being not formally but materially only the same (and forma denominat:) For he was to fulfil the Law of Moses and of Innocency, to such ends (as a Redeemer) and with such difference from our case, that it was not formally but materially (and that but in part) the same Law: and so his Baptism was formally another thing from any ones Baptism else in the World. It was one thing that Christ promised and undertook in his Covenant with the Father, and it's another thing that we undertake and promise. It's one thing that God promiseth to Christ upon his Merits (that he shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied) and another thing that he promiseth us (that our persons shall be Justified, sanctified and saved.) In a word, by the Law given to Christ, Christ himself is Governed as a Subject, and Justified and Rewarded by God as his Judge for fulfilling it. By the Law given to us, we are the subjects and Christ is the Governor, Lawgiver and our Judge, who will Justify, reward, or condemn and punish us. I know not how that man can preach the Gospel that knoweth not the difference between the Law and Covenant made to and with Christ as Mediator, and the Law and Covenant made to and with us, and in Baptism solemnly professed! Children should not be ignorant of it.

P. Quest. 4. Did not Christ as a Covenanter undertake all this? And do we do so too? And do not we in Baptism our selves, consent and promise, to take God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for our Father, Saviour and Sanctifier, and to forsake the flesh, the world and the devil? Is it Christ only that is Baptized? Nay did Christ ever receive such a Baptism as this, to wash away his sins, and deliver him a pardon? Is it Christ or we that at Baptism make these promises to God? Is it to Christ or us that Christ himself saith, If thou believe and repent thou shalt be saved? Doth Christ as King make Laws and Covenants to bind himself only? Who seeth not, that hath any sense of Scripture matters, that The Mediators case, office and work is one, and ours another: that It is one Law that was given him, and another to us: yea, that which seemeth the same was another, being not formally but materially only the same (and forma denominat:) For he was to fulfil the Law of Moses and of Innocency, to such ends (as a Redeemer) and with such difference from our case, that it was not formally but materially (and that but in part) the same Law: and so his Baptism was formally another thing from any ones Baptism else in the World. It was one thing that Christ promised and undertook in his Covenant with the Father, and it's another thing that we undertake and promise. It's one thing that God promiseth to Christ upon his Merits (that he shall see of the ravail of his soul and be satisfied) and another thing that he promiseth us (that our persons shall be Justified, sanctified and saved.) In a word, by the Law given to Christ, Christ himself is Governed as a Subject, and Justified and Rewarded by God as his Judge for fulfilling it. By the Law given to us, we are the subjects and Christ is the Governour, Lawgiver and our Judge, who will Justifie, reward, or condemn and punish us. I know not how that man can preach the Gospel that knoweth not the difference between the Law and Covenant made to and with Christ as Mediatour, and the Law and Covenant made to and with us, and in Baptism solemnly prosessed! Children should not be ignorant of it.

Lib. But it is the same thing which is promised to Christ and us, viz. that we shall be justified and saved; and this is promised first to Christ, and therefore the words cited may be justified: Christ is the seed of the woman who is first to break the Serpents head, Gen. 3. 15.

P. 1. The same thing may be promised to different persons, in different Covenants: To promise to Christ that his elect shall be saved, and to promise Believers that they shall be saved, are two promises. 2. What one word do you find in Gen. 3. of a Covenant or promise made to Christ? It's true that he is the principal Seed there meant (though ⟨p. 247⟩not the only:) But he is the Promised Seed: It's one thing for a promise▪ to be made to Christ, and another thing that Christ as the victorious seed • be promised to man. There is no promise in Gen. 3. to Christ mentioned •• (and what can be meant by a Promise of God to God himself?) but a prophecy and promise of a Saviour to man: But if there had, that would not have proved these two to be one. Understand the tenor and difference of these several Laws and Covenants of God, or pretend not to understand the Scripture: viz. 1. The Law and Covenant of Innocency made to Adam. •. The Law and Covenant made to and with the Mediator for our Redemption. 3. The promise, Law or Covenant of Grace of the first Edition, made to Adam▪ and all in him, and renewed with Noah and mankind in him. 4. The Law▪ and Covenant both of Common Grace and of Peculiarity, at once given to Abraham, and perfected in the Law and Covenant of Works made by Moses with the Jews. 5. The Law and Covenant of Grace made by the▪ Incarnate Mediator (and the Father by him) in the second perfect Edition, with eminent peculiarity.

P. 1. The same thing may be promised to different persons, in different Covenants: To promise to Christ that his elect shall be saved, and to promise Believers that they shall be saved, are two promises. 2. What one word do you find in Gen. 3. of a Covenant or promise made to Christ? It's true that he is the principal Seed there meant (though ⟨p. 247⟩

CHAP. VI. Whether the New Covenant of Grace have any Conditions?

Lib. V. BY feigning the Covenant of Grace to have Conditions, you make it to be a Covenant of works.

P. Either by works you mean [any humane acts;] And so all Gods Covenants with man (and his Laws) are of works; that is, It is some act of man that they require: For what else can be commanded? Or you mean as Paul doth, when he calls the Jews Law, a Law of works: And if so, you falsify his doctrine or ours. Prove if you can that by works he meaneth every humane Act, and that Faith it self is either no Act of man, or the works meant by him.

P. Either by works you mean [any humane acts;] And so all Gods Covenants with man (and his Laws) are of works; that is, It is some act of man that they require: For what else can be commanded? Or you mean as Paul doth, when he calls the Jews Law, a Law of works: And if so, you falsifie his doctrine or ours. Prove if you can that by works he meaneth every humane Act, and that Faith it self is either no Act of man, or the works meant by him.