that hath only the effect, cannot be faid to be made Chap. 11. the Impetrating cause, no more can we be said to be made the Righteoufnefs of Christ, if we only have the fruit of it, not the thing it felf: That Righteousness, as a meritorious cause, may be faid to be for us; but not to be upon us, unlefs by Imputation it be made ours: Chrift in refpect of Merit only is no more for Righteousness (which yet is the Emphasis of the Text) than for fanctifying Graces, these being as much merited as the other; Chrift is fo far Righteousness as he is the end of the Law, and that he is in the fatisfaction it felf, not in Remiffion, which is the effect of it; the Satisfaction it felf therefore is made ours in Juftification. It seems to me a great departure from the Text to fay, Chrift is the end of the Law for Righteousness, that is for Pardon, which is the Effect, or for Impunity, which is the Effect of the Effect.

Secondly, It is utterly impoffible that there should be a Juftification without a Righteousness. Conftitutive Juftification makes us Righteous, Eftimative or fentential Juftification esteems or pronounces us fuch; a Juftification cannot be without a Rightcousness; nor can any thing be a Righteousness, unless it answer the Law. What then is our Righteousness as to the Law? Faith, answers the Gospel terms: But what answers the Law? Surely nothing under Heaven can do it but Chrift's Satisfaction. The Quare therefore is, Whether that Satisfaction be our Righteousness in it felf, or only in its effects: if in the effects only, then fomething less than Christ's fatisfaction, viz. an effect, is our Righteoufness as to the Law, and by confequence fomething less than that fatisfies the Law: I cannot imagine Xx that

"

Chap. 11. that one thing fhould fatisfie the Law, and another justifie againit it; one and the fame fatisfaction of Chrift doth both. There are but two forts of Righteoufnefs as to the Law; the one a Righteoufnels in the idem, a direct conformity to it; the other aRightcousness in valor, a full compenfation or fatisfaction for the breaches of it, a third cannot be found,where there is neither fuch a conformity to the Law, that all is done as it ought to be, nor fuch a fatisfaction to it, that all that is done amifs, is compenfated, there is no fuch thing as Righteousness, a pardon or freedom from punishment there may be, but a Righteoufnefs there is not. Because there is nothing done to the Law; either by way of obedience or recompence; and where nothing is done to the Law, there cannot be a Righteoufnefs: Now a Sinner not being capable of a Righteoufnefs of conformity, his Righteousness must be that of a fatisfaction or compenfation; not an effect of it, but the thing it felf, no other thing can be a Sinners Righteoufnefs. It is obfervable in Scripture, That Juftification is fo fet forth, that the Law is eftablifhed in it, Rom. 3. 31. that its Righteoufnefs is fulfilled, Rom. 8. 4. that it hath its end, Rom. 10. 4. And all this because in Chrift's Satisfaction there is a full compenfation made for fin, fuch as comes in the room of a perfect conformity, and fupplies that defect of it which rifes out of the fault committed: This is done by the Satisfaction it felf,not by an effect of it. Nothing lefs than it felf could give the Law its end or establishment: If that Satisfaction be our Righteousness,nor init felf but in its effects, what is that effect? Is it a Pardon? that is God's act; God's act may make or esteem.us righteous, but it is not the Righteouf

nefs

nefs it felf; it is a jus impunitatis that is not the Right- Chap. 11. eousness it felf; a Righteousness as to the Law must be either a perfect conformity or a satisfaction, but a fus impunitatis is neither of these; as in Condemnation the Obligatio ad pœnam is not the very culpa, but a confequent of it. So in Juftification the Jus impunitatis is not the very Righteousness, but a confequent of it. A Jus impunitatis is oppofite to the reatus pænæ; but a Satisfaction, which is our true Righteoufnefs, is oppofite to the reatus culpe, as compenfating the fault committed. It remains therefore that Chrift's Satisfaction is not in its effects, but in it self our Righteousness, which also further appears: In that, when we are to answer for our breaches of the Law, our great Plea is to that no other than his Satisfaction; Oftendo fide jufforem me- De Juft.hab. um, faith Bishop Davenant, When the Law makes its 370. demands against me, I fhew my Sponfor Chrift, who satisfied it. Now, if his Satisfaction be it self our Righteousness, it must be made ours by Imputation, for that which is not ours, cannot be our Righteousness; neither doth God, who judgeth according to Truth, esteem it fuch: You will fay, Though it felf be not ours, yet it is that for which God doth justifie us: To which I anfwer, Though God juftifie us for it, yet, unless it be ours, it is no more our Righteousness than it is our Holiness; when God fanctifies us for it, no Man (I think) will call it our Holiness, no more, unless it be ours, may we call it our Righteousness. If it be ours by Imputation, then it is more than a meritorious caufe. It is the very matter of our Juftification; neither can I tell how to think it lefs, feeing a Sinner is capable of no other Righteousness, as to the Law, but a SatisfactiXx 2

on,

Chap. 11. on, seeing fo glorious a Satisfaction, as that of Christ is, is ushered into the World for that very end; it is to me unimaginable, that that Satisfaction fhould yet not be our Righteoufnefs as to the Law, but fomething less than it self should have the honour of it.

Thirdly, Very momentous in this point, is the collation of the two Adams, Rom. 5. the firft Adam was the Origen of Sin; Chrift the second Adam, was the Origen of Righteousness and Life: never were there in the World two fuch Heads as thefe, uterque quod fuum eft cum fuis communicat, as the Learned Beza hath it, Adam communicates Sin and Death to his Pofterity; Chrifts Righteousness and Life to his believing Seed, in the parallel it is obfervable, that Chrift is as ftrong; nay, a ftronger Head than Adam, Adam was a Type of him that was to come; and less then the Antitype, who was more potent to rebuild the ruines of the fall, than Adam was to make them, Righteoufnefs came as full from Chrift, as fin did from Adam; nay, more fully, as the Apostle hints in the war, verfe. 15. and in the abundance and fuperabundance of Grace, verf. 17.& 20. hence it appears, that fo far as Adam's fin was ours, fo far is Chrift's Righteousness ours also. Adam's fin was not ours in the full latitude,as it was in him,we did not eat the Fruit in our own perfons, we were not heads of Mankind, we did not uîher in Sin and Death upon the World, no, this was, 'v,by that one Adam, neither was it ours in the effect only,for then our innate pravity would be no fin, as meerly proceeding from that firft fin of Adam, in which we participated not that in the Schools must needs be true, peccatum habituale dicit effentialem ordinem ad præcedens actuale; Its impoffible,that one should be a finner habitually, who in no fenfe was a finner before: hence that of St.

1

Austin,quoted by Dr. Ward, Nulla foret hominis culpa, Chap. 11. fi talis a Deo Creatus effet, qualis nunc nafcitur, it remains therefore that Adam's fin it felf is derived to each one of us, pro ratione membri, proportionably:. Chrift's fatisfaction is not ours in the full latitude, as it was in him; we fatisfied not God's Juftice in our own Perfons, we were not Heads of the Church, neither did we usher in Life and Righteousness into the. World; no, it was, by that one Chrift,neither is it ours in the effect only; for then the effect a thing less than the fatisfaction it self, fhould juftifie or make us righteous against the Law, which cannot. be: It remains therefore that it is it felf derived upon each one of us, pro menfurà membri: Again, Adam's fin did firft in order of Nature, make us finners by it self imputed, and then by the inherent pravity confequent; in like manner Chrift's fatiffaction doth first in order of Nature make us righteous by it self imputed, and then by the fanctifying Graces communicated by vertue of it: Now if Christs fatisfaction be not it felf communicated to us as Members of him; then the Glory of his Headship feems to fail, he is not fo ftrong an Head as Adam, Righteousness is not fo amply communicated from Chrift,as fin is from Adam, Adam communicates the fin it self to us, but Chrift communicates his Righteousness in the effects only; if Chrift only me-rited Juftification, the Glory of his Headship feems not to ftand in it; in Sanctification he as our Head communicates fanctifying Graces to us, to be thematter of our Sanctification, but in Juftification he doth not communicate his fatisfaction to us, to be the matter of our Juitification; he merited Juftification upon Gofpel-terms before our Union with him,.

what