we must endeavour to save it from a Contradiction which cannot be but by restraining this Universal Term Vnder any Denomination whatsoever thus under any Denomination whatsoever that can bear a sound sense but the Notion of Subordination not being able to bear a sound sense it 's not to be taken within the verge of under any Denomination whatsoever Well then 4. If this phrase under the Notion of Subordination can't bear a sound sense it must be because they hold a Subordinate Righteousness in our Justification where it must be noted that here is the mention only of one Iustification which carrieth in it the Pardon of sin the accepting of sinners and an Entituling them to Eternal Life and that this Justification is not only by Christs Righteousness but also by a Subordinate one of our own they both concurring to our Justification the one Principally the other Subordinately This is the only way that I can think on to fetch my Brother off from a Contradiction and yet do I what I can I must at last lodge him under a Contradiction For 5. This Third Paper doth expresly declare that we are Pardoned Accepted and Entituled to Eternal Life only by the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto us and received by Faith alone But to be Pardoned Accepted and Entituled unto Eternal Life only by Christs Righteousness and yet to be Pardoned Accepted or Entituled to Eternal Life by a Subordinate Righteousness of our own is an Implication Being thus necessitated to leave my Brother in these dark shades I will return to the private Brethren such as Dr. Bates Mr. 〈◊〉 Mr. Alsop and the rest of this denomination to see what Influence that light which they received from the many discerning Heads hath had on them which my Brother assures me was very great For he saith III. Those Individual nine Brethren who for and in hopes of Peace had signed the former Paper had their Hands their Heads and their Hearts too in the forming wording and assenting to this Third For they now saw in the former some few â—assages and Expressions which carried a Fâ—â—e of some dangerous Tendencies which however they might escape the Notice of Private Brethren could not pass the observation of many discerning Heads In Examining this Passage it must be remark'd 1. That these Private Brethren every one of the Individual Nine saw the Face of some dangerous Tendencies in the First Paper which they had formerly Subscribed and therefore must be now supposed to Repent of that but whether this be true or not I appeal to their own Consciences for till this Brother published his Rebuke I could not hear one word to this purpose some of 'em assuring me that the Alterations between the two Papers were but very Minute such Tanâ—â—lla as were not worth a contending about and not of such things as were of dangerous Tendencies 2. Several of the Nine have very lately declared their Approbation of the First paper and one of 'em in particular told me that my Brother was guilty of a Notorious Falshood in saying that the Individual Nine had their Hands their Heads and Hearts in the forming wording and assenting to the Third Paper for he had neither Hand nor Head nor Heart in it 3. If the Individual Nine had a Hand a Head and a Heart in composing the third and in Waving the Phrases rejected because they could not bear a sound sense then must Dr. Bates who is one of the Nine Private Brethren be for a waving the Phrases of Christs sustaining the Person of sinners and suffering the wrath of God as our Surety as what could not bear a sound sense and if it be so I do humbly conclude that 't is his Duty to answer that part of his Harmony where these Phrases are used and the Doctrine they express is Asserted and Defended But sure I am that I have heard him say that the Harmony was the fruit of Fervent Prayer of his closest studies and most Impartial Examination not only of the Orthodox but of their Adversaries and that tho' t was his resolution to follow light and if he could meet with good reasons to convince him he was in an Errour he would fall under it yet hitherto he has met with no reasons to move him to change his mind and to this purpose he has spoke since the composure of the Third Paper To close my Answer to this Enquiry it 's manifest to me that my Brother and his Teacher are for rejecting the above mentioned Orthodox Terms and Phrases because they have forsaken the Protestant Doctrine as ordinarily conceived by them Tho' I have put my Charity on the outmost stretch in favour of my Rebuking Brother yet must I say That if he doth not see the Tendencies of a rejecting the aforesaid Phrases upon the Reasons he has assigned to be destructive of the Protestant Faith in the Article of Christs Satisfaction He is not the sittest Man in the World to enter on a Controversie of this kind and yet I must at the same time acknowledge that the more unmeet any one is to enter on this Controversie the more likely he is to be imposed on by his more seeing guide who doth in the instance before us as the nature of the thing speaks leave the Reformed and nothing short of this can be the import of my Brothers arguings in his Rebuke This Assertion I do confess leads me to the consideration of the seventh Enquiry which is VII In what Confessions are the Terms or Phrases so much contended for to be found My Brother is very confident that the Phrase of a Change of Persons between Christ and Us and his taking on him the Person of Sinners is not in any one Confession of Faith For saith he Faithful Rebuke Observe further That the Phrase of a Change of Persons between Christ and Us and his taking upon him the Person of Sinners are Terms wholly Unknown to those Confessions and Articles which were made the Test of soundness in the Faith by the United Ministers nay if you have the leisure search the whole Body of Confessions of the Reformed Churches from Helvetia to Transilvania thence to America and you shall not find these Terms Phrases or Expressions in any one of them p. 17. Reply 1. This strong Assurance of my Brother brings to my remembrance a passage I have met with in Mr. Baxters Catholick Theology of a Jocular Contemptuous Defendant who whilst He pretended to have a Commission from all the Systematical Divines of Germany was so Charitably Uncharitable as to say That never a man in his Wits affirmed That the Righteousness of Christ was the Formal Cause of our Iustification Append to the Praemun par 2. whereas on the other hand Davenant who was far from being a Mad-man or from representing the Protestants to be so doth assure us That it is the common sense of all our Divines that the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us is the Formal
Mr Ws doth grant that Christ by his Righteousness did not only purchase a Conditional Grant of those Effects which he had merited by his Righteousness But besides these Effects made ours the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed to true Believers Gospel Truth Stated p. 39. However if we compare this passage with what is more lately and fully explain'd in his Man made Righteous p. 77 c. you will soon unravel the whole Mystery and see that whilst he is labouring to hide himself for a while in a Cloud of Words be means nothing at all by this Grant For he is most explicite in affirming That the Righteousness of Christ as it was the Performance of the Conditions of our Salvation is mediately imputed to the Believer Christs very Performance of the Conditions is saith he Imputed mediately in this manner If one give me my Liberty which he voluntarily purchased for me at a dear rate he mediately gives me what he paid for my Ransom tho' immediately I receive my Liberty and a Right thereto Now what is this more than an imputation of Christs Righteousness in the Effects Because the Effects of Christs death such as a Right to Pardon c. is given to the True Believer therefore it may be said that Christs Righteousness the procuring Cause is imputed unto him As the money which one gives for anothers Liberty may be said to be given to that other to whom Liberty is given which is only in the effects of that Money so Christs Righteousness is imputed in that the effects of it are given unto us that is to say Christs Righteousness is imputed to us mediately It is imputed to us mediante effectu or in its effects If he can make any thing more of it let him Besides so long as he against the Common Sentiment of Protestants denies a Commutation or Change of Persons between Christ and us or that Christ sustained the Person of sinners or as our Surety came under the Bond and Obligations of the violated Law of works to answer those Obligations for us it is impossible there should be on his Principles any other imputation of Christs Righteousness but what is in its effects which Mr. Humphrey clearly understanding does honestly Assert and that he must do the same or relinquish his Principles may be more distinctly proved at any time that he will tho' let him be but sincere and confess it I shall be most willing with my Reverend Brethren to consider how far we are to extend our Communion or Charity towards such wherein he will find me Charitable enough 6. The Breach being on this account begun it is now widened by a Rejecting the Assertion of a Necessity of a Commutation of Persons between Christ and us for the due explaining and defending the Doctrine of Christs satisfaction and our Justification together with a Laying by the Vse of the Phrases of Christs sustaining the Person of Sinners of a Change of Persons between Christ and us of Christs being our Surety to answer for us the Obligations of the Violated Law of Works and the like And made more dangerous since these Phrases have been so very much Ridiculed by this Brother But there being so much wonder made at an insisting on the Vse of these Phrases I will for the sake of those Brethren who either by disuse have forgotten or by reason of a too early and constant Application unto practical Preaching never throughly understood this necessary Doctrine of Christs Satisfaction I will I say show how useful these Phrases are to explain this glorious and blessed Truth There are in the Holy Scriptures several Texts which discover and prove the Doctrine of Christs Satisfaction About the Genuine Sense of these Texts the chief Controversie between the Reformed on the one hand and the Arminian and Socinian on the other doth Lye The Controverted Texts are such as speak of Christs dying for our sins and for us of his being our Surety and a Sacrifice for us and the like that relate to these Matters The different Senses which the Orthdox and their Adversaries have of these Texts I will distinctly Propose 1. When it 's said in Scripture that Christ was wounded and bruised for our Transgressions suffered and dyed for our Sins Socinus and his Followers affirm that the Expression for our sins signifies only a Final Cause as if no more was meant than that Christ dyed for our good The Orthodox expresly Asserts that For our sins in these Texts imports an impulsive meritorious Cause and Grotius proves against Socinus that these words Christ suffered for our sins cannot be understood of a Final but of Meritorious Cause And if our sins be the Meritorious Cause of Christs Sufferings it necessarily follows that Christs sufferings were a Proper Punishment for them and must be satisfactory to Gods Justice which Grotius and the Right Reverend Bishop of Worcester have unanswerably Proved 2. When in Scripture it is affirmed that Christ suffered and dyed For us the Socinians who Labour to reduce all to his suffering for our good only are positive that the signification of the Proposition For â—s that Christ dyed nostro bono for our good He suffered for our sins that is say they he suffered for our good He dyed for us that is say they he dyed only for our good On the contrary the Orthodox aver that the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For when it 's said Christ dyed for us signifies a Commutation or Change of persons between Christ and us which is aptly expressed by that other Phrase in our Place and Stead that is Christ suffered not only for our good but that God might be glorified in our Redemption Christ suffered in our Place and Stead Christ in his sufferings did sustinere vicem seu Persunam nostram He was put into our Place State and Condition that having the Guilt of our sins laid upon him he might according to the Rule of Justice suffer a Proper Punishment for our sins and so make Satisfaction to Gods Justice for us When it 's said Christ came into our Place State and Condition the meaning is he came under the Bonds and Obligations of the violated Law of Works lay under the Guilt and Punishment of sin on our behalfs that we by laying hold on Christ by Faith might be delivered The Phrases then of a Change of Persons between Christ and us of Christs taking on him the Person of Sinners suffering in their Person Rooms and Stead are most apt to convey unto our Vnderstandings the true the Orthodox and Genuine Sense of these Texts Christ dyed for our sins and for us in opposition to the Socinian Interpretation that is to bring all to Christs suffering for our good only which they do that they may the better subvert the Doctrine of a Real Proper and full Satisfaction to Gods Justice 3. The Term Surety when spoken of Christ in Scripture relates to us as we are Sinners endebted to the
Cause of our Justification and as to what pertains to the thing it self not one Protestant Divine has either spoke or written otherwise Praelect de Justit hab c. 22. This Over-bold Rash and Untrue Assertion of the Jocular Defendant ran in my Mind as soon as I entred on the Examination of what the Rebuker here says not only because He has as little reason for what he says but upon another account For 2. Do we in good earnest press for what hath not the countenance so much as of One Confession of Faith This would really be hard and Provocation sufficient to stir up his Angeâ— against the offended Brethren To whom in Answer I do declare that if I had not found these phrases in some Publick Confessions nay if I had not met with them in the Holy Scriptures I would have been silent and never have put Pen to Paper on this occasion Mistake me not my meaning is that the things signified by these Terms and Phrases are expresly in our Confessions and in the Holy Scriptures too and perhaps it may appear that the phrase most exposed by him will be found to be literally in one or other Confession 3. That I may set what I now declare in the clearest light I must observe unto you 1. That the phrases of a Commutation or Change of Persons between Christ and us of Christs sustaining our Person of his being Substituted into our room and his Suffering in our Place and Stead are so nearly Allied to each other that they are as Hypocrates his Twins they Live and Dye together Grant one and all necessarily come in with it oppose but any one of 'em in the genuine meaning and you oppose all of 'em The Phrase of Christs Dying in our Place and Stead as it imports somewhat more than for our good implies a Substitution of Christ into our Place which cannot be without a change of Persons between Christ and Us or without Christs sustaining our Person If then any one of these phrases be found in any one Confession there is an owning all the rest 2. Those Scriptures which speak of Christs Dying for us of his being a Sacrifice and of his being our Surety to satisfie the Law for us do all import Christs Suffering in our stead his being Substituted in our Place a change of Persons between him and us and his sustaining our Person in suffering What I here assert is so clear that there is no doubt of it amongst the Orthodox who throughly understand this Controversie Yea further 3. These controverted phrases do express what is essential unto a Real Proper and Plenary satisfaction to Gods Justice for our sins and upon this account in what confession soever such a satisfaction is asserted there these phrases are owned If then I can direct to the Confession where either a Proper Satisfaction is asserted or where 't is declared that Christ as our Surety suffered for us or that Christ suffered in our Place and Stead or stood in our Person when He Died I hope it may satisfie any unprejudiced person that the phrases Contended for are in our Confessions and if I shew that all these last mentioned are in some publick Confessions or Catechisms why may it not be enough to remove my Brother from his Fastnesses and oblige him to conclude that they who plead for their use are not so singular as he has Insinuated These things Praemised our first Enquiry must be 1. In what Confession is a proper Satisfaction owned Go to the Assemblies cap. 8. sect 8. and there you may read That the Lord Jesus by his Perfect Obedience and Sacrifice of himself hath fully satisfied the Justice of his Father And cap. 11. sect 3. Christ by his Death and Obedience did make a Proper Real and Full Satisfaction to his Fathers Justice on their behalf The same is repeated in the larger Catechism in answer to the Question What is Justification and to that which follows it If my Brother can't see in the assertion of a Proper Real and Full Satisfaction made for us by Christ to the Justice of God the Phrase of a Change of Persons between Christ and Us it is not because it 's not there For in a Proper Satisfaction whatever is essential thereunto as a Commutation or Change of Persons between Christ and Us is is contained and whoever understands the true nature of a proper Satisfaction cannot but see it However for the sake of the less studied I will by a very plain instance Illustrate thus much affirming that all sound Believers are Discharged from that Obligation to Punishment they lay under for their past sins that the Obligation unto Punishment is in their case dissolv'd that this is the Doctrine embraced by the Reformed Now if my Brother demands of me in what Confession of Faith is this phrase of Dissolving the Obligation to Punishment to be found In answer I 'll refer him to the Assemblies Confession cap. 11. sect 1. Those whom God Effectually calleth he also Freely Justifieth by Pardoning their Sins If he saith he can't in this place see the phrase of Dissolving the Obligation to Punishment I 'll tell him it is there tho' he can't see it for in the Pardon of sin it is it being Essential unto Pardon that the Obligation unto Punishment be dissolv'd to talk of the Pardon of a sinner whilst he continues to lye under the Obligation unto Punishment is to Trifle and to say that the dissolving the Obligation to Punishment cannot be read where the Pardon of sin is expressed is to talk after such a manner as Modesty wont give me leave to call by its most proper name The same is true of Christs Satisfaction and a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Us for a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Us is as essential unto a proper Satisfaction as the dissolving the Obligation to Punishment is unto Pardon of sin 2. The phrase of Christs suffering in our place and stead as it imports somewhat more than for our good implies a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Vs and signifieth the same with Christs suffering in our Person as our Surety That it is thus understood by the Orthodox I have already cleared and to what hath been said I will add the Judgment of the Palatinate Divines which they delivered into the Synod of Dort which was That one Errour amongst the many embraced by the Remonstrants was the same which my Brother has in his Rebuke viz. That to Die for sinners must not be understood as if Christ died Loco aut vice ipsorum in their Place and Stead sed bono tantum but only for their good This Errour these Divines in what they have said on the second of the five Articles did confute asserting in opposition unto them that Christ our Surety according to the Scriptures died Loco Peccatorum in the place of sinners which in their Orthodox Antithesis they thus explain partim Loco