search in any measure, by a spiritual light, into his own heart and soul, will find "God be merciful to me a sinner," a better plea than any he can be furnished withal from any worth of his own. "What is man, that he should be clean? and he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?" Job xv. 14–16, iv. 18, 19. Hence saith Gregory, in Job. ix., lib. ix. cap. 14, "Ut sæpe diximus omnis justitia humana injustitia esse convincitur si distincte judicetur." Bernard speaks to the same purpose, and almost in the same words, Serm. i. fest. omn. sanct., "Quid potest esse omnis justitia nostra coram Deo? nonne juxta prophetam, velut 'pannus menstruatæ' reputabitur; et si districtè judicetur, injustitia invenietur omnis justitia nostra, et minus habens." A man cannot be justified in any sense by that righteousness which, upon trial, will appear rather to be an unright eousness. 2. It is imperfect with respect unto every act and duty of it, whether internal or external. There is iniquity cleaving unto our holy things, and all our "righteousnesses are as filthy rags," Isa. lxiv. 6. It hath been often and well observed, that if a man, the best of men, were left to choose the best of his works that ever he performed, and thereon to enter into judgment with God, it only under this notion, that he hath answered and fulfilled the condition required of him as unto his acceptation with God, it would be his wisest course (at least it would be so in the judgment of Bellarmine) to renounce it, and betake himself unto grace and mercy alone. And what con 3. It is imperfect by reason of the incursion of actual sins. Hence our Saviour hath taught us continually to pray for the "forgiveness of our sins;" and "if we say that we have no sins, we deceive ourselves," for "in many things we offend all." fidence can be placed in this righteousness, which those who plead for it in this cause acknowledge to be weak, maimed, and imperfect? I have but touched on these things, which might have been handled at large, and are indeed of great consideration in our present argument. But enough hath been spoken to manifest, that although this righteousness of believers be on other accounts like the fruit of the vine, that glads the heart of God and man, yet as unto our justifica. tion before God, it is like the wood of the vine,-a pin is not to be taken from it to hang any weight of this cause upon. Two things are pleaded in the behalf of this righteousness, and its influence into our justification:-1. That it is absolutely complete and perfect. Hence some say that they are perfect and sinless in this life; they have no more concern in the mortification of sin, nor of growth in grace. And indeed this is the only rational pretence of ascribing our justification before God thereunto; for were it so with any, what should hinder him from being justified thereon before God, but only that he hath been a sinner?-which spoils the whole market. But this vain imagination is so contrary unto the Scripture, and the experience of all that know the terror of the Lord, and what it is to walk humbly before him, as that I shall not insist on the refutation of it. 2. It is pleaded, "That although this righteousness be not an exact fulfilling of the moral law, yet is it the accomplishment of the condition of the new covenant, or entirely answereth the law of grace, and all that is required of us therein." Ans. (1.) This wholly takes away sin, and the pardon of it, no less than doth the conceit of sinless perfection which we now rejected; for if our obedience do answer the only law and rule of it whereby it is to be tried, measured, and judged, then is there no sin in us, nor need of pardon. No more is required of any man, to keep him absolutely free from sin, but that he fully answer, and exactly comply with, the rule and law of his obedience whereby he must be judged. On this supposition, therefore, there is neither sin nor any need of the pardon of it. To say that there is still both sin and need of pardon, with respect unto the moral law of God, is to confess that law to be the rule of our obedience, which this righteousness doth no way answer; and therefore none by it can be justified in the sight of God. (2.) Although this righteousness be accepted in justified persons by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, yet consider the principle of it, with all the acts and duties wherein it doth consist, as they are required and prescribed in the gospel unto us, and they do neither jointly nor severally fulfil and answer the commands of the gospel, no more than they do the commands of the law. Wherefore, they cannot all of them constitute a righteousness consisting in an exact conformity unto the rules of the gospel, or the law of it; for it is impious to imagine that the gospel requiring any duty of us, suppose the love of God, doth make any abatement, as unto the matter, manner, or degrees of perfection in it, from what was required by the law. Doth the gospel require a lower degree of love to God, a less perfect love, than the law did? God forbid. The same may be said concerning the inward frame of our natures, and all other duties whatever. Wherefore, although this righteousness is accepted in justified persons (as God had respect unto Abel, and then unto his offering), in the way and unto the ends that shall be afterward declared; yet, as it relates unto the commands of the gospel, both it and all the duties of it are no less imperfect than it would be if it should be left unto its trial by the law of creation only. (3.) I know not what some men intend. On the one hand they affirm that our Lord Jesus Christ hath enlarged and heightened the spiritual sense of the moral law; and not only so, but added unto it new precepts of more exact obedience than it did require;-but on the other, they would have him to have brought down or taken off the obligation of the law, so as that a man, according as he hath adapted it unto the use of the gospel, shall be judged of God to have fulfilled the whole obedience which it requires, who never answered any one precept of it according unto its original sense and obligation; for so it must be if this imperfect righteousness be on any account esteemed a fulfilling of the rule of our obedience, as that thereon we should be justified in the sight of God. (4.) This opinion puts an irreconcilable difference between the law and the gospel, not to be composed by any distinctions; for, according unto it, God declares by the gospel a man to be perfectly righteous, justified, and blessed, upon the consideration of a righteousness that is imperfect; and in the law he pronounceth every one accursed who continueth not in all things required by it, and as they are therein required. But it is said that this righteousness is no otherwise to be considered but as the condition of the new covenant, whereon we obtain remission of sins on the sole account of the satisfaction of Christ, wherein our justification doth consist. Ans. (1.) Some, indeed, do say so, but not all, not the most, not the most learned, with whom in this controversy we have to do. And in our pleas for what we believe to be the truth, we cannot always have respect unto every private opinion whereby it is opposed. (2.) That justification consists only in the pardon of sin is so contrary to the signification of the word, the constant use of it in the Scripture, the common notion of it amongst mankind, the sense of men in their own consciences who find themselves under an obligation unto duty, and express testimonies of the Scripture, as that I somewhat wonder how it can be pretended. But it shall be spoken unto elsewhere. (3.) If this righteousness be the fulfilling of the condition of the new covenant whereon we are justified, it must be in itself such as exactly answereth some rule or law of righteousness, and so be perfect: which it doth not; and therefore cannot bear the place of a righteousness in our justification. (4.) That this righteousness is the condition of our justification before God, or of that interest in the righteousness of Christ whereby we are justified, is not proved, nor ever will be. I shall briefly add two or three considerations, excluding this personal righteousness from its pretended interest in our justification, and close this argument: 1. That righteousness which neither answereth the law of God nor the end of God in our justification by the gospel, is not that whereon we are justified. But such is this inherent righteousness of believers, even of the best of them. (1.) That it answereth not the law of God hath been proved from its imperfection. Nor will any sober person pretend that it exactly and perfectly fulfils the law of our creation. And this law cannot be disannulled whilst the relation of creator and rewarder on the one hand, and of creatures capable of obedience and rewards on the other, between God and us doth continue. Wherefore, that which answereth not this law will not justify us; for God will not abrogate that law, that the transgressors of it may be justified. "Do we," saith the apostle, by the doctrine of justification by faith without works, "make void the law? God forbid: yea, we establish it," Rom. iii. 31. (2.) That we should be justified with respect unto it answereth not the end of God in our justification by the gospel; for this is to take away all glorying in ourselves and all occasion of it, every thing that might give countenance unto it, so as that the whole might be to the praise of his own grace by Christ, Rom. iii. 27; 1 Cor. i. 29-31. How it is faith alone. that gives glory to God herein hath been declared in the description of its nature. But it is evident that no man hath, or can possibly have, any other, any greater occasion of boasting in himself, with respect unto his justification, than that he is justified on his performance of that condition of it, which consists in his own personal right eousness. 2. No man was ever justified by it in his own conscience, much less can he be justified by it in the sight of God; "for God is greater than our hearts and knoweth all things." There is no man so righteous, so holy, in the whole world, nor ever was, but his own conscience would charge him in many things with his coming short of the obedience required of him, in matter or manner, in the kind or degrees of perfection; for there is no man that liveth and sinneth not. Absolutely, "Nemo absolvitur se judice." Let any man be put unto a trial in himself whether he can be justified in his own conscience by his own righteousness, and he will be cast in the trial at his own. judgment-seat; and he that doth not thereon conclude that there must be another righteousness whereby he must be justified, that originally and inherently is not his own, will be at a loss for peace with God. But it will be said, that "men may be justified in their consciences that they have performed the condition of the new covenant, which is all that is pleaded with respect unto this righteousness.' And I no way doubt but that men may have a comfortable persuasion of their own sincerity in obedience, and satisfaction in the acceptance of it with God. But it is when they try it as an effect of faith, whereby they are justified, and not as the condition of their justification. Let it be thus stated in their minds,-that God requireth a personal righteousness in order unto their justification, whereon their determination must be, "This is my righteousness which I present unto God that I may be justified," and they will find difficulty in arriving at it, if I be not much mistaken. 3. None of the holy men of old, whose faith and experience are recorded in the Scripture, did ever plead their own personal righteousness, under any notion of it, either as to the merit of their works or as unto their complete performance of what was required of them as the condition of the covenant, in order unto their justification before God. This hath been spoken unto before. CHAPTER XI. The nature of the obedience that God requireth of us-The eternal obligation of the law thereunto. OUR second argument shall be taken from the nature of that obedience or righteousness which God requireth of us that we may be accepted of him, and approved by him. This being a large subject, if fully to be handled, I shall reduce what is of our present concernment in it unto some special heads or observations: 1. God being a most perfect, and therefore a most free agent, all his actings towards mankind, all his dealings with them, all his constitutions and laws concerning them, are to be resolved into his own sovereign will and pleasure. No other reason can be given of the original of the whole system of them. This the Scripture testifieth unto, Ps. cxv. 3, cxxxv. 6; Prov. xvi. 4; Eph. i. 9, 11; Rev. iv. 11. The being, existence, and natural circumstances of all creatures being an effect of the free counsel and pleasure of God, all that belongs unto them must be ultimately resolved thereinto. 2. Upon a supposition of some free acts of the will of God, and the execution of them, constituting an order in the things that outwardly are of him, and their mutual respect unto one another, some things may become necessary in this relative state, whose being was not absolutely necessary in its own nature. The order of all things, and their mutual respect unto one another, depend on God's free constitution no less than their being absolutely. But upon a supposition of that constitution, things have in that order a necessary relation one to another, and all of them unto God. Wherefore, 3. It was a free, sovereign act of God's will, to create, effect, or produce such a creature as man is; that is, of a nature intelligent, rational, capable of moral obedience, with rewards and punishments |