any reasonable Man desire more than a clear revelation concerning the terms upon which God will be reconciled and an assurance given by miraculous operations That there 's no collusion in the Declaration The Exemplary Life of our Blessed Lord is sufficient to invite us to be agreeable in our Conversation to the conditions of the New Covenant His Death with all the terrifying circumstances attending it have a tendence to affright Men from embracing his Doctrin No Man is naturally inclined to espouse that way which may expose him to so much sorrow Was there no more intended in the Death of Christ than what Socinus asserts He might after his Immaculate Life spent in this World like Enoch and Elias have been immediately translated into Heaven and there with as much advantage as if he had suffered the pains of death have transacted all those things appertaining to our reconciliation which they attribute unto him He was above Thirty Years in this sublunary state contesting with the anxieties of humane Life and therefore must necessarily be touched with a fence of our infirmities His whole Life was meritorious and therefore there is no reason to think That the most easie way to Heaven would have been denied him had his sufferings imported no more than what our Adversaries in this Cause affirm The God of Nature and Grace doth not use to do any thing in vain Lastly The reasons of the sufferings of our Blessed Lord which must be granted to be of more importance than any thing which has been alledged by the Socinians the Holy Scripture resolves into our sin and represents his Passion as the Punishment of it Man violating the Law of his Creation if nothing did interpose to prevent the infliction of Punishment our condition would be a state of desperation destructive of that which is most essential to Religion and pleasing unto God No place would be left for the emanations of his benignity which he is eminently delighted with He being propense to pardon and his hatred to Sin and love to his Law inclining him not to do it without some severe expression of his detestation first made against the violation of his Command in order to the reconciling of these propensities and making way for his clemency to exert it self his eternal Son has freely offered himself to bear the penalty due to us upon the account of Sin For this reason he is said to be made a curse Gal. 3.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he might redeem us from the curse He has freely without any compulsion derived it upon himself Crellius tell us That the word here cannot be taken in this fence because he who is properly accursed is the object of Divine Hatred which cannot be asserted of the Son of God and the curse which he suffered was the death of the Cross but the curse of the Law is Eternal death To which I reply He which is accursed upon his own account is the object of Divine Hatred but he That is so upon the account of another freely bearing the curse in order to the satisfying Divine Justice and the vindicating the authority of the Law is not The hatred is terminated upon the Sin which is ours and not upon the Person who undertakes to bear the demerit of it and by so doing accomplish the ends which are highly agreeable to the desires of the Supreme Rector The Death of our Blessed Lord upon the Cross tho' it was not the same with Eternal Death yet it was equivalent The want of eternity was compensated by the dignity of the Person who was so contumeliously treated The degrees of suffering are usually estimated by the quality of the person who suffereth A Magistrate suffers more by a contumelious usage than a private Man The Supreme more than he who is subordinate Therefore if he who suffers be infinite in dignity as the Son of God is his punishment must have an infinity in it And an infinite punishment is equipollent to that which is eternal Parallel to this are the words of S. Peter Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree 1 Ep. 2.24 Christ is said to bear our sins that is The punishment of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tulit sursum eundo When he was upon the Cross he had the burden of them upon his shoulders Crellius in order to the disappointing the force of this Text says That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not necessarily denote to bear it may as well be translated to take away but supposing it doth yet it does not follow That the pain he bore was a punishment one may be said to bear the sins of another who falls into any calamity occasioned by them altho' there be nothing of the formality of punishment in it To which I answer That to bear is the proper signification of the word and we are not to depart from the proper import except the circumstances of the place put a necessity upon us The Context is so far from obliging us to any such thing That in case it may be allowed to arbitrate it will determine us to the signification of bearing The scope of the Apostle is to exhort those to whom he writes to bear with patience the sufferings which the profession of the Gospel might expose them to In order to this end he draws an argument from the pattern of our Blessed Lord who did patiently bear the penalty of our sins in his Body on the Tree without any menacing returns to the Authors of his Crucifixion The word in conjunction with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but once more found in the New Testament and there it has evidently the fence we contend for So Christ was once offered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bear the sins of many and to them which look for him he shall appear the second time without sin Heb. 9.28 Here are two appearances of Christ set opposite one to the other the last without sin that is without bearing the burthen of it and therefore the first was with sin He was burdened with it and did bear the demerit This fence is favoured by the Context He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself v. 26. A Sacrifice did bear the punishment due to him for whom it was offered Crellius overthrows himself in saying That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies to take away for this taking away must be performed upon the Tree But Christ according to his notion did not take away Sin upon the Cross His suffering was but preparatory to his ingress into Heaven where he was first invested with a power to forgive sin S. Peter in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has a manifest aspect upon the Prophecy of Esaias c. 53.11 He shall bear their iniquities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word too stiff to be bent into a compliance with the Socinian
perswasion It constantly signifies to bear or carry and for this reason is interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matt. 8.17 He bore their sicknesses that is He did undergo much trouble and pains in the curing of them He had no respite all the day and when the even was come at which time others compose themselves for rest he was pressed upon by the multitude and did attend this great work What Crellius says in the second place if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to bear it doth not follow That he did bear the punishment of sin He might accidentally undergo sorrow which was occasioned by our sins in which there was nothing of the nature of punishment in relation to him is of no validity If it be granted That it signifies to bear the thing born must be the punishment of sin Punishment imports a natural evil inflicted by one in authority That the party offended by the commission of some moral evil may receive satisfaction and the ends of government be secured All this agrees to the Sufferings of Christ They import a natural evil They were displeasing to humane Nature They were inflicted by the Supreme Rector of the World It pleased the Lord to bruise him The design of his Passion was to make Satisfaction to the injured Our Sins robbed God of his Glory This was restored by the Sufferings of his Son He was set forth to be a propitiation to declare his Righteousness The ends of Government are eminently secured His Sufferings must necessarily strike a consternation into all If such things were done in the green Tree what may be expected in the drie If he who had no sin of his own was so severely treated what can we look for if we persevere in our provocations If all things appertaining to the nature of a penalty agree to the Sufferings of Christ there is no reason but to believe when Christ is said to bear our sins that the meaning is That he did bear the punishment of them It is true A Man may be said to bear the miscarriages of another who accidentally falls under any disaster occasioned by them But the case here is quite otherwise Nothing was fortuitous The Person suffering was delivered into the hands of his Crucifiers according to the determinate Counsel of Heaven The intent of his Passion was to accomplish all those ends which are intended in punishment And that which makes an affliction to be a penalty in a proper sense is nothing but the end which is aimed at Consonant to this is what S. Paul has expressed 2 Cor. 5.21 For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him He was made sin for us that is Put under an obligation to suffer the punishment which our sins had deserved God laid upon him the Iniquity of us all The Transgressions of those who lived in the most opposite parts of the Terrestrial Globe did all meet together upon him He is the center upon which the burthen of them did settle Crellius tells us That when Christ is said to be made Sin the meaning is That he was by wicked Men reputed and treated as a sinner But if this was the meaning then Christ was made sin by his Crucifiers whereas the action is ascribed unto God When he is said to be made sin something must be understood which is peculiar to him But if Crellius's sence of the words prevails the Martyrs may be said to be made sin when they were punished under the notion of Malefactors by their inveterate enemies The Antithesis betwixt being made sin and knowing no sin is a clear justification of our interpretation Christ knew no sin that is was guilty of none by any deviation of his own Therefore when it is said He was made sin the meaning is He was made guilty of ours by imputation and by his own consent together with assent of his Father brought under an obligation to suffer the penalty of it It is manifest from the Text That he was so made sin for us as we are made righteousness or righteous in him Now it is manifest That upon our performing the conditions of the New Covenant we are made righteous in consideration of his meritorious satisfaction and therefore he was made sin for us in consideration of our demerit which he undertook to make expiation for That which induceth the Socinians to endeavour the elusion of the evidence of the Texts which are produced is a perswasion That the fence we contend for is repugnant to reason There can be no punishment but where there is guilt there can be no guilt where there is innocency and there was nothing but innocency in the Immaculate Lamb of God But it must be remembred That the proper notion of guilt is nothing but an obligation to punishment And it is not disagreeable to reason That such an obligation should be contracted by an Innocent Person in case he be willing to stand in the place of the Nocent and suffer the penalty due to him If he be one who has power to dispose of his own life as our Blessed Lord had he may by an act of his Will as well engage himself to lay down his life as to lay down a sum of Mony Every Man may do with that which is in his power what he pleaseth Tho' it be essential to punishment to be inflicted for sin yet it is not essential to be inflicted upon the sinner The merit of Virtue is as personal and incommunicable as the merit of sin yet it as not essential to the reward to be always conferred upon the person meriting Chimham was rewarded by David for Barzillais's kindness Children frequently fare the better for their Parents deservings There is no reason to believe That it is unjust in all cases to punish one for the crime of another God who is not obnoxious to errour in his administrations has done it When he tells the people That they should have occasion no more to use this Proverb The fathers have eaten sowr grapes and the childrens teeth are set on edge he intimates That they had formerly occasion so to do and what was now said in this matter was but a particular favour granted to them at this time and not to be a standing rule in all succeeding generations It is most evident That Judah suffered in the reign of Josiah for the provocations of Manasses 2 Kin. 23.26 Tho' they had sins of their own to irritate Divine Justice yet they were not the cause of their suffering He who punisheth a Nocent Person in that respect in which he is Innocent doth the same thing as if he punished one who is perfectly Innocent It is evident by the Second Command That the iniquity of the fathers is visited upon their children If such Children are only understood who imitate their Parents transgression no reason can be given of the limitation to the
others in dignity there mast be a kind of infinity in that penalty which was laid upon him Now what can be more efficacious than this to remove all contempt from the Laws and put a check upon that aptitude which is in Men to take encouragement from a bad example to violate them Who dare lightly think of that the vindication of which cost no less than the Death of the Lord of Life That Authority will not easily be disvalued when it is manifest That the crime in neglecting of it was expiated upon no easier terms than the Passion of the Son of God Who will not be afraid to affront that Order which the Divine Wisdom has established when he considers the drops of Blood which fell from the face of our Blessed Lord the wounds which were made in the most nervous parts of his Body the greatness of the Agony which he suffered As the damage done by Sin to the Laws is repaired by the Passion of Christ so likewise the mind of the Supreme Rector is fully appeased and reconciled A Reconciliation is attributed to his sufferings in the Holy Scriptures This reconciliation must import a reconciliation of God unto us The Apostle in his Epist to the Romans speaks of our receiving the atonement c. 5. v. 11. We then receive it when we lay aside our enmity and are converted unto God and therefore this atonement must be made before our enmity be deposited The thing received is always antecedent to the act of receiving and by consequence it can import nothing but God's reconciliation to us by the Blood of Christ provided we comply with the terms of that Covenant of which he is the Mediator For this reason mention is made of a reconciliation thro' the blood of the Cross Col. 1.20 And then after follows another reconciliation when we cease to be enemies in our minds to God v. 21. parallel to this is what is expressed 2 Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself And then v. 20. We pray you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled unto God Here are evidently Two Reconciliations One of God unto us in case we perform the conditions of the New Covenant The Other of us unto God when we are converted Then that Reconciliation which was before conditional becomes absolute and we fully stated in the possession of the Divine favour Now this reconciliation of God unto us can import no less than that his mind is fully satisfied and his displeasure appeased in consideration of the Sufferings of Christ Upon this account our Blessed Lord is stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3. He is a cover to the Law and prevents the Penal part of it from being executed upon us He is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a propitiation for our sins God is made by his precious blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hilaris or chearful in his countenance when he looks upon a sinner He who before was angry is now propitious His righteousness being declared and the authority of his Law as fully vindicated by the Passion of Christ as if we had suffered He is satisfied and contented upon the terms of the Gospel to make us the objects of his favour Crellius in opposition to what has been asserted affirms 1. That the Apostle in his Ep. to the Romans speaks of Conversion and because Conversion expresseth only the amicable temper of our minds towards God he useth the word Reconciliation to import That if there be a friendship wanting on God's part by reason of our hostility to him in an unconverted state it is then when we are converted fully completed 2. The Apostle in his Epistle to the Celossians cannot speak of a reconciliation of God unto us in a proper sence because in the reconciliation there mentioned things in Heaven are concerned namely Good Angels who were never in a state of enmity to God 3. When the Apostle says in his Epistle to the Corinthians That God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself 2 Ep. 5.18 19. the meaning is That God did promote Conversion by the preaching of Jesus Christ as afterwards he did by the Preaching of the Apostles 4. When Christ is said to be a Propitiation the word cannot import any placation of the Divine Anger The love of God in sending Christ evidently demonstrates a reconciliation antecedent to the mission and coming of Christ into the world To all which I reply in order 1. The granting That the word Reconciliation is used with a design to express That if there be any friendship wanting on God's part it is completed at our Conversion is a concession of the whole cause The Spirit of God doth not use to speak conjecturally He has a full comprehension of all the Mystery of Godliness Had he not known That there is a reconciliation of God unto us as well as of us unto God he would not have used a word with a design to express so much Now this reconciliation is not imputed to conversion but the Death of the Son of God as the procuring cause and therefore to receive the atonement can be nothing but to receive the reconciliation and friendship of God which is merited by the sufferings of Jesus Christ 2. By Things in Heaven there is no necessity to understand Angels There were Men in Heaven as well as Angels who had been in a state of enmity to God These God was reconciled unto by the Blood of his Son when they were upon the earth and now they were in a state of fruition reaping the advantages of his atonement 3. When the Apostle says God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself something more must be meant than the promoting Conversion by the preaching Christ Our Blessed Lord did not preach unto the World but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel If the reconciling by Christ did import no more than the converting of Men by his Preaching then it might have been as well said That God was in the Apostles reconciling the world unto himself It will be difficult to prevail with any to believe That there is not something peculiar in this expression which cannot with justice to the honour of our Redeemer be attributed to any other 4. The Love of God in sending Christ is no argument of a reconciliation in God antecedent to the sufferings of Christ When so much love was expressed to Eliphaz and his two friends as to appoint Job to be an Intercessour for them and to direct them to offer up Seven Bullocks and Seven Rams at that very time the wrath of God was kindled against them The Plague an undoubted testimony of divine displeasure was at that time upon Israel when God sent his Prophet to instruct David how to stop the spreading of the Contagion All which can be reasonably deduced from the mission of Christ is a design or purpose to be reconciled and not an actual reconciliation And now if we look back
and consider That Christ suffered the punishment of our sin what he suffered was in our stead By his Sufferings the damage done by sin is repaired and the mind of the Supreme Rector fully reconciled the verity of the third Proposition will be evident That a full and complete satisfaction is made by Jesus Christ 4. Our acceptance with God is upon the account of this meritorious satisfaction It sets believers free from the Curse of the Law The Curse of the Law doth include the loss of the Divine Favour That which frees us from this malediction must necessarily restore us to our acceptation with God The ransome laid down by our Redeemer as it has an aspect upon the justice of Heaven is said to satisfie as it stands in relation to those benefits it procures for us to merit So that our acceptance is upon the account of the meritorious satisfaction of our Blessed Lord. Therefore S. Paul asserts That God hath made us accepted in the beloved Epb. 1.6 and S. Peter represents our Spiritual Services to be acceptable to God thro' Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 2.5 Of this truth there are very early significations Psal 80.15 18. David prays God That he would visit the vineyard which he had made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter Regem Messiam as the Chaldee Paraphrase expounds it c. 9.17 Daniel prays That God would shine upon the Sanctuary for the Lord's sake The Israelites use to pray with their faces toward the Temple Rev. 21.22 it being a Type of the blessed Messias which they had a great expectation of When Ezekias turned his face to the wall and prayed 2 Kin. 20.2 Jonathan in his Targum says He turned it to the wall of the house of the Sanctuary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At the hour of Prayer Act. 10.9 it was usual to go to the house top That they might have the fairer prospect that way The Hebrews say That in the fire whereby God did declare his acceptance of their Sacrifices there was the appearance of a Lyon to signifie That it was the Lyon of the Tribe of Judah which procured them an interest in the Divine Favour 5. Our acceptance with God is only upon the account of the meritorions satisfaction of his Blessed Son As he has troden the Wine-press alone So the honour of meriting for us is peculiar to him The Romanists indeed speak of the merits of Saints and are not contented to attribute to them so much only as is expedient for themselves but assert an overplus which being blended with the surplusage of the merits of Christ and laid up in a Treasury are the ground and foundation of the Papal Indulgencies But he who considers the true notion of Merit will easily discover all this to be but a fiction It imports a dignity in the work adequate to the reward In the choicest of those services which they perform who arrive at the greatest degree of Sanctity no such worth can be found If it may it must be either innate or derived from without It cannot be the first for the reward is no less than God himself under the fullest disclosures of his Goodness and none of the most Heroick performances can indignity be equal to him Gen. 17. If the Passions and Sufferings of this Life are not worthy to stand in competition and be compared with the Glory which shall be revealed much less the actions There can be no action more noble than with alacrity of mind to suffer what the profession of Religion may expose us to If it be acquired Worth derived from something without it must be either from the Habit of Grace the Spirit of God the Merit of Christ or the Promise All these are pretended by the Romanists as the fountain of it 1. Not from the Habit of Grace Altho' as it descends from the Father of lights it is a good and perfect gift yet considered with relation to the Recipient into which it descends and out of which it does not expel all the remains of the Primitive Apostasy it is but imperfect Now it acting as a quality of this subject it is impossible that it should invest its operations with the highest degree of perfection Nothing can communicate to another That which it has not in it self 2. Not from the Spirit which excites and moves the Soul to act according to the Habit. If any such value be imparted the Spirit in the communication must act as a necessary or a free Cause Not as a necessary for then every Religious action will be meritorious there is no good but the Spirit of God contributes to the production of it and a necessary cause is uniform in all its effects Not as a free cause For if it is not the will of the Holy Spirit to invest us in this life with such a measure of Grace as will prevent all sinful defects We have more than a usual presumption That it is not his pleasure to impress such a dignity upon our services as is proportionable to the eternal reward in the life to come 3. Not from the Merit of Christ If he has merited That we may merit then his deservings communicate to our Services either a finite or infinite value If a finite only then they cannot merit that infinite love which our acceptance supposeth Finite worth is not commensurate to an unlimited and infinite reward If infinite then the works of Holy Men are not inferiour in perfection to the Works of Christ infinity will admit of no degrees A work which is finite in respect of the Principle from whence it proceeds has not capacity enough to receive and entertain boundless dignity The Ocean may as well be included within the confines of a small vessel Christ has procured for us a power to do well and acceptance for those actions which flow from that power but not a power to merit The nature of a meer creature is not reconcileable with such an immunity It cannot under the greatest elevation do any service but that which God may challenge as a just debt and the notion of Merit includes and imports something which is not due 4. Not from the Promise The Promise doth not communicate any excellency to the Work but supposeth it to be in its perfection In the Old Covenant Do this and live Do which imports the work is the Antecedent Live which is the promise of compensation the Consequent The Consequent cannot be the Cause of any thing in the Antecedent If the Promise raises the value and dignity of the Work then the larger the Promise is the greater will the value of the Work be which assertion runs the maintainers of it upon an inevitable contradiction for the more large the Promise is the greater is the Mercy of Heaven and the more value there is in the service the less mercy and kindness there is in the reward Now if the amplitude of the Promise adds a value to the