procuring it And in that sense we acknowledge That the death of Christ was a declaration of Gods will and decree to pardon but not meerly as it gave testimony to the truth of his Doctrine for in that sense the blood of the Apostles and Martyrs might be said to purge us from sin as well as the blood of Christ but because it was the consideration upon which God had decreed to pardon And so as the acceptance of the condition required or the price paid may be â—aid to declare or manifest the intention of a person to release or deliver a Captive So Gods acceptance of what Christ did suffer for our sakes may be said to declare his readiness to pardon us upon his account But then this declaration doth not belong properly to the act of Christ in suffering but to the act of God in accepting and it can be no other ways known than Gods acceptance is known which was not by the Sufferings but by the Resurrection of Christ. And therefâ—re the declaring Gods will and decree to pardon doth properly belong to that and if that had been all which the Scripture had meant by purging of sin by the blood of Christ it had been very incongruously applied to that but most properly to his Resurrection But these phrases being never attributed to that which most properly might be said to declare the will of God and being peculiarly attributed to the death of Christ which cannot be said properly to do it nothing can be more plain than that these expressions ought to be taken in that which is confessed to be their proper sense viz. That Expiation of sin which doth belong to the death of Christ as a Sacrifice for the sins of the world But yet Socinus and Crellius have another subterfuge For therein lies their great art in seeking rather by any means to escape their enemies than to overcome them For being sensible that the main scope and design of the Scripture is against them they seldom and but very weakly assault but shew all their subtilty in avoiding by all imaginable arts the force of what is brought against them And the Scripture being so plain in attributing such great effects to the death of Christ when no other answer will serve turn then they tell us That the death of Christ is taken Metonymically for all the consequents of his death viz. His Resurrection Exaltation and the Power and Authority which he hath at the right hand of his Father But how is it possible to convince those who by death can understand life by sufferings can mean glory and by the shedding of blood sitting at the right hand of God And that the Scripture is very far from giving any countenance to these bold Interpretations will appear by these considerations 1. because the effect of Expiation of our sins is attributed to the death of Christ as distinct from his Resurrection viz. Our reconciliation with God Rom. 5. 10. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life To which Crellius answers That the Apostle doth not speak of the death of Christ alone or as it is considered distinct from the consequences of it but only that our Reconciliation was effected by the death of Christ intervening But nothing can be more evident to any one who considers the design of the Apostles discourse than that he speaks of what was peculiar to the death of Christ for therefore it is said that Christ dyed for the ungodly For scarcely for a righteous man will one dye but God commâ—ndeth his love towards us in that while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us Much more then being now justified by his blood we shall be saved through him upon which those words follow For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son c. The Reconciliation here mentioned is attributed to the death of Christ in the same sense that it is mentioned before but there it is not mentioned as a bare condition intervening in order to something farther but as the great instance of the love both of God and Christ of God in sending his Son of Christ in laying down his life for sinners in order to their being justified by his blood But where is it that St. Paul saith that the death of Christ had no other influence on the expiation of our sins but as a bare condition intervening in order to that power and authority whereby he should expiate sins what makes him attribute so much to the death of Christ if all the benefits we enjoy depend upon the consequences of it and no otherwise upon that than meerly as a preparation for it what peculiar emphasis were there in Christs dying for sinners and for the ungodly unless his death had a particular relation to the expiation of their sins Why are men said to be justified by his blood and not much rather by his glorious Resurrection if the blood of Christ be only considered as antecedent to the other And that would have been the great demonstration of the love of God which had the most immediate influence upon our advantage which could not have been the death in this sense but the life and glory of Christ. But nothing can be more absurd than what Crellius would have to be the meaning of this place viz. that the Apostle doth not speak of the proper force of the death of Christ distinct from his life but that two things are opposed to each other for the effecting of one of which the death of Christ did intervene but it should not intervene for the other viz. it did intervene for our reconciliation but it should not for our life For did not the death of Christ equally intervene for our life as for our reconciliation was not our eternal deliverance the great thing designed by Christ and our reconciliation in order to that end what opposition then can be imagined that it should be necessary for the death of Christ to intervene in order to the one than in order to the other But he means that the death of Christ should not intervene anymore what need that when it is acknowledged by themselves that Christ dyed only for this end before that he might have power to bestow eternal life on them that obey him But the main force of the Apostles argument lies in the comparison between the death of Christ having respect to us as enemies in order to reconciliation and the life of Christ to us considered as reconciled so that if he had so much kindness for enemies to dye for their reconciliation we may much more presume that he now living in Heaven will accomplish the end of that reconciliation in the eternal salvation of them that obey him By which it is apparent that he
speaks of the death of Christ in a notion proper to it self having influence upon our reconciliation and doth not consider it metonymically as comprehending in it the consequents of it 2. Because the expiation of sins is attributed to Christ antecedently to the great consequents of his death viz. his sitting at the right hand of God Heb. 1. 3. When he had by himself purged our sins sate down on the right hand of his Majesty on high Heb. 9. 12. But by his own blood he entred in once into the Holy Place having obtained eternal redemption for us To these places Crellius gives a double answer 1. That indefinite particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being joyned with Verbs of the praeterperfect tense do not always require that the action expressed by them should precede that which is designed in the Verbs to which they are joyned but they have sometimes the force of particles of the present or imperfect tense which sometimes happens in particles of the praeterperfect tense as Matth. 10. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and several other instances produced by him according to which manner of interpretation the sense he puts upon those words Heb. 9. 12. is Christ by the shedding of his blood entred into the Holy of Holies and in so doing he found eternal redemption or the expiation of sins But not to dispute with Crellius concerning the importance of the Aorist being joyned with a Verb of the praeterperfect tense which in all reason and common acceptation doth imply the action past by him who writes the words antecedent to his writing of it as is plain in the instances produced by Crellius but according to his sense of Christs expiation of sin it was yet to come after Christs entrance into Heaven and so it should have been more properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not I say to insist upon that the Apostle manifests that he had a respect to the death of Christ in the obtaining this eternal redemption by his following discourse for v. 14. he compares the blood of Christ in point of efficacy for expiation of sin with the blood of the Legal Sacrifices whereas if the expiation meant by him had been sound by Christs Oblation of himself in Heaven he would have compared Christs entrance into Heaven in order to it with the entrance of the High-Priest into the Holy of Holies and his argument had run thus For if the High-Priest under the Law did expiate sins by entring into the Holy of Holies How much more shall the Son of God entring into Heaven expiate the sins of Mankind but we see the Apostle had no sooner mention'd the redemption obtained for us but he presently speaks of the efficacy of the blood of Christ in order to it and as plainly asserts the same v. 15. And for this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions which were under the first Testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance Why doth the Apostle here speak of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the expiation of sins by the means of death if he had so lately asserted before that the redemption or expiation was found not by his death but by his entrance into Heaven and withal the Apostle here doth not speak of such a kind of expiation as wholly respects the future but of sins that were under the first Testament not barely such as could not be expiated by vertue of it but such as were committed during the time of it although the Levitical Law allowed no expiation for them And to confirm this sense the Apostle doth not go on to prove the necessity of Christs entrance into Heaven but of his dying v. 16 17 18. But granting that he doth allude to the High-Priests entring into the Holy of Holies yet that was but the representation of a Sacrifice already offer'd and he could not be said to find expiation by his entrance but that was already found by the blood of the Sacrifice and his entrance was only to accomplish the end for which the blood was offer'd up in sácrifice And the benefit which came to men is attributed to the Sacrifice and not to the sprinkling of blood before the Mercy-seat and whatever effect was consequent upon his entrance into the Sanctuary was by vertue of the blood which he carried in with him and was before shed at the Altar Neither can it with any reason be said that if the redemption were obtained by the blood of Christ there could be no need of his entrance into Heaven since we do not make the Priesthood of Christ to expire at his death but that he is in Heaven a merciful High-Priest in negotiating the affairs of his People with God and there ever lives to make intercession for them Crellius answers That granting the Aorist being put before the Ver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should imply such an action which was antecedent to Christs sitting at the right hand of God yet it is not there said that the expiation of sins was made before Christs entrance into Heaven for those saith he are to be considered as two different things for a Prince first enters into his Palace before he sits upon his throne And therefore saith he Christ may be said to have made expiation of sins before he sate down at the right hand of his Father not that it was done by his death but by his entrance into Heaven and offering himself to God there by which means he obtained his sitting on the right hand of the Majesty on high and thereby the full Power of remission of sins and giving eternal life To which I answer 1. That the Sripture never makes such a distinction between Christs entrance into Heaven and sitting at the right hand of God which latter implying no more but the glorious state of Christ in Heaven his entrance into Heaven doth imply it For therefore God exalted him to be a Prince and a Saviour and the reason of the power and authority given him in Heaven is no where attributed to his entrance into it as the means of it but our Saviour before that tells us that all power and authority was committed to him and his very entrance into Heaven was a part of his glory and given him in consideration of his sufferings as the Apostle plainly asserts and he became obedient to death even the death of the Cross wherefore God hath highly exalted him c. There can be then no imaginable reason to make the entrance of Christ into Heaven and presenting himself to God there a condition or means of obtaining that power and authority which is implyed in his sitting at the right hand of God 2. Supposing we should look on these as distinct there is
shewing his power in working miraculous Cures and his humility in concealing them Conversing with the meanest of the people and choosing such for his Apostles who brought nothing to recommend them but innocency and simplicity Who by their heats and ignorance were continual exercises of his Patience in bearing with them and of his care and tenderness in instructing them And after a life thus led with such unparallel'd humility when he could add nothing more to it by his actions he doth it by his sufferings and compleats the sad Tragedy of his Life by a most shameful and ignominious Death This is the short and true account of all those things which the admirers of the greatness of this world think mean and contemptible in our Saviours appearance here on earth But we are now to consider whether so great humility were not not more agreeable with the design of his coming into the World than all that pomp and state would have been which the Son of God might have more easily commanded than we can imagine He came not upon so mean an errand as to dazle the eyes of Mankind with the brightness of his Glory to amaze them by the terribleness of his Majesty much less to make a shew of the riches and gallantry of the World to them But he came upon far more noble and excellent designs to bring life and immortality to light to give men the highest assurance of an eternal happiness and misery in the World to come and the most certain directions for obtaining the one and avoiding the other and in order to that nothing was judged more necessary by him than to bring the vanities of this World out of that credit and reputation they had gained among foolish men Which he could never have done if he had declaimed never so much against the vanity of worldly greatness riches and honours if in the mean time himself had lived in the greatest splendour and bravery For the enjoyning then the contempt of this world to his Disciples in hopes of a better would have looked like the commendation of the excellency of fasting at a full meal and of the conveniencies of Poverty by one who makes the greatest hast to be rich That he might not therefore seem to offer so great a contradiction to his Doctrine by his own example he makes choice of a life so remote from all suspicion of designs upon this world that though the foxes had holes and the birds of the air had nests yet the Son of Man who was the Lord and Heir of all things had not whereon to lay his head And as he shewed by his life how little he valued the great things of the World so he discovered by his death how little he feared the evil things of it all which he did with a purpose and intention to rectifie the great mistakes of men as to these things That they might no longer venture an eternal happiness for the splendid and glorious vanities of this present life nor expose themselves to the utmost miseries of another world to avoid the frowns of this From hence proceeded that generous contempt of the World which not only our Saviour himself but all his true Disciples of the first Ages of Christianity were so remarkable for to let others see they had greater things in their eye than any here the hopes of which they would not part with for all that this world thinks great or desirable So that considering the great danger most men are in by too passionate a love of theâ—e things and that universal and infinite kindness which our Saviour had to the Souls of men there was nothing he could discover it more in as to his appearance in the world than by putting such an affront upon the greatness and honour of it as he did by so open a neglect of it in his life and despising it in his death and sufferings And who now upon any pretence of reason dare entertain the meaner apprehensions of our Blessed Saviour because he appeared without the pomp and greatness of the world when the reason of his doing so was that by his own humility and self-denyal he might shew us the way to an eternal happiness Which he well knew how very hard it would be for men to attain to who measure things not according to their inward worth and excellency but the splendour and appearance which they make to the world who think nothing great but what makes them gazed upon nothing desireable but what makes them flattered But if they could be once perswaded how incomparably valuable the glories of the life to come are above all the gayeties and shews of this they would think no condition mean or contemptible which led to so great an end none happy or honourable which must so soon end in the grave or be changed to eternal misery And that we might entertain such thoughts as these are not as the melancholy effects of discontent and disappointments but as the serious result of our most deliberate enquiry into the value of things was the design of our Saviour in the humility of his appearance and of that excellent Doctrine which he recommended to the World by it Were I to argue the case with Philosophers I might then at large shew from the free acknowledgements of the best and most experienced of them that nothing becomes so much one who designs to recommend Vertue to the World as a real and hearty contempt of all the pomp of it and that the meanest condition proceeding from such a principle is truly and in it self more honourable than living in the greatest splendour imaginable Were I to deal with the Iews I might then prove that as the Prophecies concerning the Messias speak of great and wonderful effects of his coming so that they should be accomplished in a way of suffering and humility But since I speak to Christians and and therefore to those who are perswaded of the great kindness and love of our Saviour in coming into the World to reform it and that by convincing men of the truth and excellency of a future state no more need be said to vindicate the appearance of him from that meanness and contempt which the pride and ambition of vain men is apt to cast upon it 2. But not only our Saviours manner of Appearance but the manner of his Conversation gave great offence to his enemies viz. That it was too free and familiar among persons who had the meanest reputation the Publicans and Sinners and in the mean time declaimed against the strictest observers of the greatest rigours and austerities of life And this no doubt was one great cause of the mortal hatred of the Pharisees against him though least pretended that even thereby they might make good that charge of hypocrisie which our Saviour so often draws up against them And no wonder if such severe rebukes did highly provoke them since
the preservation of civil Societies as this doth yet all this it doth by way of subordination to the great end of it which is the promoting mens eternal happiness And the more we consider the vast consequence and importance of this end to mankind the greater reason we shall find that St. Paul had why he should not be ashamed of the Gospel of Christ. For can we imagine any end more noble that any doctrine can aim at than this Supposing the common principles of all Religion to be true viz. the Being of God and Immortality of our Souls there can be nothing more becoming that God to discover or those Souls to be imployed about than the way to a blessed immortality And if we admire those discourses of the Heathen Philosophers wherein they speak more darkly and obscurely concerning those things what admiration doth the Gospel deserve which hath brought life and immortality to light If we commend the vertuous Heathens who according to those short and obscure notices which they had of God and themselves sought to make the world any thing the better for their being in it what infinitely greater esteem do those blessed Apostles deserve who accounted not their own lives dear to them that they might make even their enemies happy If those mens memories be dear to us who sacrifice their lives and fortunes for the sake of the Country they belong to shall not those be much more so who have done it for the good of the whole world Such who chearfully suffered death while they were teaching men the way to an eternal life and who patiently endured the flames if they might but give the greater light to the world by them Such who did as far out-go any of the admired Heroes of the Heathens as the purging the World from sin is of greater consequence than cleansing an Augaean Stable from the filth of it and rescuing men from eternal flames is a more noble design than clearing a Country from Pyrats and Robbers Nay most of the Heathen Gods who were so solemnâ—y worshipped in Greece and at Rome owed their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to such flenâ—er benefits to mankind that sure the world was very barbarous or hugely grateful when they could think them no less than Gods who found out such things for men If a Smiths forge and a Womans distaffe if teaching men the noble arts of fighting and cheating one another were such rare inventions that they only became some of the most celebrated Deities which the grave and demure Romans thought fit to worship sure St. Paul had no cause to be ashamed of his Religion among them who had so much reason to be ashamed of their own since his design was to perswade them out of all the vanities and fooleries of their Idolatrous Worship and to bring them to the service of the true and ever living God who had discovered so much goodness to the world in making his Son a propitiation for the sins of it And was not this a discovery infinitely greater and more suitable to the nature of God than any which the subtilty of the Greeks or wisdom of the Romans could ever pretend to concerning any of their Deities Thus we see the ex cellent end of our Religion was that which made St. Paul so far from being ashamed of it and so it would do all us too if we did understand and value it as St. Paul did But it is the great dishonour of too many among us that they are more ashamed of their Religion than they are of their sins If to talk boldly against Heaven to affront God in calling him to witness their great impieties by frequent oaths to sin bravely and with the highest confidence to mock at such who are yet moâ—e modest in their debaucheries were not to be ashamed of the Gospel of Christ we might find St. Pauls enough in the Age we live in and it would be a piece of gallantry to be Apostles But this is rather the utmost endeavour to put Religion out of countenance and make the Gospel it self blush and be ashamed that ever such boldfaced impieties should be committed by men under the profession of it as though they believed nothing so damnable as Repentance and a Holy life and no sin so unpardonable as Modesty in committing it But to use St. Pauls language when he had been describing such persons himself Hob. 6. 9. We are perswaded better things of you and things that accompany that salvation the Gospel was designed for though we thus speak For certainly nothing can argue a greater meanness of spirit than while wicked and profane persons are not ashamed of that which unavoidably tends to their ruine any should be shy of the profession and practice of that which conduces to their eternal happiness What is become of all that magnanimity and generous spirit which the Primitve Christians were so remarkable for if while some are impudent in sinning others are ashamed of being or doing good If we have that value for our immortal souls and a future life which we ought to have we shall not trouble our selves much with the Atheistical scoffs and drollery of profane persons who while they deride and despise Religion do but laugh themselves into eternal misery And thus much for the first ground of St. Pauls confidence viz. The excellent end the Gospel was designed for 2. The effectualness of it in order to that end It is the power of God to salvation Wherein two things are implyed 1. The inefficacy of any other doctrine for that end 2. The effectualness of the Gospel in order to it 1 The inefficacy of any other Doctrine for this end of promoting the eternal salvation of Mankind If the world had been acquainted with any doctrine before which had been sufficient for the purposes the Gospel was designed for there would have been no such necessity of propagating it among men nor had there been reason enough to have justified the Apostles in exposing themselves to so great hazards for the preaching of it If the notion of an eternal God and Providence without the knowledge of a Saviour had been sufficient to reform the World and make men happy it had not been consistent with the wisdom or goodness of God to have imploy'd so many persons with the loss of their lives to declare the Doctrine of Christ to the World So that if Christianity be true it must be thought necessary to salvation for the necessity of it was declared by those who were the instruments of confirming the truth of it I meddle not with the case of those particular persons who had no means or opportunity to know Gods revealed will and yet from the Principles of Natural Religion did reform their lives in hopes of a future felicity if any such there were but whether there were not a necessity of such a Doctrine as the Gospel is to be discover'd to
hearty and sincere obedience to his will declared by his Son so that all those who perform that though they live not in the nice observance of the Law of Moses shall not need to fear the penalty of their sins in another life Which is the second thing he designs to prove viz. That those who obeyed the Gospel whether Iew or Greek were equally capable of salvation by it For saith he is God the God of the Iews only is he not also of the Gentiles Tes of the Gentiles also because both Iew and Gentile were to be justified upon the same terms as he proves afterwards So that Gods justifying of us by the Gospel is the solemn declaration of himself upon what terms he will pardon the sins of men that is deliver them from the penalties they have deserved by them For the actual discharge of the person is reserved to the great day all the justification we have here is only declarative from God but so as to give a right to us by vertue whereof we are assured that God will not only not exercise his utmost rigour but shew all favour and kindness to those who by belief of the Gospel do repent and obey God doth now remit sin as he forbears to punish it he remits the sinner as he he assures him by the death of Christ he will not punish upon his repentance but he fully remits both when he delivers the person upon the tryal of the great day from all the penalties which he hath deserved by his sins So that our compleat justification and salvation go both upon the same terms and the same Faith which is sufficient for one must be sufficient for the other also What care then ought men to take lest by mis-understanding the notion of Believing so much spoken of as the condition of our salvation they live in a neglect of that holy obedience which the Gospel requires and so believe themselves into eternal misery But as long as men make their obedience necessary though but as the fruit and effect of Faith it shall not want its reward for those whose hearts are purified by Faith shall never be condemned for mistaking the notion of it and they who live as those that are to be judged according to their works shall not miss their reward though they do not think they shall receive it for them But such who make no other condition of the Gospel but Believing and will scarce allow that to be called a Condition ought to have a great care to keep their hearts sounder than their heads for their only security will lye in this that they are good though they see no necessity of being so And such of all others I grant have reason to acknowledge the irresistable power of Divine Grace which enables them to obey the will of God against the dictates of their own judgements But thanks be to God who hath so abundantly provided for all the infirmities of humane Nature by the large offers of his Grace and assistance of his Spirit that though we meet with so much opposition without and so much weakness within and so many discouragements on every side of us yet if we sincerely apply our selves to do the will of God we have as great assurance as may be that we shall be kept by the power of God through Faith unto Salvation SERMON V. Preached at WHITE HALL HEBREWS II. III. How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation WHen the wise and eternal Counsels of Heaven concerning the salvation of Mankind by the death of the Son of God were first declared to the World by his own appearance and preaching in it nothing could be more reasonably expected than that the dignity of his Person the authority of his Doctrine and the excellency of his Life should have perswaded those whom he appeared among to such an admiration of his Person and belief of his Doctrine as might have led them to an imitation of him in the holiness of his life and conversation For if either the worth of the Person or the Importance of the Message might prevail any thing towards a kind and honourable reception among men there was never any person appeared in any degree comparable to him never any Message declared which might challenge so welcome an entertainment from men as that was which he came upon If to give Mankind the highest assurance of a state of life and immortality if to offer the pardon of sin and reconciliation with God upon the most easie and reasonable terms if to purge the degenerate World from all its impurities by a Doctrine as holy as the Author of it were things as becoming the Son of God to reveal as the Sons of men to receive nothing can be more unaccountable than that his person should be dispised his Authority slighted and his Doctrine contemned And that by those whose interest was more concerned in the consequence of these things than himself could be in all the affronts and injuries he underwent from men For the more the indignities the greater the shame the sharper the sufferings which he did undergo the higher was the honour and glory which he was advanced to but the more obliging the instances of his kindness were the greater the salvation that was tendered by him the more prevailing the motives were for the entertainment of his Doctrine the more exemplary and severe will the punishment be of all those who reject it For it is very agreeable to those eternal Laws of Justice by which God governs the world that the punishment should arise pro portionably to the greatness of the mercies despised and therefore although the Scripture be very sparing in telling us what the state of those persons shall be in another life who never heard of the Gospel yet for those who do and despise it it tells us plainly that an eternal misery is the just desert of those to whom an eternal happiness was offered and yet neglected by them And we are the rather told of it that men may not think it a surprize in the life to come or that if they had known the danger they would have escaped it and therefore our Blessed Saviour who never mentioned punishment but with a design to keep men from it declares it frequently that the punishment of those persons and places would be most intolerable who have received but not improved the light of the Gospel and that it would be more tolerable for the persons who had offered violence to Nature and had Hell-fire burning in their hearts by their horrid impurities than for those who heard the Doctrine and saw the Miracles of Christ and were much the worse rather than any thing the better for it But lest we should think that all this black scene of misery was only designed for those who were the Actors in that doleful Tragedy of our
though upon different grounds agree in the neglect of their own salvation But is the case of such men grown so desperate that noremedy can work upon them hath the love of sin and the world so far intoxicated them that no reason or consideration whatever can awaken them have they hardned themselves against all the power of divine Truths with a resolution as strong as death and as cruel as the grave whither they are going Will neither the love of happiness nor the fear of misery their own interest and the wisdom of avoiding so great a danger the dread of the Majesty and Power of God and the horror of the great day prevail at least so far on men to consider whether these things be true or no and if they be what unspeakable solly it is to neglect them And the better to make that appear I shall prove these following things 1. That God by the Gospel hath taken so great care of mens happiness that nothing but a gross neglect can make them miserable 2. That nothing can be more unreasonable than when God hath taken so much care of it men should neglect it themselves 3. That it is very just for God to vindicate himself against so gross a neglect by the severe punishments of the life to come 1. That God by the Gospel hath taken so great care of mens salvation that nothing but a gross neglect can make them miserable For whatever the mind of man can imagine necessary in order to its own happiness in its present fallen and degenerate condition is abundantly provided for by the Gospel of Christ. For man was so wholly lost as to his own felicity that among the ruins and decays of his Nature he could not pick up so much as the perfect image and Idea of his own happiness when he reflects upon himself he finds himself such a consused mass of folly and weakness that he can never imagine that so noble a design should have its ground-work laid upon so course a Being And rather than believe the foundation of his happiness to be within himself there is nothing so vain and trifling without him but he is ready to fall down before it and cry out Here I place my selicity Sometimes he admires the brave shews and the Pomp and Gallantry of the World and thinks nothing comparable to a glorious out-side and a great train of attendants sometimes he raises himself and flutters upon the wings of a popular Air till a cross blast comes and leaves him in the common rout sometimes his eyes are dazled with the glory of the more refined and solid pieces of that Earth out of which he was framed and thinks it reasonable that the softness of flesh and blood should yield to the impressions of silver and gold sometimes he even envies the pleasures of the Brutes and if it were possible would outdo them in their grossest sensualities sometimes again he slatters himself and then adores his own imperfections and thinks his Passions Honour and his Profaneness Wit So far is vain man from making himself happy that the first step to it is to make him understand what it is to be so But supposing that the true image of his happiness should drop down from Heaven and by the place from whence it fell should conclude where the thing it self is to be found yet this were only to make him more miserable unless he withal knew how to come thither He is sure not to climb up to it by the tops of the highest mountains nor to be carried thither upon the wings of a mighty wind he hath no fiery Chariots at his command to ascend with to the Glories above but only he that maketh his Angels Spirits and his Ministers a flame of fire is able to preserve the souls of men from vanishing into the soft air and to conduct them to the Mansions of eternal Bliss It is he only that can make them capable of the Joys of another life by purging them from the stains and the pollutions of this And therefore without his grace and favour ever to hope for the happiness of Heaven must be by fancying a Heaven to be there where there is no God So that it is necessary that the Proposals of this salvation must come from the Author of it and that with such arguments as may perswade men of the truth of it and with such motives as may encourage men to accept of them Now the Gospel of Christ affords us all these things which are necessary to our happiness there we have the most agreeable and setled notion and Idea of it the most large and free offers of divine goodness in order to it the greatest assurance that these things did immediately proceed from God and the most encouraging motives to accept of these offers in order to that great salvation which is tendred to us 1. We have the most agreeable and setled notion of true happiness not such a mean and uncertain thing which lies at the mercy of the continual vicissitudes and contingencies of this present state but that which is able to bear up the mind of man against all the troubles of this life and to carry him to a Region beyond them all where there is a fulness of joy without an allay of sadness after it and ever-flowing rivers of pleasures that need no dams to make them rise higher nor falls to make their motion perceived Our Blessed Saviour never flatters his followers with the expectation of a felicity in this life Contentment is the most he hath promised them and that they may enjoy if they follow his directions let this world be what it will and do what it pleases with them He never tells his Disciples they may have satisfaction here if they lie upon their beds of down with their heads full of tormenting cares that the pleasure of humane life lies in the gratifications of the senses and in making what use they can of the world he never deceives them with the promise of so poor a happiness as that which depends upon health friends prosperity and having our own wills No but he tells them of a more noble and generous felicity that will preserve its own state and grandeur in spight of the world a happiness consistent with loss of Estate loss of Friends with affronts and injuries with persecutions and death it self For when our Saviour begins to discourse of happiness what another kind of strain doth he speak of it in than any of those Philosophers who have so much obstructed the happiness of mans life by their voluminous writings and contentions about it Here we meet with no Epicurean softness which the sense of true Vertue carried the minds of the more noble Heathens above no rigid and incredible Stoical Paradoxes that make men only happy by the change of names no Aristotelean supposition of a prosperous life for Vertue to shew its power
laid on him the iniquities of us all that through the eternal Spirit he offer'd himself without spot to God and did appear to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself that he was made a propitiation for our sins that he laid down his life as a price of Redemption for Mankind that through his blood we obtain Redemption even the forgiveness of sins which in a more particular manner is attributed to the blood of Christ as the procuring cause of it That he dyed to reconcile God and us together and that the Ministery of Reconciliation is founded on Gods making him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him and that we may not think that all this Reconciliation respects us and not God he is said to offer up himself to God and for this cause to be a Mediator of the New Testament and to be a faithful high-Priest in things pertaining to God to make reconciliation for the sins of the people and every high-Priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God not appointed by God in things meerly tending to the good of men which is rather the Office of a Prophet than a Priest So that from all these places it may easily appear that the blood of Christ is to be looked on as a sacrifice of Atonement for the sins of the World Not as though Christ did suffer the very same which we should have suffer'd for that was eternal death as the consequent of guilt in the person of the Offender and then the discharge must have been immediately consequent upon the payment and no room had been left for the freeness of remission or for the conditions required on our parts But that God was pleased to accept of the death of his Son as a full perfect sufficient sacrifice oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the World as our Church expresseth it and in consideration of the sufferings of his Son is pleased to offer pardon of sin upon sincere repentance and eternal life upon a â—…y obedience to his will Thus much for the things we are to consider concerning the contradiction of sinners which Christ endured against himself Nothing now remains but the influence that ought to have upon us lest we be weary and faint in our minds For which end I shall suggest two things 1. The vast disproportion between Christs sufferings and ours 2. The great encouragement we have from his sufferings to bear our own the better 1. The vast Disproportion between Christs sufferings and our own Our lot is fallen into suffering times and we are apt enough to complain of it I will not say it is wholly true of us what the Moralist saith generally of the complaints of men Non quia dura sed quia molles patimur that it is not the hardness of our conditions so much as the softness of our spirits which makes us complain of them For I must needs say this City hath smarted by such a series and succession of judgements which few Cities in the world could parallel in so short a time The Plague hath emptied its houses and the fire consumed them the War exhausted our spirits and it were well if Peace recovered them But still these are but the common calamities of humane nature things that we ought to make account of in the World and to grow the better by them And it were happy for this City if our thankfulness and obedience were but answerable to the mercies we yet enjoy let us not make our condition worse by our fears nor our fears greater than they need to be for no enemy can be so bad as they Thanks be to God our condition is much better at present than it hath been let us not make it worse by fearing it may be so Complaints will never end till the World does and we may imagine that will not last much longer when the City thinks it hath trade enough and the Country riches enough But I will not go about to perswade you that your condition is better than it is for I know it is to no purpose to do so all men will believe as they feel But suppose our condition were much worse than it is yet what were all our sufferings compared with those of our Saviour for us the sins that make us smart wounded him much deeper they pierced his side which only touch our skin we have no cause to complain of the bitterness of that Cup which he hath drunk off the dreggs of already We lament over the ruins of a City and are revived with any hopes of seeing it rise out of the dust but Christ saw the ruins that sin caused in all mankind he undertook the repairing them and putting men into a better condition than before And we may easily think what a difficult task he had of it when he came to restore them who were delighted in their ruins and thought themselves too good to be mended It is the comfort of our miseries if they be only in this life that we know they cannot last long but that is the great aggravation of our Saviours sufferings that the contradiction of sinners continues against him still Witness the Atheism I cannot so properly call it as the Antichristianism of this present Age wherein so many profane persons act over again the part of the Scribes and Pharisees they slight his Doctrine despise his Person disparage his miracles contemn his Precepts and undervalue his Sufferings Men live as if it were in defiance to his holy Laws as though they feared not what God can do so much as to need a Mediator between him and them If ever men tread under foot the Son of God it is when they think themselves to be above the need of him if ever they count the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing it is not only when they do not value it as they ought but when they exercise their profane wits upon it Blessed Saviour was it not enough for thee to bear the contradiction of sinners upon Earth but thou must still suffer so much at the hands of those whom thou dyedst for that thou mightest bring them to Heaven was it not enough for thee to be betrayed on Earth but thou must be defied in Heaven Was it not enough for thee to stoop so low for our sakes but that thou shouldest be trampled on because thou didst it was the ignominious death upon the Cross too small a thing for thee to suffer in thy Person unless thy Religion be contemned and exposed to as much shame and mockery as thy self was Unhappy we that live to hear of such things but much more unhappy if any of our sins have been the occasion of them If our unsuitable lives to the Gospel have open'd the mouths of any against so
suspicion of it yet in the morning the door was open and they fast asleep For as the Orator saith no man can imagine that those who had broken all the Laws of God and nature by so great an act of wickedness could presently sleep upon it for they who do such things can neither rest withoutcare nor breath without fear We are not to believe saith he the fables of the Poets as though wicked men were haunted and terrified with the burning torches of the furies but every mans wickedness is the greatest terrour to himself and the evil thoughts which pursue wicked men are their constant and domestick furies It would be endless to repeat what force the more civil Heathens have given to conscience either way as to the peace which follows innocency and the disquiet which follows guilt Which they looked on as the great thing which governed the world quâ sublatâ jacent omnia as the orator speaks without which all things would be in great disorder for these punishments they are sure not to escape though they may do others and these they thought so great and weighty that upon this ground they vindicated divine providence as to the seeming prosperity of wicked men thinking it the most unreasonable thing in the world to call those persons happy who suffered under the severe lashes of their own consciences If there were such a force in the consciences of those who had nothing but the light of nature to direct them how much greater weight must there be when the terrours of the Lord are made known by himself and the wrath of God revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness of men I know that wicked men in the height of their debaucheries pretend to be above these things and are ready to laugh at them as the effects of a strong spleen and a weak brain but I appeal to their most sober thoughts when the steams of wine are evaporated and the intoxication of evil company is removed from them when in the deep and silent night they revolve in their minds the actions of the foregoing day what satisfaction they then take in all the sinful pleasures they have pursued so eagerly but especially when either their lusts have consumed their bodies or the vengeance of God hath overtaken them when death begins to seize upon their vitals and themselves not wholly stupified through the power of their sins or their disease let then if it were possible any represent the fears the horrour and astonishment which the consciences of wicked men labour under in remembrance of their evil actions How mean and poor would they leave themselves if with all their honours and riches they could purchase to themselves a reprieve from death and from the miseries which follow after it what would they then give for the comfort of a good conscience and the fruit of a holy righteous and sober life with what another sense of Religion do men whose minds are awakened speak then in comparison of what they did in the days of their mirth and jollity Neither is this to take them at the greatest disadvantage as some of them have been ready to say for I suppose their minds as clear then as at any time and so much the clearer because freed from the impediments of such freedom of their thoughts at another time for the same thoughts would have possessed them before only the pleasures and the hopes of life diverted their minds from them but now the nearness of the things they feared and the weight and consequence of them make them more diligently examine and impartially consider them But that demonstrates the great misery of a sinners State that what cures the other greatest troubles of our life doth the most increase his which is the exercise of reason and consideration that allays the power of griefs that easeth the mind of vain fears that prevents many troubles and cures others that governs other passions and keeps them in their due bounds but this is it which of all things doth the most increase the trouble of a wicked mans mind for the more he considers the worse he finds his condition and while he finds his condition so bad he can never enjoy any peace in his mind 2. The violence of his passions those a wicked man hath lost the command of or else he could never be a wicked man and whosoever is under the power of any unruly passion forseits all his peace by it For what peace can ever be expected in such a State of violence and usurpation where the calm government of reason is cast off as an unnecessary burden and every passion under the pretence of liberty sets up for an arbitrary power Nay what confusion and disorder must needs follow where the powers of the mind which ought to keep all in order are themselves in subjection to their own slaves and none ever govern so ill as those which ought to obey How serene and quiet is the mind of a man where the superiour faculties preserve their just authority How composed is his temper how moderate his desires how well governed his fears But where once that authority is lost how extravagant is the rage of men how unruly their lusts how predominant their fears What peace had Xerxes in his mind when in stead of conquering his foolish passion he challenged mount Athos into the field and no doubt would have run fast enough if he had seen it moving What pleasure was it to see that mighty Monarch whip the Sea in a rage as though the waves had been under his discipline and would run the faster for the fear of his rod What harm had the hair of his head done to that man who pulled it off with the violence of his passion as though as the Philosopher told him baldness would asswage his grief Was ever Varus the nearer to restoring his Legions for Augustus knocking his head against the wall in a rage about the loss of them What injury did Neptune suffer when he displaced his image in the Circenstan games because he had an ill Voyage at Sea What height of madness and folly did that modern Prince's rage betray him to who as the French Mora list saith having received a blow from heaven sware to be revenged on Almighty God and for 10. years space forbid all publick exercise of devotion towards him I instance in these things to let us see there is nothing so ridiculous nothing so absurd nothing so irreligious but a violent passion may betray men to And if such things ever break forth into actions what may we conceive the inward disturbance is where the outward shew which usually dissembles the inward passion betrayed so much rage and disorder for where such flames break out what combustion may we conceive within But it is not only this kind of passion which is so great an enemy to the peace of
men as any thing else is But here men think they may justly plead with God and talk with him of his judgements what proportion say they is there between the sins of this short life and the eternal misery of another which objection is not so great in it self as it appears to be by the weak answers which have been made to it When to assign a proportion they have made a strange kind of infinity in sin either from the object which unavoidably makes all sins equal or from the wish of a sinner that he might have an eternity to sin in which is to make the justice of Gods punishments to be not according to their works but to their wishes But we need not strain things so much beyond what they will bear to vindicate Gods justice in this matter Is it not thought just and reasonable among men for a man to be confined to perpetual imprisonment for a fault he was not half an hour in committing Nay do not all the Laws of the world make death the punishment of some crimes which may be very suddenly done And what is death but the eternal depriving a man of all the comforts of life And shall a thing then so constantly practised and universally justified in the world be thought unreasonable when it is applyed to God It is true may some say if annihilation were all that was meant by eternal death there could be no exception against it but I ask whether it would be unjust for the Laws of men to take away the lives of offenders in case their souls â—urvive their bodies and they be for ever sensible of the loss of life if not why shall not God preserve the honour of his Laws and vindicate his Authority in governing the world by sentencing obstinate sinners to the greatest misery though their souls live for ever in the apprehension of it Especially since God hath declared these things so evidently before hand and made them part of his Laws and set everlasting life on the other side to ballance everlasting misery and proposed them to a sinners choice in such a manner that nothing but contempt of God and his grace and wilful impenitency can ever betray men into this dreadful State of eternal destruction 2. Thus much for the argument used by the Apostle the terrour of the Lord I now come to the assurance he expresseth of the truth of it Knowing therefore the terrour of the Lord we perswade men We have two ways of proving Articles of faith such as this concerning Christs coming to judgement is 1. By shewing that there is nothing unreasonable in the belief of them 2. That there is sufficient evidence of the truth and certainty of them In the former of these it is of excellent use to produce the common apprehensions of mankind as to a future judgement and the several arguments insisted on to that purpose for if this were an unreasonable thing to believe how come men without revelation to agree about it as a thing very just and reasonable If the conflagration of the world were an impossible thing how came it to be so anciently received by the eldest and wisest Philosophers How came it to be maintained by those two Sects which were St. Paul's enemies when he preached at Athens and always enemies to each other the Epicureans and the Stoicks It is true they made these conflagrations to be periodical and not final but we do not establish the belief of our doctrine upon their assertion but from thence shew that is a most unreasonable thing to reject that as impossible to be done which they assert hath been and may be often done But for the truth and certainty of our doctrine we build that upon no less a foundation than the word of God himself We may think a judgement to come reasonable in general upon the â—…sideration of the goodness and wisdom and justice of God but all that depends upon this supposition that God doth govern the world by Laws and not by Power but since God himself hath declared it who is the Suprem Judge of the world that he will bring every work into judgement whether it be good or evil since the Son of God made this so great a part of his doctrine with all the circumstances of his own coming for again this end since he opened the commission he received from the Father for this purpose when he was upon earth by declaring that the Father had committed all judgement to the Son and that the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth they that have done good to the resurrection of life and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation Since this was so great a part of the Apostles doctrine to preach of this judgement to come and that God hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained whereof he hath given assurance to all men in that he hath raised him from the dead No wonder the Apostle speaks here with so great assurance of it knowing therefore c. And no persons can have the least ground to question it but such who wholly reject the Christian doctrine upon the pretences of infidelity which are so vain and trifling that were not their lusts stronger than their arguments men of wit would be ashamed to produce them and did not mens passions oversway their judgements it would be too much honour to them to confute them But every Sermon is not intended for the conversion of Turks and Infidels my design is to speak to those who acknowledge themselves to be Christians and to believe the truth of this doctrine upon the Authority of those divine persons who were particularly sent by God to reveal it to the world And so I come to the last particular by way of application of the former viz. 3. The efficacy of this argument for the perswading men to a reformation of heart and life knowing the terror of the Lord we perswade men For as another Apostle reasons from the same argument Seeing all these things shall be dissolved what manner of persons ought we to be in all holy conversation and godliness There is great variety of arguments in the Christian Religion to perswade men to holiness but none more sensible and moving to the generality of mankind than this Especially considering these two things 1. That if this argument doth not perswade men there is no reason to expect any other should 2. That the condition of such persons is desperate who cannot by any arguments be perswaded to leave off their sins 1. There is no reason to expect any other argument should perswade men if this of the terror of the Lord do it not If an almighty power cannot awaken us if infinite justice cannot affright us if a
of kindness it must be there fore out of enmity and with a design to destroy him and so our sins cannot be understood as Socinus and Crellius would have them as the meer occasions of Christs death but as the proper impulsive cause of it Whether the following word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken with a respect to sin and so it properly signifies It is required or with a respect to the person and so it may signifie he was oppressed is not a matter of that consequence which we ought to contend about if it be proved that Christs oppression had only a respect to sin as the punishment of it Which will yet further appear from another expression in the same Chapter vers 5. The chastisement of our peace was upon him and by his stripes we are healed In which Grotius saith the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie any kind of affliction but such as hath the nature of punishment either for example or instruction but since the latter cannot be intended in Christ the former must Crellius thinks to escape from this by acknowledging that the sufferings of Christ have some respect to sin but if it be such a respect to sin which makes what Christ underwent a punishment which is only proper in this case it is as much as we contend for This therefore he is loth to abide by and saith that chastisement imports no more than bare affliction without any respect to sin which he thinks to prove from St. Pauls words 2 Cor. 6. 9. We are chastised but not given over to death but how far this is from proving his purpose will easily appear 1. Because those by whom they were said to be chastened did not think they did it without any respect to a fault but they supposed them to be justly punished and this is that we plead for that the chastisement considered with a respect to him that inflicts it doth suppose some fault as the reason of inflicting it 2. This is far from the present purpose for the chastisement there mentioned is oposed to death as chastened but not killed whereas Grotius expresly speaks of such chastisements as include death that these cannot be supposed to be meerly designed for instruction and therefore must be conceived under the notion of punishment The other place Psal. 73. 14. is yet more remote from the business for though the Psalmist accounts himself innocent in respect of the great enormities of others yet he could not account himself so innocent with a respect to God as not to deserve chastisement from him But Crellius offers further to prove that Christs death must be considered as a bare affliction and not as a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or exemplary punishment because in such a punishment the guilty themselves are to be punished and the benefit comes to those who were not guilty but in Christs sufferings it was quite contrary for the innocent was punished and the guilty have the benefit of it and yet he saith if we should grant that Christs sufferings were a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that will not prove that his death was a proper punishment To which I answer That whatever answers to the ends of an exemplary punishment may properly be called so but supposing that Christ suffered the punishment of our sins those sufferings will answer to all the ends of an exemplary punishment For the ends of such a punishment assigned by Crellius himself are That others observing such a punishment may abstain from those sins which have brought it upon the person who suffers Now the question is whether supposing Christ did suffer on the account of our sins these sufferings of his may deter us from the practice of sin or no And therefore in opposition to Crellius I shall prove these two things 1. That supposing Christ suffered for our sins there was a sufficient argument to deter us from the practice of sin 2. Supposing that his sufferings had no respect to our sins they could not have that force to deter men from the practice of it for he after asserts That Christs sufferings might be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to us though they were no punishment of sin 1. That the death of Christ considered as a punishment of sin is a proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or hath a great force to deter men from the practice of sin and that because the same reason of punishment is supposed in Christ and in our selves and because the example is much more considerable than if we had suffered our selves 1. The same reason of punishment is supposed For why are men deterred from sin by seeing others punished but because they look upon the sin as the reason of the punishment and therefore where the same reason holds the same ends may be as properly obtained If we said that Christ suffered death meerly as an innocent person out of Gods dominion over his life what imaginable force could this have to deter men from sin which is asserted to have no relation to it as the cause of it But when we say that God laid our iniquities upon him that he suffered not upon his own account but ours that the sins we commit against God were the cause of all those bitter Agonies which the Son of God underwent what argument can be more proper to deter men from sin than this is For hereby they see the great abhorrency of sin which is in God that he will not pardon the sins of men without a compensation made to his Honor and a demonstration to the world of his hatred of it Hereby they see what a value God hath for his Laws which he will not relax as to the punishment of offenders without so valuable a consideration as the blood of his own Son Hereby they see that the punishment of sin is no meer arbitrary thing depending barely upon the will of God but that there is such a connexion between sin and punishment as to the ends of Government that unless the Honor and Majesty of God as to his Laws and Government may be preserved the violation of his Laws must expect a just recompence of reward Hereby they see what those are to expect who neglect or despise these sufferings of the Son of God for them for nothing can then remain but a certain fearful looking for of judgement and fiery indignation which shall devour the Adversaries So that here all the weighty arguments concur which may be most apt to prevail upon men to deter them from their sins For if God did thus by the green tree what will be do by the dry If he who was so innocent in himself so perfectly holy suffered so much on the account of our sins what then may those expect to suffer who have no innocency at all to plead and add wilfulness and impenitency to their sins But if it be replied by Crellius that it is otherwise
use words sometimes out of their proper and natural sense thence he tells us The sufferings of Christ are called chastisements though they have nothing of the nature of chastisements in them And from this liberty of interpreting they make words without any other reason than that they serve for their purpose be taken in several senses in the same verse For Socinus in one verse of St. Iohns Gospel makes the World be taken in three several senses He was in the World there it is taken saith he for the men of the world in general The world was made by him there it must be understood only of the reformation of things by the Gospel and the world knew him not there it must be taken in neither of the former senses but for the wicked of the world What may not one make of the Scripture by such a way of interpreting it But by this we have the less reason to wonder that Socinus should put such an Interpretation upon Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law being made a curse for us for it is written Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree In which he doth acknowledge by the curse in the first clause to be meant the punishment of sin but not in the second And the reason he gives for it is amavit enim Paulus in execrationis verbo argutus esse St. Paul affected playing with the word curse understanding it first in a proper and then a Metaphorical sense But it is plain that the design of S. Paul and Socinus are very different in these words Socinus thinks he speaks only Metaphorically when he saith that Christ was made a curse for us i. e. by a bare allusion of the name without a correspondency in the thing it self and so that the death of Christ might be called a curse but was not so but St. Paul speaks of this not by way of extenuation but to set forth the greatness and weight of the punishment he underwent for us He therefore tells us what it was which Christ did redeem us from The curse of the Law and how he did it by being not only made a curse but a curse for us i. e. not by being hateful to God or undergoing the very same curse which we should have done which are the two things objected by Crellius against our sense but that the death of Christ was to be considered not as a bare separation of soul and body but as properly poenal being such a kind of death which none but Malefactors by the Law were to suffer by the undergoing of which punishment in our stead he redeemed us from that curse which we were liable to by the violation of the Law of God And there can be no reason to appropriate this only to the Iews unless the death of Christ did extend only to the deliverance of them from the punishment of their sins or because the curse of the Law did make that death poenal therefore the intention of the punishment could reach no further than the Law did but the Apostle in the very next words speaks of the farther extension of the great blessing promised to Abraham That it should come upon the Gentils also and withall those whom the Apostle speaks to were not Iews but such as thought they ought to joyn the Law and Gospel together that St. Paul doth not mean as Crellius would have it that Christ by his death did confirm the New Covenant and so take away the obligation of the Law for to what end was the curse mentioned for that What did the accursedness of his death add to the confirmation of the truth of his Doctrine and when was ever the curse taken for the continuance of the Law of Moses but that Christ by the efficacy of his death as a punishment for sin hath redeemed all that believe and obey him from the curse deserved by their sins whether inforced by the Law of Moses or the Law written in their hearts which tells the consciences of sinners that such who violate the Laws of God are worthy of death and therefore under the curse of the Law We come now to the force of the particles which being joyned with our sins as referring to the death of Christ do imply that his death is to be considered as a punishment of sin Not that we insist on the force of those particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though of themselves they did imply this for we know they are of various significations according to the nature of the matter they are joyned with but that these being joyned with sins and sufferings together do signifie that those sufferings are the punishment of those sins Thus it is said of Christ that he dyed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for our sins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he suffered once 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he gave himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he offered a Sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To which Crellius replies That if the force of these particles not being joyned with sufferings may be taken for the final and not for the impulsive cause they may retain the same sense when joyned with sufferings if those sufferings may be designed in order to an end but if it should be granted that those phrases being joyned with sufferings do always imply a meritorious cause yet it doth not follow it should be here so understood because the matter will not bear it To this a short answer will at present serve for It is not possible a meritorious cause can be expressed more emphatically than by these words being joyned to sufferings so that we have as clear a testimony from these expressions as words can give and by the same arts by which these may be avoided any other might so that it had not been possible for our Doctrine to have been expressed in such a manner but such kind of answers might have been given as our Adversaries now give If it had been said in the plainest terms that Christs death was a punishment for our sins they would as easily have avoided the force of them as they do of these they would have told us the Apostles delighted in an Antanaclasis and had expressed things different from the natural use of the words by them and though punishment were sometimes used properly yet here it must be used only metaphorically because the matter would bear no other sense And therefore I commend the ingenuity of Socinus after all the pains he had taken to enervate the force of those places which are brought against his Doctrine he tells us plainly That if our Doctrine were not only once but frequently mentioned in Scripture yet he would not therefore believe the thing to be so as we suppose For saith he seeing the thing it self cannot be I take the least inconvenient
fell to the share of the Priests and these were either sins particularly enumerated by God himself under the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or else generally comprehended under the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being allowed to be expiated because committed through inadvertency 3. Such whereof a less part was consumed as in the Peace-offerings of the Congregation mentioned Levit. 23. 19. whereof the blood was sprinkled only the inwards burnt and the flesh not eaten by the persons that offered them as it was in the Peace-offerings of particular persons of which as being private Sacrifices I have here no occasion to speak but only by the Priests in the Court and these had something of expiation in them For thence saith Vatablus the Peace offering was called by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Expiatorium and the LXX commonly render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and several of the Iews think the reason of the name was That it made peace between God and him that offered it But the great reason I insist on is Because all the things which were used in an Expiatory Sacrifice were in this too the slaying of the Beast the sprinkling of the blood and the consumption of some part of it upon the Altar as an Oblation to God which are the three ingredients of an Expiatory Sacrifice for the shedding of the blood noted the bearing the punishment of our iniquity and the sprinkling of it on the Altar and the consuming of the part of the Sacrifice or the whole there that it was designed for the expiation of sin From whence it follows that the phrase of a sweet-smelling savour being applied under the Law to Expiatory Sacrifices is very properly used by St. Paul concerning Christs giving up himself for us so that from this phrase nothing can be inferred contrary to the Expiatory nature of the death of Christ but rather it is fully agreeable to it But Crellius hath yet a farther Argument to prove that Christs death cannot be here meant as the Expiatory Sacrifice viz. That the notion of a sacrifice doth consist in the oblation whereby the thing is consecrated to the honour and service of God to which the mactation is but a bare preparation which he proves Because the slaying the sacrifice might belong to others besides the Priests Ezek. 44. 10 11. but the oblation only to the Priests To this I answer 1. The mactation may be considered two ways either with a respect to the bare instrument of taking away the life or to the design of the Offerer of that which was to be sacrificed As the mactation hath a respect only to the instruments so it is no otherways to be considered than as a punishment but as it hath a respect to him that designs it for a Sacrifice so the shedding of the blood hath an immediate influence on the expiation of sin And that by this clear Argument The blood is said to make an Atonement for the soul and the reason given is because the life of the flesh is in the blood So that which was the life is the great thing which makes the Atonement and when the blood was shed the life was then given from whence it follows that the great efficacy of the sacrifice for Atonement lay in the shedding of the blood for that end Thence the Apostle attributes remission of sins to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the shedding of the blood and not to the bare Oblation of it on the Altar or the carrying it into the Holy of Holies both which seem to be nothing else but a more solemn representation of that blood before God which was already shed for the expiation of sins which was therefore necessary to be performed that the concurrence of the Priest might be seen with the sacrifice in order to expiation For if no more had been necessary but the bare slaying of the Beasts which was the meanest part of the service the people would never have thought the institution of the Priesthood necessary and least of all that of the High-Priest unless some solemn action of his had been performed such as the entring into the Holy of Holies on the day of expiation and carrying it and sprinkling the blood of the sin offering in order to the expiation of the sins of the people And it is observable that although the Levitical Law be silent in the common Sacrifices who were to kill them whether the Priests or the Levites yet on that day whereon the High-Priest was to appear himself for the expiation of sin it is expresly said that he should not only kill the bullock of the sin-offering which is for himself but the goaâ— of the sin-offering which is for the people And although the Talmudists dispute from their Traditions on both sides whether any one else might on the day of expiation slay the sin-offerings besides the High-Priest yet it is no news for them to dispute against the Text and the Talmud it self is clear that the High-Priest did it From whence it appears there was something peculiar on that day as to the slaying of the sin-offerings and if our Adversaries opinion hold good that the Sacrifices on the day of expiation did iâ— not aâ—one yet chiefly represent the Sacrifice of Christ no greater argument can be brought against themselves than this is for the office of the High-Priest did not begin at his carrying the blood into the Holy of Holies but the slaying the sacrifice did belong to him too from whence it will unavoidably followâ— that Christ did not enter upon his Office of High-Priest when he entred into Heaven but when the Sacrifice was to be be slain which was designed for the expiation of sins It is then to no purpose at all if Crellius could prove that sometimes in ordinary Sacrifices which he will not say the Sacrifice of Christ was represented by the Levites might kill the beasts for Sacrifice for it appears that in these Sacrifices wherein themselves contend that Christs was represented the office of the High-Priest did not begin with entring into the Sanctuary but with the mactation of that Sacrifice whose blood was to be carried in thither Therefore if we â—peak of the bare instruments of mactation in the death of Christ those were the Iews and we make not them Priests in it for they aimed at no more than taking away his life as the Popae among the Romans and those whose bare Office it was to kill the beasts for Sacrifice among the Iews did but if we consider it with a respect to him that offered up his life to God then we say that Christ was the High-Priest in doing it it being designed for the expiation of sin and by vertue of this bloodshed for that end he enters into Heaven as the Holy of Holies there ever living to make intercession for us But the vertue of the consequent acts depends upon the
accept of this Sacrifice as an expiation for them and so charge not on them the innocent blood c. and upon doing of this it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the blood shall be expiated i. e. as the Vulgar Latin explain it the guilt of the blood shall be taken from them But how then should the expiating sin upon a Sacrifice slain in order thereto destâ—oy that satisfaction which we assert by the blood of Christ being shed in order to the expiation of our sins Nay it much rather sheweth the consistency and agreeableness of these one with another For we have before proved that the Sacrifice here did expiate the sin by a substitution and bearing the guilt which could not have been expiated without it But Crellius further urgeth that God himself is here said to expiate and therefore to expiate cannot signifie to attone or satisfie in which sense Christ may be said to expiate too not by atoning or satisfying but by not imputing sins or taking away the punishment of them by his power To which we need no other answer than what Crellius himself elsewhere gives viz. that Socinus never denyes but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie to appease or atone which is most eviâ—ently proved from the place mention'd by Grotius Gen. 32. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expiabo faciem ejus in munere saith the interlineary Version placabo illum muneribus the Vulg. Lat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the LXX and all the circumstances of the place make it appear to be meant in the proper sense of appeasing the anger of a person by something which may move him to shew favour And if Crellius will yield this to be the sense of expiation as applyed to the Sacrifice of Christ he need not quarrel with the word satisfaction But why should he rather attribute that sense of expiation to Christ which is alone given to God wherein the expiation is attributed to him that receives the Sacrifice rather than to him that offers the sacrifice in order to the atonement of another since it is acknowledged that Christ did offer a sacrifice and therefore there can be no reason why that sense of expiation should not belong to him which was most peculiar to that which we shall now shew to be of the same kind with what is here mentioned viz. an appeasing by a gift offered up to God So we find the word used to the same sense 2 Sam. 21. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and wherewith shall I make the Atonement i. e. wherewith shall I satisfie you for all the wrong which Saul hath done unto you and we see afterwards it was by the death of Sauls sons In which place it cannot be denyed but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not only signifies to appease but such a kind of satisfaction as is by the death of some for the faults of others and so comes home not only to the importance of the expiation belonging to a Sacrifice in general but to such a kind of expiation as is by the suffering of some in the place of others Which though it be more clear and distinct where one man suffers for others yet this was sufficiently represented in the sacrifices under the Law in which we have already proved that there was a substitution of them in the place of the offenders And in this sense the Iews themselves do understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. such an expiation as is made by the substitution of one in the place of another Of which many instances are collected by Buxtorf wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken by the Rabbinical Writers for such an expiation whereby one was to undergo a punishment in the place of another So when in the title Sanhedrin the people say to the High-Priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simus nos expiatio tua let us be for an expiation for you the Gloss explains it thus hoc est in nobis fiat expiatio tua nosque subeamus tuo locò quicquid tibi evenire debet And when they tell us how Children ought to honour their Parents after their death they say when they recite any memorable speech of their Fathers they are not barely to say My Father said so but my Lord and Father said so would I had been the expiation of his death i. e. as they explain it themselves would I had undergone what he did and they give this general rule Where ever it is said behold I am for expiation it is to be understood behold I am in the place of another to bear his iniquities So that this signifies the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a price of redemption for others Hence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for a price of redemption of the life of another and rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exod. 21. 30. 30. 12. Numb 35. 31 32. where we render it satisfaction and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 48. 7. and thereby we fully understand what our Saviour meant when he said that he gave his Soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a ransome for many and to this day the Iews call the Cock which they kill for Expiation on the day of Atonement by the name of Cappara and when they beat the Cock against their heads thrice they every time use words to this purpose Let this Cock be an exchange for me let him be in my room and be made an Expiation for me let death come to him but to me and all Israel life and happiness I insist on these things only to let us understand that the Iews never understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sense our Adversaries contend for when applyed to an Expiatory Sacrifice but as implying a Commutation and a Substitution of one in the place of another so as by the punishment of that the other in whose room he suffers may obtain deliverance Which is the sense we plead for But the utmost which Socinus and Crellius will allow to the Sacrifices in order to Expiation is barely this That the offering of them is to be considered as a meer condition that hath no other respect to the expiation of sins than the paring a mans nails would have had if God had required it upon which slight obedience the pardon of some light sins might be obtained But can any one imagine that this was all that was designed by the Sacrifices of old who considers the antiquity and universality of them in the world in those elder times before the Law the great severity by which they were required under the Law the punctual prescriptions that were made in all circumstances for them the vast and almost inestimable expence the people were at about them but above all the reason that God himself assigns in the Law That the blood was given for expiation because it was the life and the correspondency so clearly expressed
said to be reconciled to him that hath offended him First when he is not only willing to admit of terms of agreement but doth declare his acceptance of the mediation of a third person and that he is so well satisfied with what he hath done in order to it that he appoints this to be published to the World to assure the offender that if the breach continues the fault wholly lies upon himself The second is when the offender doth accept of the terms of agreement offered and submits himself to him whom he hath provoked and is upon that received into favour And these two we assert must necessarily be distinguished in the reconciliation between God and us For upon the death and sufferings of Christ God declares to the World he is so well satisfied with what Christ hath done and suffered in order to the reconciliation between himself and us that he now publishes remission of sins to the World upon those terms which the Mediator hath declared by his own doctrine and the Apostles he sent to preach it But because remission of fins doth not immediately follow upon the death of Christ without supposition of any act on our part therefore the state of favour doth commence from the performance of the conditions which are required from us So that upon the death of Christ God declaring his acceptance of Christs mediation and that the obstacle did not lye upon his part therefore those Messengers who were sent abroad into the world to perswade men to accept of these terms of agreement do insist most upon that which was the remaining obstacle viz. the sins of Mankind that men by laying aside them would be now reconciled to God since there was nothing to hinder this reconciliation their obstinacy in sin excepted Which may be a very reasonable account why we read more frequently in the writings of the Apostles of mens duty in being reconciled to God the other being supposed by them as the foundation of their preaching to the world and is insisted on by them upon that account as is clear in that place to the Corinthians That God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself not imputing unto men their trespasses and hath committed to us the Word of Reconciliation and therefore adds Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead be ye reconciled to God And least these words should seem dubious he declares that the reconciliation in Christ was distinct from that reconciliation he perswades them to for the reconciliation in Christ he supposeth past v. 18. All things are of God who hath reconciled us to himself by Iesus Christ and v. 21. he shews us how this Reconciliation was wrought 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 Crellius here finds it necessary to acknowledge a twofold Reconciliation but hopes to escape the force of this place by a rare distinction of the Reconciliation as preached by Christ and by his Apostles and so Gods having reconciled the World to himself by Iesus Christ is nothing else but Christs preaching the Gospel himself who afterwards committed that Office to his Apostles But if such shifts as these will serve to baffle mens understandings both they were made and the Scripture were written to very little purpose for if this had been all the Apostle had meant that Christ preached the same Doctrine of Reconciliation before them what mighty matter had this been to have solemnly told the World that Christs Apostles preached no other Doctrine but what their Master had preached before especially if no more were meant by it but that men should leave their sins and be reconciled to God But besides why is the Ministery of Reconciliation then attributed only to the Apostles and not to Christ which ought in the first place to have been given to him since the Apostles did only receive it from him Why is that Ministery of Reconciliation said to be viz. that God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself was this all the subject of the Apostles preaching to tell the World that Christ perswaded men to leave off their sins how comes God to reconcile the World to himself by the preaching of Christ since Christ himself saith he was not sent to preach to the world but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Was the World reconciled to God by the preaching of Christ before they had ever heard of him Why is God said not to impute to men their trespasses by the preaching of Christ rather than his Apostles if the not imputing were no more than declaring Gods readiness to pardon which was equally done by the Apostles as by Christ himself Lastly what force or dependance is there in the last words For he made him to be sin for us who knew no sin c. if all he had been speaking of before had only related to Christs preaching How was he made sin more than the Apostles if he were only treated as a sinner upon the account of the same Doctrine which they preached equally with him and might not men be said to be made the righteousness of God in the Apostles as well as in Christ if no more be meant but being perswaded to be righteous by the Doctrine delivered to them In the two latter places Eph. 2. 16. Coloss. 1. 20. c. it is plain that a twofold reconcilation is likewise mentioned the one of the Iews and Gentiles to one another the other of both of them to God For nothing can be more ridiculous than the Exposition of Socinus who would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be joyned with the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to stand by it self and to signifie that this reconciliation of the Iews and Gentiles did tend to the glory of God And Crellius who stands out at nothing hopes to bring off Socinus here too by saying that it is very common for the end to which a thing was appointed to be expressed by a Dative case following the Verb but he might have spared his pains in proving a thing no one questions the shorter answer had been to have produced one place where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ever signifies any thing but to be reconciled to God as the offended party or whereever the Dative of the person following the Verb importing reconciliation did signifie any thing else but the party with whom the reconciliation was to be made As for that objection concerning things in Heaven being reconciled that phrase doth not import such a Reconciliation of the Angels as of Men but that Men and Angels upon the reconciliation of men to God become one body under Christ and are gathered together in him as the Apostle expresseth it Eph. 1. 10. Having thus far proved that the effects of
an Expiatory Sacrifice do belong to the death of Christ nothing now remains but an answer to be made to two Objections which are commonly insisted on by our Adversaries The first is That God was reconciled before he sent his Son and therefore Christ could not dye to reconcile God to us The second is That the Doctrine of Satisfaction asserted by us is inconsistent with the freeness of Gods grace in the remission of sins Both which 〈◊〉 admit of an easie Solution upon the principles of the foregoing discourse To the first I answer That we assert nothing inconsistent with that love of God which was discovered in sending his Son into the world we do not say That God hated mankind so much on the account of sin that it was impossible he should ever admit of any terms of Reconciliation with them which is the only thing inconsistent with the greatness of Gods love in sending Christ into the world but we adore and magnifie the infiniteness and unexpressible greatness of his love that notwithstanding all the contempt of the former kindness and mercies of Heaven he should be pleased to send his own Son to dye for sinners that they might be reconciled to him And herein was the great love of God manifested that while we were enemies and sinâ—ers Christ dyed for us and that for this end that we might be reconciled to God by his death And therefore surely not in the state of favour or Reconciliation with God then But it were worth the while to understand what it is our Adversaries mean when they say God was reconciled when he sent his Son and therefore he could not dye to reconcile God to us Either they mean that God had decreed to be reconciled upon the sending his son or that he was actually reconciled when he sent him if he only decreed to be reconciled that was not at all inconsistent with Christs dying to reconcile God and us in pursuance of that decree if they mean he was actually reconciled then there was no need for Christ to dye to reconcile God and us but withal actual Reconciliation implies pardon of sin and if sin were actually pardoned before Christ came there could be no need of his coming at all and sins would have been pardoned before committed if they were not pardoned notwithstanding that love of God then it can imply no more but that God was willing to be reconciled If therefore the not remission of sins were consistent with that love of God by which he sent Christ into the world then notwithstanding that he was yet capable of being reconciled by his death So that our Adversaries are bound to reconcile that love of God with not presently pardoning the sins of the world as we are to reconcile it with the ends of the death of Christ which are asserted by us To the other Objection Concerning the inconsistency of the Freeness of Gods Grace with the Doctrine of Satisfaction I answer Either Gods Grace is so free as to exclude all conditions or not If it be so free as to exclude all conditions then the highest Antinomianism is the truest Doctrine for that is the highest degree of the Freeness of Grace which admits of no conditions at all If our Adversaries say That the Freeness of Grace is consistent with conditions required on our part Why shall it not admit of conditions on Gods part especially when the condition required tends so highly to the end of Gods governing the world in the manifestation of his hatred against sin and the vindication of the honour of his Laws by the Sufferings of the Son of God in our stead as an Expiatory Sacrifice for our sins There are two things to be considered in sin the dishonor done to God by the breach of his Laws and the injury men do to themselves by it now remission of sins that respects the injury which men bring upon themselves by it and that is Free when the penalty is wholly forgiven as we assert it is by the Gospel to all penitent sinners but shall not God be free to vindicate his own Honor and to declare his righteousness to the world while he is the Iustifier of them that believe Shall men in case of Defamation be bound to vindicate themselves though they freely forgive the Authors of the slander by our Adversaries own Doctrine and must it be repugnant to Gods Grace to admit of a Propitiatory Sacrifice that the world may understand that it is no such easie thing to obtain pardon of sin committed against God but that as often as they consider the bitter Sufferings of Christ in order to the obtaining the forgiveness of our sins that should be the greatest Argument to disswade them from the practice of them But why should it be more inconsistent with the Sacrifice of Christ for God freely to pardon sin than it was ever presumed to be in all the Sacrifices of either Jews or Gentiles who all supposed Sacrifices necessary in order to Atonement and yet thought themselves obliged to the goodness of God in the Remission of their sins Nay we find that God himself in the case of Abimelâ—ch appointed Abraham to pray for him in order to his pardon And will any one say this was a derogation to the grace of God in his pardon Or to the pardon of Iobs Friends because Iob was appointed to Sacrifice fâ—r them Or to the pardon of the Israelites because God out of kindness to them directed them by the Prophets and appointed the means in order to it But although God appointed our High-Priest for us and out of his great love sent him into the world yet his Sacrifice was not what was given him but what he freely underwent himself he gave us Christ but Christ offered up himself a full perfect and sufficient Sacrifice Oblation and Satisfaction for the sins of the world Thus Sir I have now given you a larger account of what I then more briefly discoursed of concerning the true Reason of the Sufferings of Christ and heartily wishing you a right understanding in all things and requesting from you an impartial consideration of what I have written I am SIR Your c. E. S. Ian. 6. 166â— FINIS Serm. I. A B C D E A B C D a Lam. 2. 1. E A B C D E A B C D E A a Luk. 17. 28 29. B 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de beil Jud. l. 7. c. 14. C D E A B C D a Jude 7. E A a Tacit. Aâ— 15. B 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Xiphil in Epit. Dion in Tito p. 227. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herodian in Commod hist. l. 1. p. 22. v. Xiphil ad fin Commodi C b Niceph. l. 15. c. 21. c Eâ—â—gr l. 2. cap 13. d Baâ—â—â— Tom. 5. A. 465. 1. D E A B C D E A B C D E A B a Hieron in loc C D b Gildas