A55299:521
An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ,…
An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ, and our union and communion with him by Edward Polhill ..., Esquire.
London: printed for Ben. Foster, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
But if we care not for our selves in a Paroxysm of holy Zeal for God, as when Moses prayed, to be blotted out of Gods book: Or when St. Paul wished himself accursed from Christ: then our love to God is very great and fervent; if, whilst we pay that debitum naturae, love to our selves; We subordinate it to the love of God, loving God above our selves, and in that sense comparatively not estimating our selves; then our love to God is true, and as it ought to be: We need not make men hypocrites or desperate, we need not break any of the sweet links, duty and interest may well consist together, our love to God, and our love to our selves may stand in conjunction; yet still our love must keep its decorum, we must have a higher respect for Duty than for interest; and our love to God must be superlative, and above our love to our selves.
But if we care not for our selves in a Paroxism of holy Zeal for God, as when Moses prayed, to be blotted out of Gods book: Or when St. Paul wished himself accursed from Christ: then our love to God is very great and fervent; if, whilst we pay that debitum naturae, love to our selves; We subordinate it to the love of God, loving God above our selves, and in that sence comparatively not estimating our selves; then our love to God is true, and as it ought to be: We need not make men hypocrites or desperate, we need not break any of the sweet links, duty and interest may well consist together, our love to God, and our love to our selves may stand in conjunction; yet still our love must keep its decorum, we must have a higher respect for Duty than for interest; and our love to God must be superlative, and above our love to our selves.
Thirdly, 1they oppose our love to Christ to our own Duties; that is, to the most proper and natural expression of our love to him: Herein Dr. Owen places the chastity of our affections to Christ; ⟨p. 609⟩(which you know is a great marriage duty) in not taking any thing (as our own righteousness) into our affection and esteem; for those ends and purposes for which we have received Christ; and God forbid that any Christian should, for our own Righteousness and Duties, cannot be our Mediators and Advocates: What then is the difference? Why it is only this: The Doctor places the Righteousness of Christ, in the room of our righteousness, to be not only the foundation, but the condition of the Covenant of Grace, and then makes it an expression of our chaste affection to Christ, quite to thrust out our own righteousness, and to allow it no place in our Religion: He makes Christ all to us, and leaves no room for any thing else, and then warns us upon our vows of chastity, not to take any thing into Christ's place; Whereas, as he has ordered the matter, we must take our own righteousness into Christ's place, or else cast it quite away; for there is no other place left for it: But is it not very strange, that when our Saviour hath made our obedience the principal expression of our Love to him: These men should make such a competition between our Love to Christ, and our Obedience? should put