whatever is included in the justifying Sentence yet in the way time manner and limits which the Gospel declares § 9. The Consideration of the Rule of Iudgment as before explained led me to affirm that the Justification of a believing Sinner is equivalent to a twofold Justification the one at our Creator's Bar the other at the Redeemer's the first by the imputed Righteousness of Christ the other by that of Faith which I have insisted on in PS to Gospel-Truth p. 276 279 c. 3d Edit And being desirous to prevent Mistakes in this Point which I think is probable to prevent furious Debates concerning the Doctrine of Iustification I 'll give a few hints of fuller Thoughts about it premising only that I hoped none would think that I said there is a twofold Justification for I make the Sentence to be but one tho that includes what 's equivalent to a twofold Justification Nor yet that I denied Christ as of one Essence with the Father to be Creator or said there be two actually existing Bars But these are things too low for many words 1. I consider God at our first Formation as our Creator governing Men by a Law suted to their rational innocent and perfect Natures by which Law he promised Life to sinless Obedience and threatned Death for all Disobedience God considered in this relation cannot be apprehended to enact a Gospel-Law with a Promise of Pardon and Life to the imperfect tho sincere Faith of Sinners 2. I consider this Creator offended by Man's Violation of his holy Law Under this Notion 1. He condemns the Sinner unless Satisfaction be made and excludes him from Life unless purchased by one capable of meriting it 2. He would reject Faith and every Work of a Sinner as satisfactory or meritorious this Offendor being incapable to satisfy for the least Fault or merit the least Blessing 3. I consider our Mediator transacting with our offended creating Lawgiver in the Covenant of Redemption wherein 1. Our governing Creator demands of Christ if he would save Sinners that in their Nature he must obey the violated Law and endure Death and what was equivalent to its threatned Punishment in their stead 2. He declareth that this Obedience and those Sufferings of this Mediator considering the Dignity of his Person should be accepted for Satisfaction for Sin and the Merit of eternal Life and of whatever subserved Sinners obtaining thereof 3. He promiseth Christ as a Reward of his Obedience and Sufferings that whoever of fallen Men should believe on him should be absolved pardoned accepted as righteous and eternally glorified for the sake of what he was to do and suffer and that a certain number should believe on him and so be absolved c. to his Glory and he have all Power Authority and Iudgment committed to him 4. Christ our Mediator covenanteth to do and suffer what was proposed and accepts of the said Rewards 5. In due time Christ porforms his Undertaking and becomes entitled to the said Rewards and invested in a right thereto with respect to which he is said to be justified 6. His Undertaking is allowed to operate as if performed at least from Adam's Fall and thereby his Kingdom and the saving Effects of his Obedience and Death antecede his obeying and dying 7. Whatever concerned the Sinner's Salvation was to be founded upon the satisfactory and meritorious Death and Obedience of Christ our Mediator 8. Man is to be considered under the first Head as an innocent Subject in a state of Trial according to the Law of Works and under the second Head as a Sinner obnoxious to the Curse of the Law past Relief by his own Merit and yet upon Christ's Satisfaction pursuant to the Covenant of Redemption in this third Head as savable notwithstanding the Curse of the Law 4. As an Effect of this Transaction I do not consider only Christ our Mediator under the Notion of a Redeemer as all will grant him to be in an especial manner because he alone paid the redeeming Price But I consider also the Creator to be Redeemer as he gave his Son to be a Saviour accepted the Satisfaction made by him promised to him the foresaid Rewards and so far executed them as to invest him in his Office of an accepted authorized Mediator admitting his Kingdom to commence as well as his Death to operate to saving Effects before he actually dy'd c. Upon these and the like accounts I apprehend the blessed God considered essentially tho the Father eminently bears the Title of Creator and sustains the Dignity of the Divine Essence and Government in proposing the Terms and receiving Satisfaction to stand towards us in the relation of a Redeemer who hath received Satisfaction and transacting with us in and by our Mediator in whom he is well pleased Our Creator being considered thus as God in Christ who is satisfied as to the Violations of his Law the Honour of his Government vindicated and the Ends of it secured tho Pardon and Life be granted to Sinners it will follow that in a consistency with rectoral Iustice he can so far suspend the Curse of the Law towards sinful Man and exert his Mercy as 1. To be willing to admit to Peace and Favour all whom Christ shall present to him 2. To be ready to forgive our Offences 3. To make Offers of Peace Pardon and Salvation to lost Sinners begging them to be reconciled c. 4. To return his expelled forfeited Spirit to strive with and work on dead Sinners in order to their acceptance of this offered Salvation 5. To be long-suffering and waiting to be gracious in the use of fit Methods and Means to conquer their Resistance These and the like immediately ensue upon Christ's Satisfaction and if Men intend but Instances of this kind when they say God was reconciled to us by the Death of Christ before Conversion we should allow it yet intreating them to note that the Curse suspended thus far and the Curse removed by an actual Interest in saving Blessings are very distinct as be Forgiveness with God and Forgiveness bestowed on us and yet I fear many do detract from this Benefit viz. that there is Forgiveness with God for guilty Sinners and Salvation for undone Apostates this is in it self a higher thing than that this or that Man is Partaker of it tho our personal Advantage consisteth in the latter 5. I consider God in Christ Redeemer making his offers of Salvation to Sinners and stating the Conditions upon which he will give the merited Pardon and eternal Life personally to them commanding their acceptance with a Promise of applying Christ's Satisfaction in those Effects upon their Compliance and denouncing their abiding under Guilt and Misery with sorer Punishments if they finally refuse This is by the Gospel To explicate which Note 1. Compliance is injoined by a governing Authority tho with a display of Grace it supposeth Christ's Sacerdotal Offering over and is an Instrument of
depends not on any such mere words But was Christ appointed and did he consent to endure what the Sinner was to suffer that in virtue thereof the offended God might be appeased and the Sinner delivered This is the thing they oppose Crell Resp. ad Grot. cap. 9. par 14. explaining this very Phrase 3. Nor is with them the Question Whether Christ's Sufferings were in part the Idem and in other respects a full Equivalent to the Punishments the Sinner deserved No their Arguments run against the Equivalency and on that account deny that his Sufferings could be a full Price of Redemption or a Satisfaction and well they may when they call him a mere Creature Crell Resp. ad Grot. c. 4. par 2. c. 6. par 18. It 's the Proportion in the Value they most directly militate against 4. Nor whether Christ was a Sinner in judicial Esteem or was he reputed the innocent Mediator making amends to Iustice for our Sins that we the Offendors might be redeemed by his merits who to make Satisfaction submitted to be dealt with as if he had been a Sinner The last is enough for their Abhorrence and tho Socinus took all Advantages to expose the Orthodox in representing their Opinion as to the Imputation of Sin to Christ yet grants they hold that Christ was truly innocent and reputed so by God even when he was punished as if an Offender De Servat cap. 6. It 's true sometimes they would force some such Consequence on the words of the Orthodox as if Christ must be legally reputed a Sinner but that is to furnish themselves with an Argument to ridicule the true Doctrine of Satisfaction And note they deny that 2 Cor. 5. 21. Christ was made Sin to be Christ was made a Sacrifice for Sin yea some render it he was made a Sinner as Slicht c. God dealt with him as a Sinner Socin in loc 5. It 's far enough from the Socinian Controversy whether Christ was immediately obliged by the Law of Works to die i. e. Did God thus sentence him Thou Christ hast sinned and therefore thou shalt die Or was he immediately obliged to die by the Govenant of Redemption and mediately by the Law of Works i. e. the Sentence is to be thus apprehended Whereas thou my Son the Mediator hast with my Consent declared thy willingness to expiate Sin and ransom Sinners justly condemned by the Curse of my Law to die And whereas my Vindictive Iustice the Honour of my Law and Government required that I the Rector should exact Satisfaction and Reparation for the Crimes of these Sinners by thy Death if I agreed to thy redeeming and saving them and thou hast obliged thy self to die in their stead to redeem them therefore thou shalt die this accursed shameful Death This I say is no part of the Dispute with the Socinians for the last account doth as directly oppose their Notions as the former nay much more for it asserts the Compact before his Incarnation and consequently the Divinity at least Preexistence of Christ. 6. Nor yet is it of any moment with them whether Men say Sin would be in a more proper sense the immediate meritorious Cause of the Sinner's dying who committed the Sin than of Christ's dying who did not commit the Sin tho he obliged himself to make Satisfaction for it in the Sinner's stead that the provoked God might be reconciled to him The Point with them being this Did our Sins notwithstanding God's merciful Disposition retain that Demerit in his account as rendered Satisfaction for it by Death necessary to reconcile him to Sinners and consequently did Christ suffer Death to make that Satisfaction which was become thus necessary by Sin and yet impossible for the Sinner to make 7. It 's true the Socinians usually say our Sins were the occasion of Christ's Death yet oft they call them the antecedent Cause but occasion being more common and agreeable to their Hypothesis I wish others had waved that word to prevent Abuse Nevertheless the mere using of that word is far from arguing any Man to Socinianize so that he apply it to a sense opposite to what Socinians do This will appear if we consider in what sense the Socinians use it they say our Sin was an occasion of Christ's Death as Sin was that which we were to be reclaimed from and our hope supported against And the Death of Christ was that way in which God who was not unreconciled before did appoint Christ to reclaim us from our Sins as his Death assureth us of the Truth of his Doctrine and Promises manifesteth God's prior Reconciliation and so his Death became an Argument to encline us to believe and repent and also a causa sine qua non both of a strong Motive to Holiness viz. the endless Glory designed in Heaven for us which was before shut up and of that Power Authority and Care of Christ at God's Right-hand to bring us into the Possession of it But when others shall call our Sins an occasion of Christ's Death and explain it thus That it was an occasion of Christ's Death as a penal Satisfaction to the Iustice of God and that he endured it to pacify God to Sinners that God's hatred of Sin and his Justice yea punitive Justice might be no less demonstrated in Christ's Satisfaction than if the Sinners had been damned And his Obedience and his Punishments wherein Vindictive Iustice was thus glorified did merit the Pardon of our Sins and eternal Life such an Explication doth as much oppose Socinianism as if they had used the word meritorious Cause instead of occasion That no Person may pretend the Reverend Mr. Baxter's Authority in favour of Socinianism because he sometimes calls our Sins an occasion of Christ's Death I do assure the Reader that he explains the word occasion in the last sense and in the most direct opposition to Socinianism nor can any pretend but the reason he useth this word as also pro causa meritoria or instead of a meritorious Cause is only to distinguish Christ the Sponsor making Satisfaction to Justice for our Sins from the Sinner himself when suffering for his own Sins To evidence which I have repeated his own Assertions under this seventh Head and could easily cite his own words which agree exactly to what 's Antisocinian in the six foregoing Heads See Method Theol. par 3. cap. 1. determ 11 12 15. Need I add that he says God declared to the feeling of Christ his Displeasure against Sin which was the Cause of all the Miseries which he endured i. e. saith he Christ bare those Punishments which the Anger and Displeasure of God against Sin and Sinners caused to be inflicted on him our Sponsor Vbi sup Disp. 4. and all this in our stead Det. 10. He made Satisfaction for our Sins to God as Rector and as the injured Party Determ 14. Christ's Death answered all the Ends of the most proper Punishments and
transacts still as Mediator but he obliging himself to these great Performances in order to our doing what we are personally obliged to do and our receiving what we are necessitated to receive if ever we be saved even in a Gospel-way tho it supposeth him already crucified he is properly called a Surety of the New Covenant yet still connoting him a Mediator I need not suggest that if in this new Covenant Christ's Suretyship will not infer our being one foederating Party with Christ and hence that we covenanted in him it will far less follow we did so in the Covenant of Redemption which treated of things so improper to be once propos'd to us as undertaking Parties much less as Principals which to strictly legal Sureties always are supposed But of this I have treated in Man made righteous and in Answer to the Report and P. S. to Gospel-Truth THE OTHER SIDE think Christ with the Father's consent came into the Covenant of Works considered as a Bond as unviolated say some as violated say others and therein became one foederating Party with us as Elect some say as Believers say others even such a Surety as made the Covenant of Works run thus If thou Christ my Son or you the Elect or Believers do obey all the Law you shall live But if they sin thou or they shall die or they having sinned thou shalt die And they conceiving Christ to be as a strict pecuniary Surety in this one Bond with us they esteem him one legal Person and Representative in such a sense as that we did covenant in him and are legally esteemed to do and suffer what he did and not only secured of Salvation in his right and for his sake This may be accounted by some a dangerous Difference and so it were on our part if we did not own that Christ's fulfilling of the Law was an Article in the Covenant of Redemption and that we are as fully assured of Salvation if we accept of Christ as if we had covenanted in him and that he hath engaged the Elect should accept of him tho they did not covenant in him and that Believers have as inviolable an Interest in the Benefits of Christ's Death both in his right and by the Gospel-promise as if they were legally esteemed to suffer what he did suffer But all this we acknowledg It would be as dangerous on our Brethrens part to say we covenanted in Christ and obeyed in him if they did not renounce all proud assuming Boasts as if they were as righteous as Christ or stood on terms with God needing no more Acts of Mercy than that one of appointing Christ to be Mediator but after that they are on terms of strict Justice and above Forgiveness c. The like Danger would ensue their Position if they did not acknowledg the necessity of Faith to Justification and this Faith to be always accompanied with Repentance and persevering Holiness But our Brethren renounce the former and own the latter Matters standing thus will afford no ground to hereticate each other We think a mediating Surety obliged in a distinct Bond to perform the utmost which our Brethren affirm Christ to have done doth as well secure our State and support our Faith as if in the same Bond and better account for the sapiential Methods of Divine Government towards Man since the Fall with God's judicial Procedures towards Man as under Gospel-offers and his suspending Christ's merited Benefits till Men believe as also his recorded Pleadings with Sinners The Brethren think not that Christ did more for our Salvation than we allow but that we did more in Christ and thence judge our Faith more supported and the Law of Works more honoured in their way But did each side perceive all the aforesaid respective Ends alike provided for and evil Consequences equally avoided the Notion in debate could for its own sake admit no Dispute on either side And is it not pity to hate each other for mistaking the best Scheme to avoid the same Evils which both would prevent and secure that same Good which both honestly aim at by their respective Hypotheses Forbearance is the juster in this point because it turns upon a Solution of this Question When Adam is called a Figure of Christ Rom. 5. 18. is there not some disparity in their Representation of Men as well as in those other things there instanced Our Brethren think Christ so fully prefigured by Adam as a Representative that we as truly obeyed and suffered in Christ as we sinned in Adam We think the Figure as to Representation is to be explained thus As no man becomes a Sinner or dieth whose Depravedness and Death were not procured and merited by Adam's first Sin and tho the Pagan Sinners who died did not actually sin against a revealed positive Law as Adam did yet he was the Root of Death to them as well as to the Jews under Moses's Law So no men are quickned justified sanctified or saved but Christ is a Root of Life Grace Justification Holiness and Glory to them in all these by his Merits in some also by his Spirit and Power But yet we conceive Christ may as well answer Adam's Figure here intended by our being quickned justified and saved by Christ's Obedience imputed to us without our being esteemed to have obeyed and suffered in him as Christ was condemned and died for Adam's Sins imputed to him tho he was not esteemed to have sinned in Adam As he was condemned by our Disobedience so we are justified by his Obedience viz. the first by his own Compact with the Father the last by that and the Gospel too He was not condemned by any imputation that made him by the Law a Sinner unless he sinned in Adam neither are we justified by being legally judged Sufferers or Obeyers in him It avails not to say Christ was legally a Sinner and yet not reputed to sin in Adam because Christ was our Root for tho he was our Root as to Grace Acceptance Pardon and Glory and whatever else did proceed from him to us as our Saviour nevertheless if he was a Sinner he could not as to this be our Root unless we derive Sin from him but surely that Denomination must have its Root not in him but in those that were Sinners before him and whose Sins were imputed to him they must denominate that one legal Person into which he came a sinful guilty Person as he doth that one obeying satisfying Person into which we are admitted which Terms our Brethren espousing I argue from Finally we are enclined to set the foresaid Limit to Christ's Representation by this among many other Reasons for in that Rom. 5. 18. where Adam is called a Figure the Death of those Heathens was merited by their own personal Transgressions as well as by Adam's Disobedience But the Elect even when Believers do not merit Life by their own personal Obedience and therefore we are not represented altogether in the
same manner in Christ as in Adam 2. From the former another point ariseth referring expresly to the Satisfaction viz. in what sense our Sins were imputed to Christ. One saith our Sins were imputed to Christ only as to Guilt or Obligation to bear the Punishment which we deserved for them which Punishments tho he obliged himself to endure in our stead to reconcile God to us yet that did not render him a Sinner in God's account because that Title results from the violation of the Precept abstractedly from a respect to the threatning and conceiving he was not a Sinner in our stead tho he suffer'd in our stead the punishments due to our sins they think he was esteemed by God what in truth he was viz. the holy innocent Mediator punishable by his own consent for the Sins he came to expiate and were not expiable without his dying in our stead But our Brethren think our Sins were so imputed to Christ as to give him the Denomination and judicial acceptation of a Sinner in the esteem of God and the Law Yet lest the difference should appear greater than it is it 's fit I inform you that our Brethren deny that Christ had any Sin or Defilement in him or had any Sin of his own they were our Sins only imputed to him and he was a legal Sinner by being one political Person with those Sinners whom the Law esteemed real Sinners and condemned as such On the other hand we own that supposing the Covenant of Redemption he was as truly obliged and God the just Rector at as full liberty to punish him for our Sins as if he had been reputed a Sinner Nay Divine Justice required the inflicting those Punishments on him if the Sinner was to be redeemed from them for his sake Now Reader can this difference justify mutual Censures or Alienation What is a Sinner without Filth yea or any Fault of his own above a Sponsor obliged to bear the Punishments of other mens Sins in the stead of the Offenders And they who acknowledg him to be this what less say they of him than the others mean tho scrupulous of that harsher Denomination At least it would appear strange to revile each other for a different explication of that Text 2 Cor. 5. 21. he was made Sin for us One thinks he was made a Sacrifice for Sin after the Hebrew Custom for we find very oft the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify a Sin-Offering as well as Sin Lev. 7. 1 2. and cap. 4. 28 29 33. And this very Apostle follows the same Usage calling an Offering or Sacrifice for Sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 8. Heb. 10. 5. The other side will have it meant that Christ was made a Sinner but a Sinner that 's holy undefiled and never offended which Notion of being made Sin is too diminutive to admit harsh thoughts of such as entertain it An unconcerned Observer will be apt to say These who call Christ a Sinner are intent to renounce Socinianism and they who call him a Sacrifice for Sin are as sollicitous to confute Socinianism and Antinomianism too by withholding an advantage which both these Errors receive by the use of that Word But where 's the Christian Charity or Prudence of the condemning Side when both contend for what seems the best Defence of the Doctrine of Satisfaction The other Phrases accounted for in the 6th Chapter admit the same Mitigation as this and upon the same Grounds 3. The third point wherein there appears some difference refers to the Doctrine of Iustification But before I insist on this permit me to offer a few hints 1. Any Difference in this matter seems to proceed from want of an equal Consideration of the Covenant of Redemption which fixed the terms of Satisfaction and Impetration of saving Benefits which Christ alone was thereby obliged to perform and the Gospel-Covenant wherein the Method of giving us a personal Interest in the Blessings impetrated by Christ is ordained By the former all that belongs to Satisfaction and Merit are confined to Christ and Pardon Adoption and eternal Life put in the hand of our Saviour as his Reward By the latter a way becoming our fallen State and rational Nature is appointed to apply to us a Right to the purchased Blessings nor can the Scripture-Account of God's Calls Pleadings and judicial Proceedings be explained without it I think the not distinguishing these two Covenants or fixing the Mind upon either of them with too little regard to the other contribute much to our Debates 2. With Humility I propose to Consideration whether such can dangerously err as to the way of Salvation and particularly in the Doctrine of Justification who do honestly adhere to our foregoing account of Christ's Satisfaction and in subordination thereto assert a Gospel-Law or Covenant wherein is enacted a Rule by which the saving Effects of that Satisfaction are given forth it seems to me highly improbable For in the account given of Satisfaction we ascribe the whole Impetration of Pardon Acceptance and all saving Benefits only to the Atonement and Merits of Christ expresly excluding all our own Graces and good Works from the least place therein And by our Judgment of the Gospel-Law we secure the Method and Rule of the personal Application of these merited Benefits and that conformably to the scope of the Bible in its most explained Parts as well as in full consistency with an apt Ministry and a judicial Sentence against impenitent Infidels to whom those Benefits are not applied notwithstanding Gospel-Offers Whereas if we conceived never so fitly and with greatest Soundness concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and denied a Gospel-Law or what 's equivalent to it we apprehend no small Danger inevitably to ensue and that in no less a matter than Mens Salvation for if this Gospel prove a Rule of Iudgment and that Christ gives forth Pardon and such merited Benefits thereby will not our Ministry be useless and ensnaring to Souls which doth not explain and press the Gospel Conditions in order to an Interest in those Benefits And must not those secure Sinners be destroyed who submit not to those Conditions however confident they be upon Orthodox Apprehensions of what Christ hath done to satisfy Justice and merit eternal Life The Boundaries therefore I would propose to my self are that Christ be not rivalled in his atoning or meriting Performances on the one hand nor rejected in his enacted Rules of dispensing his purchased and offered Benefits on the other for he is truly dishonoured and Souls undone by both But I would not be mistaken as if this were suggested to reflect on the Brethren who are seriously intent upon the first for it already appears and will be more evident that they neglect not the last but affirm what to this purpose is equivalent to a Gospel-Law 3. It is very evident that when Protestants express great Zeal for Christ's alone Righteousness
repeat 1. Our Testimony against Dr. Crisp's Errors when so many were indangered by his reprinted Books 2. Some part of our former Declarations against Popish Socinian and Arminian Errors when our Brethren accused us thereof for subscribing the foresaid Testimony against Crispianism 3. We shall give an account of our Congregational Brethrens Declaration against Antinomian Errors 4. We shall evidence that this taken together and examined with Candor ought to be acknowledged a sufficient Vindication of the Approvers thereof from all hurtful Antinomian Errors 5. We shall add our further Testimony against Errors about Christ's Satisfaction and Justification If Peace at least must not be allowed us after this we must bewail a judicial stroke and expect to be despised by such who perceive our common hurt from these Debates but have not Judgment to distinguish between the injured Seekers of Peace and the injurious Fomenters of Trouble CHAP. I. The State of Truth and Errors subscribed by near fifty of us drawn up and published by Mr. Williams in a Book called Gospel-Truth stated and vindicated first Edition Anno 16. 1692. Truth 1. IT is certain from God's Decree of Election that the Elect shall in time be justified adopted and saved in the way God hath appointed and the whole meritorious Cause and Price of Justification Adoption and Eternal Life were perfect when Christ finished the Work of Satisfaction Nevertheless the Elect remain Children of Wrath and subject to Condemnation till they are effectually called by the Operation of the Spirit Error The Elect are at no time of their Lives under the Wrath of God nor are they subject to Condemnation if they should die before they believe yea when they are under the Dominion of Sin and in the Practice of the grossest Villanies they are as much the Sons of God and justified as the very Saints in Glory Truth 2. Tho our Sins were imputed to Christ with respect to the Guilt thereof so that he by the Father 's Appointment and his own Consent became obliged as Mediator to bear the Punishments of our Iniquities and he did bear those Punishments to the full Satisfaction of Iustice and to our actual Remission when we believe nevertheless the Filth of our Sins was not laid upon Christ nor can he be called the Transgressor or was he in God's account the Blasphemer Murderer c. Error God did not only impute the Guilt and lay the Punishment of the Sins of the Elect upon Christ but he laid all the very Sins of the Elect upon Christ and that as to their real Filthiness and Loathsomness yea so that Christ was really the Blasphemer Murderer and Sinner and so accounted by the Father Truth 3. The Atonement made by Christ by the Appointment of God is that for which alone the Elect are pardoned when it is applied to them But the Elect are not immediately pardoned upon Christ's being appointed to suffer for them nor as soon as the Atonement was made nor is that Act of laying Sins on Christ God's forgiving Act by which we are personally discharged Error The very Act of God's laying Sins on Christ upon the Cross is the very actual discharge of all the Elect from all their Sins Truth 4. An Elect Person ceaseth not to be a Sinner upon the laying of our Sins upon Christ that is he remains a Sinner as to the Guilt till he believes if Adult He is a Sinner as to the Filth of Sin till he be sanctified He is a Sinner as to the charge of the sinful Fact he commits and that even after Pardon and Sanctification Nevertheless he is free from the Curse when he is pardoned and shall be purged from all the Filth of Sin when he is perfect in Holiness And tho Christ did bear the Punishment of our Iniquity yet it never was Christ's Iniquity but ours Error The Elect upon the Death of Christ ceased to be Sinners and ever since their Sins are none of their Sins but they are the Sins of Christ. Truth 5. The Obligation of suffering for our Sins was upon Christ from his undertaking the Office of a Mediator to the moment wherein he finished his satisfactory Atonement The Punishment of our Sins lay upon Christ from the first moment to the last of his state of Humiliation Error The time when our Sins were laid actually on Christ was when he was nailed to the Cross and God actually forsook him and they continued on him till his Resurrection Truth 6. The God testified his threatned Indignation against Sin in the awful Sufferings of Christ's Soul and Body in his Agony and suspended those delightful Communications of the Divine Nature to the Human Nature of Christ as to their wonted Degrees yet God was never separated from Christ much less during his Body's lying in the Grave neither was the Father ever displeased with Christ and far less did he abhor him because of the Filthiness of Sin upon him Error Christ was on the account of the Filthiness of Sins while they lay upon him separated from God odious to him and even the Object of God's Abhorrence and this to the time of his Resurrection Truth 7. The Mediatorial Righteousness of Christ is so imputed to true Believers as that for the sake thereof they are pardoned and accepted unto Life eternal it being reckoned to them and pleadable by them for these Uses as if they had personally done and suffered what Christ did as Mediator for them whereby they are delivered from the Curse and no other Atonement nor meriting Price of saving Benefits can be demanded from them Nevertheless this Mediatorial Righteousness is not subjectively in them nor is there a Change of Person betwixt them and Christ neither are they as righteous as he but there remain Spots and Blemishes in them until Christ by his Spirit perfect that Holiness begun in all true Believers which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven See the 2d Truth and note it is only Dr. Crisp ' s Change of Person is denied viz. a perfect Change which makes us as righteous as he c. but not Christ's dying in our stead which in this Book is oft asserted Error Every Believer or elect Person is as righteous as Christ and there is a perfect Change of Person and Condition betwixt Christ and the Elect he was what we are viz. as sinful as we and we are what he was viz. perfectly holy and without Spot or Blemish Truth 8. I shall express it in the words of the Assembly The Grace of God is manifested in the second Covenant in that he freely provideth and offereth to Sinners a Mediator and Life and Salvation by him requiring Faith as the Condition to interest them in him promiseth and giveth his holy Spirit to all his Elect to work in them that Faith with all other saving Graces and to enable them unto all Obedience as the Evidence of the Truth of their Faith and Thankfulness to God and as the way which
signs of Regeneration And he adds such Power to the Testimony of Conscience for the Truth and In-being of these Graces as begets in the Soul a joyful sense of its reconciled State and some comfortable freedom from those Fears which accompany a doubting Christian and according to the Evidence of these Graces Assurance is ordinarily strong or weak Error Assurance is not attained by the Evidence of Scripture-Marks of Signs of Grace or by the Spirit 's discovering to us that he hath wrought in our Hearts any holy Qualifications But Assurance comes only by an inward Voice of the Spirit saying Thy Sins are forgiven thee and our believing thereupon that our Sins are forgiven Truth 16. The Sins of Believers have the loathsomness of Sin adhering to them which God seeth and accounteth the Committers guilty thereby and they ought to charge themselves therewith so as to stir up themselves to Repentance and renew their Actings of Faith on Christ for Forgiveness Nevertheless they ought not thereby to fear their being out of a justified State further than their Falls give them just cause of suspecting that Sin hath Dominion over them and that their first believing on Christ was not sincere Error God seeth no Sin in Believers tho he see the Fact neither doth He charge them with any Sin nor ought they to charge themselves with any Sin nor be at all sad for them nor confess repent or do any thing as a Means of their Pardon no nor in order to assuring themselves of Pardon even when they commit Murder Adultery or the grossest Wickedness Truth 17. It 's true of Believers that if Sin should have Dominion over them they would thereby be subject to Condemnation And tho the Grace of God will prevent the Dominion of Sin in every elect Believer and so keep them from eternal Death yet true Believers may by Sin bring great hurt upon themselves in Soul and Body which they ought to fear and they may expect a share in National Judgments according as they have contributed to common Guilt Error The grossest Sins that Believers can commit cannot do them the least harm neither ought they to fear the least hurt by their own Sins nor by National Sins yea tho themselves have had a hand therein Truth 18. Tho God is not so angry with his People for their Sins as to cast them out of his Covenant-favour yet by their Sins he is so displeased as for them to correct his Children tho he speaks Instructions by his Rebukes Error None of the Afflictions of Believers have in them the least of God's Displeasure against their Persons for their Sins Truth 19. Tho the present sincere Holiness of Believers be not perfect according to the Precepts of the Word nor valuable by the Sanction of the Law of Innocency nor any Atonement for our Defects and we still need Forgiveness and the Merits of Christ for Acceptance thereof yet as far as it prevails it's lovely in it self and pleasing to God and is not Dung or Filth Error The greatest Holiness in Believers tho wrought in them by the Holy Ghost is meer Dung Rottenness and Filthiness as in them Truth 20. Gospel-preaching is when the Messengers of Christ do publish to fallen Sinners the good News of Salvation by Christ to be obtained in the way which he hath appointed in his Word freely offering Salvation on his Terms earnestly perswading and commanding Men in the Name of Christ to comply with those Terms as ever they would escape the Misery they are under and possess the Benefits he hath purchased directing all to look to him for Strength and acknowledg him as the only Mediator and his Obedience and Sufferings as the sole Atonement for Sin and meriting Cause of all Blessings instructing them in all revealed Truth and by Gospel-Motives urging them to obey the whole Will of God as a Rule of Duty but especially to be sincere and upright pressing after Perfection Error Gospel-Preaching is to teach Men they were as much pardoned and as acceptable to God always as when they are regenerate and while they were ungodly they had the same Interest in God and Christ as when they believe neither can Sin any way hinder their Salvation or their Peace nor have they any thing to do to further either of them Christ having done all for them and given himself to them before any holy Qualification or Endeavour Truth 21. Legal Preaching is to preach the Law as a Covenant of Innocency or Works or to preach the Mosaick or Jewish Covenant of Peculiarity But it is not Legal Preaching to require and perswade to Faith Holiness or Duties by Promises and Threatnings according to the Grace of the Gospel and direct Men to fear and hope accordingly Error Legal Preaching is to call People to act any Grace or do any Duty as a required Means of Salvation or inward Peace or to threaten them with Death or any Affliction to cause Fear if they commit the grossest Sins and backslide and fall away or to promise them any Blessing upon their Obedience to the Commandments of Christ or urge the Threatnings to perswade Sinners to believe and repent CHAP. II. A Renunciation of sundry Errors Anno 1696. A Paper called The second Paper 1696. A Proposal made by us 1697. ALtho we hoped the Caution used in the foresaid State of Truth and Error would prevent the Imputation of Socinianism and other hurtful Errors yet finding our Brethren dissatisfied we subscribed with them Anno 1692. about seven Months after the State of Truth was published certain Doctrinal Propositions collected out of the Assembly's Confession which we printed Anno 1693. with this Title An Agreement in Doctrinals c. but that being too long to be here inserted we shall confine our selves to the more material Parts of what further Account we have given of our Judgment concerning the Doctrines of Satisfaction and Iustification which may be seen at large in our Answer to the Report p. 3 11 27 33 c. Anno 1694. In a Paper sent to our Congregational Brethren it 's thus declared We the united Ministers in and about London do renounce and testify against these following Opinions 1. That there is no definite number of Persons elected from all Eternity whom God will by his appointed Means certainly save and bring to Eternal Life leaving the rest who fall under a just Condemnation for their Original and Actual Sins especially for their Neglect and Contempt of the Means of Salvation 2. That Christ died equally for all Men not intending the final Salvation of some more than others 3. That Men have in their own Power by the use of the natural Faculties of their Reason and Will unassisted by the special Light and Grace of the Holy Ghost to perform all that is necessary to Salvation or that his special efficacious Light and Grace is not necessary to their Conversion Perseverance and final Salvation 4. That any of them whom God hath
always have access to God and obtain eternal Life Socin Tom. 1. 788. Truth Jesus Christ was by Divine Adjustment a middle Person between God and Sinners and as such laid his hand on both undertaking to appease God's Wrath and procure Salvation for us at his hand and also to make God and the way of Salvation known to us for our Reconciliation and Obedience to God and by him God still imparts his Blessings to us and admits us free access to himself Error 5. Christ is called a Surety as a Sponsor or Messenger on God's part to us but he promised nothing to God for us Crell vol. 1. p. 612. Truth Tho Christ was not a joint federating Party with us in the Covenant of Works yet he was not only a Surety on God's part to us but he was a mediating Surety on both parts and as such he engaged in the Covenant of Redemption to make Atonement for us and in the Gospel-Covenant that all true Believers shall persevere to the obtaining of eternal Life Error 6. Christ was not an High-Priest while on Earth nor was his Blood offered by him to God but it was himself was offered and that not on the Cross but when he entred into Heaven yet the Death of Christ so far belongs to his Priesthood that he was prepared by his Death to become a High-Priest and to offer himself a perfect Sacrifice for Sin in Heaven neither of which could be according to the Decree of God if his Death had not intervened Crell vol. 2. Resp. ad Grot. cap. 10. vol. 1. 613. vol. 2. par 1. 162. Socin Tom. 1. Praelect Theol. cap. 23. Truth Christ was an High-Priest while he was on Earth and as such upon the Cross offered up himself by his bloody Death a perfect Sacrifice whereby his Blood was a propitiatory offering at the very time it was shed and tho in the virtue thereof the Saints were saved before his Incarnation and Christ for ever intercedeth in the Heavens yet the presenting of himself or it there makes no addition to the Perfection of it as a Sacrifice Error 7. There is no use nor place in the Priesthood of Christ for appeasing God's Wrath or offering any Sacrifice no not in Heaven as a Condition of obtaining Remission properly as from God or impetrating the same but Christ's Death is a means of our enjoying that Remission from God and it was indirectly a Condition thereof as to be given to us i. e. it was a Condition imposed on Christ without which by the Divine Decree he was not to obtain Authority from God to forgive us our Sins and it may be called a Sacrifice to God's Mercy as of his own free Grace reconciled but not as offended with Sinners Socin Tom. 2. 665 666. Crell vol. 1. 612. Wolzog. in Ioh. 3. 16. Truth The first and principal use of Christ's Priesthood was to offer on the Cross a Sacrifice to appease God's Wrath against Sinners and to impetrate Remission and eternal Life that so God the offended Governor might consistently with the Honour of his Law and of all his Divine Perfections be at liberty and inclined as well to give the said Blessings as that we might become actual Partakers of them from Christ as authorized to apply them to us And all the other Sacerdotal Acts of Christ do refer to this Error 8. Redemption mentioned in the New Testament signifies no more nor other than a freeing us from the Punishment of Sin without any proper Price intervening And when it 's said Redemption is obtained by the Blood of Christ it 's not meant that the Blood of Christ could move God or that God was thereby obliged to grant us Deliverance from the Punishment of our Sins but that the shedding of his Blood ought to intervene that we might be moved thereby to accept that Deliverance when offered to us Neither did Christ buy us but God by Christ asserted his Right to us and tho our Deliverance from Punishment is gotten as if by a Price yet this is not as if the Blood of Christ were paid to any Socin Tom. 〈◊〉 Prael Theol. cap. 19. Tom. 2. 145 147. Slicht in Rom. cap. 5. v. 10. Truth Redemption by the Blood of Christ is that we are bought by his Blood as a proper Price and delivered from the Curse of the Law and Captivity under Sin and Satan as by a proper Ransom paid to the just Governor of the World Error 9. Christ by his Death did not reconcile God to us but he reconcileth us to God by his Death i. e. we come thereby to be converted to God and cease to offend him yea God's Anger was so far from being appeased by the Death of Christ that thereby it was declared that God was before pacified to us Socin Tom. 1. 144 145 665 666. Crell vol. 3. Resp. ad Grot. 154 155 107. Slicht Tom. 2. 214 401. in Rom. 5. 10. 2 Cor. 5. Truth We being Children of Wrath because of our Sin the Lord Jesus did by his Death atone our offended God who became thereby so reconciled that he offereth Peace to Sinners and requireth and urgeth us by believing aright to accept thereof and upon our penitent believing he becomes actually reconciled to us delighting in us and dealing with us as Objects of his restored Favour Note 1. Crellius Resp. ad Grot. cap. 8. part 3. disputes against this as the Error of Grotius and the rest of the Orthodox stating it in these words God was before angry but being appeased by the Death of Christ he determined to lay aside his Anger and upon our believing and repenting he doth actually lay aside his Anger 2. Grotius de Satisf cap. 7. distinguisheth the Actings of the Divine Will 1. As before Christ's Death is decreed c. then God is angry with the Sinner yet so as not to be averse to all methods of Reconciliation 2. Vpon Christ's Death as well when fixed as when undergone then God not only appoints the way but promiseth to be reconciled 3. When a Man believes in Christ with a right Faith and Christ according to the Tenor of the Covenant presents the Believer to God then God lays aside his Anger and receives the Person into Favour or is actually reconciled 3. How little do well-meaning Antinomians consider that not only in the third Error c. but in this last Error they agree with the Socinians and that in a Point whence most of their false Notions about Christ's Satisfaction proceed For see you not they hold that after God's absolute Decree to justify us there 's no Wrath in God to appease the change is only on our part And no Reconciliation but on our side whom God begs to be reconciled to him he being already at Peace with us Error 10. By Christ's dying for our Sins as being laid on him is not meant that Christ according to his Sponsion satisfied Divine Iustice for our Sins or that he paid to God
any thing which we owed for our Sins but when he is said to have died for our Sins as they were laid on him nothing else is meant but that he died by occasion of our Sins to take them away i. e. he died to reclaim us from our Sins and to assure us that if we did leave our Sins we should be forgiven and besides this that we might perceive and obtain the fruit of that Forgiveness c. Socin Tom. 2. 153. Tom. 1. Prael Theol. cap. 18 20. Crell Vol. 3. Resp. ad Grot. cap. 9. Truth When it 's said Christ died for our Sins as being laid on him it 's not only to bring about the forementioned Ends and such other Purposes as are assigned by the Socinians but they were imputed to him as what he had for our Salvation engaged to make Satisfaction for And he did by his Death make a real full and proper Satisfaction to God's Justice vindicating the Honour of his Justice and Government and of the violated Law as fully as if the pardoned Sinner had endured the utmost Punishment threatned by the said Law Error 11. God did not inflict Death on Christ our Mediator to express his hatred of Sin and deter us from it by his Death as any instance of Divine Displeasure against our Offences and therefore our Sins were not punished in Christ. Socin Tom. 1. 577 578 581. Tom. 2. 194. Crell vol. 1. de Morte Christi p. 611. Truth God did punish our Sins in the Death of Christ by shewing his real Hatred against Sin in all the Extremities Christ did endure which Extremities and Death thus inflicted were not only fit but truly design'd to deter us from all Disobedience against which God thus testified his high Displeasure Error 12. Christ did not by his Death properly merit Salvation or any other thing for us nor did he by the Merit of his great Obedience appease God's Anger Socin Tom. 2. de Servat Part. 3. cap. 6. p. 205. Ruari Epist. 164. Smal. Disp. 2. contr Frantz Truth Christ by his Death and Obedience did properly merit our Salvation and the Reconciliation of God to us his Death being to be considered first as satisfactory and hen meritorious and his Obedience first as meritorious and then satisfactory Error 13. By Christ's dying for us or in our stead as some of them sometimes word it tho they expresly dispute against it is not meant that Christ was substituted to die in the room of us who were condemned to die that God might be pacified nor that his Death was instead of our Death that we for the Merit of it might be delivered but the meaning is that Christ for our good did by his Death come to be crowned with Glory and Power whereby he is able to make us meet for Pardon and authorized to give that Pardon to us Socin Praelect cap. 20 21. de Scrvat cap. 8. Crell Resp. ad Grot. cap. 9. Par. 1 c. Truth By Christ's dying for us and in our stead is meant that whereas we Sinners were condemned to die for our Sins our Lord Jesus tho he became not a Sinner in our stead yet as Mediator he was substituted to die in our stead that by his Death God might be inclined to forgive us who otherwise must have died and by virtue of his Death as a Satisfaction to Divine Justice we are delivered from Death This Parenthesis I add to the Description Grotius gives of Christ's dying in our stead De Satisf cap. 9. LIMBORG's Opinion of Christ's Satisfaction consonant to EPISCOPIVS and some few other Arminians Error 14. Vindictive Justice required not Satisfaction to be made in order to the remission of Sin Limbor Theol. Christian. lib. 3. cap. 18. § 4. Truth Vindictive Justice for the Honour of the Divine Law required Satisfaction in order to the remission of Sin at least after the enacting of Adam's Covenant Error 15. Christ's Sufferings were not a full Satisfaction to Justice nor was the Price of our Redemption fully equivalent to the Misery we deserved But God might accept as a redeeming Price much or little as himself judged fit and might be satisfied with any sort of Affliction laid on Christ. Nor did Christ satisfy the Rigor of Divine Justice but the Will of God considered at once merciful as well as just i. e. Mercy abated to Christ in the terms of Satisfaction what Iustice demanded Lib. 3. cap. 2. § 8 9. cap. 22. § 2. cap. 23. § 6. Truth Tho the great Mercy of God appeared in his being willing to admit accept and provide Christ our Mediator to make Satisfaction for our Sins yet God our just Governor would have it that the terms of Satisfaction proposed to our Mediator should be such as strict Iustice demanded for the Honour of his violated Law and securing the Ends of his Government which terms were no lower than that he should suffer what was fully equivalent to the Punishments they whom he was to redeem deserved to endure And as our Lord Jesus did suffer in kind much of what we deserved to suffer so he suffered considering the Dignity and Innocency of his Person what was in the intrinsick Value fully equivalent to such of our deserved Punishments as he was not capable of suffering in kind Nay the Price of our Redemption paid by him was not only equivalent to what the Law of Works required of us but it was supralegal that is it far exceeded what any Sinners were thereby obliged to nor see we how a full Satisfaction for all our Sins could be otherwise made Error 16. Our Faith and Regeneration were not merited by Christ. Lib. 3. cap. 22. § 3. Truth Considering that our New-birth and Faith are the Fruits of the holy Spirit whom by Sin we had expelled his return to regenerate and make us Believers must be for the sake and with respect to the Merits of Christ as what vindicated the Honour of God who restored him to us Truth No Penance Pilgrimage Fastings or good Works of our own or other Men can make proper Satisfaction to Divine Justice for the least of our Sins as to any part of their Fault or Guilt This last we add in opposition to what POPISH Opinions seem to militate against the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction Socinian Notions of Iustification Error 1. In our Justification by Christ our Sins are blotted out not by Christ's Death and Obedience as any Compensation or Satisfaction to God for them but only by God's simple Forgiveness and Pardon absolutely free in all respects without any Merit of Christ's or our own Socin Tom. 1. Praelect Theol. cap. 15 16. Crell vol. 1. in Phil. 3. 9. in Rom. 3. 24. Truth In Justification upon our penitent believing our Sins are pardoned and our Persons accepted for the sake of Christ's Death and Obedience as what compensated and made Satisfaction for our Sins And tho neither our Graces nor Works do merit our Pardon Acceptance or eternal
the Righteousenss of Christ and only that It 's another matter whom our Judg in his justifying Act accounts and adjudgeth in conformity to the Gospel-Offer to be the Persons who he therein promised should be actually reconciled pardoned and entitled to Glory in the alone meriting virtue of what appeased his Anger made amends for Sin and was the Price of Glory Now this Person is the penitent Believer and he is accounted to be such from his having Gospel-Faith in Christ with true Repentance and as such is adjudged to be under the Favour of the foresaid Gospel Promise of Reconciliation Pardon and Glory yet procured and merited not by his Faith but by Christ's alone Righteousness as before accounted for and obtained in his Right who as well had these promised to him for Believers in the Covenant of Redemption as they are promised by God in Christ in the Gospel to Believers themselves for a personal Title to possess them and to plead the Merits of Christ for the enjoyment of them Having testified our Concord with our Brethren and and added this further account of what we esteem Truth and Error in the Doctrines of Satisfaction and Justification we must express our Thankfulness to God that our Brethren in the foresaid Declaration have testified against ignorant and scandalous Persons intruding themselves into the Ministry And tho the Vindication of our selves in this matter be needless when our Principles and Practice are so well known and it 's so notorious that of the great number of unqualified Men who are of late turned Preachers those very few who broke out of any of our Congregations in this City receiv'd no Approbation or Countenance from us and to avoid Restraint and Discouragement they renounced the Name of Presbyterians yea preach'd against us yet to support what we can this present Testimony of our Congregational Brethren we 'll publish one of the Articles agreed to by all of us for strengthening our Vnion after our said Brethrens Recess which is as follows 6. That no Ministers of the Union shall admit or consent that any Person shall preach in their Congregations unless they have been solemnly admitted to the Ministry by Ordination or approved by some of the United Brethren or produce a Testimony that they have been under proper and preparatory Studies to qualify them for that sacred Function CHAP. VI. Some further Examination what is Socinianism as to the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction and what is not so with a brief account of several Phrases used by Socinians and by the Orthodox in a very contrary sense A Strict Observation in how uncertain a sense Terms and Phrases are made use of must convince one that Errors may be easily concealed from the Ignorant and the Orthodox as easily impeached without ground by sagacious Persons who design imposing on the Vulgar I shall give an instance in the Controversy before me which makes it evident that Mens Explications and main Hypothesis must be regarded above words otherwise their sense will be mistaken 1. I find the Socinians admit and make use of the words which some Orthodox Divines esteemed most distinguishingly expressive of their own sense as Commutation of Persons as well as things for Persons Substitution and Surrogation of Christ's Person in our room Dying in our stead Christ was an Expiatory Sacrifice His Sufferings were Punishments Our Sins were an impulsive Cause of Christ's Death God was moved by Christ's Death to give us Forgiveness Yea it was a Satisfaction Christ was made a Sinner yea the chief Sinner And many more such I could mention But this evidenceth that these very Phrases are capable of a very ill sense as well as a good one Ruarus admits Christ did in a sense impetrate our Pardon by his Death Epist. 64. So doth Crellius Resp. ad Got. cap. 9. part 3. 2. The last Chapter gave us such a Summary of their Assertions as demonstrates they use these Expressions in no good sense but if you consult the places last cited and in Chap. 5. you 'll find them wrested to consist with the fore-mentioned Errors but because it will be tedious to particularize I shall enumerate the Causes and Ends they plainly and truly ascribe the Death of Christ to 1. They assign Christ's Death to God's meer Dominion over him as his entire Creature whom he would reward for it tho not as merited 2. It was an Example of Patience 3. It was a Preparation of his Sacrifice to be offered to God in Heaven for our Sins 4. It shew'd how much he desired our Salvation tho such great Sinners and how faithful he would be in expiating our Sins in Heaven when he endured such dreadful things for our sakes which God would have chiefly considered in our High-Priest 5. His Death impressed a tender Affection and Pity towards us that so he would succour us who were to be so extreamly afflicted God would not have put Mankind in his hands unless he first suffered Death for Sinners And that God might render us more assured that if we obeyed we should have eternal Life Christ should be so fashioned that in a sense it should appear Christ had more Tenderness for us than God himself or otherwise it had been as to us alike that God had saved us immediately as to have saved us by Christ. Or 6. To establish the new Covenant and Promises 7. To confirm his Doctrine 8. To come pursuant to God's Decree to be crowned with Glory and Honour and invested with Authority and Power to convert protect forgive and give us eternal Life 9. That there might be greater Rewards promised to induce us to repent than there were before 10. To take away those greater Sins which the legal Sacrifices were not appointed for 11. Beget in us a firm hope of Life tho we should die as terrible a Death 12. That we might not fear Death or the Curse which we see conquered by him 13. That we might be induced to leave our Sin when he died that we might be reclaimed from it by such hope of Pardon upon leaving of it 14. To make known how highly kind and pacified God was to us I pass by a compliance with Pagan Customs 3. As they limit Christ's Death in this manner exclusively of and in opposition to other Causes and Ends which the proper Satisfaction of Christ more directly supposeth as you see in the fifth Chapter So I could easily shew how they dilute their own seeming Concessions as well as reduce plain Scripture-Expressions to that Insignificancy that no Man can hope by their method to apprehend any kind of words with certainty as to their meaning one while an as if a quasi is all they intend by their large Grants as if a redeeming Price c. God is as it were moved and as it were obliged by Christ to pardon us another while all is figurative
of the Threatning of the Law Determ 12. When he calls Sin an occasion of Christ's Death he there calls it also a remote meritorious Cause Determ 5. And as for a proper meritorious Cause as when Children are punished for their Parents Sins Determ 5. His Safaction yielded to our most just Rector a sufficient ground on which to forgive penitent Believers spiritual and eternal Punishments Disâ— 2. Nay he sees not supposing the Law of Works how God could forgive our Sins without the Penal Satisfaction of Christ Disp. 2. Determ 15. It were endless to produce the Instances demonstrating the Orthodoxness of this great Man as to the Satisfaction of Christ against Socinianism And by the way such as say Christ's penal Satisfaction was not necessary to the forgiveness of our Sins do a thousand times more favour Socinianism than Mr. Baxter's Notions or Words can be wrested to Perhaps others who follow Episcopius and some other Arminians when all must acquit him of Socinianism may surmise he favoureth their Notion of Christ's Death as if it were a Satisfaction only to the Will of God and not a full Satisfaction to the Iustice of God To this I answer Mr. B. distinguisheth Satisfaction into that which is the fulfilling the Will of a Person and that which is the Payment of what was owing by an Equivalent otherwise not due And he affirms that Christ's Satisfaction was not a mere fulfilling the Will of God tho it supposeth his Consent but it was a full Equivalent to what Punishments we deserved in that it better answered the Ends of Divine Government than the Sinner's Punishment would have done it more fully demonstrated the vindictive Justice of God than if the Sinner had been damned and it was a full Satisfaction to governing Justice and the End of the Law Vbi supra Determ 10 11 12 15. I thought this account necessary not only for the forementioned End but also that our Agreement in opposition to Socinianism might not exclude Mr. B. and such as approve of his Scheme which would add strength to that Heresy and be injurious to many worthy Persons nor ought a few words so fully explained be pressed to brand them with that odious Title who could more plausibly fix the same Character on Persons from things plainly asserted in the Socinian sense and subserving their Hypothesis As Christ's Death was not necessary to the remission of Sin the Promise of Forgiveness is no Effect of Christ's Death Repentance under the Gospel is an Effect of justifying Faith in Christ. The preaching of Reconciliation to Sinners is only to publish to them that God is already reconciled to them and to call them to be reconciled to God Many others might be instanced but I think it were unjust even upon such grounds to call any of these Socinians CHAP. VII An Enquiry into what Difference seems to remain concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Iustification of a Sinner And this Difference reduced below any Cause of Discord I Think both sides are acquitted from all dangerous Errors concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Justification of a Sinner nor can I doubt but the impartial Reader must apprehend the remaining Difference doth not lie in Opinions about these Doctrines themselves but in accommodating some words in opposition to other Errors which either Side have more especially applied their Minds to confute unless he should also ascribe it to a Zeal for sundry received Phrases on the one part and an apprehension in the other part that more accuracy is become needful since those Phrases were received 1. In both these Doctrines the visible Spring of what Difference remains is a different Notion of Christ's Suretiship For by this the word Imputation as used in both these Doctrines is governed viz. how our Sins were imputed to Christ when he satisfied and how Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us when we are justified both which depend upon the various Conceptions of the Suretiship of Christ and the manner of his representing us which I will begin with One Side thinks him a mediating Surety and distinguishing both as to the matter engaged and Instrument wherein he voluntarily engaged himself as also the respect he had to us therein 1. In the Covenant of Redemption they consider Christ agreeing with his Father the Terms of Satisfaction to Justice and Impetration of Life for Sinners and obliging himself to assume our Nature and therein perfectly to obey the Law die an accursed Death with whatever was equivalent to what by the Covenant of Works our Sins deserved Here they think Christ did not covenant strictly in our stead or as our Proxy tho he covenanted to die in our stead even strictly so He transacted as a free Interposer tho for our Salvation we were no federating Party tho we were the Persons whose Salvation was his promised Reward And therefore we have more reason since we are become his Members to say we intercede in Christ now than to say that we covenanted in Christ then Finally they account his Act of engaging so peculiar to himself that his non-performance of what he engaged which was impossible had not made us more guilty tho it would have left us miserable for our own Sins there being no other way to redeem us 2. They find Christ called a Surety in the Gospel-Covenant made with fallen Man Heb. 7. 22. and no where else This Covenant supposeth the former yea supposeth Christ's having executed his Engagements by the Covenant of Redemption to make Satisfaction to Justice i. e. it was at first accepted as if executed for this Covenant with Man doth not adjust the terms of Redemption but the way of conveying the Effects of that Redemption and is called the Testament of our Lord Jesus whereby he bequeaths the Blessings he acquired by his atoning Death In this Covenant Christ is such a Surety as not only assures us all will be performed which is promised to us on God's part but that undertakes to bring in the Elect and for the Perseverance of Believers unto eternal Life by his exerting that Power and Authority he hath received But here also they apprehend Christ a distinct federating Party A Mediator treating and obliging himself to make the Covenant stand sure and effect the Ends it was designed for but he binds not himself to believe repent or persevere for us but that we shall repent believe and persevere nor doth his Engagement that we should do so prevent our personal Engagement by Covenant to do it our selves tho in his Strength Now our Act of engaging is not his engaging Act but an Effect of it nor is our repenting his repenting Act but the Effect of his engaged Assistance nor is that Assistance of his reckoned to be legally our assisting our selves nor can we say that we covenanted in Christ to bring in the Elect or that Believers shall persevere By which with other Reasons we are induced to think that in covenanting he
without what it confineth its promised Absolution or Benefits to seeing the Lord our Judg doth sentence us as this revealed Rule takes hold of us § 5. I find nothing plainer than that on the one hand we are made righteous by Christ's Obedience Rom. 5. 19. 2 Cor. 5. 21. and accepted in the Beloved Eph. 1. 6 7. and washed from our Sins in his Blood Rev. 1. 5. and we receive the Atonement Rom. 5. 11. And on the other hand that Faith is imputed for Righteousness Rom. 4. 9 11 22 24. and we are justified by Faith Rom. 5. 1. chap. 3. 30. and by our words Mat. 11. 37. and by our Works Iam. 2. 24. and Men are called righteous with respect to their Graces and Actings short of Perfection and that Christ's judicial Proceedings are upon Mens Temper and Behaviour Mat. 22. 25. chap. 10. 32. and Promises of Pardon and Life are made still to Repentance Faith and Perseverance and the Gospel denounceth Death against impenitent Ones Luke 13. 3. Infidels Iob. 3. 36. Disobedient Rom. 2. 8. Barren Heb. 6. 8. Apostates Heb. 10. 38. and Workers of Iniquity Luke 13. 27. Nor can it be overlook'd that Perfection is not intended in what the Gospel-Promise is made to nor is the Gospel threatning of Damnation levell'd against any Offences consistent with Sincerity Hence I conclude that when God justifies a Sinner the Rule by which he judgeth requires a judicial regard to inherent Faith c. § 6. By one Rule of Judgment the same justifying Sentence in all respects could not be pronounced upon Christ's Righteousness and upon that of a believing Sinner unless that one Rule did either 1. Originally promise Life to perfect Legal Obedience and also to that which was not a perfect Obedience to the Law But if I suppose this I must admit that the Law did not denounce Death for the least Sin for to condemn to Death for the least Sin and to promise Life to imperfect Obedience consist not yea I must then consider God to enact that Rule of Judgment as in his first relation to innocent Man viz. as Creator governing by virtue of his absolute Propriety in Man as his Creature But if God be considered only in that relation it was inconsistent with his Perfections to enact a Rule of Judgment which promised Life to any thing short of perfect Obedience to the Law he delivered and which Man was originally capable to obey And moreover we find in the Rule of Judgment by which he now justifies Men a direct respect to many things which that first Law was inconsistent with as the Death of a Redeemer for our Sin Faith in this Redeemer Pardon of Sin and Absolution from the Curse which condemned us as Sinners c. 2. Or unless that one Rule of Judgment were the Gospel-Promise of the Redeemer viz. He that believeth shall be saved Hereby indeed the justifying Sentence would directly pass upon Man as a Believer and adjudg him to a right in whatever the Gospel promised to Believers qua such And considering the chief design of the Gospel is to induce fallen Sinners to believe upon a supposition and assurance given that Satisfaction is already made by our Redeemer and not now to be made or adjusted Many are apt to confine their thoughts of Justification to this as the alone Rule of Judgment and the account of the final Judgment generally states it in this manner nor can I deny but this is in some respects a safe as well as easy method But I cannot agree that the justifying Sentence is by this Rule so abstractedly taken For 1. This would too much confine the Influence of Christ's Merits to the mere procuring of the Gospel-Promise whereas we find it more immediately and fully connected with Pardon and all other saving Benefits 2. We must be made righteous by Christ's Obedience in some way less remote than this 3. The Satisfaction of Christ is not hereby sufficiently acknowledged nor applied in our Justification Many other Reasons might be given why I am convinced that when God ustifies a believing Sinner the Sentence respects him under some further judicial Consideration than merely a Believer and consequently the Rule of Judgment extensively taken required somewhat more to constitute him a justifiable Person § 7. I therefore take the Rule of Judgment to be the Gospel-Law in a subordinated Connexion with the Law of Mediation wherein the Honour of our Creator governing us by the Law of Works is provided for and the Ends of that Law fulfilled and so the Sentence will respect the imputed Righteousness of Christ and the Righteousness of Faith too the first as satisfactory and meritorious with our injured creating Lawgiver the latter as the performed Condition of the Redeemer's Grant of the blessed Effects of Christ's Satisfaction and Merits and whereby this Man who believes is discriminated from such who rejected the Offer of Salvation In the first Justice is satisfied that a Rebel should be absolved and glorified in the last the Rule enacted by governing Grace is answered by the Believer so that the Judg is no more a Respecter of Persons in applying these Benefits as Redeemer than he was regardless of governing Justice in the Condition upon which they were procured by our Saviour § 8. The Rule of Iudgment then must be this That the Believer tho a Sinner whose Absolution Pardon Acceptance as righteous and Salvation were promised to Christ by the governing Creator in reward of his Obedience and Sufferings and promised to himself for the sake of Christ in the Gospel upon his believing with that Faith which it appoints is to be absolved pardoned accepted as righteous and saved From this Rule of Judgment is easily inferr'd that justifying Sentence on which our State is changed viz. Thou art that true Believer whose Absolution Pardon Acceptance as righteous and Salvation were promised to Christ in the Covenant of Redemption and to thy self personally in my Gospel and therefore thou art adjudged absolved pardoned accepted and an Heir of Glory by virtue of that Promise made to Christ and the Gospel-Promise made to thy self and hast a Title to plead Christ's perfect Obedience and Sufferings for thy certain enjoyment thereof which will also be continually pleaded by Christ thy Advocate In like manner we see Constitutive Justification is our being made such Believers through the Influence of the Spirit of Christ as fall under the foresaid Promise made to Christ in the Covenant of Redemption and the Gospel-Promise made to our selves and so are conformed to the Rule of Judgment but yet considered as not judicially sentenced according to it Again Passive Iustification is no other than our Persons and State considered as affected by that Sentence as already past upon us viz. absolved pardoned accepted as righteous and intitled to Glory Finally Executive Iustification is no other than God's dealing with us as Persons so absolved pardoned accepted and entitled to Glory and his performing