Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	conscience_n	law_n	sin_n	4,881	5	5.2089	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45147	Pacification touching the doctrinal dissent among our united brethren in London being an answer to Mr. Williams and Mr. Lobb both, who have appealed in one point (collected for an error) to this author, for his determination about it : together with some other more necessary points falling in, as also that case of non-resistance, which hath always been a case of that grand concern to the state, and now more especially, in regard to our loyalty to King William, and association to him, resolved, on that occasion / by Mr. John Humfrey.	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.	1696 (1696)	Wing H3697; ESTC R16468	49,303	49

sorry for Mr. Williams that he printed his Sheet when mine alone as a Third Person to let the World know how little they had against him how curious the Difference what need of bearing with one another had been enough because he must be forced to agree with me when he should have differ'd and is put upon the Defence of a Denial of that which I take to have been advantageous and the credit of his Books to have owned It is objected against him that he holds the Penal Sanction of the Law of Works to be changed What if he had owned this for his Opinion and said it is no Error but stood to it As Mr. Baxter hath his and I my State of the Point Mr. W. might have his and we never fall out Suppose then the Point stated only with two Distinctions 1. As to the Law between the Law it self and its Sanction 2. As to the Subjects of this Law between the Believer and Unbeliever Let him then say the Law it self is unchangeable but its Sanction is changed and that change to be understood as to Believers for he every where says the Unbeliever is under Condemnation And let me see who he is will be his Opponent I say let me see whether any of our Brethren out of whose Books Mr. Lobb does bring some opposite Sayings to Mr. W. and thereby shifts himself off from being Accuser or Opponent so as it is not he but they are engaged to make them good that will undertake to Oppose and Mr. W. be Respondent I suppose the Question to be Whether the Sanction of the Law be changed and held affirmatively being but thus stated This I take to be the very ordinarily preached Doctrine by our most Judicious Divines for to be more exact in Preaching may but amuse and hurt the People and Mr. Lobb does know and I think Mr. W. too that trite Determination I mentioned in my Letter to him which is co-incident with what is here said The Law is to be considered qua Foedas and qua Regula Qua Regula it binds us to perfect Obedience Qua Foedus it binds us to it as the Condition of Life Qua Regula then it remains Obligatory Qua Foedus it does not Christ hath freed us from it Let us suppose this to be Mr. W's Opinion and then bring Mr. Lobb's Objection There is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law of Works Very well he grants it The Gospel doth not denounce Death for the same Sins and every Sin as the Law doth Very true the one follows undeniably from the other Let us bring then Mr. W's Explanation Comment or Confirmation of this Opinion Though nothing be abated in the Rule of Sin and Duty yet Blessings are promised to lower degrees of Duty and a continuance in a State of Death with a bar to the Blessing are not threatned against every degree of Sin as the Covenant of Works did Can any doubt this to be the Grace of the Gospel-Promise Doth it promise Life to all Men however Vile and Impenitent they be or Doth it threaten Damnation or a continuance of it on any True Penitent Believing Godly Man because he is imperfect This change of the Sanction supposeth the Death of Christ and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience wherein God hath provided for his own Glory while he promises Life by Forgiveness to imperfect Man and yet insists on some degree of Obedience to which of his Grace he enableth us What can be spoken more appositely more judiciously more roundly to the purpose and more sufficiently supposing Mr. W. had but held and stood to this Opinion It is all exactly true according to the Point thus stated I cannot blame Mr. Lobb though I had a mind to do it to think that this was indeed Mr. W's Opinion because his Discourse loses its current upon a contrary Supposition Mr. Lobb shews himself a more piercing Man than I thought upon that account I will turn therefore to another place Gospel Truth p. 115. Dr. Crisp oft tells us that the Sanction of the Law of Works is removed and the Curse gone as to the Elect This is true if he mean that sinless Obedience is not now the way of Life and all bellow it shall not bind Death upon us so as to hinder our Relief by the Gospel Here Mr. Lobb shews me in a Letter that Mr. W. grants expresly that the Sanction of the Law is removed It is true that is he confesses it Very good all consonant to himself It is true in this meaning which he sets forth just in the Sense I say the Point is stated By the way let Mr. Lobb note that when Mr. W. says It is true in 〈◊〉 meaning it implies that if it be meant otherwise It is 〈◊〉 true which answers the Quotation By this it appears how well throughly well all would have been if he had maintained not denied the Charge of his Brethren Hear therefore a little more amply Mr. George Lawson with whom neither Mr. W. Mr. Lobb nor I are to be compared for a Conclusion There is one great Change in respect to the Law Perfect Obedience to it was first made the Condition of Life but afterwards that Promise of Life upon those strict Terms and that severe Commination of Death upon Sin were abolished and Faith was made the only Condition of Life So that it may be truly said that the Law of Works is abrogated but not the Moral Law considered by it self I would have therefore Mr. W. methinks here ask the Brethren to give him his hand in again or if he thinks good he may take it If not let us come to the Question waved hitherto Is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Moral Law the same as The Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law For answering which Question by the Sanction of the Law I understand the Penalty under which the Duty is required and so does Mr. Lobb because when Mr. W. says Sanction he cites Penal Sanction supposing as here spoken nothing else by it but the Penalty Now then when Mr. W. says The Gospel hath another Sanction or a Change of the Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law Mr. Lobb accounts he must be understood to mean That the Precepts of the Law being taken into the Gospel are not required under that Penalty as they were in the Covenant of Works and thereupon does collect this as his Error The Collection is Rational but Mr. W. denies this to be his meaning Every Sin out of doubt does deserve Death even in the Believer and therefore the perfect Duty of the Law is required by the Gospel under the same Penalty though that Penalty is remitted being not remediless as under the Law it was upon the other Terms of it Christ's Law comprehends I have said the Law of Nature and the Remedying Law both When the Law of Nature therefore remaineth it must

make the Punishment due but the Pardoning Law being conjunct with it makes the Impunity due also In primo instanti the Punishment in secundo Impunity It is necessary therefore I judge for Mr. W. to explain his Term Sanction and try if he can make his words so intelligible as one may say he gave no occasion of Mis-construction But seeing by this Phrase of his as I call it in Mr. Lobbs Sheets and much more by that Mr. Lobb hath added from another place The Gospel doth not denounce Death for the same and every Sin as Adam 's Law did there is occasion given to Mr. Lobb to believe him herein in an Error if it be one and the contrary be not and rationally to do so I must in my Judgment on the case so far excuse Mr. Lobb Let us consider again The words of Mr. W. may be construed either with Application of his Readers Thoughts to the Law alone or to the Gospel alone or to the Law and Gospel both together If the Readers Thoughts be applied to the Law alone then Another Sanction being the same with a Change of the Sanction and that upon Christ's Satisfaction too he must needs understand the meaning to be that the Penal Sanction of the Law is by the Gospel or by Christ's Death and Obedience made void for the same Law cannot have two Sanctions and if its own be changed it is abolished If the Readers Thoughts be applied to the Gospel alone they must recur for there is no change of Sanction questionable as to that If his Reader construe him with Application of his Thoughts to Law and Gospel both together then may the meaning indeed be understood that the Gospel Sanction is changed from that which was the Law Sanction so as to be another and not the same without making void one or the other which yet is a perplext Conception Now of these three Applications of a Man's Thoughts to the words if one did not know that the last was the Author's meaning because he says so the first Application I think likest to fall into the Thoughts of another Man as well as Mr. Lobb's rather than either of the other So far is he farther to be excused On the other side when I come to look into Mr. W's Books and see with my Eyes what he hath said I may excuse Mr. Lobb in a mistake of Judgment if he do mistake but do not till farther Scrutiny clear him from wronging Mr. W. I will turn to his last Book first Man made Righteous p. 100. There is hardly a Truth more plain in the Word of God than that the Wrath of God abides still upon Unbelievers notwithstanding Christ's Death Mr. Lobb says he holds the Penal Sanction of the Law abrogated and how does this place stare in Mr. Lobb's Face I will turn next to his middle Book Defence of Gospel Truth p. 2. That Men while they reject the Gospel are not at all under the Curse of the Law I abhor How any should be under the Curse of the Law and the Penal Sanction of it be not of Force I never yet had one thought Let us look then last into his first Book from whence the Exception was gathered Gospel Truth p. 5. That the Elect while Dead in Sin and Unbelief are Children of Wrath and condemned by the Law I affirm Again p. 107. The Gospel denounceth and declareth all condemned till they believe It declares they are so and denounceth they shall be so John 3.36 He that believeth not on the Son shall not see Life but the Wrath of God abideth on him And v. 18. He that believeth not is condemned already Here is the case of all men by the Fall they are condemned and under Wrath Here is the way of Relief a Christ believed on and they that believe their Condemnation is reversed These places at the reading moved me much and made me write to Mr. Lobb but I found him aware of such Passages and not moved answering that for all these words Mr. W. meant them only of the Gospel Denunciation Mr. W's Opinion he accounts was that Christ by his Death hath taken away the Curse of the Law and the Curse the Unbeliever is under is only that of the Gospel He that believeth not shall be Damned To this purpose may be observed those picked Terms of Governing Justice and Governing Grace which Mr. W. uses as equivalent to the two Governments of Mr. Lawson the Creator's Government and the Redeemer's Government which must be supposed to have their two Laws the New vacating the Old As also those Arguments Mr. W. offers to prove a new Law that do notable fit a Judgment so possest What kind of Government can we assign to Christ says he if there be no Sanction to his Law But if he hold the Sanction of the Old Law as taken into Christ's to stand good I pray why such a Necessity of it to the New Nevertheless the words of Mr. W. as I have quoted them are so express for all Men by the Fall to be under the Curse which does imply the Law therefore to be of force that I cannot give Judgment upon any such bare Reasoning Let us therefore see another place Mr. Lobb points me to Defence of Gospel Truth p. 23. Adam's Law must be altered by the Law-giver to admit of Satisfaction Here says Mr. Lobb is plain proof of Mr. W's holding the Law changed But though the word altered be unskilfully said and he should say relaxed that which follows in three lines after to wit The Sentence that condemned Adam seizes on all Men as soon as they have being there needs no other does again turn the Scale for Mr. W. The Truth is the words I am to judge of between these two Brethren are in Mr. W's first Book and it is that alone must shew what was his mind then The Passages for him I have mentioned are not so positively fixt in that Book as in the two other after he was warned And there are two places not mentioned by Mr. Lobb but observed by me in reading the Book afresh quite over that do put me to a stand One is p. 221. where he hath words to this sense We are not to preach the Sanction of the Law of Innocency but may press the Gospel Sanction The other is in the express words Is it the Grace of God to leave his Precepts without any Sanction when he removed the Curse of the Law Here is the Curse of the Law that is the Penal Sanction removed that is changed and another brought into its room as being that it is like he meant which lies on all till they believe There is nothing goes before or after to alieviate this sense P. 242. I must needs say here therefore that I was sorry to see this place because I had come to a Judgment and finished my Sheets and was brought to this pass within my self Mr. Lobb I reasoned does verily believe that Mr.

obeyed not that we might not obey he obeyed not in our stead How is it then Why Christ obeyed the Law as the perfect Obedience thereof required was the Condition of Life and by his obeying it thus he hath freed us from being under that Condition that is from so obeying it as by his Suffering we are freed from enduring the Curse Not by a Cessation of the Duty or Sanction Premiant or Penal of the Law of Works but by the Accession of the Law of Grace because the Sanction of that Law is remedied by this both being in Christ's hands neither abrogating the other To be freed from the Obligation of perfect Obedience as the Condition of Life does import or is all one as or with to be freed from the Commination of Death upon the least failing thereof so that the Promisory part of that Law and Comminatory part are alike concerned and must be understood both alike to be of force or cease as before shewn By Christ's Sufferings we are not freed from all Sufferings or Punishment for Sin but from suffering the Curse in that Punishment So by his Obedience we are not freed from endeavouring and doing what we can to become perfect but we are freed from the Obligation of the Performance as necessary to Salvation This comes in by the way but for the Imputation now of Christ's Righteousness Christ suffered and obeyed for us I say which must be understood aright Not that God looks on us as if we our selves had obeyed or suffered either in his Person or he to have done it strictly in ours but that he obeyed and suffered loco nostro to free us from so Obeying and Suffering as he himself did which is the making his Death and Obedience ours only as to this Benefit Thus much being right and the Righteousness of Christ consisting in this Obedience and suffering of this in our room now what at last is the Imputation of it Why certainly the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is and must be nothing else but God's accounting the matter to be thus as it is Here is the Point That what Christ hath done is lookt upon is accepted as done in our behalf or the granting it to be so that upon this Obeying and Suffering of his in our place as the Meritorious Cause we shall be freed from the same Obedience and Suffering our selves as the Effect of it This is the only Fundamental Truth in the Phrase and this Imputation then of Christ's Righteousness which Man hath so phrased going into this Grant on God's part or obtaining the Grant on Christ's part which precedes the Application it cannot go into the Application it self that follows after upon the Performance of the Gospel-terms so as to make Christ's Righteousness ours any otherwise than in this Benefit only Besides this the fancying such Acts in God as the imputing Christ's Righteousness to every single Person upon his Believing any otherwise than by that one Act of Grace now promulgated in the Gospel is not becoming the Divine Being There is there can be no new Acts in God He is Actus purus his Will one I must not grow too Subtle here only I must say there is his Will and the Effects of his Will and in those Effects there is an Order In that Order the Righteousness of Christ precedes the Impetration of all the Benefits we have by him as the Meritorious Cause of them and the Impetration precedes the Application and the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness going to the Impetration the Application cannot but be of the Effects thereof Not of this Righteousness I say it self in se but of the Benefits themselves we have by it To be more short That Commutation of Persons and Imputation of Christ's Righteousness which come both in earnest to this one same thing Mans Benefit for Christ's Satisfaction how soever the Thoughts thereof have amused so many good Men when you have throughly considered them and made as much of them as ever you can it must all of it every drop of it you can make go into that Act of Grace Salvation upon Gospel-Conditions which is already procured and passed Unto the Impetration then of our Redemption Christ's Righteousness was indeed imputed in it self In the Application it can be imputed only in the Effects I know there are some Texts very high Texts about this matter in Scripture such as these He hath made him Sin for us that we may be made the Righteousness of God in him By the Obedience of one many shall be made Righteous Christ is the end of the Law to the Believer What is the meaning of such Texts The meaning really I take to be but the same I have now opened They all come to this That Christ by his Satisfaction and Obedience hath procured us such a Freedom from the Law that Faith without Works that is Legal Works may be imputed to us for Righteousness which is all one as that we may become Righteous upon performing only the Terms of the Gospel Christ is the end of the Law How I answer If I say by putting an end to it I speak what is plainest This is to give 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it s own proper Interpretation But how hath Christ done that He hath done it by satisfying and obeying it I have said in our stead He hath by the Merit of his Obedience procured our Deliverance from the Obligation to perfect Obedience as the Condition of Life This is such an end of the Law as will hold and can never be contradicted I will confirm it with the words following Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to him that believeth There are two Questions here will go to the heart of this Text What is the end of the Law and Why there is an end of it For the What we see The end of the Law is this Fredom as I say from the Condition mentioned For the Why the Text says it is for Righteousness to him that believeth Now what is the meaning of these words It is that by believing we make Christ's Righteousness ours and thereby are Justified No it is that by believing true believing which is also obeying the Gospel we may be made as one of the Texts has it Righteous and being so be accounted so of God and dealt with as so not Legally but Evangelically so and accepted in that Righteousness of God See my Book of Justif p. 57 58. opposed to the Righteousness of Works unto Eternal Life This St. John teaches He that doeth Righteousness is Righteous and Christ's own mouth hath confirmed And the Righteous to Life Everlasting As for that Text which is like still to be laid in our way the first of those that in the words I have quoted to wit 2 Cor. 5.21 I will accumulate thus much that In Christ's taking on him our Sins to become a Sacrifice for them and fulfilling the Law to procure those new terms in performance whereof

Conscience of it also is hereby so resolved that under King James we would not be Papists under those that succeed We will not be Slaves * Having said this for the People I must say one thing also for the King out of the same Principle There is the Positive and Negative Power of Rulers According to our English Government it is true and to be held that the King can Positively do nothing but according to Law But it being true also and to be considered that the Supreme Law in all Polities is the Common Good if a Prince in the use of his Power only which is Negative should upon occasion do something otherwise than Law for the Benefit of the Subject Bona fide and not his private Ends I do believe both Politically and as a Divine that he may have a good Conscience in it and when he has that he is not to account he acts then against the Law but according to it seeing he does Govern in such a Case by the Supreme Law unto which all others are Subordinate Not long before King Charles's Death the Justices were sending Mr. Baxter to Prison for Conventicling but he hearing of it and being told it might kill the ill good Man out of his kind Nature sends word immediately he would have him forborne To have controul'd the Law to a Man's hurt it had been Tyranny but when it was only for Good without detriment to any who could open his Mouth against it It is to be supposed no Law-givers can foresee all Cases that may happen and when Equity and a good Conscience is against the Letter of the Law thus much I think Justifiable by the Old Covenant Oath where the King Sware to execute the Laws Cum Justitia Miserecordia If not it will be by that Power our Kings have of granting a Nolle Profequi in some cases to Offenders and much more by that of Pardoning All ad libitum which a Majore ad Minus cannot but warrant more than this It is fit that Kings before they Swear do understand their Oath to have this Construction and to know that which is much more to the purpose that any Law which is against God or Nature that is which is against the Law of Nature or Word of God or the Common Good is really in foro Conscientiae No Law so that in the Non-Prosecution thereof they are not to be condemned Nay if a Prince by Malversation even Positive or Privative shall render himself Obnoxious to God and the People it is good yet for the Subject to bear with him as we do with Storms so long as we can but if the Case comes to that once as the Nation is in danger of Ruin by it the Doctrine of Non-resistance any longer than we can help our selves is perfect Ignorance of our State or raving Obstinacy Salus Populi Suprema lex esto Habetüs Sententiam meam in Causa hac gravissima J. H. The Postscript to the Reader THERE are several Pieces that at several Times upon several Subjects I have written called The Middle Way One is the Middle Way of Justification which I printed in the year 71 or 72 and reprinted lately 95 upon the account of our Brethrens Difference about that Point In that second Edition I have gathered up all Passages that concern that Subject out of the rest of those Papers to put them to it and took advantage from certain Exceptions against Mr. Williams to add something that I thought wanting in a single Sheet and have here supplied what was yet in my Mind to say farther upon this Occasion Now if the Reader shall bid the Bookseller stitch these six Sheets that one Sheet so called and those eight or nine together and then shall take time to read them and notice of what he reads unless he thinks this Point of Justification be such as is not worthy his Time or Thoughts which was an Article of so great Concern to our first Reformers and does not meet with something or other in them and that as an Original which may serve at least Vice cotis to whet his own Understanding upon them then is it not I my self only but two of our most eminent Brethren while alive as appears by their hands put to one of my Papers are deceived I will add that if Mr. W. therefore shall not now set himself to peruse them and finding any such Matter which he can improve or make out better for me than I have done if he does it not then am I farther disappointed in one End of this present Work as also of my believed Estimation of Mr. Williams For according to what a Man's Mind is most upon in such Disputes as these the Investigation of Truth or the Defence of ones self such is his value more or less Having yet room the fear of the want whereof made me put those two Paragraphs p. 29. into a Marginal Note that should else have been part of the Book I will use it to supply one thing lacking in the single Sheet mentioned The Sacrifice and Righteousness of Christ's Death and Life is that which hath procured Pardon and Salvation to every Believing Sinner upon the account of that Satisfaction God as Rector hath received by it so that being Legislator also and above Law he might with Demonstration too of his Righteousness relax and hath relaxed or dispensed with his Law of Works requiring another Condition to those Benefits in a new one the Law of Grace or the Gospel This Pardon now and Life or Grant thereof upon Condition being the Grand Fruits of our Redemption it is a Question between Mr. W. and I whether the Condition it self also be a Fruit of Christ's Purchase which if it be not derives not yet from our Free Will but the Grace of Election It is not agreeable to my Genius to make Christ's Redemption which I would have One thing and Universal to be differently insluxive on the Elect and others I have opened this Apprehension of mine in that single Sheet mentioned and there are two Considerations moreover offered against the received Opinion which I desire Mr. W. to weigh Honestly and if he can to solve me the Difficulty or if he cannot to come with me to this Composition The Lord Christ by Redeeming the World and consequently by his Death hath obtained a Right of Dominion over it and by that Right does give that Condition to whom he will Acts 5.31 But though Faith therefore and Repentance in this remote way about may be said to be obtained by Christ's Death as he hath obtained thereby a Power or Right of giving it I deny it to be the immediate Purchase or direct Fruit of it I deny that Faith is a Fruit of Christ's Death in the same manner as Pardon and Life is upon Condition of Faith I deny that it proceeds from Satisfaction given to God's Justice which Christ's Death was though it may from his Merit or Redundancy of it as all other Good does seeing in his Name it is or through his Merits that we ask all things at the Hands of God as Health and Wealth and the like Blessings which we cannot say yet Christ died that we should have Again Christ came and died to Save Man by restoring him to Righteousness from whence he is fallen Now the Righteousness of Nature we never can be in this Life restored to and there is therefore a Righteousness of Grace which God hath ordained in room of that to Save us revealed in the Gospel and it is called the Righteousness of God because of this his Ordination By the Obedience of Christ we are said to be made Righteous and the Righteousness of God in him or by the Means of him as one has it But how by the Means of him Why by his Death but this way about still Christ died to procure for us a Covenant with another Condition than that of the Old which performing we become Righteous that never could be so else but mark it when the Condition is purchased the Performance comes not from thence but from the Free Gift of God In the mean time this Mercy that God hath ordained and doth accept of such a Condition as we do or can perform must not pass without Resentment Blessed be the God of Heaven for some Sense and Knowledge of this in these Sheets Blessed be God that it is not a Righteousness of the Law required of us but a Righteousness of the Gospel Blessed be God it is not by a Righteousness of Works that we are Saved but a Righteousness the Failings whereof are pardoned and the little Done accepted through the alone Merits of Christ Jesus Which when they had read they rejoyced for the Consolation Deo Gloria mihi Condonatio J. H. FINIS

Effects only I conclude either then there is nothing at all in this or if there be something so as he may come off in his saying that Besides the Effects the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed it is a coming off but with a Fallacy fallacia dictionis For he understands that Righteousness of Christ which is so called in relation to the Sanction and we speak altogether of his Righteousness in relation to the Precept of the Law of Redemption I must yet add If Mr. W. will stand to it that the very Righteousness of Christ without equivocating is imputed to us besides or any more than in regard to the Effects then let him say that Christ obeyed and suffered not only for us or in our stead but also in our Persons taking it too in their own sense and so make a full end with his Brethren But I argue If Christ obeyed and suffered so in our Persons as well as for us and in our stead Then should not we obey at all Then should not we suffer at all for he that hath perfectly obeyed can be punished for nothing Then should we need no Forgiveness Then would Christ's Sufferings for us having obeyed be needless Then must he be lookt on by God as the Sinner Then must the Culpa as well as the Poena be imputed to him Then could not Christ be our Mediator because he is the Offending Party and a Mediator is a third Party between the Offender and the Offended in which Person he obeyed and suffered for us Then lastly should Impunity and Life be due to us immediately by a meer Resultancy from his Obedience and Sufferings and not be given by the Interposition of a new Law or Covenant upon terms as they are according to the Gospel which is subverted therefore by that Opinion Once more If Christ suffered in our Persons then should he have borne the same Sufferings and if they were the same they could not be instead of Ours You may say the Righteousness of Christ in it self is imputed to us though it be not Ours only in the Effects But Mr. W. must not come off so for I say To be imputed in it self is to be Ours by Imputation that is Judicially Ours which draws the same Consequences as Ours in it self But I pray let us consider a little in good earnest what is in this Conception of Mr. W. that besides the Effects being made Ours the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed Is there any thing in it or nothing in it Is it of any or no Signification Certainly if his meaning comes not to thus much that besides the Effects Christ's Righteousness it self is ours also by Imputation it is an idle impertinent vile Trifling with us which in regard to Mr. Baxter is not to be spoken without some Resentment in so exquisite a matter If he will grant his meaning to be thus much that though Christ's Righteousness cannot be inherently Ours yet it is indeed Ours by Imputation then is he come quite home to his Brethren who never said or intended any other After this I argue If Christ's Righteousness be imputed to us in it self Then were it pleadable by us as if we our selves had done and suffered what Christ did which Mr. W. does in effect allow or without Tergiversation must Gospel Truth p. 39 40. And also Then must God have dealt with us as if we had which he does more positively allow P. 42. To impute to one says he what is suffered by another is to deal with him as if he himself had suffered But God hath not dealt thus with us and we cannot plead so with him which appear by the said Consequences It is not all one as if we had done and suffered in Christ what he did and suffered for us for Satisfaction is another thing than this It is not all one in other respects it is as good for us only in the obtained when attained Effects PART IV. THERE remains now one thing and a chief thing yet to be done which is to offer something that may serve to reconcile such Brethren at least as agree in the main though it cannot such as quite differ in the Point I shall first dilate a little more for lights sake and so be lead thereto by the matter it self Christ in Scripture is said to dye for us and to dye for our Sins For our Sins he may be said to dye or suffer in these two senses For our Sins To expiate them to deliver us from them the Guilt and Condemnation due to us for them For our Sins As the Meritorious Cause of his Death and Sufferings upon his voluntary undertaking that Expiation Both these Senses are good and to be retained For us may have a double Sense also Loco nostro or Bono nostro In our stead or in regard to our Benefit The Socinians will have Christ to dye for us only bono nostro which they fetch about too so as makes his dying for us of no more concern than a Martyr's Christ by his Death confirmed his Doctrine This makes us believe it His Doctrine teaches a Holy Life By a Holy Life we leave Sin Christ therefore dyed for our Sins But we hold Christ dyed loco nostro in our stead in our room Now In our stead or loco nostro may have again a double Interpretation In our stead As representing our Persons so that God looks on us as having done and suffered what Christ did and suffered for us As what my Attorney or Delegate does for me I am accounted to have done He is the Agent Naturally but Civilly or Legally it is I In this Interpretation we are not to hold Christ dyed in our stead for that draws all those mentioned Consequences after it which must carefully be avoided There is another Interpretation then of Suffering in our stead In our stead that is To save us from Suffering our selves and this is the Sense we are first to know to be the right and then stand by it To do any thing or suffer it in the room of another I have said is to do or suffer that thing that the other may escape it and in this right sense it is that Grotius understands Christ's dying for us and speaks of a Commutation or Subrogation of Christ's Person in the room of ours in his Sufferings for us as the Beast was subrogated in the place of him that Sacrificed it If any stretch such words of his farther than so they abuse both their Understanding and him Now when this In our stead in usual speaking is Suffering or doing in our Person I am brought at last to a pause as to the words we use That Christ suffered and obeyed in our Persons is said by our Divines without scruple and Dr. Bates does but handsomly express what they speak ordinarily Nay Mr. Baxter does acknowledge that these words may be used if we put a right Sense on them And what is that Sense The Sense