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,…

P. 1. The Alexandrian Copy which giveth him this occasion, is singular, and not be set against all other (though the Vulgar Latin go the same way). Beza who yet thinks that a transposition of two Verses hath darkened these Texts, this Book being negligently used, because many for a time took it not for an Apostolical Writing, (or Canonical,) yet saith, that it is contra omnium Graecorum codicum fidem, that the Vulgar goeth. 2. But all's one in sense: For [to wash their Garments] is [to be sanctified or purified from sin] and not only from guilt of punishment: And [Greek or Hebrew] signifieth such a Power as we call Authority o• Right (usually.) But what maketh you deny Conditions on mans part?

P. 1. The Alexandrian Copy which giveth him this occasion, is singular, and not be set against all other (though the Vulgar Latin go the same way). Beza who yet thinks that a transposition of two Verses hath darkned these Texts, this Book being negligently used, because many for a time took it not for an Apostolical Writing, (or Canonical,) yet saith, that it is contra omnium Graecorum codicum fidem, that the Vulgar goeth. 2. But all's one in sense: For [to wash their Garments] is [to be sanctified or purified from sin] and not only from guilt of punishment: And 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 signifieth such a Power as we call Authority o• Right (usually.) But what maketh you deny Conditions on mans part?

Lib. Because, 1. It is supposed that a condition is profitable to him that requireth it. 2. It is some Cause of the benefit. 3. It is to be done by the performers own strength: whereas God giving •s Faith, that can be no condition on our part which is first a Gift from him that requireth it: For to give it first, maketh it no condition of ours.

P. Here we see what it is to quarrel about ambiguous Words: No one of these is true that you say, of the common nature of a condition; or at least as we mean by that word. 1. Civilians define a Condition to be Lex addita negotio, qua donec praestetur eventum suspendit. As it is Required it is only Modus promissionis, donationis vel contractus: as Performed it is only a Removal of an Impediment, and a Disposition of the Receiver. So that as the Non-performance is but the suspension of a Causation, so the performance of a Condition as such, is no Cause efficient: But it is dispositio subjecti, which you may call a necessary Modus of a Material Cause, as the Recipient may improperly be called; Dr. Twice therefore calleth faith Ca•sa justificationis dispositiva. ⟨p. 249⟩2. So it be an act of our own, it is no way necessary that it be done without the Commanders help or gift: For he that giveth us to believe, doth give it by this means, even by commanding it, and making it a Condition of his further benefits, that so he may induce us as rational free agents, to perform it ex intuitu mercedis, or by the motive of the end or benefit. For he causeth it by suitable means. And no doubt, but faith, and the rest, are free acts of ours, though caused by Gods grace. 3. And it is accidental to a Condition, that it be any way commodious to the Imposer. What profit is it to a Father that his Child put off his Hat and say, I thank you? And yet he may make that a condition of his gift. What profit is it to a free Physician, that the Patient observe his order in taking his Medicines? And yet he may give them on that condition. But yet I will add, that as usually men make that the condition of a Gift or Contract, which the person obliged is backward else to perform, and that which is somewhat either for the Donor or Contractors Interest, or the Ends of his contract: so God who taketh his Glory and Pleasure in his Children's Good, to be as his Interest, and the End of his Gifts, and knoweth how backward we are to our duty, doth on these accounts impose on us our duty and conditions, his Pleasure and Glory being instead of his Commodity.

P. Here we see what it is to quarrell about ambiguous Words: No one of these is true that you say, of the common nature of a condition; or at least as we mean by that word. 1. Civilians define a Condition to be Lex addita negotio, qua donec praestetur eventum suspendit. As it is Required it is only Modus promissionis, donationis vel contractus: as Performed it is only a Removal of an Impediment, and a Disposition of the Receiver. So that as the Non-performance is but the suspension of a Causation, so the performance of a Condition as such, is no Cause efficient: But it is dispositio subjecti, which you may call a necessary Modus of a Material Cause, as the Recipient may improperly be called; Dr. Twisse therefore calleth faith Casa justificationis dispositiva.

Lib. Doth not God promise us the first Grace, even to take the hard heart out of our bodies, and give us hearts of flesh, and new hearts, &c. And I pray, what condition can the first grace have, unless you will run in infinitum, to seek Conditions of Conditions?

P. 1. This is a Cause of great moment, of which I have my self had darker thoughts than now I have. 1. If one Benefit of the Covenant have no Condition (viz. the first,) will it follow, that none of the rest are given upon condition? May not God in Baptism give us a Right of special Relation to the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, his Love, Grace and Communion, Pardon, Adoption and Glory, on condition of Faith and Repentance, and yet himself give us that Faith and Repentance which is the condition of the rest? 2. But upon fuller consideration it will appear, that It is not the first Grace that those promises mean, by a new and soft heart: For who ever will examine them, shall find that the Texts mention Conditions and also antecedent Grace: And indeed, [A new and soft heart] is but the same thing which the New Testament calleth Sanctification. And yet that Sanctification is promised as consequent to Faith as its condition: And our ordinary Divines do accordingly distinguish of Vocation and Sanctification; holding that in Vocation the Act of Faith and Repentance are caused by Gods Grace, before proper Habits; and that Sanctification is the Habits (specially of Love and Holiness) following them, (vid. Ames. Medull. de Vocat. Rolloc. de Vocat. Hookers Souls Vocat. & Humil. Rogers of Faith, &c.) And this is the new and fleshy heart. But what need we more to prove that Covenant Conditional which I mean, when it is nothing but the Baptismal Covenant? where sure the condition is notorious, and every Baptizing Minister prerequireth the profession of it.

CHAP. VII. Whether Justifying Faith be a Believing in Christ as a Teacher, Lord, &c. or only a Receiving of his Righteousness?

P. VI. AS to this your sixth Charge, I have said so much elsewhere, in my Disputations of Justification, and in other Books, that I cannot justify the tiring of Readers by repeating it: And will say now but this little following: 1. That Paul doth not distinguish between justifying faith, and saving faith, but excludeth the Works excluded by him, from being the causes either of Justification or Salvation. 2. That if [Receiving Christs Righteousness] be meant by them properly and physically, it is no sort of faith at all; but only [the effect of the donation,] which they call [Justificari,] or passive Justification: But if it mean a moral metonymical Reception, that is nothing but [Consent to have the offered gift]; And if only Consent to have Christs Righteousness be Justifying faith, then all the Assenting part is excluded (in which Scripture much placeth it, and most Divines in part, and many in whole, besides Cam•ro and his followers). And so also all the Affiance or Fiducial acts are excluded, which almost all include; even that which they call Recumbency being distinct from Consent. 3. All these acts following are essential to Justifying faith, as well as this Consent to be Justified: 1. An Assenting belief in God, in the baptismal sense. 2. An Assent to the truth of Christs Person, Office and Doctrine. 3. A belief in the Holy Ghost. 4. A belief of Pardon, Sanctification and Glory as possible, purchased and offered by Christ. 5. A Consent that God be our God in Christ. 6. And a Consent that Christ be our Teacher. 7. And our King, and Ruler. 8. And our Intercessor. 9. And our Judge and Justifier by sentence (and as our Advocate). 10. A belief of his Resurrection, Power and Glory. 11. A Trusting to the Father and the Son according to these forementioned Offices. 12. A Consent to be Sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 4. Plainly our Justifying and Saving Faith in Pauls sense is the same thing with our Christianity, or becoming Christians: And the same thing with our Baptismal faith and consent. 5. To believe in Christ as Christ is in Scripture Justifying faith: But to accept his righteousness only, and not to believe in him as our Lord, and our Teacher and Intercessor, &c. as aforesaid, is not to believe in him as Christ. 6. In my Answer (ubi sup.) to Mr.

P. VI. AS to this your sixth Charge, I have said so much elsewhere, in my Disputations of Justification, and in other Books, that I cannot justifie the tiring of Readers by repeating it: And will say now but this little following: 1. That Paul doth not distinguish between justifying faith, and saving faith, but excludeth the Works excluded by him, from being the causes either of Justification or Salvation. 2. That if [Receiving Christs Righteousness] be meant by them properly and physically, it is no sort of faith at all; but only [the effect of the donation,] which they call [Justificari,] or passive Justification: But if it mean a moral metonymical Reception, that is nothing but [Consent to have the offered gift]; And if only Consent to have Christs Righteousness be Justifying faith, then all the Assenting part is excluded (in which Scripture much placeth it, and most Divines in part, and many in whole, besides Camro and his followers). And so also all the Affiance or Fiducial cts are excluded, which almost all include; even that which they call Recumbency being distinct from Consent. 3. All these acts following are essential to Justifying faith, as well as this Consent to be Justified: 1. An Assenting belief in God, in the baptismal sense. 2. An Assent to the truth of Christs Person, Office and Doctrine. 3. A belief in the Holy Ghost. 4. A belief of Pardon, Sanctification and Glory as possible, purchased and offered by Christ. 5. A Consent that God be our God in Christ. 6. And a Consent that Christ be our Teacher. 7. And our King, and Ruler. 8. And our Intercessor. 9. And our Judge and Justifier by sentence (and as our Advocate). 10. A belief of his Resurrection, Power and Glory. 11. A Trusting to the Father and the Son according to these forementioned Offices. 12. A Consent to be Sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 4. Plainly our Justifying and Saving Faith in Pauls sense is the same thing with our Christianity, or becoming Christians: And the same thing with our Baptismal faith and consent. 5. To believe in Christ as Christ is in Scripture Justifying faith: But to accept his righteousness only, and not to believe in him as our Lord, and our Teacher and Intercessor, &c. as aforesaid, is not to believe in him as Christ. 6. In my Answer (ubi sup.) to Mr.

Warner, and elsewhere, I have detected the fraud of their quibbling distinction, who say, that All this is in faith quae justificat, but not quà justificat, as supposing a falsehood, that any act of faith quà talis justifieth. 7. They that say that only our Acceptance of Christs Imputed Righteousness is the Justifying act of faith, and that to expect to be Justified by any other (viz. by Believing in God the Father, and the Holy Ghost, and believing a Heaven hereafter, and believing the Truth of the Gospel, and of Christs Resurrection, Ascension, Glory, &c. and by taking him for our Teacher, Ruler, Intercessor, &c.) is to expect Justification by Works in Pauls disclaimed sense, and so to fall from Grace; I say, they that thus teach, ⟨p. 251⟩do go so far towards the subverting of the Gospel, and making a Gospel or Religion of their own, as that (I must tell them, to move them to repentance) not only the adding of Ceremonies is a small corruption in comparison of this, but many that in Epiphanius are numbered with Heretics, had far lesser errors than this is.

Warner, and elsewhere, I have detected the fraud of their quibling distinction, who say, that All this is in faith quae justificat, but not quà justificat, as supposing a falshood, that any act of faith quà talis justifieth. 7. They that say that only our Acceptance of Christs Imputed Righteousness is the Justifying act of faith, and that to expect to be Justified by any other (viz. by Believing in God the Father, and the Holy Ghost, and believing a Heaven hereafter, and believing the Truth of the Gospel, and of Christs Resurrection, Ascension, Glory, &c. and by taking him for our Teacher, Ruler, Intercessor, &c.) is to expect Justification by Works in Pauls disclaimed sense, and so to fall from Grace; I say, they that thus teach, ⟨p. 251⟩do go so far towards the subverting of the Gospel, and making a Gospel or Religion of their own, as that (I must tell them, to move them to repentance) not only the adding of Ceremonies is a small corruption in comparison of this, but many that in Epiphanius are numbred with Hereticks, had far lesser errors than this is.

CHAP. VIII. Of Faiths Justifying as an Instrument.

P. VII. And I have said so much in the foresaid Disputations of Justification and other Books, of Faiths Instrumentality and the reason of its Justifying interest, that I cannot persuade my self now to talk it out with you all over again; but only to say, 1. That I have fully oft proved from many plain Scriptures, that pardon and salvation are given (with Christ) in the Covenant of Grace, on Condition of a penitent believing fiducial acceptance. And therefore that it is most certain that faith is a Condition of our Justification; and so to be profest in Baptism. 2. The name of An Instrument given to faith, and its Justifying as an Instrument, are of mens devising, and not in Gods Word. 3. But as to the sense, It is certain that faith is no Instrument of our Justification (Gods or Mans,) if it be meant properly of an Instrumental efficient cause. 4. But if it be taken Metaphorically, for an Act whose Nature or essence is An Acceptance of a free Gift, and so by Instrumentality be meant the [Greek or Hebrew] credere, that is, Faiths very Essence in specie, then no doubt it is what it is. 5. Or if by an Instrument be meant, A Moral aptitude or Disposition of the person to be justified (answerable to the Dispositio Recipientis vel materiae in Physics) then it is such an Instrument. But how well this is worded, and what cause there is to contend for a word both of humane invention and metaphorical, and this as if it were a weighty Doctrine, I leave to sober judgements. 6. But it is certain that the Accepting Act of faith is but its Aptitude to be the condition of the Gift, and therefore that its being made by Christ the Condition is its Moral nearest interest in our Justification.

P. VII. ANd I have said so much in the foresaid Disputations of Justification and other Books, of Faiths Instrumentality and the reason of its Justifying interest, that I cannot perswade my self now to talk it out with you all over again; but only to say, 1. That I have fully oft proved from many plain Scriptures, that pardon and salvation are given (with Christ) in the Covenant of Grace, on Condition of a penitent believing fiducial acceptance. And therefore that it is most certain that faith is a Condition of our Justification; and so to be profest in Baptism. 2. The name of An Instrument given to faith, and its Justifying as an Instrument, are of mens devising, and not in Gods Word. 3. But as to the sense, It is certain that faith is no Instrument of our Justification (Gods or Mans,) if it be meant properly of an Instrumental efficient cause. 4. But if it be taken Metaphorically, for an Act whose Nature or essence is An Acceptance of a free Gift, and so by Instrumentality be meant the credere, that is, Faiths very Essence in specie, then no doubt it is what it is. 5. Or if by an Instrument be meant, A Moral aptitude or Disposition of the person to be justified (answerable to the Dispositio Recipientis vel materiae in Physicks) then it is such an Instrument. But how well this is worded, and what cause there is to contend for a word both of humane invention and metaphorical, and this as if it were a weighty Doctrine, I leave to sober judgements. 6. But it is certain that the Accepting Act of faith is but its Aptitude to be the condition of the Gift, and therefore that its being made by Christ the Condition is its Moral nearest interest in our Justification.

CHAP. IX. Whether Faith it self be imputed for Righteousness?

Lib. VIII. What do you but subvert the Gospel, when you put faith instead of Christ or of his Righteousness? When the Scripture saith that we are justified by Christs Righteousness Imputed to us, you say it is by faith imputed.

Lib. VIII. WHat do you but subvert the Gospel, when you put faith instead of Christ or of his Righteousness? When the Scripture saith that we are justified by Christs Righteousness Imputed to us, you say it is by faith imputed.

P. Do you think any sober Christians here really differ? or is it only about the Names and Notions? Which ever it be; 1. Of the name, Is it not oft said that Faith is and shall be imputed for Righteousness, Rom. 4. 22, 23, 24. James 2. 23.

Lib. Yes: I must grant the words, but not your meaning.

P. Where doth the Scripture say, that Christs Righteousness is Imputed to us? Remember that it is only the Name that I ask you of.