himself acquitted and exonerated of the whol Debt of their Sin for whom he suffered which was charged on him he makes Demand of the Accomplishment of the forementioned Engagement made to him concerning the freedom and deliverance of the Persons whose Sins were laid on him and whose bringing unto Glory he undertook On these Two I say it is That our Right to the Fruits of the Death of Christ even before beleeving doth depend from hence at least it is right and equal That we do in the time appointed enjoy these things Yea to say That we have Right upon beleeving to the Fruits of the Death of Christ affirmed universally can only be affirmed of a Jus in re such a Right as hath at least in part conjoyned actual Possession beleeving it self being no smal Portion of these Fruits This Argument then being fallacious omitting the chief Causes in Annumeration concludes not the thing proposed Besides it is in no small measure faulty in that the first thing proposed to be confirmed was That Remission of Sin and Justification are not the immediate Effects of Christs Death whereof in this Argument there is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Argum. 2. If God hate all the Works of Iniquity and we are all by Nature the Children of Wrath and without Faith it is impossible to please God and he that beleeveth not is Condemned already then certainly the Elect while they are unbeleevers are not actually de facto no nor in personal Right delivered from this Hatred Wrath Displeasure and Condemnation But Ergo Answ. 1 This Argument for what indeed it will prove is handled at large in my Treatise of Redemption as also re-urged in the Pages foregoing Against actual Justification from Eternity it hath its Efficacy 2 It doth also Conclude That the Elect whilest unbeleevers are not actually and de facto put in Possession of the Issues of Love Faith being with the first of them But 3 That they have not upon the Grounds forementioned a Right to these things Or 4 That Justification is not the immediate Effect of the Death of Christ being the sole things in question it hath the same unhappiness with the former not once to mention Argum. 3. If we are Justified only by Faith then certainly not before Faith But we are Justified only by Faith Ergo Answ 1 If I mistake not it is not Justification before Faith but a Right to the Fruits of the Death of Christ before Faith that is to be proved 2 That Justification is not the immediate Effect of the Death of Christ to which Ends for this Argument Valeat quantum valere potest to me it comes not within many miles of the thing in Question So that with the absurd ANSWERS supposed thereunto we passe it by The like also I am enforced to say of the Two other that follow being of the same length and breadth with those foregoing too short narrow to cover the things in Question so that though they may have their strength to their own proper End yet as to the things proposed to be proved there is nothing in their Genuine Conclusions looking that way If I might take the Liberty of ghessing I should suppose the Mistake which lead this Author to all this labor in vain is That the immediate Effects of the Death of Christ must be immediatly enjoyed by them for whom he died Which Assertion hath not indeed the least Colour of Truth The Effects of the Death of Christ are not said to be immediate in reference to others enjoyment of them but unto their Causality by that Death Whatever it be that in the first place is made out to Sinners for the Death of Christ when ever it be done that is the immediate Effect thereof as to them As to them I say for in its first tendency it hath a more immediate Object If Mr Baxter go on with his Intentions about a tract concerning universal Redemption perhaps we may have these things cleered and yet we must tell him before hand That if he draw forth nothing on that Subject but what is done by Amiraldus and like things to them he will give little Satisfaction to learned and stable men upon the Issue of his undertaking I shall not presume to take another mans Task out of his hand especially one's who is so every way able to go through with it Else I durst undertake to demonstrate that Treatise of Amiraldus mentioned by Mr Baxter to be full of weak and sophistical Argumentations absurd Contradictions vain strife of Words and in sum to be as birthless a tympanous Endeavour as ever so learned a man was engaged in For the present being by Gods Providence removed for a Season from my Native soyl attended with more then ordinary weaknesses and infirmities separated from my Library burdened with manifold Employments with constant Preaching to a numerous multitude of as thirsting a People after the Gospel as ever yet I conversed withal it sufficeth me That I have obtained this Mercy Briefly and plainly to Vindicate the Truth from mistakes and something further to unfold the Mystery of our Redemption in Christ all with so facile and placid an Endeavour as is usually upon the Spirits of men in the familiar writings of one Friend to another That it hath been my Aim to seek after Truth and to keep close to the forme of wholesome words delivered to us will I hope appear to them that love Truth and Peace Dublin-Castle Decemb. 20. 1649. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} FINIS ERRATA The Author having no opportunity to attend the Press and being absent many miles during the Printing the most part of it finds the Accenting of sundry Greek Expressions omitted with other mistakes which he desireth the Reader to Correct as followeth PAg. 5. l. 10. r. have p. 9. l. 23. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 10. l. 8. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} so also in other places l. 9. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 11. l. 10. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} l. 26. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 12. l. 21. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 15. l. 3. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} l. 14. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 16. l. 9. hudled p. 19. l. 10. alius p. 20. l. 4. now p. 22. l. 22. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 24. l. 22. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 27. l. 12. observed p. 28. l. 24. not all the thing l. 26. to any p. 29. l. 4. Now the p. 30. l. 6. Now he p. 31. l. 1. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} l. 4. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} l. 11. pressures p. 32. l. ult. Pactional p. 33. l. 24. Contradiction p. 34. l. 33. Oblation made p. 36. l. 22. that ever I. l. 31. feigne p. 44. l. 8.
it was not Death is the reward of Sin is all that is there 3 We Enquire not about Payment but Suffering To make that suffering a Payment supposeth another Constitution by vertue whereof Christ suffering the same that was threatned it became another thing in Payment then it would have been if the Person Offending had suffered himself 4 That the Law threatned not Christ but us is most true but the Question is Whether Christ underwent not the threatning of the Law not we A Commutation of Persons is allowed Christ undergoing the Penalty of the Offence though he were not the Person Offending I cannot but still suppose that he paid the Idem of the Obligation 5 For the Parenthesis about Christ's not suffering the loss of Gods love c. and the like Objections they have been Answered neer a thousand times already and that by no ordinary Divines neither so that I shall not further trouble any therewith How this is the Argument the great chief Argument of Grotius and Vossius which Mr Baxter affirmes I overlooked That I did not Express it I easily grant neither will I so wrong the ingenious Reader as to make any long Apology for my Omission of it considering the state of the matter in difference as before proposed When Mr B. or any man else shall be able to draw out any Conclusion from thence That granting the relaxation of the Law as to the Person suffering the Lord Christ did not undergo the Penalty constituted therein or that undergoing the very Penalty appointed he did not pay the idem in the Obligation supposing a new Constitution for the converting of suffering into a satisfactory payment I shall then give a Reason why I Considered it not In the next place Mr B. giveth in the two Arguments wherewith I deal And for the First about an Acquitment ipso facto upon the payment of the Idem in the Obligation with my Answer refers it to be considered in another place Which though I receive no small Injury by as shall be there declared yet that I may not transgress the Order of Discourse set me I passe it by also until then The Second Argument of Grotius with my Answer he thus expresseth To the Second Argument that the payment of the same thing in the Obligation leaveth no room for Pardon he Answereth thus 1 Gods Pardoning compriseth the whole Dispensation of Grace in Christ As 1 The laying of our Sin on Christ 2 The imputation of his Righteousness to us which is no lesse of Grace and Mercy However God pardoneth all to US but nothing to CHRIST So that the Freedome of Pardon hath it's Foundation 1 In Gods Will freely appointing this Satisfaction of Christ 2 In a Gracious Acceptation of the decreed Satisfaction in our stead 3 In a free Application of the Death of Christ to us To which I Answer c. So far he Though this may appear to be a distinct Expression of my Answer yet because it seems to me That the very strength of it as laid down is omitted I shall desire the Reader to peruse it as it is there Proposed and it will give him some light into the thing in hand I apply my self to what is here Expressed and Answer 1 To the Objection proposed from Grotius as above I gave a Threefold Answer 1 That Gracious Condonation of sin which I conceive to be the Sum of the glad tydings of the Gospel seemeth to comprize those Two Acts before recounted both which I there prove to be free because the very Merit and Satisfaction of Christ himself was founded on a free Compact and Covenant or Constitution Now I had Three Reasons among others that prevailed with me to make Gracious Condonation of so large extent which I shall Expresse and leave them to the thoughts of every Judicious Reader whether they are enforcing thereunto or no being exceedingly indifferent what his Determination is For the weight of my Answer depends not on it at all And they are these 1 Because that single Act of remission of sins to particular persons which is nothing but a disolution of the Obligation of the Law as unto them whereby they are bound over to Punishment as it is commonly restrained is affirmed by them whom Grotius in that Book opposed into whose Tents he was afterwards a Renegado to be inconsistent with any Satisfaction at all yea that which Grotius maintains per tantundem But now if you extend that Gospel phrase to the Compasse I have mentioned they have not the least Colour so to do 2. Whereas the Scripture mentioneth That through Christ is Preached the forgivenesse of Sin Act. 13. 38. I do suppose that phrase to be Comprehensive of the whole manifestation of God in the COVENANT of Grace 3 God expresly saith That this is his Covenant That he will be merciful to our unrighteousness Heb. 8. 12. By the way I cannot close with Mr B. that this place to the Hebrews and the other of Jeremiah 31. 32 33. do comprize but part of the Covenant not the whole God saying expresly THIS IS MY COVENANT To say it is not is not to Interpret the Word but to Deny it It is true it is not said that is the whole Covenant no more is it that Christ is the Way the Truth and the Life only As the want of that term of nestriction doth not enlarge in that no more doth the want of the note of Vniversality restrain in this To say thus because here is no Condition expressed is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} If you mean such a Condition as God requireth of us and yet worketh in us it is there punctually expressed with reference to the nature of the COVENANT whereof it is a Condition which is to effect all the Conditions thereof in the Covenanters This by the way having resolvedly tied up my self from a Debate of those Positions which Mr B. dogmatizeth though a large field and easie to be walked in lies open on every hand for the scattering of many Magisterial Dictates which with confidence enough are crudily asserted This is to return my First Answer to the forementioned Objection with the Reasons of it whereunto Mr B. excepteth as followeth 1 Pardon implyeth Christs Death as a Cause but I would he had shewed the Scripture that makes Pardon so large a thing as to comprize the whole Dispensation of Grace or that maketh Christs death to be a part of it or comprized in it 2 If such a word were in the Scripture will he not confesse it to be Figurative and not proper and so not fit for this Dispute 3 Else when he saith That Christs Death procured our Pardon he meaneth that it procured it self So he To all which I say 1 The death of Christ as it is a Cause of Pardon is not once mentioned in any of my Answers There is a wide Difference in Consideration between Gods imputation of Sin to Christ and the Death of Christ
as the meritorious cause of Pardon So that this is Pura Ignoratio Elenchi 2 Take Pardon in the large sense I intimated and so the Death of Christ is not the meritorious cause of the whole but only of that particular in it wherein it is commonly supposed solely to Consist of which before But In what sense and upon what grounds I extended gracious Condonation of sin unto that Compasse here mentioned I have now expressed Let it stand or fall as it sutes the Judgement of the Reader the weight of my Answer depends not on it at all My Second Answer to that Objection I gave in these words That Remission Grace and Pardon which is in God for Sinners is not oppossed to Christs Merits and Satisfaction but ours He pardoneth all to us but he spared not his only Son he bated him not one farthing To this Mr B thus expressing it But it is of Grace to us though not to Christ Answereth Doth not that cleerly intimate That Christ was not in the Obligation That the Law doth threaten every man personally or else it had been no favour to accept it of another It is marvelous to me That a Learned man should voluntarily chuse an Adversary to himself and yet Consider the very leaves which he undertakes to Confute with so much Contempt or Oscitancy as to labour to prove against him what he possitively Asserts terminis terminantibus That Christ was not in the Obligation that he was put in as a Surety by his own Consent God by his Soveraignty dispensing with the Law as to that yet as a Creditor exacting of him the due Debt of the Law is the maine Intendment of the place Mr Baxter here Considereth 2 Grant All that here is said how doth it prove that Christ underwent not the very Penalty of the Law Is it because he was not Primarily in the Obligation He was put in as a Surety to be the Object of it's Execution Is it because the Law doth threaten every man Personally Christ underwent Really what was threatned to others as shall be proved but it is not then of favour to accept it but this is the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} And thus to set it down is but a Petition {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} 3 How doth this Elude the force of my Answer I see it not at all After this I give a Third Answer to the former Objection manifesting how the FREEDOM of Pardon may Consist with Christ Satisfaction in these words The Freedom then of Pardon hath not its foundation in any defect of the Merit or Satisfaction of Christ but in Three other things 1 The Will of God freely appointing the Satisfaction of Christ Joh. 3. 16. Rom. 5. 8. 1 Joh. 4. 9. 2 In a Gracious Acceptation of that decreed Satisfaction in our steads so many no more 3 In a free Application of the Death of Christ unto us Remission then excludes not a full Satisfaction by the solution of the very thing in the Obligation but only the Solution or Satisfaction of him to whom Pardon and Remission is granted It being the Freedom of Pardon that is denied Upon the supposals of such a Satisfaction as I Assert I Demonstrate from whence that Freedom doth accrew unto it notwithstanding a supposal of such a Satisfaction not that Pardon consisteth in the Three things there recounted but that it hath its Freedom from them That is Supposing those Three things notwithstanding the Intervention of Payment made by Christ it cannot be but Remission of Sin unto us must be a free and gracious Act To all this Mr B. opposeth divers things For 1 Imputation of righteousness saith he is not any part of Pardon but a necessary Antecedent 2 The same may be said of Gods Acceptation 3 Its Application is a large Phrase and may be meant of several Acts but of which here I know not In a word this mistake is very great I affirm the Freedom of Pardon to depend on those things he Answereth That Pardon doth not consist in these things It is the Freedom of Pardon whence it is not the Nature of Pardon wherein it is that we have under Consideration But saith he how can he call it a gracious Acceptation a gracious Imputation a free Application if it were the same thing the Law requireth that was paid To pay all according to the full exaction of the Obligation needeth no favour to procure Acceptance Imputation or Application Can Justice refuse to accept of such a payment or can it require any more Though I know not directly what it is he means by saying I call it yet I passe it over 2 If all this were done by the Persons themselves or any one in their stead procured and appointed by themselves then were there some difficulty in these Questions but this being otherwise there is none at all as hath been declared 3 How the Payment made by Christ was of Grace yet in respect of the Obligation of the Law needed no favour nor was refusable by Justice supposing its free Constitution shall be afterwards declared To me the Author seems not to have his wonted cleerness in this whole Section which might administer occasion of further Enquiry and Exceptions but I forbear And thus much be spoken for the cleering and vindicating my Answer to the Arguments of Grotius against Christs paying the Idem of the Obligation The next shall further confirme the Truth CAP. IV. Further of the matter of the Satisfaction of Christ wherein is proved That it was the same that was in the Obligation IT being supposed not to be sufficient to have shewed the weakness of my Endeavour to Assert and Vindicate from Opposition what I had undertaken Mr Baxter addeth That I give up the Cause about which I contend as having indeed not understood him whom I undertook to Oppose in these words Mr Owen giveth up the Cause at last and saith as Grotius having not understood Grotius his meaning as appeareth Pag. 141 142 143. Whether I understand Grotius or no will by and by appear Whether Mr B. understandeth Me or the Controversie by me handled you shall have now a TRYAL The Assertion which alone I seek to Maintain is this That the Punishment which our Saviour under-went was the same that the Law required of us God relaxing his Law as to the Person suffering but not as to the Penalty suffered Now if from this I draw back in any of the Concessions following collected from pag. 141 142 143. I depracate not the Censure of giving up the Cause I contended for If otherwise there is a great mistake in some body of the whole businesse Of the things then Observe according to Mr B. his Order I shall take a brief account 1 He acknowledgeth saith he That the Payment is not made by the Party to whom Remission is granted and so saith every man that is a Christian This is a part of
3 That as the making out of all spiritual blessings first purposed by the Father then purchased by the Son that they might be bestowed Condecently to divine Justice God hath reserved it to his own Sovereign disposal That it be done so that they for whom this whole Dispensation is appointed may really enjoy the Fruits of it is all that necessarily is included either in the Purpose or Purchase Hence it is that the discharge of the Debtor doth not immediately follow the Payment of the Debt by Christ not because that Payment is refusable but because in that very Covenant and Compact from whence it is that the Death of Christ is a Payment God reserveth to himself this Right and Liberty to discharge the Debtor when and how he pleaseth I mean as to Times and Seasons for otherwise the means of actual freedom is procured by that Payment though not considered meerly as a Payment which denotes only Satisfaction but as it had adjoyned Merit also Therefore that Principle much used and rested on by Mr Baxter in the Business of Satisfaction to obviate this very difficulty of a not immediate discharge if Christ paid the Debt viz. That the Satisfaction of Christ is a refusable Payment which he presseth Page 149 150. is neither true in it self nor accommodate to this difficulty 1 Not True For The Suffering of CHRIST may be Considered either 1 Absolutely as in it self abstracting from the Consideration of any Covenant or Compact thereabout and so it cannot be said to be a refusable Payment not because not refusable but because no Payment That any thing should have any such reference unto God as a Payment or Satisfaction whether refusable or otherwise is not from its self and its own nature but from the Constitution of God alone Between God and the Creature there is no Equality not so much as of Proportion Christ in Respect of his Humane Nature though United to the Deity is a Creature and so could not absolutly satisfie or merit any thing at the hand of God I mean with that kind of merit which ariseth from an absolute Proportion of things This Merit can be found only among Creatures and the Advancement of Christs Humanity takes it not out of that Number Neither in this sense can any Satisfaction be made to God for sin The Sinners own undergoing the Penalty neither is Satisfaction in the sense whereof we speak neither can it properly be said to be so at all no more then a thing to be done which is Endlessly in doing 2 It may be Considered with Reference unto Gods Constitution and Determinatiou Predestmating Christ unto that Work and appointing the Work by him to be accomplished to be satisfactory equaling by that Constitution the End and the Means And thus the Satisfaction of Christ in the Justice of God was not refusable the Wisdom Truth Justice and suitable Purpose of God being engaged to the Contrary 2 This distinction is not accommodate to this difficulty the sole Reason thereof being what was held out before of the Interest of Gods Sovereign Right to the bestowing of Purposed Purchased Promised Blessings as to Times and Seasons according to the free Councel of his own Will 3 Hence then it is That God in the Scripture upon the Death of Christ is said to be reconciled to be returned unto Peace with them for whom he so died the Enmity being slain and peace actually made Ephes. 2. 14 15 16. Collos. 1. 20. because he now will and may suitablely to his Justice Wisdome and Appointment make out unto them for whom the Atonement was made all fruits of Love Peace and Amity Heb. 2. 17. Rom. 5. 10 11. 2 Cor. 5. 19. The OBJECTION unto this How then can God deny us the present Possession of Heaven used by Mr Baxter Page 157. is not of any force the whole disposal of these Things being left to his own pleasure And this is the SCHEME which upon the Death of CHRIST we assigne unto God He is atoned appeased actually reconciled at peace with those for whom Christ died and in due time for his sake will bestow upon them all the Fruits and Issues of Love and renewed Friendship This possibly may give some light into the immediate Effect of the DEATH of CHRIST which though I shall not purposely now handle yet Mr Baxter with much diligence having employed himself in the Investigation thereof I shall turn aside a little to Consider his ASSERTIONS in this Particular CAP. IX A Degression concerning the Immediate Effect of the Death of Christ IT is one of the greatest and noblest Questions in our Controverted Divinity What are the immediate Effects of Christs Death He that can rightly Answer this is a Divine indeed and by help of this may expedite most other Controversies about Redemption and Justification In a word The Effects of Redemption undertaken could not be upon a Subject not yet existent and so no Subject though it might be for them None but Adam and Eve were then Existent Yet as soon as we do Exist we receive benefit from it The suspending of the rigorous execution of the Sentence of the Law is the most observable immediate Effect of the Death of Christ which suspension is some kind of Deliverance from it Thus far Mr Baxter Thess. 9. Explicat pag. 67. There are scarce more lines then mistakes in this Discourse Some of them may be touched on 1 Effects are to be Considered with Respect to their Causes Causes are Real or Moral Real or Physical Causes produce their Effects immediately either Immediatione suppositi or Virtutis Unto them the subject must be Existent I speak not of creating power where the Act produceth its Object Moral Causes do never immediately acting their own Effects nor have any immediate influence into them There is between such Causes and their Effects the intervention of some 3d Thing previous to them both viz. Proportion Constitution Law Covenant which takes in the Cause and lets out the Effect And this for all Circumstances of where how when suitable to the limitations in them expressed or implyed with the Nature of the things themselves The Death of Christ is a Moral Cause in respect of all its Effects Whether those subjects on which it is to have its Effects be Existent or not Existent at the time of its performance is nothing at all considerable If it wrought Physically and Efficiently the Existence of the Subjects on which it were to work were requisite It is altogether in vain to enquire of the immediate Effects of Christs Death upon an Existent subject By the way That Adam and Eve only were Existent when Christ undertook the work of Redemption to me is not cleer no nor yet the following Assertion That as soon as we do Exist we receive Benefit by it taking benefit for a benefit actually collated as Mr Baxter doth not for a right to a benefit or the purpose of bestowing one which will Operate
in its due time This is easily Affirmed and therefore Eadem Facilitate is Denyed I have no fancy to strive to carry the Bell and to be accounted a Divine indeed by attempting at this time a right Stating of and Answer to this Question Proposed I am not altogether ignorant of the endeavour of others even as to this Particular and have formerly spoken somthing that way my self Mr Baxter seems here to understand by this Question viz. What is the immediate Effect of the Death of Christ what is the first benefit which from the Death of Christ accreweth unto them for whom he died Not what is the first thing that every particular person is actually in his own Person in his own time made partaker of but a Benefit Generally established and in being upon the designment of the work of Redemption which every one for whom Christ died hath a share of And of this he Positively Affirms That the suspending of the rigorous execution of the Sentence of the Law is the most observable immediate Effect of the Death of Christ and so deserves the Title of a Divine indeed Now truly though not to contend for the Bell with Mr Baxter whereof I confess my self utterly unworthy and willingly for many commendable Parts ascribe it unto him I cannot close with him nor Assent unto that Assertion Very gladly would I see Mr Baxters Arguments for this but those as in most other Controverted things in this Book he is pleased to Conceal and therefore though it might suffice me to give in my Dissent and so wait for further Proof yet that it may be apparent That I do not Deny this meerly because its said not Proved which in things not cleer in themselves is a Provocation so to do I shall oppose One or Two ARGVMENTS unto it All the Effects of the Death of Christ are peculiar only to the Elect to some the suspension of the rigorous execution of the Law is not so Ergo The Minor is apparent The Major proved by all the Arguments against Vniversal Redemption used in my former Treatise 2 All the Effects of the Death of Christ are Spiritual distinguishing and saving to the praise of Gods free Grace The suspending of the vigorous Execution of the Law is not so Ergo The Assumption is manifest 't is only a not immediate casting into Hell which is not a spiritual distinguishing Mercy but in respect to many tends to the manifestation of Gods Justice Rom. 9. 22. The Proposition is evident The Promises made unto Christ upon his undertaking this Work doubtless do hold out all that he Effected by his Death Of what Nature they are and what is the main tendance of them I have elsewhere discovered from the first to the last they are restrained to distinguishing Mercies see Isa. 49. 6 7 8 9 10. Chap. 53. 10 11 12. Isa. 61. 1 2. and no less is positively affirmed Eph. 1. 4. Rev. 1. 5 6. If Mr Baxter say that his meaning in this is That if Christ had not undertaken the Work of Redemption and Satisfaction then the Law must have had rigorous Execution upon all and therefore this being suspended upon his undertaking of it is the first fruit of the Death of Christ Notwithstanding this yet that suspension which in respect of the different Persons towards whom it is actually exercised hath different ends is not a Fruit nor Effect of the Death of Christ but a free Issue of the same eternally wise Providence Sovereignty and Grace as the Death of Christ himself is If then by the rigorous Execution of the Law you intend the immediate Execution of the Law in all its rigour and punishments this if it had been effected could in your own Judgment have reached Adam and Eve and no more and would have so reached them as to cut off the Generation of Mankind in that Root If so and this be the Fruit of Christs Death Why do you not reckon the Procreation of humane race among those Fruits also for had it not been for this suspension that also had failed which is as good a Causative Connection as that between the Death of Christ and this Suspension had not he undertaken the Work of Redemption it had not been If by a rigorous Execution you intend the Penalty of the Law inflicted in that way which hath pleased the Will of the Law-giver by several parts and degrees from conception through birth life death to Eternity the Curse of it being wholly incumbent in respect of desert and making out it self according to Gods appointment then the suspension thereof is not the immediate Effect of the Death of Christ which opposing the first Arguments to the former acceptation I further prove If those for whom Christ died do lie under this rigorous Execution of the Law that is the Curse of it until some other Effect of Christs Death be wrought upon them then that is not the first Effect of the Death of Christ but that supposal is true Joh. 3. 36. Ephes. 2. 3. therefore so also the Inference 2 In a word Take the suspending of the rigorous execution of the Law for the Purpose of God and his acting accordingly not to leave his Elect under the actual Curse of it so it is no Fruit of the Death of Christ but an Issue of the same Grace from whence also the Death of Christ proceeds Take it for an actual freeing of their Persons from the Breach of it and its Curse and so it differs not from Justification and is not the immediate effect of Christs Death in Mr Baxters Judgment Take it for the not immediately executing of the Law upon the first offence and I can as well say Christ died because the Law was suspended as you that the Law was suspended because Christ died had not either been the other had not been Take it for the actual forbearance of God towards all the World and so it falls under my Two first Arguments Take it thus that God for the Death of Christ will deal with all men upon a new Law freeing all from the Guilt of the first broken Law and Covenant So it is non Ens. If you mean by it Gods entring into a New way of Salvation with those for whom Christ died this on the part of God is antecedaneous to the Consideration of the Death of Christ and of the same free Grace with it self For the Question it self as I said before I shall not here in Terms take it up the following Discourse will give Light into it I have also spoken largely to it in another place and that distinctly The Sum is I conceive that all the intermediate Effects of the Death of Christ tending to its ultimate Procurement of the Glory of God are all in respect of his death immediate that is with such an immediation as attends Moral Causes Now these concerning them for whom he died as they are not immediatly bestowed on them the ultimate Attingency of
Faith Object But if God account Christ unto and bestow him upon a Sinner before Beleeving and upon that Account absolve him from the Obligation unto Death and Hell which for sin he lies under what wants this of compleat Justification Answ. Much every way 1 It wants that Act of pardoning Mercy on the part of God which is to be terminated and compleated in the Conscience of the Sinner this lies in the Promise 2 It wants the Hearts perswasion concerning the Truth and Goodness of the Promise and the Mercy held out in the Promise 3 It wants the Souls rolling it self upon Christ and receiving of Christ as the Author and Finisher of that Mercy an Al-sufficient Saviour to them that beleeve So that by Faith alone we obtain and receive the forgiveness of sin for notwithstanding any antecedent Act of God concerning us in and for Christ we do not actually receive a compleat Soul-freeing discharge until we beleeve And thus the Lord Christ hath the preheminence in all things He is the Author and finisher of our Faith This then is that which here we assign unto the Lord Upon the Accomplishment of the appointed Season for the making out the fruits of the Death of Christ unto them for whom he died he loves them freely sayes to them Live gives them his Son with and for him all things bringing forth the choicest Issue of his being reconciled in the bloud of Jesus whilest we are Enemies and totally alimated from him It will not be requisite at all as to our purpose in hand to make particular enquiry into the State and Condition of them towards whom such are the Actings of God as we before described What it is that gives them the first real alteration of Condition and distinguishment from others I have now no occasion to handle So far as Advantage hath been offered I have laboured to distinguish aright those things whose Confusion and mis-apprehension lies at the bottome of very many dangerous Mistakes How the forgoing Discourse may be accommodated and improved for the Removeal of those Mistakes I shall leave to the Consideration of others CAP. XIII The Removal of sundry Objections to some things formerly taught about the Death of Christ Vpon the Principles now delivered HAving fully declared not only what was my Intendment in the Expressions so exceedingly mistaken by Mr Baxter as hath in part already been made manifest and will instantly more fully appear I shall now take a view of what is Imposed on me as my Judgement and the Opposition made thereunto so far as may be needful for the cleering of the One and removing of the Other at least in what they may really concern what I did deliver in the Treatise impugned In Page 146 of his Apendix Mr Baxter endeavours to vindicate a Thesis of his from some Exceptions that he was by his friend pointed to unto which it seemed liable and Obnoxious The Thesis he layes down is That no man is actually and absolutly Justified upon the meer payment of the debt by Christ till they become beleevers Against this Article as he calls it he produceth some Objections of Maccovius censuring his Assertions to be senseless his Positions strange and abhored his Arguments weak and ineffectual with some other Expressions to the same purpose 1 I am now by the Providence of God in a Condition of Separation from my own small Library neither can I here attain the sight of Maccovius Disputations so that I shall not at all interpose my self in this Contest only I must needs say 1 I did not formerly account Maccovius to be so senseless and weak a Disputant as here he is represented to be 2 That for Mr Baxters Answer to that Argument where the Debt is paid there Discharge must follow by Asserting the Payment made by Christ to be refusable and the Interest of sinners in that Payment to be purely upon the performance of a Condition I have fully before in both parts of it Demonstrated to be weak and inconsistent with it self and Truth That the Interesting of Sinners in the Payment made by Christ at such and such a Season is from the Sovereignty of God and his free Engagement sub Termino for this End hath been also fully manifested But Secondly Mr Baxter Affirms That to these Arguments of Maccovius Mr Owen addes some in the place against Grotius whereunto he was referred To what End you will say doth Mr Owen adde these Arguments Why to prove that men are actually and absolutly Justified upon the meer Payment of the Debt by Christ before beleeving But Fidem tuam Is there any one Argument in my whole Book used to any such purpose Do I labour to prove that which I never Affirmed never thought never beleeved In what Sense I Affirmed that by the Death of Christ we are actually and ipso facto delivered from Death that is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} we have in due time the time appointed free and full Deliverance thereby without the Intervention of any Condition on our part not absolutly procured for us by his Death I have before declared How much this comes short of actual and absolute Justification I need not now mention I shall therefore only so far Consider the Answers given by Mr Baxter as they may seem to impair or entrench upon the main Truth I Assert and that in the Order by him laid down These saith he Mr Owen layeth down 1 By Death he delivereth us from Death Answ. Not immediatly nor absolutly nor by his Death alone but by that as a Price supposing other Causes on his part and Conditions on ours to concur before the actual Deliverance Reply 1 To what End I mention that place of the Apostle was before declared 2 By the Death of Christ we are immediatly delivered from Death with that Immediation which is proper to the Efficiency of Causes which produce their Effects by the way of Moral procurement that is certainly without the Intervention of any other Cause of the like kind And 3 Absolutly no Condition being interposed between the Cause and the Effect Christs Death and our total Deliverance but such as is part of our Deliverance and solely procured by that Death Though that Death of Christ be not considered as alone that is separated from his Obedience Resurrection and Intercession when the Work of Redemption is assigned to it in the Scripture 4 By the Death of Christ as a Price I suppose you understand his Purchase as well as his Payment his Merit as well as his Satisfaction or else this is a false Notion of the Death of CHRIST as the Cause of our Deliverance 5 All other Causes concurring on the Part of Christ for our Deliverance are 1 Either not of the same kind with his Death Or 2 Bottomed on his Death and flowing from thence so that summarily all may be resolved therinto 6 The Conditions on our Part in the Sense intended are often
mentioned never proved nor I am perswaded will never be But he Addes 2 He saith the Elect are said to die and rise with Christ Answ. 1 Not in respect of time as if we died and rose at the same time either really or in Gods esteem 2 Not that we died in his Dying and rose in his Rising But 3 It is spoken of the distant mediate Effects of his Death and the immediate Effects of his Spirit on us Rising by Regeneration to Union and Communion with Christ So he Reply 1 I pass the 1 and 2 Exceptions notwithstanding that of Gods not esteeming of us as in Christ upon his Performance of the Acts of his Mediation for us might admit of some consideration 2 The Inference here couched That these things are the immediate Effects of Christs Spirit on us therefore the distant and mediate Effects of his death for us is very weak and unconcluding The death of Christ procureth these things as a Cause Moral and Impelling the Spirit worketh as an Efficient and therefore the same thing may be the immediate Effect of them both according to their several kinds of Efficacy And so indeed they are Our actual Conversion the Efficient whereof is the Spirit is the immediate procurement of the Merit of Christ see this at large in my Treatise opposed I know not any man that hath run out into more wide mistakes about the immediate Effects of the death of Christ than Mr Baxter who pretends to so much Accurateness in this Particular 3 He saith ads Mr Baxter Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse being made a Curse for us Answ. I explained before how far we are freed by Redemption He hath restored us that is paid the price but with no intent that we should by that Redemption be immediately or absolutely freed Yet when we are freed it is to be ascribed to his death as the Meritorious Cause but not as the Only Cause Reply 1 A being freed so FAR or so far by Redemption and not wholly fully or compleatly what ever men may explain the Scripture is wholly silent of 2 That Christ in paying a price had no intent that those he paid it for should be immediatly or absolutely freed is crudely enough asserted 1 Of the immediateness of their Delivery I have spoken already It hath as strict an Immediation as the Nature of such Causes and Effects will bear 2 If he intended not that those for whom he died should be absolutly freed then either he intended not their freedom at all and so the Negation is upon the term freed or the Negation of his Intention is only as to the qualification absolutly and so his Intention to free them is Asserted and the Affection of absolutness in that Intention only denyed If the First be meant 1 It is contrary to innumerable express Testimonies of Scriptures 2 It renders the Son of God dying with no determinate End or designed Purpose at all in Reference to them for whom he dyed A thing we would not ascribe to a Wise man in a far more easie Undertaking If the Second 1 I desire to know What is this Intention here assigned to our Saviour He payd a Price or Ransom for us he bought and purchased us by his blood to be a peculiar People to himself he redeemed us from the Curse and Wrath due to us that we may be conditionally freed All things intended under Condition are as to their Accomplishment uncertain The Condition may be fulfilled or it may not be fulfilled and therefore the thing intended thereon can have no certainty as to its Accomplishment in the mind of the Intender This then is That which is ascribed to the Lord Jesus Making his Soul an Offering for sin laying down his Life a ransom for Mercy and tasting Death to free the Children given him from Death praying together that those for whom he died might be partakers of his Glory yet was altogether uncertain whether ever any one of them should at all partake of the Good things which in his whole undertaking of Mediation he aimed at Thus is he made a Surety of an uncertain Covenant a Purchaser of an Inheritance perhaps never to be enjoyed a Priest Sanctifying none by his Sacrifice c. 2 Is the Accomplishment of this Condition upon which freedom depends in the Intention of Christ certain in his mind under that Intention I ask then Whence that Assurance doth accrew Is it from his foresight of their good using their Abilities to fulfil the Condition to them prescribed See then whither you have rolled this stone The Folly and Absurdity of this hath been long since sufficiently discovered But is it from hence because by his Death he Purchaseth for them the compleating of that Condition in them Thus he payes a Price with Intention that those for whom he payes it shall be freed by enjoying that freedom under such a Condition as he procures for them and thereupon knows That at the appointed time it shall be wrought in them What differs this in the Close from absolute freedom Further Feign some of them for whom Christ died to fulfil this Condition others not and it will be more evident That the greatest uncertainty possible as to the Issues of his Death must be assigned to him in his dying The pretence of an effectual discriminating purpose of free Grace following the Purpose of giving Christ promisuously for all will not salve the Contradictions of this Assertion But the Truth is This whole figment of Conditional freedom is every way unsavoury That very thing which is assigned for the Condition of our freedom being it self the chiefest part of it the whole indeed as here begun Potential Conditional not actual not absolute Issues and Effects of the Death of Christ have been abundantly disproved already That which follows in Mr Baxter from Page 152 unto page 155. Chap. 19. belongs not to me being only a Declaration of his own Judgement about the things in hand wherein although many things are not only incommodiously expressed to suit the un-Scriptural Method of these Mysteris which he hath framed in his mind but also directly opposite to the Truth yet I shall not here meddle with it refering them who desire Satisfaction in this Business to a serious Consideration of what I have above-written to this purpose Page 155. C. 20. he returns to the Consideration of My Assertion concerning our Deliverance ipso facto by the bloud of Christ And tells you I do not understand Mr Owen his meaning for he saith That Christ did actually and ipso facto deliver us from the Curse and Obligation yet we do not instantly apprehend and perceive it nor yet possess it but only we have actual Right to all the Fruits of his Death c. So he Answ. The things of that Treatise were written with the Pen of a vulgar Scribe that every one might run and read whence then it should be That so learned a man should not
mighty supplications under his fear Heb. 5. 7. that were upon him do all make out That the bitterness of the Death due to Sin was fully upon his Soul Sum all his outward appearing Preasures Mocks Scoffs Scorns Cross Wounds Death c. And what do some of their afflictions who have suffered for his Name come short of it And yet how far were they above those dreadful expressions of anguish which we find upon the fellow of the Lord of Hosts the Lyon of the Tribe of Judah who received not the Spirit by measure but was anoynted with the Oyle of Gladness above his Fellows Certainly his un-conceivable sufferings were in an other kind and such as set no example to any of his to suffer in after him It was no less then the weight of the wrath of God and the whole punishment due to sin that he wrestled under 2 The Second Part of my Position is to me confirmed by these and the like Arguments That there is a Distinction to be allowed between the Penalty and the Person suffering is a common apprehension especially when the nature of the Penalty is only enquired after If a man that had but one Eye were Censured to have an Eye put out and a dear Friend pitying his deplorable Condition knowing that by undergoing the Punishment decreed he must be left to utter blindness should upon the allowance of Commutation as in Zaleucus case submit to have one of his own Eyes put out and so satisfie the Sentence given though by having two Eyes he avoid himself the misery that would have attended the others suffering who had but one If I say in this Case any should ask Whether he underwent the idem the other should have done or tantundem I suppose the Answer would be easie In things Real it is unquestionable and in things Personally I shall pursue it no further lest it should prove a strife of words And thus far of the suffering of Christ in a way of Controversie what follows will be more Positive CAP. V. The Second Head about JVSTIFICATION before Believing THE next thing I am called into Question about is Concerning actual and absolute Justification before Believing this Mr Baxter speaks to page 146 and so forwards and First Answers the Arguments of Maccovius for such Justification and then page 151 Applyes himself to remove such further Arguments and places of Scripture as are by me Produced for the Confirmation of that Assertion Here perhaps I could have desired a little more Candor To have an Opinionion fastened on me which I never once received nor intimated the least Thought of in that whole Treatise or any other of Mine and then my Arguments Answered as to such an end and purpose as I not once intended to promote by them is a little to harsh Dealing It is a facile thing to Render any mans Reasonings exceedingly weak and rediculous if we may impose upon them such and such things to be proved by them which their Author never once intended For Partional Justification Evangelical Justification whereby a Sinner is compleatly Justified that it should preceed Believing I have not only not Asserted but Positively Denyed and disproved by many Arguments To be now traduced as a Patron of that Opinion and my Reasons for it Publickly Answered seems to me something Uncouth However I am Resolved not to interpose in other mens Disputes and Differencies yet lest I should be again and further mistaken in this I shall briefly give in my Thoughts to the whole Difficulty after I have discovered and discussed the Ground and Occasion of this mistake In an Answer to an Argument of Grotius about the Satisfaction of Christ denying that by it we are ipso facto delivered from the Penalty due to Sin I Affirmed that by his Death Christ did actually or ipso facto deliver us from the Curse by being made a Curse for us and this is that which gave occasion to that Imputation before mentioned To cleer my mind in this I must desire the Reader to consider That my Answer is but a Denial of Grotius his Assertions In what kind and respect Grotius doth there deny that we are ipso facto delivered by the Satisfaction of Christ in that sense and that only do I affirm that we are so otherwise there were no Contradictions between his Assertion and mine not speaking ad idem and eodem respectu The truth is Grotius doth not in that place whence this Argument is taken fully or cleerly manifest what he intends by a deliverance which is not actual or ipso facto and therefore I made bold to Interpret his Mind by the Analogie of that Opinion wherewith he was throughly infected about the Death of Christ According to that Christ delivering us by his Satisfaction not actually nor ipso facto is so to make Satisfaction for us as that we shal have no Benefit by his Death but upon the performance of a Condition which himself by that Death of his did not absolutely procure This was that which I opposed and therefore affirmed That Christ by his Death did actually or ipso facto deliver us Let the Reader then here Observe 1 That our Deliverance is to be referred to the Death of Christ according to its own Causality that is as a Cause Meritorious Now such Causes do actually and ipso facto produce all those Effects which immediatly slow from them not in an immediation of Time but Causality Look then what Effects do follow or what things soever are procured by them without the interposition of any other Cause in the same kind they are said to be procured by them actually or ipso facto 2 That I have abundantly proved in the Treatise mentioned That if the Fruits of the Death of Christ be to be communicated unto us upon Condition and that Condition to be among those Fruits and be it self to be absolutely communicated upon no Condition then all the Fruits of the Death of Christ are as absolutely procured for them for whom he Died as if no Condition had been prescribed for these things come all to one 3 I have proved in the same Place That Faith which is this Condition is it self procured by the Death of Christ for them for whom he Died to be freely bestowed on them without the prescription of any such Condition as on whose fulfilling the Collation of it should depend These things being considered as I hoped they would have been by every one that should undertake to Censure any thing as to this Business in that Treatise they being there all handled at large it is apparent what I intended by this actual Deliverance viz. That the Lord Jesus by the Satisfaction Merit of his Death Obligation made for all only his Elect hath actually absolutly purchased procured for them all Spiritual Blessings of Grace Glory to be made out unto them and bestowed upon them in Gods way and Time without dependance on any
of Christ is a low carnal Conception The Will of God is not moved by any thing without it self k Alterations are in the things altered not in the Will of God concerning them 3 To make this the whole Effect of the Death of Christ that God should determine and promise to lay aside his wrath is l no Scripture discovery either as to Name or Thing 4 The Purposes of God which are all Eternal and the Promises of God which are all made in time are very inconveniently ranged in the same Series 5 That by the Death of Christ Attonement is made everlasting Redemption purchased that God is Reconciled a Right unto Freedom obtained for those for whom he died shall be afterwards declared 6 If God doth only Purpose and Promise to lay aside his Anger upon the Death of Christ but doth it not until our actual believing then 1 our Faith is the proper procuring cause of Reconciliation the Death of Christ but a Requisite Antecedent which is not the Scripture Phrase Rom. 5. 10. 2 Cor. 5. 18. Eph. 2. 16. Col. 1. 20 21. Dan. 9. 24. Heb. 2. 17. Eph. 1. 7. Heb. 9. 12. 2 How comes the Sinner by Faith if it is the Gift of God It must be an Issue of Anger and Enmity for that Schem only is actually ascribed to him before our enjoyment of it Strange that God should be so far reconciled as to give us Faith that we may be reconciled to him that thereupon he may be reconciled to us 3 For the Third Instance of Gods receiving the sinner into love and favour upon his beleeving quite laying aside his anger I Answer To wave the Anthropomorphisme wherwith this Assertion is tainted as the former If by receiving into favour he intend absolute compleat pactional Justification being an Act of favour quitting the sinner from the guilt of sin charged by the Accusation of the Law terminated on the Conscience of a sinner I confess it in order of nature to follow our beleiving I might Consider further the Attempts of others for the right sttating of this business but it would draw me beyond my Intention His failings herein who is so often mentioned and so much used by him who gives occasion to this rescript I could not but remark What are my own Thoughts and Apprehensions of the whole I shall in the next place briefly impart Now to make way hereunto some things I must suppose which though some of them otherwhere controverted yet not at all in reference to the present business and they are these 1 That Christ died only for the Elect or God gave his Son to die only for those whom he chuseth to life and salvation for the praise of his glorious Grace This is granted by Mr Baxter where he affirms That Christ bare not punishment for them who must bear punishment themselves in eternal fire Thes. 33. p. 162. And again Christ died not for final Vnbelief Thes. 32. p. 159. therefore not for them who are finally Unbelievers as all non-Elected are and shall be For what Sinners he died he died for all their sins Rom. 5. 6 7 8. 2 Cor. 5. 21. 1 Joh. 1. 7. If any shall say That as he died not for the final Unbelief of others so not for the final Unbelief of the Elect and so not for final Unbelief at all I Answer First If by final Unbelief you mean that which is actually so Christ satisfied not for it His satisfaction cannot be extended to those things whose Existence is prevented by his Merit The Omission of this in the consideration of the Death Christ lies at the bottom of many mistakes Merit and Satisfaction are of equal Extent as to their Objects both also tend to the same End but in sundry respects Secondly If by final Vnbelief you understand that which would be so notwithstanding all means and remedies were it not for the Death of Christ so he did satisfie for it It's Existens being prevented by his Merit So then if Christ died not for final Unbelief he died not for the finally Unbeleeving Though the Satisfaction of his Death hath not paid for it the Merit of his Death would remove it Thirdly I Suppose That the Means as well as the Ends Grace as Glory are the Purchase and procurement of Jesus Christ See this proved in my Treatise of Redemption Lib. 3. Cap. 4. c. Fourthly That God is absolutely immutable unchangable in all his Attributes Neither doth his Will admit of any alteration This proved above Fifthly That the Will of God is not moved properly by any external Cause whatsoever unto any of its Acts whether imminent or transient For 1 m By a moving Cause we understand a Cause Morally Efficient and if any thing were so properly in respect of any Act of Gods Will then the Act which is the Will of God Acting must in some respect viz. As it is an Effect be less worthy and inferiour to the Cause for so is every Effect in respect of it's Cause And 2 Every Effect produced proceedeth from a Passive possibility unto the Effect which can no way be assigned unto God besides it must be temporarie for nothing that is Eternal can have dependance upon that whose Rise is in Time and such are all things external to the Will of God even the Merit of Christ himself 3 I cannot imagine how there can be any other Cause why God Willeth any thing then why he not Willeth or Willeth not other things which for any to Assign will be found Difficult Mat. 11. 25. Chap. 20. 15. So then when God Willeth one thing for another as our Salvation for the Death of Christ the one is the Cause of the other neither moveth the Will of God Hence Sixthly All Alterations are in the things concerning which the Acts of the Will of God are none in the Will of God its self These things being premised what was before proposed I shall now in order make out beginning with the Eternal Acts of the Will of God towards us antecedent to all or any Consideration of the DEATH of CHRIST CAP. VII In particular of the Will of God towards them for whom Christ died and their state and Condition as Considered Antecedanous to the Death of Christ and all Efficiency thereof FIRST then the Habitude of God towards man Antecedent to all fore-sight of the Death of Christ is an Act of Supream Soveraignty and Dominion appointing them by means suited to the manifestation of his Glorious Properties according to his Infinitely Wise and Free Disposal to Eternal Life and Salvation for the praise of his glorious Grace That this Salvation was never but one or of one kind consisting in the same kind of Happiness in reference unto Gods appointment needs not much proving To think that God appointed one kind of Condition for man if he had continued in Innocency and another upon his Recovery from the Fall is to think That
the Cause and the first Rise of the Effect lying in an intervening Compact so not simul at once neither though simul and a like procured the Cause of this being that Relation Coherence and Causality which the Lord hath appointed between the several Effects or rather parts of the same Effect of the death of Christ in reference to the main and ultimate End to be thereby attained as at large I have discused Lib. 2. Cap. 1. p. 52 53 c. In one word The first Effect of the Death of Christ in this sense is the first Fruit of Election For for the Procuring and Purchasing of the Fruits thereof and them alone did Christ die If I mistake not Mr Baxter himself is not setled fully in this Perswasion that the suspension of the Rigorous Execution of the Law is the most immediate Effect of the Death of Christ for pag. 52. these words which he useth God the Father doth accept the Sufferings and Merits of his Son as a full satisfaction to his violated Law and as a valuable Consideration upon which he will wholly acquit and forgive the Offendors themselves and receive them again into favour so that they will but receive his Son upon the terms expressed in the Gospel seems to place the ultimate Efficacy of the Death of Christ in Gods acceptation of it as to our good on the Condition of Faith and Obedience Which first makes the suspension of the Law to be so far from being the first effect of the Death of Christ that the last reacheth not so far And 2dly the fond absurdity of this Conditional Acceptation I have before declared Neither am I clear to which of those Assertions that of Page 92 where he affirms That some benefit by Christ the Condemned did receive is most accommodate neither can I easily receive what is here Asserted if by Benefit you understand that which in respect of them is intentionally so For First Condemned Persons as condemned Persons surely receive no Benefit by Christ for they are Condemned Secondly The delay of the Condemnation of Reprobates is no part of the Purchase of Christ The Scripture sayes Nor more nor less of any such thing but peculiarly assigns it to another Cause Rom. 9. CAP. X. Of the Merit of Christ and its immediate Efficacy what it effecteth in what it resteth with the state of those for whom Christ died in reference to his Death of their Right to the Fruits of his Death before Beleeving THAT they for whom Christ died have a right to the things which he Purchased thereby that is an actual Right for so men may have to what they have not in actual Possession is no singular Conception of mineOur Divines freely express themselves to this Purpose Even the Commender and Publisher of Grotius his Book of Satisfaction learned Vossius himself Affirmeth That Christ by his Death Purchased for us a double Right First a Right of escaping punishment and then a Right of obtaining the Reward By the way I cannot close with his Distinction in that place of some things That Christ by his Life and Death purchased for us and other that he daily bestoweth for the things he daily bestoweth are of them which by his Death he purchased My Expressions then alone are not subject to the Consequences charged on them for Asserting a right to Life and Salvation in them for whom Christ Died even before beleeving Yea some have gone farther and Affirmed That those for whom Christ died are in some manner restored into saving favour Not to mention some of them to whose Judgment Mr Baxter seems to accede who assert Vniversal Justification and Restauration into Grace upon the Death of Christ but I lay no weight on these things To cleer my Thoughts in this Particular Two things must necessarily be enquired into and made out 1 Seeing the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ do tend directly for the Good of them for whom he died and that there is a distance and space of Time between that Death and their Participation of the good things purchased therby wherein lyeth or in what resteth the Efficacy of that his Death with the Principle of the certain Futurition of the spiritual things so procured which those for whom he died shall assuredly in due time enjoy 2 Wherin lies the Obligation unto Death Hel Wrath which before beleeving the Scripture Affirms to be upon the Elect seeing Christ hath actually purchased for them freedom from these things and this without more a-do will be cleered in the former 1 For the first then upon the Issue of the Death of Christ something being supposed in God beyond his meer Purpose of which before somethings being actually procured and purchased by it which yet they for whom they are so purchased neither do nor possibly can upon the Purchase immediately possess and enjoy It is enquired Wherein resteth the Efficacy of his Death which in due Time causeth the making out of all those spiritual Blessings which by it are so procured Now this must be either in those for whom he Died or in Himself as Mediator or in his Father who sent him 1 That it is not in them for whom he Died is apparent Upon the Death of Christ in Purpose and Promise when first its Efficacy took place they were not I mean actually Existent True They were Potentially in the Purpose of God but will that make them a meet subject for the Residence of this Right and Merit whereof we speak as is the Thing such are all its Affections and Adjuncts but possible if it be no more This is something actual whereof we speak 2 That it is not in Christ as Mediator is no less evident He that makes Satisfaction and he to whom it is made he who Meriteth any thing and he at whose hands he Meriteth it must be distinguished The second Person under the Notion of performing the work of Mediation receiveth not Satisfaction The Power Christ receiveth of the Father because he is the Son of Man to give eternal Life to those given him of his Father is of latter Consideration to that we have in hand being a Result and Consequence thereof 3 It must therefore be in the Father or God as receiving Satisfaction Of all the Attributes of God where this may be placed to speak after the manner of men one of these Four must needs be the proper seat of it 1 His Power 2 His Will 3 His Justice 4 His Truth 1 His Power and then it must be not that God hath any addition of Power for that cannot be to him who is Omnipotent but that a Way is made for the Exercise of his Power which before by somewhat from himself was shut up And as some suppose it is no otherwise That whereas the Lord could not make out Grace and Favour unto Sinners because of his Justice necessarily enclining him to their punishment and destruction Now that Justice being satisfied in Christ
Justice so repaired as above For Positive good things in Grace and Glory by Satisfaction alone they are not at all respected 2 There is the Merit of the Death of Christ and that Principally intendeth the Glory of God in our enjoying those good things whereof it is the Merit or desert And this is the Foundation of that Right whereof we treat What Christ hath Merited for us it is just and equal we should have that is We have Right unto it and this before Beleeving Faith gives us actual Possession as to some Part and a new Pactional right as to the whole but this Right or that equalling of things upon divine Constitution Jus est operatio illa qua sit aequalitas Pesant in Tom. 22. ae q. 57. whereby it becomes Just and Right that we should obtain the things Purchased by it is from the Merit of Christ alone What Christ hath Merited is so far granted as that they for whom it is so Merited have a Right unto it The Sum then of what we have to prove is That the Merit of the Death of the Lord Jesus hath according to the Constitution of the Father so procured of him the good things aimed at and intended therby that it is Just Right and Equal that they for whom they are so procured should certainly and infallibly enjoy them at the appointed Season and therefore unto them they have an actual Right even before Beleeving Faith it self being of the number of those things so procured All which I prove as followeth 1 The very Terms before mentioned enforce no less If it be justum before their Beleeving that those for whom Christ Died should enjoy the Fruits of his Death then have they even before Beleeving jus or a right thereunto for jus est quod justum est That it is right and equal that they should enjoy those Fruits is manifest For. 1 It was the Engagement of the Father to the Son upon his undertaking to die for them that they should so do Isa. 53. 10 11 12. 2 In that Undertaking he Accomplished all that was of him required Joh. 17. 4. 2 That which is Merited and Procured for any one thereunto he for whom it is procured certainly hath a Right That which is obtained for me is mine in actual right though not perhaps in actual Possession The thing that is obtained is granted by him of whom it is obtained and that unto them for whom it is obtained In some sense or other that is a man's which is procured for him In saying it is procured for him we say no less If this then be not in Respect of Possession it must be in Respect of Right Now all the Fruits of the Death of Christ are obtained and procured by his Merit for them for whom he died He OBTAINS for them eternal Redemption Heb. 9. 12. purchasing them with his own Blood Act. 20. 28. Heb. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18. Gal. 1. 4. Rev. 14. 3 4. The very Nature of Merit described by the Apostle Rom. 4. 4. infers no less Where Merit intercedes the Effect is reckoned as of debt That which is my due debt I have a Right unto The Fruits of the Death of Christ are the Issues of Merit bottomed on Gods gracious Acceptation and reckoned as of debt He for whom a Ransome is paid hath a Right unto his Liberty by vertue of that Payment 3 2 Pet. 1. 1. The Saints are said to obtain precious Faith through the reghteousness of God It is a righteous thing with God to give Faith to them for whom Christ died because thereby they have a Right unto it Faith being amongst the most precious Fruits of the Death of Christ by vertue thereof becometh their due for whom he died 4 The Condition of Persons under Merit and de-Merit in respect of Good or Evill is alike The Proportion of things requires it Now men under de-Merit are under an Obligation unto Punishment and it is a righteous thing with God to recompence tribulation unto them 2 Thess. 1. 6. It being the judgement of God that they who do such things are worthy of death Rom. 1. 32. They then who are under Merit have also a Right unto that whereof it is the Merit It is not of any force to say That they are not under that Merit but only upon Condition For this is 1 False 2 With God this is all one as if there were no Condition at the Season and Term appointed for the making out the Fruit of that Merit as hath been declared Neither yet to Object That it is not their own Merit but of another which Respects them That Other being their Surety doing that whereby he Merited only on their behalf yea in their stead they dying with him though the same in them could not have been Meritorious they being at best meer men and at worst very sinful men 5 A Compact or Covenant being made of giving Life and Salvation upon the Condition of Obedience to certain Persons that Condition being compleatly fulfilled as it was in the Death of Christ Claim being made of the Promise according to the Tenure of the Compact and the Persons presented for the Enjoyment of it surely those Persons have an Actual Right unto it That all this is so see Isa. 49. 2 3 4 5 6 c. Psal. 2. 2. 4 5. Isa. 53. 10 11 12. Joh. 17. 3. 2. 21. Heb. 2. And so much for this also concerning the Issue of the Death of Christ and the Right of the Elect to the Fruits of it before Beleeving CAP. XII Of the way whereby they actually attain and enjoy Faith and Grace who have a Right thereunto by the Death of Christ THE Way and Causes of bestowing Faith on them who are under the Condition before described is the next thing to be enquired after What are the Thoughts of God from Eternity concerning those for whom Christ was to die with the State they are left in in relation to those Thoughts as also what is the Will of God towards them immediatly upon the Consideration of the Death of Christ with the Right which to them accrews thereby being Considered it remaineth I say that we declare the Way and Method whereby they obtain Faith through the righteousness of God And here we must lay down certain POSITIONS As 1 Notwithstanding the Right granted them for whom Christ died upon his Death to a better State and Condition in due Time that is in the Season suiting the Infinitly-Wise-Sovereignty of God yet as to their present Condition in point of Enjoyment they are not actually differenced from others Their Prayers are an abomination to the Lord Prov. 28. 9. all Things are to them unclean Tit. 1. 15. they are under the Power of Satan Eph. 2. 2. in bondage unto death Heb. 2. 14. Obnoxious to the Curse and Condemning power of the Law in the Conscience Gal. 3. 13. having sin reigning in them Rom. 6. 17. c. 2 What