" And indeed the whole series and carriage of the context, from verse 20 to the end of the chapter, demonstratively evinceth that by the ' righteous man' all along is meant such a man as was or is truly righteous, and who, had he persevered in that way of righte- ousness wherein he some time Avalked, should have worn the crown of righteousness, and received the reward of a righteous man; as by the 'wicked man,' all along opposed to him, is meant not a person seemingly wicked, but truly and really so, as is acknowledged on all hands. So that the antithesis or opposition between the righteous and the wicked, running so visibly quite through the body of the discourse, must needs be dissolved, if by the 'righteous man' should be meant a person seemingly righteous only, he that is righteous in this sense being truly and really wicked."
Ans. The main series and context of the chapter, without the least endeavour to give any light or illustration thereunto by the scope, occasion, or dependence of the parts of it one upon another, does more than once stand Mr Goodwin in stead, when nothing else pre- sents itself to his relief It is true, the whole context of the chapter grants the person spoken of to be righteous in the performance of the duties mentioned in the chapter, in opposition to the wicked man and his intentions and ways described therein, in proportion to the dispensation of the covenant, whose rule and principle is placed in the head of verse 20, which Mr Goodwin directs us unto, namely, " The soul that sinneth, it shall die." And as there is nothing in all this contrary to any thing in this exposition by Mr Goodwin opposed, so there is not any thing more proved, nor once attempted to be, here by Mr Goodwin himself, than what is confessed therein.
It is acknowledged that the person spoken of is truly and really righteous, with that kind of righteousness which is intended, and wherein if he continued he was to receive the reward of righteous- ness then under consideration ; and yet though such an one might be truly and really united unto Christ, there is nothing in the text
XVII.] CEllTAIN PASSAGES IN SCRIPTURE CONSIDERED. 623
or context enforcing that such an one and none else is intended here. And more in this case Mr Goodwin hath not to add; nor doth he threaten us with any more than he hath delivered, as he did upon the consideration of the tenor of the words, and our inquiry whether they are of an hypothetical or absolute nature and importance.
It is true, he adds that " Calvin, in his exposition on the place, notwithstanding liis wariness to manage it so as that the doctrine of perseverance, which he maintained, might suffer no damage'' (which perhaps Mr Goodwin was not so wary in expressing, contending so much as he does to manifest that he had thoughts lying another way), " and therefore asserting the person here spoken of to be a person seemingly righteous only, yet lets fall such things as declare nothing to be wanting in this righteous person but pei'severance." But that Calvin grants, in any expression of his, this person, or him concerned herein, to be in such an estate as to want nothing but perseverance to render him everlastingly blessed, is notoriously false; neither does any thing in the expressions cited by Mr Goodwin come from the body of his discourse, [or] in the least look that way, as might easily be manifested, did I judge it meet, in a contest of this nature, to trade in the authorities of men : so that I cannot but wonder with what confidence he is pleased to impose such a sense upon his words. All this while, then, notwithstanding any thing our author hath to say to the contrary, the righteous person here in- tended may be only such an one as was described in the entrance of this consideration of his; and that it is not requisite, from the text or context, that he should be any other is more evident than that it is to be contended against.
Sect. 7, he deals with another exposition of the words, which hath no small countenance given unto it from the Scriptures; which, for to prevail himself upon an expression or two by-the-by, he sets down in the words of Dr Prideaux, Lect. vi. ; and they are these : " There is," saith he, "'a double righteousness; — one inherent, or of works, by which we are sanctified; another imputed, or of faith, whereby we are justified. A righteous man may turn aside from his own righte- ousness, namely, from his holiness, and fall into very heinous sins; but it doth not follow from hence that therefore he hath wholly shaken off from him (or out of him) the righteousness of Christ." To this he advances a threefold reply : —
1. " The doctor here presents us with a piece of new divinity, in making sanctification and justification no more intimate friends than that one can live without the company and presence of the other. Doubtless, if a man's justification may stay behind when his holiness is departed, that assertion of the apostle will hardly stand, ' Without holiness no man shall see the Lord,' Heb. xii. 14; and if 'They that are Christ's' (that is, who believe in Christ, and thereby are justified)