Human Nature was fitted for Glory might have exempted him from the Obligation of any outward Law whatever What he means by outward Laws I cannot tell for the Laws of Creation are intrinsick and essential to human Nature and if the Hypostatical Union do not destroy the Human Nature it cannot exempt it from those natural and necessary Obligations He might as well say that the Hypostatical Union exempts the Human Nature of Christ from the Laws of Reasoning as from the Rules of Life both which are equally the Glory and Perfection of a Reasonable Nature And though we should suppose the Human Nature in Christ in the very first instant of its Union to the Divine Nature to be fitted for Glory yet I cannot see how this exempts the Human Nature from the Obligation of those Laws which are essential to Human Nature unless he thinks that Human Nature in Glory is under no Obligations Had Christ been immediately translated to Heaven he had not been obliged to those particular instances of Obedience which are proper to an earthly state for glorified Saints themselves are not but while Christ is a perfect Man as well as God it will always become him in whatever state he be to live agreeably to Human Nature For though he be advanced to the Right Hand of God he is still as man inferiour to his Father and therefore can never as man be exempted from the necessary Laws of Human Nature But to proceed to the Ceremonial Law The Doctor proves that Christ as an innocent man under the Covenant of Works could not be obliged by this Law which came upon us by reason of Sin especially not to such institutions as signified the washing away of sin and repentance from sin as the Baptism of Iohn did and therefore he fulfilled this Righteousness for us To this I answered in my former Discourse That though it were granted that these Laws at first were commanded upon occasion of sin yet an innocent man may observe them to good and wise purposes as publick and solemn acts of Worship or external and visible expressions of Devotion as a publick Profession of Righteousness and a vertuous Life to which purposes among others the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the Law and the Baptism of Iohn served c. To which the Doctor returns no answer but makes me say what I never thought and abuses his credulous Readers with an apprehension that I had talked like himself at such a rate of Nonsense as any one in his Wits must needs despise to borrow some of his own Elegancies For thus he reports my sense or words or both as he would perswade his Readers that I say that an Innocent Person such as Christ was absolutely may be obliged for his own sake to the observation of such Laws and Institutions as were introduced by the occasion of sin and respected all of them the personal sins of them that were obliged by them And now he desires to be left to his liberty nay to the necessity of his mind not to believe Contradictions I wish he had been under this necessity a little sooner or were yet under a necessity of not making contradictions for what he believes no man can tell I plainly acknowledged that Christ being an Innocent Person could not observe any of these Judaical Ceremonies with respect to personal sins but I say as they had other significations so he might observe them to other purposes Circumcision in its first Institution was a seal of that Covenant which God made with Abraham and therefore did very well become him who was not only of the Seed and Posterity of Abraham but that very Seed which was promised in the Covenant whereof Circumcision was the Seal The Baptism of Iohn was a publick Profession of a vertuous Life which becomes the most innocent man but it was a profession of Repentance and signified the washing away of sin only when the baptized Person had been a Sinner and yet the Baptism of our Saviour was designed for a nobler purpose as a Publick Inauguration of him to his Prophetical Office The Passover was an Eucharistical Sacrifice in commemoration of the Deliverance of their Fore-fathers out of Aegypt and therefore might be observed by the most innocent man but I challenge the Doctor or any of his Friends to prove that Christ offered any Sin or Trespass-Offering which respect only personal Offences or that he observed any Ceremony which could signifie nothing else but personal guilt and till he can prove this his Argument is worth nothing His second Argument to prove that what Christ did as Mediator that is the actual Obedience of his Life he did for us and in our stead I represented thus That there can be no other reason assigned of Christs Obedience to the Law but only this that he did it in our stead Here the Doctor according to his usual way charges me with mis-representing his Argument for his words are That the end of the active Obedience of Christ cannot be assigned to be that he might be fit for his Death and Oblation These I acknowledge to be his words but not his Argument for the force of his Argument consists in the dis-junction as I expresly observed that either Christ fulfilled all Righteousness to fit him for his Death and Oblation or he did it for us and in our stead because otherwise as he himself expresses it if the Obedience Christ performed be not reckoned to us and done upon our account there is no just cause to be assigned why he should live here in the World so long as he did in perfect Obedience to all the Laws of God and therefore in answer to this I made it appear that though the Righteousness of Christ were supposed not necessary to qualifie him for his Death which he can never prove yet there were other great and necessary Reasons why he should live so long in the World in a perfect Obedience to the Divine Will His third Argument to prove that Christ performed all Righteousness for us is the absolute necessity of it for this is the term of the Covenant Do this and live so that we being unable to yield that compleat perfect Obedience which the Law requires as the condition of Life and Happiness it is necessary that Christ our Mediator and Surety should fulfil the Law for us The sum of which Argument as I told him before is this That there never was nor ever can be a Covenant of Grace that God still exacts the rigorous perfection of the Law from us and that we must not appear before him without a compleat and perfect Righteousness of our own or of another Now this is the thing in question whether we must be made righteous with the perfect Righteousness of Christ imputed to us or whether God will for the sake of Christ dispense with the rigor of the Law and accept a sincere and Evangelical Obedience instead of a
Saviour with the necessity of obeying his Laws and being conformed to his Example that esteem and reverence we owe to the Person of Christ with a reverence for his Laws that no man might expect to be saved by Christ though he be infinitely gracious and compassionate and inherit all the boundless Perfections of the Deity without the practice of an universal Righteousness And therefore I showed that all those Considerations which did naturally result from the contemplation of the Person of Christ as he is the Eternal Son of God who was made Man and sent into the World to accomplish the work of our Redemption did necessarily engage us to obey his Laws but gave us no encouragement to expect any thing more from him upon his Personal account than what he hath promised in his Gospel This I observed was a plain demonstration of Gods love to Mankind that he sent so great and so dear a Person as his only begotten Son to save Sinners No man can doubt of Gods good will to Sinners who sees the Son of God cloathed with our flesh and dying as a Sacrifice for our sins and this gives relief to our guilty fears and encourages us to retrieve our past follies by new Obedience No man will return to his Duty without some hope of Pardon and Forgiveness for his past sins and the proper use of Gods love in sending Christ into the World is to conquer our Obstinacy and to encourage our Hopes Thus the greatness of Christs Person gives great Reverence and Authority to his Gospel and an inviolable Sanction to his Laws as the Apostle argues If the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of Reward how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation which at first began to be spoken by the Lord Heb. 1. 2 3. And this gives great Authority to his Example and lays forcible obligations on us to imitate him who was not only our Saviour but God incarnate And this assures us of the infinite value of his Sacrifice and of the power of his Intercession God cannot but be pleased when his own Son undertakes to be a Ransom and to make Atonement for sinners which is so great a vindication of Gods Dominion and Soveraignty of the authority of his Laws and the wisdom and justice of his Providence that he may securely pardon humble and penitent sinners without reproaching any of his Attributes and we can desire no greater security for the performance of this Gospel-Covenant than that it was sealed with the blood of the Son of God And this is a great encouragement to return to God when we have such a powerful Advocate and Mediator to intercede for us But then we must expect no more from Christ upon account of his personal Excellencies and Perfections than what he hath promised in his Gospel Christ is the object of our Faith and Hope only as he is our Saviour and he is our Saviour in no other sense than as he is our Mediator and he mediates for us as our Priest that is in vertue of that Covenant which he hath sealed with his blood and therefore we have no reason to expect any thing from the Person of Christ which is not contained in his Covenant much less which contradicts it for that would be in effect to renounce his Mediation and to trust to the goodness of his Nature Christ will in his own Person accomplish all those Promises he hath made whether they concern the present assistances of his Grace or his Providence and Protection in this world or the future rewards of the next but we must learn what Christ will do for us and upon what terms not from the boundless Perfections and Excellencies of his Person but from the Declarations of the Gospel though the consideration of his Person who he is and how he lived and what he taught may convince any man that he will be a Saviour to none but those who live in the practise of that Righteousness of which he was a Preacher and Example Now to silence the clamors of some men who upbraided those Preachers who spent their greatest zeal in expounding the Laws of Christ and in pressing men by all the Motives and Arguments of the Gospel the Sacrifice and Mediation of Christ the necessity of a good Life to make men happy hereafter and the many great advantages of Holiness here c. to the practise of an universal Righteousness I say to silence the clamors of those who upbraided such Preachers with not preaching Christ I considered in the next place what it is to know Christ and so consequently what it is to preach Him and the sum of it was this That to know Christ is to be acquainted with that Revelation which Christ hath made of Gods will to the world For as in former ages God made himself known by the light of Nature and the works of Creation and Providence and those partial and occasional Revelations of his Will which he made to good men now in these last days he hath sent his Son into the world to declare his Will to us And therefore the only useful knowledge is to understand those Revelations which Christ hath made of Gods Will the necessary consequence of which is that he who expounds the Laws and Doctrine of the Gospel does in the most proper sense preach Christ as Philip is said to preach Christ to the Samaritans Act. 8. 5. which in ver 12. is called Preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God and the Name of Iesus Christ that is the whole Doctrine of the Gospel The whole Christian Religion is the Knowledge of Christ and the Laws of Righteousness and the Motives to Obedience as principal a part as any because this was the ultimate design of Christs coming into the world to reform mens lives and to prepare them for the happiness of the next world by transforming them into a Divine Nature All that Christ did and suffered was only in order to this end and then we understand all those mysteries of the Incarnation and Death and Intercession of Christ as much as is necessary to the purposes of Religion when we understand what obligations they lay on us to a holy Life and feel their power and vertue in renewing and sanctifying our minds In the next place I observed that the foundation of the greatest and most dangerous mistakes was laid in a wrong notion of our Union to Christ of which some men discourse in such uncouth and Cabbalistical terms as no Body can understand and therefore I endeavoured to state the true notion of our Union to Christ and Communion with him And the sum of it is this that those Metaphors which describe our union to Christ do primarily refer to the Christian Church not to every individual Christian as Christ is the Head and the Church or whole Society of Christians his Body a Husband and
discharge the duties which our Profession of Christianity calls us to And it is so by a perpetual Institution Now if we consider the nature of a Covenant which requires sealing on both sides it will appear that this Ceremony is essentially necessary to our admission into the Gospel Covenant or which is all one to our admission into the Christian Church God hath sealed to us in the Death of his Son whereby he has confirmed and ratified the Gospel Covenant but till we seal to him in Baptism no previous faith and consent can give us a title to the benefits of the Covenant In his fourth Proposition he tells us That the Union of the Catholick visible Church consisting in a joynt profession of the same Lord Faith and Baptism there doth therefore upon a persons submitting to the Ordinance of Baptism such a relation to the whole Catholick visible Church emerge as that he is rendered a compleat member of the Church under the notion of Catholick visible And adds So far is our Union with the visible Church by means of Baptism from being the medium of our Union to Christ that it is our dedicating our selves to Christ by this august Ceremony which constitutes us complete members of the Church under the notion of visible He tells us that Baptism makes us members of the Catholick Church so say I But it makes us members of the Catholick Church by dedicating us to Christ so say I too and therefore our Union with the Visible Church by means of Baptism is not the medium of our Union to Christ But how does this follow when Baptism dedicates us to Christ not as single Individuals but as members of his body that is his Church For that which dedicates us to Christ as members of his body unites us to Christ by uniting us to the Church But Baptism makes us compleat members whereby he would insinuate that we were members before though incomplete but this he ought to have proved which he has not yet and never can do And indeed a complete and incomplete member seems to be no very good sense for the same relation admits of no degrees one Child under the notion of a Child is as completely the Fathers Child as any other of his Children are and if we be indeed members of the Church that is united and related to the Church we are complete members for what ever makes us members makes us members and we cannot be more or less members A member may be sound or rotten weak or strong and upon that score may be a perfect or imperfect member but considering only the relation of membership which is the present case every member is as much a member as any other But Baptism makes us complete members of the Church only under the notion of Catholick visible How comes this to pass now When in his first Proposition he would by no means allow that Baptism united us to the Universal visible Church and yet here it makes us complete members of the Church under the notion of visible How will he answer his own Argument That men were baptized before there was any particular visible Church formed and if there were no particular visible Church certainly there could be no Catholick visible Church neither Unless we can imagine that there may be a Kingdom which consists of a great many subordinate Societies and Corporations and Families before there is so much as any one Family Baptism admits us into the Church of Christ under the notion of Christ's body not under the notion of visible or invisible unless we think that the Covenant of Grace and all the Promises of it which are sealed to us in Baptism be made only to the Church under the notion of visible and then I shall not blame the Church of Rome for making Visibility one mark of the true Church But to proceed I argued also from the nature of the Lords Supper which is a Sacrament and Symbol of our Union to Christ and Fellowship with him after we are incorporated into his Church and signifies and represents that near conjunction which is between Christ and the Christian Church and the mutual Fellowship of one Christian with another as members of the same body Which is a plain Argument that Christ owns us not as single Individuals but as members of his body as incorporated into the Christian Church To this Mr. Ferguson answers 1. The Supper of the Lord though a Sacrament of Union yet it cannot be the first medium of our Union to the Church seeing none have a right to it but such as are already Church members Nor did I ever say it was the first medium but that it represents that near conjunction which is between Christ and the Christian Church and every particular Christian as incorporated into the Church For as the Apostle says to use our Authors own words in another place seeing it's one loaf 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which we partake we are therefore one body viz. in Christ who participate of that one loaf 1 Cor. 10. 17. Pichorellus well observes that Paul doth not say we are one loaf or bread though our Translation renders it so but that he argues from the Coalition of the clusters of the small corpuscles of meal surely our Author was taught this bombast by the School master in Sir Philip Sidney of which a Loaf is kneaded and contexed to the identity and oneness that intervenes between Christ and Believers intervening identity and oneness is a great elegancy But our Author seems to have abused Pichorellus not only in a phantastical Translation of his words but in perverting the sense of them whose words as he has set them in the margin are these Non dicit Paulus fideles unum esse panem sed ab uno panc ducit similitudinem Paul does not say that all Believers are one bread but takes a similitude and resemblance from one bread What to do To prove the oneness and identity which intervenes between Christ and single Believers as Mr. Ferguson would represent it no but to prove that near alliance and conjunction which is between the whole body of Believers which are as closely compacted into one body as the several particles of flour are when they are kneaded into one Loaf and so as one body are united to Christ and entertained at his Table Agreeably to St. Chrysostoms account of the words as they are translated also by our Author What is that Loaf It is the body of Christ. What are those who partake of it They are the body of Christ not many bodies but one For as the many grains of which a loaf is formed are so convened into one mass mighty elegant still that the distinction and diversity one from another doth not appear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same manner are we conjoyned to Christ and one another or according to the order of St. Chrysostoms words to one another and to Christ So that
but commends that divine power and vertue which appeared in him and accounts this the best answer to the Arrians objection from these words That Christ was God participatione tantum gratiâ only by participation and by Grace On Ioh. 17. 21. That they all may be one as thou Father art in me and I in thee that they also may be one in us Mr. Calvin observes Tenendum est quoties unum se cum patre esse in hoc capite pronunciat Christus sermonem non habere simplicitèr de divinà ejus essentiâ sed unum vocari in personâ mediatoris quatenùs caput nostrum est That is we must acknowledge and own that as often as Christ calls himself one with the Father in this Chapter it does not simply and primarily refer to the unity of the Divine Essence but he is one with the Father considered as Mediator and head of the Church That is as he acts in Gods name and authority and does his will And he adds That many of the Fathers expound these words of Christs being one with the Father as he was Eternal God but this they were forced to by their contention with the Arrians longè autem aliud Christi consilium fuit quà m ad nudam arcanae suae divinit at is speculationem nos evehere But Christ had a quite different design in these words than to raise them to a naked contemplation of his secret and unsearchable divinity And now if Mr. Ferguson will be a just and impartial Judge he must accost Mr. Calvin as he has done me I would not be thought to impeach Mr. Calvin of opposing the Godhead of Christ but this I affirm that if his glosses of Col. 1. 19. Col. 2. 3. and 2. 8. Joh. 14. 20. Joh. 1. 14. and add Joh. 17. 21. which are as much the same as Mr. Sherlock's with those the Socinians impose upon those places be admitted we have some of the main proofs of it wrested out of our hands But to proceed Dr. Owen hath given in his charge against me very fully and emphatically He that shall consider what reflexions are cast in this discourse on the necessity of satisfaction to be made unto divine Iustice and from whom they are borrowed the miserable weak attempt that is made therein to reduce all Christ's mediatory actings to his Kingly Office and in particular his Intercession the faint mention that is made of the satisfaction of Christ clogged with the addition of ignorance of the Philosophy of it as it is called well enough complying with them who grant that the Lord Christ did what God was satisfied withal with sundry other things of the like nature will not be to seek whence these things come nor whither they are going nor to whom our Author is beholden for most of his rare notions which it is an easie thing at any time to acquaint him withal The Doctors chief skill lies in scandalous insinuations but he is just like other men when he comes to reason As for that attempt to reduce all Christ's Mediatory actings to his Kingly Office I have given a sufficient account of that in answer to Mr. Ferguson and suppose I shall hear no more of it As for my faint mention of the satisfaction of Christ clogged with an ignorance of the Philosophy of it what he calls a faint mention I cannot tell but I did more than once expresly assert it and that very heartily but I must beg his pardon that I dare not pretend to understand the strict Philosophy of that Atonement made by Christ so long as I assert that every Christian may easily learn all that is useful and necessary for him to know We may all know whatever the Scripture has revealed about it that Christ died for our sins that he died for us that he is a propitiation for the sins of the whole world that we are reconciled to God by the death of his Son that his bloud is the bloud of the Covenant that he has redeemed his Church with his own bloud and hath purchased and ratified the New Testament with his bloud which gives us the greatest assurance of the pardon of our sins and the promises of eternal life upon the conditions of a lively active faith which is made perfect by works But then there are some enquiries concerning this matter of a nicer speculation as wherein the proper nature of atonement and expiation consists in what sense the death of Christ may be said to satisfie the justice of God whether Christ died as the Surety of particular Persons or as the Surety of the Covenant whether Christ suffered the Idem or the tantundem what is the immediate effect of Christs death whether to give an actual right to those for whom he died to pardon and life or to seal the Covenant of grace with mankind and to put all men into a possibility of salvation I presume the Doctor knows that these and a great many more such questions are hotly disputed among those very men who do not use to make a very faint mention neither of the satisfaction of Christ and methinks the Doctor should for once have commended the young mans modesty that he would not peremptorily determine these matters rather than blame me for professing my ignorance And as for what the Doctor adds that this favours of a compliance with them who grant that the Lord Christ did what God was satisfied withal If I mistake not this is the utmost of what he himself can bring it to whether right or wrong I shall not now determine for he expresly affirms that Christ could not merit of God with that kind of merit which ariseth from an absolute proportion of things and gives this wise reason for it because Christ in respect of his humane nature though united to the Deity is a Creature and so could not absolutely satisfie nor merit any thing at the hand of God This merit from an absolute proportion can be found only among Creatures and the advancement of Christs humanity takes it not out of that number neither in this sense can any satisfaction be made to God for sin And therefore he founds the merit and satisfaction of Christ upon Gods constitution and determination predestinating Christ unto that work and appointing the work by him to be accomplished to be satisfactory equalling by that constitution the end and the means Which at most signifies no more but this that what Christ did was not in its own nature satisfactory but was only what God was satisfied with upon account of his own constitution and determination And therefore all the merit the Doctor ascribes to Christ is the accomplishment of that condition which God required to make way that the Obligation which he had freely put upon himself might be in actual force Which he says is no more than what Mr. Baxter assigns to our own works By which we may learn what a lame and conditional merit