may in a very little space of time read over the whole unto his full satisfaction. I shall therefore only consider his exceptions, and haste unto an end of this fruitless trouble, wherein I am most unwillingly engaged by this man's unsuspected disingenuity and ignorance.

After the citation of some passages, he adds, p. 301. •This methinks is very strange, that what he did as mediator, is not imputed unto us, but what he did not as our mediator, but as a man subject to the law that is imputed to us, and reckoned as if we had done it, by reason of his being our mediator. And it is as strange to the full that Christ should do whatever was required of us, by virtue of any law when he was neither husband, nor wife, nor father, merchant, nor tradesman, seaman, nor soldier, captain or lieutenant; much less a temporal prince and monarch. And how he should discharge the duties of these relations for us, which are required of us by certain laws, when he never was in of these relations, and could not possibly be in all, is an argument which may exercise the subtlety of schoolmen, and to them I leave it.'

any

It were greatly to be desired that he would be a little more heedful, and with attention read the writings of other men, that he might understand them before he comes to make such a bluster in his opposition to them. For I had told him plainly, that though there was a peculiar law of mediation, whose acts and duties we had no obligation unto, yet the Lord Christ even as mediator was obliged unto, and did personally perform all duties of obedience unto the law of God, whereunto we were subject and obliged; p. 181. sec. 14. And it is strange to apprehend how he came to imagine that I said he did it not as our mediator, but as a private man. That which possibly might cast his thoughts into this disorder was, that he knew not that Christ was made a private man as mediator, which yet the Scripture is sufficiently express in. For the following objections that the Lord Christ was neither husband nor wife, father nor tradesman,' &c. wherein yet possibly he is out in his account, I have frequently smiled at it when I have met with it in the Socinians, who are perking with it at every turn but here it ought to be admired. But yet without troubling those bugbears the schoolmen, he may be pleased to take notice,

that the grace of duty and obedience in all relations is the same, the relations administering only an external occasion unto its peculiar exercise. And what our Lord Jesus Christ did in the fulfilling of all righteousness in the circumstances and relations wherein he stood, may be imputed to us for our righteousness in all our relations, every act of duty and sin in them respecting the same law and principle. And hereon all his following exceptions for sundry pages, wherein he seems much to have pleased himself, do fall to nothing, as being resolved into his own mistakes, if he doth not prevaricate against his science and conscience; for the sum of them all he gives us in these words, p. 304. That Christ did those things as mediator, which did not belong to the laws of his mediation;' which in what sense he did so, is fully explained in my discourse. And I am apt to guess, that either he is deceived, or doth design to deceive in expressing it by the laws of his mediation,' which may comprise all the laws which as mediator he was subject unto; and so it is most true, that he did nothing as mediator, but what belonged unto the laws of his mediation; but most false, that I have affirmed that he did. For I did distinguish between that peculiar law which required the public acts of his mediation, and those other laws which as mediator, he was made subject unto. And if he neither doth nor will understand these things when he is told them, and they are proved unto him beyond what he can contradict, I know no reason why I should trouble myself with one that contends with his own mormos, though he never so lewdly or loudly call my name upon them. And whereas I know myself sufficiently subject unto mistakes and slips, so when I actually fall into them, as I shall not desire this man's forgiveness, but leave him to exercise the utmost of his severity, so I despise his ridiculous attempts to represent contradictions in my discourse, p. 306. all pretences whereunto are taken from his own ignorance or feigned in his imagination. Of the like nature are all his ensuing cavils. I desire no more of any reader, but to peruse the places in my discourse which he carpeth at, and if he be a person of ordinary understanding in these things, I declare that I will stand to his censure and judgment, without giving him the least farther intimation of the sense and intendment of what

I have written, or vindication of its truth. Thus, whereas I had plainly declared that the way whereby the Lord Christ in his own person became obnoxious and subject unto the law of creation, was by his own voluntary antecedent choice, otherwise than it is with those who are inevitably subject unto it by natural generation under it, as also that the hypostatical union in the first instant whereof the human nature was fitted for glory, might have exempted him from the obligation of any outward law whatever, whence it appears that his consequential obedience, though necessary to himself, when he had submitted himself unto the law (as Lo, I come to do thy will, O God),' was designedly for us, he miserably perplexeth himself, to abuse his credulous readers with an apprehension that I had talked like himself, at such a rate of nonsense as any one in his wits must needs despise. The meaning and sum of my discourse he would have to be this; p. 308. 'That Christ had not been bound to live like a man, had he not been a man;' with I know not what futilous cavils of the like nature; when all that I insisted on, was the reason why Christ would be a man, and live like a man, which was that we might receive the benefit and profit of his obedience as he was our mediator. So in the close of the same wise harangue, from my saying, That the Lord Christ by virtue of the hypostatical union might be exempted, as it were, and lifted above the law, which yet he willingly submitted unto, and in the same instant wherein he was made of a woman, was made also under the law, whence obedience unto it became necessary unto him;' the man feigns I know not what contradictions in his fancy, whereof there is not the least appearance in the words unto any one who understands the matter expressed in them. And that the assumption of the human nature into union with the Son of God, with submission unto the law thereon to be performed in that nature, are distinct parts of the humiliation of Christ, I shall prove when more serious occasion is administered unto me.

In like manner he proceeds to put in his exceptions unto what I discoursed about the laws that an innocent man is liable unto. For I said, that God never gave any other law to an innocent person, but only the law of his creation, with such symbolical precepts as might be instances of his obe

dience thereunto. Something he would find fault with, but well knows not what, and therefore, turmoils himself to give countenance unto a putid cavil. He tells us, 'That it is a great favour that I acknowledge, p. 310. that God might add what symbols he pleased unto the law of creation.' But the childishness of these impertinencies is shameful. To whom, I pray, is it a favour, or what doth the man intend by such a senseless scoff? Is there any word in my whole: discourse intimating that God might not in a state of innocency give what positive laws he pleased unto innocent persons, as means and ways to express that obedience which they owed unto the law of creation ? The task wherein I am engaged is so fruitless, so barren of any good use in contending with such impertinent effects of malice and ignorance, that I am weary of every word I am forced to add in the pursuit of it; but he will yet have it that ، an innocent person, such as Christ was absolutely, may be obliged for his own sake to the observation of such laws and institutions as were introduced by the occasion of sin, and respected all of them, the personal sins of them that were obliged by them;' which if he can believe, he is at liberty for me to persuade as many as he can to be of his mind, whilst I may be left unto my own liberty and choice, yea, to the necessity of my mind in not believing contradictions. And for what he adds, that 'I know those who conceit themselves above all forms of external worship,' I must say to him that at present personally I know none that do so, but fear that some such there are, as also others who despising not only the ways of external worship appointed by God himself, but also the laws of internal faith and grace, do satisfy themselves in a customary observance of forms of worship of their own devising.

In his next attempt he had been singular, and had spoken something which had looked like an answer to an argument, had he well laid the foundation of his procedure; for, that position which he designeth the confutation of, is thus laid down by him as mine, There can be no reason assigned of Christ's obedience unto the law, but only this, that he did it in our stead;' whereas my words are, That the end of the active obedience of Christ cannot be assigned to be that he might be fit for his death and oblation.' And hereon what is afterward said against this particular end, he interprets as

spoken against all other ends whatever, instancing in such as are every way consistent with the imputation of his obedience unto us, which could not be, had the only end of it been for himself to fit him for his death and oblation. And this wilful mistake is sufficient to give occasion to combat his own imaginations for two or three pages together. P. 314. he pretends unto the recital of an argument of mine for the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, with the like pretence of attempting an answer unto it; but his design is not to manage any controversy with me, or against me, but as he phraseth it, to expose my mistakes. I cannot therefore justly expect from him so much as common honesty will require, in case the real handling of a controversy in religion had been intended. But his way of procedure, so far as I know and understand, may be best suited unto his design. In this place he doth neither fairly nor truly report my words, nor take the least notice of the confirmation of my argument, by the removal of objections whereunto it seemed liable, nor of the reasons and testimonies whereby it is farther proved; but taking out of my discourse what expressions he pleaseth, putting them together with the same rule, he thinks he hath sufficiently exposed my mistakes, the thing he aimed at. I have no more concernment in this matter, but to refer both him and the reader to the places in my discourse reflected on; him truly to report and answer my arguments if he be able, and the reader to judge as he pleaseth between us. And I would for this once desire of him, that if he indeed be concerned in these things, he would peruse my discourse here raved at, and determine in his own mind, whether I confidently affirm what is in dispute (that is, what I had then in dispute; for who could divine so long ago what a doughty disputant this author would by this time sprout up into) and that this goes for an argument, or that he impudently affirms me so to do, contrary unto his science and conscience, if he had not quite pored out his eyes before he came to the end of a page or two in my book. And for the state of the question here proposed by him, let none expect that upon so slight an occasion I shall divert unto the discussion of it. When this author, or any of his consorts in design, shall soberly and candidly, without scoffing or railing, in a way of argument or reasoning becoming di