Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	formal_a	justification_n	meritorious_a	1,409	5	11.1733	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79465	Anti-Socinianism, or, A brief explication of some places of holy Scripture, for the confutation of certain gross errours, and Socinian heresies, lately published by William Pynchion, Gent. in a dialogue of his, called, The meritorious price of our redemption, concerning 1. Christ's suffering the wrath of God due to the elect. 2. God's imputation of sin to Christ. 3. The nature of the true mediatorial obedience of Christ. 4. The justification of a sinner. Also a brief description of the lives, and a true relation of the death, of the authors, promoters, propagators, and chief disseminators of this Socinian heresie, how it sprung up, by what means it spread, and when and by whom it was first brought into England, that so we be not deceived by it. / By N. Chewney, M.A. and minister of God's Word.	Chewney, Nicholas, 1609 or 10-1685.	1656 (1656)	Wing C3804; Thomason E888_1; ESTC R207357	149,812	257

which we are to speak for which purpose neither Cicero Terence Caesar nor any of those who were the first and purest Authours of the Latine tongue were ever acquainted with this word Justificare which is now in use among us and with which at this time we have to do We must therefore seek farther and look higher if we mean to be truly certified hereof and fully satisfied herein Omitting then all others we will only pitch upon two places the one in the Old the other in the New-Testament as the aptest in my judgment of all other for this purpose The one that of the Wiseman e Prov. 17.15 He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just even they both are an abomination to the Lord Here is the Word it self and its opposite the Word it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying * Absolvere to absolve or free the opposite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importing * Improbificare si ita liceret loqui i. e. condemnare ad supplicum tradere to condemne or to deliver over to just and condigne punishment They are both Judicial terms exercised or used in judgment holden on such weighty matters as touch the life or death of the person concerned or engaged The other answerable hereunto is that of St. Paul Rom. 8.33 where he propounds the question Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect and rather then we shall go away without an answer he himself as best able for to do it will furnish us Surely none None indeed can justly do it to which he adds a reason to the purpose For it is God that justifieth The Apostle in this place makes a bold challenge in the behalf of all the Elect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who can accuse them or call them into question or is there any thing that can be laid against them And yet we see they do not want accusers the Devil is ready at hand to do it the Law of Moses will do it yea rather then fail their own consciences will do it But what says the Apostle al this is to no purpose For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is God that justifies that is frees them from all these accusers and their accusations too yea absolves them from the guilt of sin not imputing it to them but imputing the righteousness which is by faith For the Apostle opposeth justification to condemnation here as Solomon also did before Even here also are two actions of judgment set before us The one charging a man with guilt or crime of which being justly convicted doth pronounce the sentence of the Law against him The other opposite to both these absolving and acquitting him from guilt and punishment doth declare and publish him to be just and righteous This is a matter of high concernment and to speak the very truth there cannot but be a great deal of difficulty in defining things of this nature We will not therefore trust to our selves or any abilities in us as thinking it sufficient to trade with our own stock in a business of so much consequence but will rather as the man of Macedonia call for help and see where or how we may best supply our selves And behold here is one at hand that is both able and willing to furnish us of whom we will make use at present for I suppose we cannot mend our selves look where we will with such a definition of Justification as may be justified in all the parts thereof which is this it is saith he an act of God whereby he acquitteth every penitent and believing sinner not imputing to him his sins but imputing to him the perfect satisfaction and righteousness of Christ There is not any part of this definition but is Scripture proof as we shall see God willing by degrees hereafter In the mean time having seen what is meant by the word Justification as also the nature and definition thereof we passe on to the next thing proposed by us namely the causes which as in all other things so in this are four to wit the Efficient Material Formal and Final The Efficient causes of a sinners Justification are of two sorts either principal or instrumental the principall is God both essentially the whole Trinity g Isa 43.25 Rom. 3.26 I even I am he that blot out thy transgressions and also personally The Father h Rom. 8.33 That He namely God the Father might be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus The Son also testifieth this of himself i Matt. 9.6 saying the Son of man hath power to forgive sins and so to justifie these that were ungodly The Holy Ghost performeth this too k 1 Cor. 6.11 And such wretches by reason of iniquity were some of you even guilty of the same impieties but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the name of our ●ord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God For seeing this work is of that kind which by the Schools is termed ad extra an outward action of God it is common to all the three Persons And yet it is distinct too in regard of the order and manner of working as also the terms and limits of operation whence the Act of justifying is antonomastically ascribed to the Father the merit thereof to the Son and the application of this merit to the Holy Ghost So that God the Father justifieth as the primary cause and as being the Authour thereof God the Son as the meritorious cause and God the Holy Ghost as the cause applicatory and brought home to the justified persons conscience in the comfortable assurance thereof So that the whole amounts to thus much God the Father through the Son doth justifie us by the Holy Ghost The Father I say as the principal cause and that in two respects 1. In that he gave his only begotten Son for us and set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud that all that believe in him should be justified as the Apostle witnesseth m Rom. 3.25 2. In that he absolveth those that so believe and pronounceth them just in Christ The Son as the Mediator and meritorious cause and that also in two respects 1. As he his our Surety who paid our debt our Redeemer who laid down the price of our redemption for us n Isa 53.11 affording unto us both the matter and the merit of our justification 2. As he is our Intercessor and Advocate to plead for us that his merits may be imputed to us For though the sufferings of Chr●st be a precious salve to cure our Souls yet we cannot look for healing by them unlesse they be applyed and though his righteousness be a wedding garment sufficient in it self to cover all our Spiritual nakedness yet will it not clothe us unlesse it be put on Therefore in the third place the Holy Ghost is said to justifie us because

silly shift is to no purpose Would the Dialogue bu undresse his brames take off and lay a side these and such like phanatick toyes that gingle about his understanding God might receive more glory the Church more peace himself more comfort others more benefit by or from the study and practise of those Truths which lend directly and necessarily to edification and salvation For fear this will not be we will leave wishing and woulding and return to the prosecution of the matter we have in hand We are justified by the perfect and compleat righteousness of Christ by which the Law is fulfilled the justice of God satisfied and we delivered from that wrath which we had deserved * Communis omnium nostrorum sententia neque quòd ad rem attinet quisquam è nostris aliter scripsit aut sensit all which we will wind up upon this one bottome and comprehend in this one argument By that righteousness we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied By the righteousness of Christ the Law is fully satisfied Therefore by the righteousness of Christ are we justified For the proof of the Proposition three things are to be granted First that whosoever is justified is made just by some righteousness For to think that a man should be justified without any Justice is as absurd as to imagine a man to be clothed without rayment Secondly that all true righteousness is a conformity to the Law of God which is the perfect Rule of righteousness insomuch that what is not conformable to that Law is called and that justly to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin Thirdly that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled * Christus induens nostram carnem nostro nomine perfectè praestitit legem either by our selves or some other for us For our Saviour Christ protested when he came to justifie and redeem us that he came not to break but to fulfill the Law * Tum demum redderetur inanis si illi non satisficeret vel per nos vel nostro nominae per alium atqui id per Christum est satisfactum qui non venit solvere sed implere Tossa pag. 26. and that not one jot or title of the Law should passe away without its due and true accomplishment These things thus premised being taken for granted the proposition is firm and undeniable The assumption is that by the righteousness of Christ the Law is fully satisfied For the cleering whereof we are to understand that to the full satisfying of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are necessarily required the one hath respect to the penalty to the suffering vvhereof sin hath made us lyable the other to the precept it self to the performing and compleating whereof the Law it self doth oblige us The former to free us from Hell and damnation the other to intitle us to Heaven and eternall salvation according to the Sanction of the Law if thou doest not that which is commanded thou art thereby accursed but if thou do then thou shall be saved In respect of the former the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him who hath once transgressed it but by eternal punishment or that at least which is equivalent thereunto in respect of the latter it is not satisfied but by a total perfect and perpetual obedience Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for all them that truly believe in him in both respects For he hath super-abundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and death he hath likewise perfectly fulfilled the Law for us by performing all r ghteousness ●hat it even to the uttermost either did or could require So that by them both we are freely and fully justified being freed from Hell that place of torment by the one and entitled to Heaven that place of happiness by the other God in Christ esteeming and accounting a sinner as just d Deus in Christo peccatorem estimat acsi ipse omnia singula peregisset perpessus esset quae Christus utraque illâ obedientiâ suâ peregit perpessus est Bradshaw de Justific as if he had performed and endured all and every thing which Christ himself both by his active and passive obedience performed and endured The form of a sinners justification is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ because by imputing it the Lord doth justifie which was also expressed in the definition And this doth necessarily follow upon that which hath bin already said of the matter For it cannot be imagined that we should be justified by that righteousness of Christ which is out of us and in him otherwise then by imputation For as we were made sinners by Adams personal disobedience e Rom. 5.19 So are we made righteous by the obedience of Christ But how could we either be made sinners by Adams disobedience or justified by the obedience of Christ either active or passive unlesse they were communicated to us And how could that be but by imputation Downame f De Justific lib. 1. cap. 3. makes it cleer by another action not unlike unto it As when Rebeccah clothed her Son Jacob in the raiment of Esau her elder Son the matter of this action was that which did cloth him that is Esau's garment the form of that action was the applying of it unto him and the putting of it upon him So the Lord justifieth us by putting upon us the precious raiment of our elder brother Christ his righteousness in which we obtain the blessing Thus doth St. Ambrose g De Jacob vita beata also use this action for illustration of the form of our justification with divers others It is not unknown how stifly Socinus and his followers oppose this namely that imputation is the formal cause of a sinners justification and how directly they conclude against it that no imputation whatsoever Object 1 can be the form of justification and they give this for a reason because it is no righteousness whereas a form of justification must of necessity be a righteousness Righteousness imputed say they and our Dialogue is not much behind them is a righteousness but the imputation of righteousness cannot be righteousness To which we answer 1. It is true Answ righteousness must be to make one righteous but that is the matter imputation of it or it imputed is the form the introduction of this which is imputation hath the place of a form And 2. this introduction giveth denomination it is the constitution of a man righteous by applying to him that which he hath not in or of himself that is the righteousness of another Again say they if the righteousness of Christ be Object 2 the matter as we have declared and imputation thereof the form as we do affirm then one righteousness must be the form of another because the form must needs be a righteousness if the matter and

by Christ is imputed to us also But the former is true And therefore the latter Seventhly from another place in the same Epistle p Rom. 10.4 before we passe away from it in which the Apostle telleth us that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth From whence the argument may be thus framed If Christ be the end of the Law and the complement thereof for righteousness unto all that believe in him we ought assuredly to perswade our selves that the fulfilling of the Law performed by Christ is our righteousness by which we are justified before God But the Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent Eightly from the words of St. Paul q 1 Cor. 1.30 who saith he meaning as is before expressed Christ Jesus of God is made to us wisdome righteousness c. Whence we argue If Christ be made of God righteousness to us then is the righteousness of Christ imputed to us because he was so made righteousness as that we might be made in him the righteousness which is by faith through him as the Prophet Jeremiah r Ier. 23.6 the Lord our Righteousness But the former is true Therefore so must be the latter Ninethly from another place in the other Epistle to the Corinthians ſ 2 Cor. 5.21 He that is God made him namely Christ to be sin for us who himself knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him who otherwise of our selves knew not what righteousness was Here then as Christ was made sin for us wh●ch knew no sin So are we made the righteousness of God who knew not what righteousness meant in respect of any thing in us But Christ was made sin for us our sins by Divine Justice and his own submission thereunto being imputed to him and he suffering death for the s●me Therefore vve are also made yet without any work of ours ●n Chr●st the righteousness of God Christs righteousness being imputed to us Tenthly and lastly from another place of St. Paul to the Galatians t Gal. 4.4 when the fulness of time was come God sent his Son made of a Woman made under the Law c. Whence we conclude that if Christ were subject to the Law that he might redeem us from the Law verily the fulfilling of the Lawby Christ performed for us is truly imputed to us for our justification and salvation But Christ was subject to the Law for no other cause * Finis enim ostenditur ab Apostolo quod videlicet non sibi ipsi sed nobis talis est factus Tossanus in Gal. 4. pag. 212. but that he might redeem us from under the power and curse thereof Therefore the fulfilling of the Law performed by Christ for us is truly and really imputed to us for our justification and eternal salvation Thus we have proved the common Doctrine of imputation as the Dialogue scoffingly terms it that we m●ght if God see good to give a blessing to these poor yet well intended endeavours make it more common And herein we appeable to the judicious and understanding Reader whether he find the least shadow or appearance of that absurd●ty in it which he imputeth to it I hope then none will believe that lies are true We have now done with the Efficient Material and Formal cause of a sinners justification before God We come now to the last namely the F●nal cause which we conceive to be two-fold Supreme ex parte justificantis in respect of the person justifying Subordinate ex parte justificati in respect of the person justified The Supreme is the mani●estation of the glory both of the mercy of God and also of his justice which as they do concurre in all the works of God if we will g●ve any credit to the P●almist u Psal 145.17 as well we may who there saith The Lord is righteous in all his wayes and holy in all his works and espec●ally in the work of redemption and justification For therein God doth so exceedingly mani●est yea magnifie the glorious attribute of his mercy that rather th●n he would suffer such wretches as we had made our selves utterly to perish in our sins he sent his own only begotten Son out of h●s bosome that we might as the blessed Apostle St. Paul excellently sets ●t forth w Rom. 3.24 be freely justified by his grace though the redemption that is in Christ Jesus and mark the end to the praise of the glory of his grace Wherein as the same Apostle in another place expresseth it x Eph. 1.6 He hath made us accepted in his beloved His Justice also is made man●fest to the wonder and amazement of all the World For rather then he would suffer the sins and transgressions of his own Elect Children to go unpunished and so his Justice be unsatisfied he punished them in the person of his own Son exacting from him a full entire and perfect satisfaction for them having set him forth as St. Paul testifies y Rom. 3.25 26. for this very purpose to be a Propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousness that he might be just and the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus The Subordinate end of just●fication is our eternal salvation this is indeed the end both of our justification and sanctification For being made free from sin z Rom. 6.22 and become servants of God we have saith the Apostle in the person of the Elect our fruit unto holiness and the end everlasting life So St. Peter a 1 Pet. 1.9 the very end of our faith by which instrumentally we are justified is the salvation of our souls These are the causes We come now according to our promise to the fruits or effects of this excellent Doctrine of a sinners justification before God which we take to be these Remission of sins * Remissio peccatorum fit per justitiam imputatam perfectam Pareus castique Bell. de justif Reconciliation with God An effectual vocation An actual adoption Peace of conscience Joy in the Holy Ghost and other such like gifts of the Spirit which it worketh in the hearts of those that are just●fied We shal not have to do with al these they are somewhat too many and too far off from our purpose in hand the two first only fall within the compasse of our present intendment and first of Remission of sins Remission of sins we conceive to be the free absolution of the person offending both from the guilt and punishment which by an irregular conversation he hath contracted and deserved If it were not in some measure free it could not properly be called remission or condonation If it were from the guilt of sin only and not from the punishment also it were foolish and ridiculous for we may as well and truly affirm that a man is discharged of a debt without be●ng freed or acquitted from the payment of the same

as to say a m●n ●s fre●d from the one and yet not discharged o● the other Some of the Socinian tribe do plead hard to have remission of sins the formal cause of a sinners justification but non benè convenit it fadges ill in their hands For dissolution of sins guilt by Chr●sts bloud before imputation is an uncouth dissolution it is a dissolution before application that which putteth the effect before the cause * Causalitate imputatio praecedit remissionem necessario prae-requiritur Polan in Daniel pa. 324. But hear their arguments and our answers compare them together and then judge indifferently First say they Remission of sins giveth denomination of justification therefore it must be the form Grant this say we though the illustration be not by whiteness and whitening whereby they make whiteness the form which among unbiassed men is the effect the form being whitning or application yet they must prove that it giveth denomination which they do thus and that worthily to If a sinner say they may therefore and thereby be justified because he hath his sins remitted unto h●m then remission of sins giveth denomination of being justified to that person whose sins are remitted This is a meer begg●ng of the question which is to be proved and we deny a sinner therefore justified till it shall be better proved which will not be while this man is Major I see by the manner of their working For say they it is a vindication or an exemption from punishment We joyn issue here say it is so indeed but after another manner then they take it it is so in effect that is that followeth something necessarily preceding which is just making or being just or else we run our selves upon a rock it will be justification of a wicked person which God himself telleth us is ah Abomination to him Secondly remission of sins say they is the formal cause of a sinners justification because it is that alteration and change which is wrought in the person justified by that act of God To which we answer 1. By denying the consequence every change or alteration in the person cnanged or altered is not the form if that act of God were the form then peace of conscience should be so for it is an alteration which supposeth pardon grounded upon imputation of righteousness whence justification and then pardon c. 2. By affirming that justification it self is so in that change which made and yet it is not the form of it self yea it is an effect of the form Thirdly their th●rd reason is vvound up thus That which makes a justified person compleatly righteous before God is the formal cause of justification But remission of sins maketh a justified person compleatly righteous before God because say they he is as cleer from sin and the guilt thereof as if he had fulfilled the whole Law and never transgressed any part or particle of the same We reply 1. That making is an ambiguous term and cannot vvithout more light then they afford us be fully discerned or discovered For every cause maketh the Efficient the Material the Formal c. 2. Remission of sins maketh not a person formally righteous and therefore vve deny the reason For though he be free from the guilt of sin yea so righteous as here they speak of yet the cause is the righteousness of Christ imputed by whose obedience he is constituted just Again they argue for the proof of this thus That righteousness which needs not fear the presence of a most strict judge is a compleat and perfect righteousness But remission of sins is such And now they think themselves cock sure for this say they will hold weight and measure But let them take our answer with them for all their hast which will we suppose take them off their confidence and it is this That which these socinians are to prove they often shift their hands of and would have us take for granted which we cannot do without prejudice to the truth They are here to prove that remission of sins is a compleat righteousness but that which they endeavour to prove it by as the ingenuous Reader may plainly perceive beggeth the question namely that it is righteousness For every thing that will abide the presence of God is not by and by righteousness much lesse compleat righteousness as they would have us believe upon their bare word As for example to the contrary in love there is no fear for perfect love casteth out fear b 1 Joh. 4.17 18. yet it is not righteousness not that righteousness by which we are justified Lastly say they remission of sins reacheth home and is given to men by God for their justification Therefore it is the formal cause thereof This they tell us is evident because by the formal cause they mean nothing else but pass●ve justification To which we return this answer 1. That many things may be and are given by God for justification in some way or other which are not the formal cause thereof for instance the Word of God and Faith are given by God for justification yet will any man therefore in his right wits conclude that they are the formal cause of a sinners justification 2. We do absolutely deny remission of sins to be given for justification we assert the contrary justification given for pardon and remission as being the effect and consequent thereof So the Apostle c Rom. 5.16 where mention is made of remission a gift as also of the gift of righteousness Whence we see ordine quidque suo first justification and then remission made good in the 18. and 19. vers of the same Chapter Moreover to put all out of doubt if remission of sins be justification passive as they said but now that is the effect of Gods justifying it cannot possibly be the formal cause thereof also For one and the same cannot be both the cause and the effect before and after it self the whole and yet but a part how ever they seem to jumble them together I have bin somewhat longer about this then at first I intended there being not wanting and that even among us that take upon them to maintain that remission of sins is the formal cause of a sinners justification before God that seeing how poorly it is defended by those that are champions for it the honest and well minded Reader may not be gulled by any Socinian 〈◊〉 bettor whatsoever The Dialogue is very much concern'd herein he doth not lag behind the rest setting remission of sins in its wrong place and then ascribing too much unto it For he makes it even our justification it self which cannot be for they are distinct in themselves and in order of time and manner of conferring to be distinguished by us which being well and wisely considered will plainly appear to be neither the whole nor a part as he nor the cause as others would have it of our justification but

able to make satisfaction Christ therefore paid that which we did we as David himself speaking in the person of our Saviour y Psal 69.4 saith I restored that which I took not away or I payed that which I did not owe. Secondly from the manner of Gods dealing with Christ He which knew no sin saith St. Paul z 2 Cor. 5.21 did God make sin yea a curse a Gal. 3.13 for us So then the argument will lye thus He which was made sin and a curse for others must needs have the sins and guilt of others imputed to him But Christ was made sin and a curse for others Therefore must he of necessity have the sin and guilt of others imputed to him For the first namely that of the Apostle to the Corinthians we shall a little more fully expresse our selves concerning it For the latter we have no more at this time to say to it though much more might be spoken of it He was made sin saith the Apostle by sin whether we understand a sinner as some or a sacrifice for sin as others do earnestly contend to have it it is all to one purpose and come both to one passe For from both the Doctrine of imputation is inferred If a sacrifice for sin it is to free us If a sinner it was by reason of our guilt imputed to him and by God his Father laid upon him And therefore Chrysostome Theophilact and Oecumenius affirm that Christ was made sin not only in respect of those afflictions and that punishment which he suffered for our sins but also and especially in regard of imputation the guilt of our sins being charged on him Likewise St. Augustine b Enchiridion ad Laurentium Ipse peccatum nos justitia non nostra sed Dei non in nobis sed in ipso sicut ipse peccatum c. saith as we are made righteousness not ours but of God not in us but in him So he was made sin not his but ours not in him but in us and yet laid upon him by just imputation Hence it is that Christ is pleased to charge himself with our sins even after such a manner and upon such terms as if they were his own for so he calls them c Psal 69.5 my sins are not hid from thee So that Christ is made sin for us * Et si peccatum victima ex Hebraeorum idiotismo c. Tamen ratio Antithesis possit ut potius Christus dicatur factus esse peccatum pro nobis i. e. peccator non in se sed ex omnium peccatorum nostrorum reatu ipsi imputato Bez. in 2 Cor. 5. ult not only ratione nocumenti in regard of punishment undergoing those things which we should have suffered but principally and especially ratione culpae reatus in regard both of sin and guilt devolving them upon himself bearing them for us and in our steed Thirdly from the designation of the meritorious cause of Christ our Saviours passion for if our sins were the meritorious cause of his sufferings and he dyed by the merit thereof it must necessarily follow that our sins were imputed to him But the first is true because he dyed for sins and for iniquities Therefore the latter For the further confirmation whereof besides those places of Scripture formerly quoted by us the Reader may please to peruse those following Rom. 4.25 also cap. 8.3 with 1 Cor. 15.3 Heb. 10.25 all which necessarily conclude the same The Socinians do attempt to blow up this truth by laying their mine and making their assault against the Proposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for telling us our sins may be an occasion but not a cause not the impulsive cause of our Saviours sufferings But it is so apparent that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joyned with an Accusative case as they who have not out-lived the memory of their rudiments know is by all Greek Authours both sacred and prophane a most usual note of the impulsive cause that the chiefest of them are ashamed to be seen in it or to appear against it onely some few underlings Novices in this Socinian heresie that they may seem to be some body among the ignorant have raised this dust on purpose which I am the rather induced to believe because the Dialogue doth passe it over in silence without taking the least notice at all of it Fourthly from the attribution of sin for whereas our sins and foolishnesses are ascribed to Christ that is those sins which proceed from folly and blindness of mind in us it cannot otherwise be but that all our other iniquities should be imputed to him also For these d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 really 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ by himself considered are no way suitable unto nor agreeable with him he being exempted from all sin Therefore our sins all our sins must needs be imputative ascribed to him * Despectus erat ignobilis quando pendebat in cruce factus pronobis maledictum peccata nostra portabat Chrysost in Isa cap. 53. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as our Pledge and Surety take them upon himself For so in the Psalm before cited Christ thus expresseth himself to his Father Lord thou knowst my foolishness and my sins are not hid from thee That the Messias our Mediatour doth speak in this Psalm the boldest and most daring Socinian hath not the front to deny if any of them should the greatness of the punishments vers 2. c. as also the cause and description of his reproach vers 8. c. would easily convince them which can truly be spoken of or safely applyed to none other but him together with drinking of Gall and Vinegar not a dose of Oximel sweet and sour but things sharp and bitter vers 22. the ensuing judgments upon the hard and obdurate Jews vers 23. Lastly the explication hereof in distinct parts in the New Testament do all stand forth and give a cleer evidence of the same and is with one consent allowed by Hilarius Athanasius Augustinus Cossiodorus Euthymius and all the Orthodox Fathers of the Church Hence therefore we conclude whosoever paying for or restoring that which another violently took away doth subject himself to most grievous pains complaining of his sins and foolishness being himself free from all manner of iniquity and transgression must needs have the sins foolishness and violence of others imputed to him which as his own he ascribeth and appropriateth to himself But Christ paying for that which others had violently taken away that is the honour due to the Majesty of God in disobeying his holy and just commands subjected himself to most grievous pains and doth miserably complain of his sins and offences being himself free from all sin and iniquity Therefore the sins of others that is of the Elect and their violence is imputed to him c. Lastly from the prefiguration of types cleerly manifested in the Levitical services