Christ's obedience, perfect in righteousness, and "undefiled" before God!

If I had a thousand tongues, could I employ them more to the glory of Christ, and the good of souls, than by crying to the thousands who are still sold under sin,' and still take their carnal ease in that imaginary garment of righteousness, Awake to true righteousness, and sin not?' Search the scriptures: Where is it said, that Christ's personal righteousness was ever imputed to either man or angel? And where is it written, that righteousness was ever imputed to any one, farther than he was possessed of, and actuated by, a living, powerful inherent principle of righteous faith?

To the law and the testimony!' Can any thing be plainer than the two following positions, on which all our doctrine of imputation is founded?—(1.) Faith is a powerful, quickening, justifying, sanctifying, working, victorious, saving grace.-(2.) This faith, as it springs from, and receives Christ, and his righteous power, 'is imputed to us for righteousness.'

Does not the first of these propositions stand unshaken upon such scriptures as these? Faith is the evidence of things not seen, and the substance of things hoped for :-All things are possible to him that believeth:

Whosoever believeth is born of God:-All that believe are justified :-Purifying their hearts by faith :Sanctified through faith that is in me :-This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith :-Ye are saved through faith :-Faith worketh by love :Remembering your work of faith:-Faith without works is dead:-He that believeth hath everlasting life-Holding the mystery of faith in a pure conscience, which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck,' &c. Is it not evident from these scriptures, that all who have a living faith, have not only a pardon, but works, especially love, which is the fulfilling of the law;'-love, the most excellent fruit of righteousness,' in which all others are con

tained? And surely, if they have a pardon, and true, inherent righteousness, in their Christ-accepting, loving, and obedient faith; that faith may well be 'imputed to them for righteousness,' or, God may well account them righteous.

Nor is the second proposition, upon which our imputation stands, less clearly laid down in the scriptures. 'Abraham believed in the Lord, and he counted,† [or imputed] it to him for righteousness.' (Gen. xv. 6.) What says the scripture ? 'Abraham

believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness,' i. e., for preceding righteousness, through the remission of his past sins; for present acceptance in the Beloved, whom he received; and for present righteousness through the righteous exertions of a faith that worketh by love.' Again, 'To him that believeth, his faith is imputed for righteousness :-We say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness :That he might be the father of all them that believe, that righteousness might be imputed to them also :He was strong in faith, giving glory to God; and therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness :-Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe.' (Gal. iii. 6; Rom. iv. 3, &c.)

As Moses had led the van of these testimonies in favour of our scriptural imputation, and St. Paul the main body, permit St. James to bring up the rear. 'Seest thou,' says he, how faith wrought with Abraham's works, and by works was faith made perfect, and the scripture was fulfilled, which says, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness?' (Jam. ii. 23.) The whole is thus summed up by the great defender of free grace: The Gentiles which followed not after righteousness have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of

There is but one word in the original, which our translators indifferently render impute, count, or reckon.

righteousness, hath not attained to it. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith; but, as it were, by [the faithless] works' which they did in self righteous obedience to the letter of the law; trampling under foot the righteousness of faith, which speaketh on this wise: If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.' (Rom. ix. and x.)

Who does not see, in reading these words, that we must do something unto righteousness, as well as unto salvation? Is it not evident, that we must now 'believe with the heart,' in order to the former, and 'make confession with the mouth,' as we have opportunity, in order to the latter; and consequently, that righteousness imputed, as well as salvation finished, without any thing done on our part, is a doctrine, that is not less contrary, even to St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, fairly taken together, than to that strong rampart of undefiled religion, the Epistle of St. James.

However, a cloud of objections arises, to keep the light from a prejudiced reader: And as he thinks that three of them are remarkably strong, I beg leave to consider them with some degree of attention.

1. OBJ. "Your doctrine of justifying, sanctifying, and working faith imputed to us for righteousness, I bear my loud testimony against; because it confounds righteousness with sanctification, two gospel-blessings, which are clearly distinguished. (1 Cor. i. 30.)"

ANS. It would be much better to confound, than to destroy them both; as I fear you do, when you cast a robe of finished salvation, i. e., of complete righteousness and finished holiness over impenitent adulterers and murderers. But be that as it will, your objection is groundless. I have already observed, and I once more declare, that when we speak of the righteousness of faith, we understand three things: (1.) The nonimputation, or forgiveness of the sins that are PAST.'

(Rom. iii. 25.)-(2.) Present acceptance in the Beloved!' (Eph. i, 6.) And (3.)—A principle of universal righteousness, by which we are interested in Christ's righteousness; just as a branch is interested in the excellence of the vine, by receiving the generous sap which it actually derives from it; and not by an imaginary imputation of the fine grapes which the vine bore 1700 years ago. Let no man deceive you; he that DOES righteousness,' is a righteous branch; even as Christ is righteous vine! (1 John iii. 7; John xv. 5.)

On the other hand, when we speak of sanctification, we understand the wonderful change, wrought in us by the working of the above-mentioned principle of righteousness; and the internal fruits which it produces, till, by growing up into Christ in all things, we come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." It is evident therefore, that, considering righteousness and sanctification even in their most intimate union, we do not confound them at all; but maintain as clear a distinction between them, as that which subsists between the derivation of sap by a wild branch from the good olive tree, and the change produced in that branch upon such a derivation.

II. OBJ. "Your doctrine is Popery refined. By paying saving honours to a Christian grace, and taking the crown from Christ to set it upon faith, you shake the very foundation of the Mediator's throne. If this is not high treason against him, what crime deserves that name?"

ANSW. Your fears are laudable, though absolutely groundless. (1.) Faith, the humble grace that will know nothing but Christ, for wisdom, righteousness, sauctification, and redemption,' can never dishonour his person, claim his crown, or shake the foundation of his throne. Is it not ridiculous to make so much ado about faith robbing Christ of saving honours, when Christ himself says, 'Thy FAITH hath SAVED thee;' and

when the apostle cries out, Believe, and thou shalt be saved!' Were then Christ and St. Paul two refined Papists, and guilty of high treason against the Redeemer ?

(2.) If some will be wise above what is written,' we dare not. If they are ashamed of the oracles of God, we are not; therefore, whatever they think of us, we must say, with the evangelical apostle, 'Faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness: And to him that believeth, HIS FAITH is imputed for righteousness.'

(3.) Should you say, that Abraham's faith, or his believing God, signifies either Christ's person, or hig personal righteousness: We reply, Credat Judæus Apella! There was indeed a time when Calvinist divines could make simple Protestants believe it, as easily as the Pope can make credulous Papists believe, that a wafer of the size of half-a-crown, is the identical body of our Lord: But as many Romauists begin to shake off the yoke of Popish absurdities; so many Protestants will cast away that of Calvinian impositions. And as our fathers taught us to protest, that the hocus pocus of a Popish priest cannot turn bread into flesh; so will we teach our children to protest, that the bare assertion of a Calvinist minister cannot turn Abraham's faith into Christ's person, or into his personal righteousness; which must however be the case, if those words, 'Abraham's faith,' or his believing God, was imputed for righteousness,' do only mean, as we are confidently told, that "Christ, or his personal righteousness, was imputed to Abraham for righteous

ness."

(4.) Does it reflect any dishouour upon Christ, to say, with St. Paul, that 'FAITH is imputed to us for righteousness;' when believing includes its object, (Christ the way, the truth, and the life,) as necessarily as eating supposes food; and drinking, liquor? Is it not as impossible to believe in the light,' without Christ the light; or to believe in the truth, without Christ the truth; as it is to breathe without air, and hear without sounds? Again, if you affirm, "that we VOL. II.

G