supposing this be true the inference of his being only a Metaphorick Priest is not to be avoided and consequently all the Texts where he is any wayes stiled a Priest are to be understood only Metaphorically For if his Priestly and Kingly Offices be not distinct either his Regal Office must be reduced to and included in his Sacerdotal which our Author will not affirm and if he should he would only gain by it the making Christ a Metaphorick King instead of a Metaphorick Priest or else his Sacerdotal Office must belong to and be included in his Regal being only a readiness to exercise that Authority and Power for his Church which as a King appertains to Him And if so then those innumerable places of Scripture which report Christ to be a Priest to have given himself a Sacrifice to God for us to have expiated Sin to have made atonement and to have rendred God propitious are every one of them Metaphorical I have insisted the longer on this Opinion of Mr. Sherlock concerning Christs Priestly Office being only a different part and administration of his Mediatory Kingdome 1 st to make it appear that by Charging Socinianism upon some of our late pretended Rational Divines we do not transform them into any thing but what they are The truth of the imputation rather than the foulness seems to be that which makes them angry As the Historian tels us of Tiberius that he was both the readier to believe the more offended at something which was said of Him because it was the true report of his guilt so I wish it were not as much the Justness as the Odiousness of the Character of Socinian which renders some men stingy But 2 ly the main reason of my insisting upon these passages was to demonstrate that whereas they arraign the Non-Conformists for turning the plainest Scriptures into Metaphors the crime lodgeth especially with themselves and that the principles which they have Espoused are not otherwise defensible but by turning the plainest Scriptures into Metaphors So that here Clodius accusat maechos And providing Mr. Sherlock will abide by his Notion That the Offices of Prophet Priest and King are not properly distinct Offices in Christ I do here undertake to prove by easy trains of deduction that for one Text capable of a proper sense which the Phanaticks pervert by imposing a Metaphorick one upon it he lyes under a necessity if he will preach or write consequentially to his Tenets of wresting twenty in the same manner § 10. But this is not the only opinion imbib'd by our Author which I impeach as pregnant with this mischief His Notion of Justification being attended with the same inconvenience nor is it any ways maintainable but by perverting innumerable Texts from their plain and natural sense to a Metaphorick In the prosecution of this Charge I shall first give a true representation of his thoughts about Justification and then endeavour to demonstrate that besides what else lyes against him it is accompanied with this fatal unhappiness of turning a great part of the Bible into meer insignificant and empty Metaphors His sentiments then in reference to Justification are these That we are only Justified by our believing and obeying the Gospel of Christ. That the Sacrifice of Christs Death and the Righteousness of his life have no other Influence upon our acceptance with God but that to them we owe the Covenant of Grace That is God being well pleased with the Obedience of Christs life and the sacrifice of his Death for his sake entred into a New Covenant with Mankind wherein he promiseth pardon of Sin and eternal life to those who believe and obey the Gospel so that the Righteousness of Christ is not the formal Cause of our Justification but the Righteousness of his life death is the meritorious Cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous rewarded as Righteous persons The Covenant of Grace which God for Christs sake hath made pardoning our past sins follies and rewarding a sincere though imperfect Obedience The Gospel by its great arguments motives and powerfull assistances forms our minds to the Love and practice of Holiness and so makes us inherently Righteous and the grace of the Gospel accepts and rewards that sincere Obedience which according to the Rigor and severity of the Law could deserve no reward This I take to be a true account of Mr. Sherlocks Judgement about Justification and I have quoted it in his own words that he may neither complain of his being imposed upon nor the Reader question the Truth and sincerity of this representation And as whosoever consults the pages I referr to will find that I treat my adversary with faithfulness so if they compare them with some other places where he hath declared himself with less Modesty they will have reason to say that I have exposed his Opinion in the favourablest manner I could Now I design not any accurate ventilation of this great Theme nor any severe research into Mr. Sherlocks faileurs in the manage of it nor a Critical survey of his neglect of Truth as well as Modesty in treating his Adversaries about it nor yet his partiality in arraigning only the Non-conformists when he could not but know that the most Eminent Persons that ever the Church of England bred as well as the Generality of Protestant Divines are equally involved having appeared in the Defence of that very Notion of Justification which he so invidiously represents and tragically declaime's against those for The full handling of Justification stands reserved for other hands who in due time will retrive the spoyles wherewith our Author hath enriched his Wardrobe and strip him of the Lawrels wherewith he hath adorned his Temples I shall only bestow one stricture upon him and then apply to the proof of the inconvenience I have already charged his Opinion with and for which in this place I cited it In brief then I see not how the Covenant of Grace is any ways owing to the Sacrifice of Christs Death and the Righteousness of his life providing that Mr. Sherlock will be constant to and write consonantly to some of his other principles For if the Natural Notions which men have of God assure them that he is very Good and that it is not possible to understand what Goodness is without pardoning Grace as our Author elsewhere tells us I say supposing this to be true I see not how the Righteousness of Christs life and Death can be the meritorious cause of Gods forgiving our sins and Follies for as much as his Essential Goodness obliged him to it I take it for a principle of Reason that nothing can be merited which is due upon an Antecedent Title Merit in its essential Notion importing an acquisition of a Right which we had not before there can be no room for it in reference to that which we stood entitled to by the natural goodness of
as Crellius expresseth it that Christ laid down his Life for us ut jus quoddam ad peccatorum remissionem vitam aeternam obtinendas nobis daret Nor do I find that Mr. Sherlock sometimes acknowledgeth any more But waveing all these things and many more managed by others which Mr. Sherlock if he please may reckon Cavil Sophistry and Vulgar Talk and judg them unworthy of a sober reply and by slighting what he cannot answer or with a storm of words not only darkning but diserediting what he will not find so easy for him in a Logical way to encounter bear up his repute amongst his Friends There are only two things I would premise in order to the more clear making out the Consequence of perverting the plainest Scriptures into Metaphors which I have fathered upon Mr. Sherlocks Opinion The First is this that to justifie is in its proper acceptation a Forensick Term signifying to acquit and absolve one that is accused That this is its import when it refer's to God and Christ as the Objects of it and men as the Agents is plain from Psal. 5.1.4 Mat. 11.19 Luk. 7.29 That this likewise is the meaning of it when it is expressive of the Act of men standing upon their own vindication and Innocency is clear by Luk. 10.29 and 16.15 Job 32.2 and 9.10 That this withall is the only acceptation which it is capable of when it relates to the Act of a Humane Civil Judg as Psal. 8.2 Isa. 5.23 Pro. 17.15 will I suppose hardly be denied In this sense also can it onely be taken when declarative of the Act of God towards us as our Judg or when set in Opposition to Condemnation or the Curse of the Law to which we are obnoxious as Rom. 8.33.5 18. Gal. 3.11 The Second thing I would premise is this that Justification not only supposeth us to be indicted but withal imports an absolution from the Charge of that Law of the breach whereof we are accused Now as the Introduction of the Law of Faith hath not abrogated the Law of Perfect Obedience but this as well as that doth remain in force each of them requiring a Conformity to its own demands so supposing us to answer all that the Gospel requireth which is both a Righteousness of inherent Grace and of Personal sincere Obedience a failure in either of which leaves us incapable not only of being justified but of being pardoned yet the other Law abiding uncancelled and we being all Guilty of the violation of its Terms there lyes accordingly a Charge against us from which by justification we are to be acquitted Had the Law of Faith repealed and abrogated the Law of Works then indeed we should have remained lyable to no farther Accusation provided we had performed the Gospel-Conditions But then it would follow that by being Believers we wholly cease to be sinners and that the Gospel instead of only making-provision for the Remission of Sins against the Law hath prevented the Breaches of it from being so And indeed the Socinians express themselves in this more consonantly to their Principles than some others do For having stated the whole of justification in the Remission of sin upon performance of the Conditions of the Gospel in pursuance of this they accordingly plead for the utter abrogation of the Sanction of the Law These things being premised I do affirm that upon Mr. Sherlocks Notion of justification viz. That we are only justified by our Believing obeying the Gospel of Christ and that the Sacrifice of Christ's Death and the Righteousness of his Life have no other influence upon our acceptance with God but that to them we owe the Covenant of Grace wherein God promiseth pardon of sin and Eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel However in reference to the meer demands of the Gospel we may in a proper sense be said to be justified yet that in reference to the Indictment of the Law which is that alone which accuseth us for were we accusable of Non-compliance with the Gospel-Terms our Condition were wholly remediless we cannot in any propriety of Speech be said to be justified but that justification wheresoever it regards our discharge from the accusation of the Law must be taken Metaphorically Pardoned indeed we may be but justified in a proper sense we cannot For to suppose God to pronounce a person just that is unjust or to declare him Righteous that is unrighteous is to make him pronounce a sentence that is unjust false to Act repugnantly to his own Holy and Righteous Nature And as to justify and to pardon are not only wholly distinct in their Natures and Idea's but always separated in the cases of such as are arraigned at Humane Tribunals unless it be where the substitution of one Person in the room of another is allowed and even then though they accompany one another yet they are both distinct Acts and we have distinct Notions of them For neither can an accused Innocent by being accquitted be said to be pardoned nor a condemned Criminal by having the execution of his sentence remitted be said to be justified In like manner as they import the Actings of God as a merciful Father and Righteous Governour towards us we have not only distinct and different Idea's of them but they have their spring and rise in distinct Attributes of God and we become interested in them upon distinct motives and pleas Remission is the result of Mercy and the Act of one exercising Favour but Justification is the off-spring of Justice and imports one transacting with us in a Juridical way without the infringement of Law or Equity The word justify neither in its Etymologie nor Application and usage according to the Institution of men and least of all in the Scripture Usurpation is Equipollent to pardon nor coincident with to forgive So that upon the whole If we be not made Righteous with the perfect Righteousness of Christ imputed to us but that God only for the sake of Christ will dispence with the Rigor of the Law As our Author expresseth himself And if the only Influence that the Sacrifice of Christs Death and the Righteousness of his Life have upon our acceptance with God be that God being well pleased with the Obedience of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of his Death for his sake entred into a Covenant with mankind wherein he promiseth Pardon of sin and eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel as Mr. Sherlock declares his Conceptions of it And if those who are justified by Christ and shall Reign with him in Life be not those who are Righteous by the imputation of Christs Righteousness to them but those who have abundance of Grace and the Gift of Righteousness that is who by the Gospel of Christ which is the Grace and the abundant Grace of God are made Holy Righteous as God is as our Author further tells us I
Declaration come from God but admitting once that it is His there is no room left to suspect its being True To make promises is the Issue of Gods arbitrary and soveraign Will but to keep and fulfil them being made proceeds from the Eternal Rectitude and Sanctity of his Nature To deny his Being is a lesser disparagement put upon him than to imagine that he can falsifie his Word Christ needed a Testimony from God to confirm his Mission but God needed none from Him to establish his being True and Unchangable Though we need good assurance that they who pretend to be the Heralds of Heaven be not Impostors yet the only reason of believing what God saith is his own Infallibility 2. The Apostle reckoning up all the evidences of the Immutability of God's Counsel hath omitted this and thereby precluded it from the number of them Other security in order to our Consolation we need not nor hath God thought fit to give any but his Promise and Oath And as by the first he gives us a Right providing we answer the Conditions annexed to them So he assures us by the second that there are no latent reserves 3. Had the Apostle been introducing Christ in the place of and advancing him above Moses who acted for and from God to the People there might have been some probability in Mr. Sherlock's gloss but by introducing him into the room of and exalting him above Aaron who acted in behalf of the People towards God there is a plain overthrow given to it Schlichtingius who useth not to be over liberal in concessions relating to the honour of Christs Priest-hood yet grants credibile esse in voce sponsoris sacerdotium Christi intelligi That the Priesthood of Christ is in all probability implied in his Sponsorship 'T is true he takes a course by the Notion which he assigns of Christs Priesthood namely that in eo praecipue Christi sacerdotium consistit quod per Christum Deus promissa sua nobis exhibeat that his concession shall little avail us but as I dare not think that Mr. Sherlock will espouse it so If he do I shall know whom to list him among and what to reply to him but in the mean time I forbear It being once evinced that the Vadimony of Christ relates to his Priesthood we do thereby immediately obtain that the ratifying of the Covenant is no part of his Suretyship For all that Christ does under the reduplication of a Priest is for us and in our behalf towards God but to undertake that the promises of the Covenant shall be made good is to act from God to us In brief that Christs Sponsorship relates to his Priesthood there needs no more but the consideration of the context to convince such as are teachable and for others I know no means sufficient to instruct them neither have I the vanity to attempt it His susception of Suretyship is the rise and basis of his Sacerdotal Office and whatsoever he did in discharge of his Priestly Function it was in pursuance of his having substituted himself our Sponsor and accordingly the Nature and Boundaries of his Suretiship are to be defined by a survey of what he became lyable to and performed as our High Priest For though the compact and convention between Him and the Father be the foundation and fountain of both yet his Priesthood is immediately erected upon his susception to be our Praes or Surety And forasmuch as his being our Sponsor ariseth from an agreement which interven'd between the Father and Him and exerteth it self in the works of his Sacerdotal Function we must therefore have recourse to these as the Standar◠and Measure by which the full import and extent of his being our Surety is to be regulated and determined The importance and derivation of the Term as applyed to Transactions amongst men falls infinitely short of expressing the Vadimony which Christ entred into and undertook For besides that the one relates to Crimes the other to pecuniary debts and that the party to whom the Security here is given stands considered as a Rector whereas elsewhere we consider him as a meer Creditor there are also other essential differences namely that in transactions amongst men he who gives the Security supposeth the Debtor Solvent but in the case before us our inability to satisfie lay as the ground-work of the whole of Christs susception The Law of Creation which had a threatning annexed to it denouncing wrath against all manner of transgression being by us violated and broken it pleased God though he did not relax the punishment at least in its essentials which was threatned for the exalting the honour of his Grace to dispense with the Law so far as concerned the immediate subject and to allow a substitution Upon this in complyance with the Call of the Father doth the interposure of the Son enter And the great end of his concerning himself being the advancement of the Glory of Gods Wisdom and Mercy in our recovery in such a way and manner as that not only none of the Divine Attributes should be impeached or eclipsed nor the Decorum of Gods Government spoiled but that through Sins having a meet recompence measured out to it God might appear the Protector of his Laws it was thereupon necessary that He should undergoe the punishment which the Justice and Law of God made due to sin And forasmuch as this could not be effected without having our sins transferred upon him he therefore substituted himself in our room and became our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Surrogate And this is all that we mean by our Legal Union with Christ which the Term and Notion of his being our Surety doth not only display and illustrate but confirm and prove And whereas Christ is styled the Surety of a better Covenant it is because the Enacting of the Covenant of Grace respects his undertaking to be made Sin and to undergoe the Curse as the Moral cause and Condition without which there had been no overtures of mercy made to the Sons of men It was in consequence of Christs susception to be our Sponsor and with respect to the Obedience of his Life and Sacrifice of his Death as the procuring and deserving Cause that God entred into a Covenant with Man-kind promising to pardon their sins receive them into favour crown them with life upon such terms conditions as the Father Son thought fit to prescribe What these are the Gospel declares nor is any man actually forgiven justified or admitted into friendship with God but upon a performance of the conditions and having the qualifications there required Christs own discharge was an Immediate consequent of his sufferings and they for whom he suffered had also immediately a Fundamental Right of being acquitted but their actual deliverance was to be in the way order that He who had substituted himself in our room and he who had both admitted and been the
we contend for he could not have chosen Terms more plain full and Emphatical to declare it than those by which he hath expressed it in the foregoing places And the same subtilties that are used to persuade the World that what we alledg is not the true meaning of them would equally serve to pervert their sense were that the intendment of the Holy Ghost in them which we affirm There are two passages which I reckon eminently manifestative of the Intimate Conjunction that is between Christ and Christians which I shall at this time borrow some Light from and reflect some upon in reference to the Matter before us The first is that of Paul Heb. 3.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For we are made partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of ou◠confidence stedfast unto the End I know that Modern Interpreters do generally suppose the name Christ to be taken here Metonymically viz. for the benefit of Christs Mediation but I judg that the Apostle intends a great deal more by our partaking of Christ than meerly so The Syriack renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are mingled i. e. united to Christ. Chrysostom paraphraseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What is it to be partakers of Christ He and we are made One He the Head we the Body Coheirs and Incorporated with Him And accordingly he makes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the beginning of our confidence to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith by which says he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are begotten and consubstantiated with him i. e. intimately and truly United to Him That an Union with Christ by some tye and ligature beyond what a bare owning of his Authority denotes is here intended in our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Being made partakers of Christ the use of the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the same Apostle from whence the Noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes induceth me to believe When Paul would express Christs participating of the Humane Nature or of Flesh and Blood he doth it in this phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which seems clearly to conduct us to the meaning of the expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we are now upon As he became no otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by the assumption of our Nature into Union with his Divine person so we do no otherwise become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by participation of the same spirit that inhabited the Humane Nature of Christ which is the Bond and Medium of that Union which we plead for between Christ and Christians The other expression which I judg declarative of a higher Union between Christ and us than what a Political Relation doth imply is his being styled our Life Life is said to be in Christ not only formally as in its subject but causally as in its fountain Nor is he only called the Word of Life and the Prince of Life but he is expresly said to be our Life Col. 3.4 And Paul witnesseth of himself that he lived through Christs living in Him Gal. 2.20 Now that he should be styled our Life meerly with reference to his bringing Life and Immortality to light in the Gospel is too jejune a sense to sustain the weight of the Phrase I do not deny but that the Gospel is the Word of Life and that it is so styled in the Scripture Nor do I bring into debate Christs being in a proper and eminent sense the alone Author as well as the Subject of it Only I affirm that the making his revealing the Gospel which discovers the Glad Tidings of Life and the Terms of it to be the only reason of the Appellation given to him which we are now discoursing is to impose a Notion upon the expression which is too scanty and narrow to answer the Majesty and Grandeur of it And as the Context even to any who do but superficially view it will not admit this to be its full import so the Apostles expression of Christs living in him which seems a commentary and paraphrase upon it doth plainly overthrow this from being the sense of it Nor will it suffice to say that he is our Life in a Moral sense because our Life of Grace here and of Glory hereafter are owing to the Sacrafice of his Death as their procuring cause 'T is true that both our Holiness and Happiness respect Christs Meritorious Life and Death as their price but yet this neither comes up to the Loftiness nor exhausts the fulness of that expression He is our Life much less is there any thing in this Gloss that bears affinity to his living in us The only sense which bears a proportion to the Words is this That as Natural life proceeds from and must be ascribed to the Soul as its spring principle so all spiritual Life is owing to Christ as immediately acting us by his quickning Spirit Of our selves saith the Learned Bishop Reynolds we are without strength without love without life no power no liking no possibility to do good nor any principle of Holiness or Obedience in us 'T is Christ that strengthens us that wins us that quickens us by his Spirit to his Service Christ is the Principle and Fountain of Holiness as the Head is of sense or motion And this he maketh to be one eminent part of the meaning of that place He that hath the Son hath Life 1 Joh. 5.12 though Mr. Sherlock is not only pleased to tell us that it signifies no such thing but treats those who do so paraphrase it with words full of contempt and scorn But to resume what I was upon forasmuch as no Vital Principle doth or can operate but as it is united to the subject that is to be quickned by it Christ being then the Principle of our spiritual life there must be an Union of Christ with us as the spring and foundation of his Influence upon us No one thing can be supposed the principle and source of life to another without admitting a previous Union between them The third and last Argument whereby Mr. Sherlocks Hypothesis of a Political Union may be combated and if I mistake not utterly defeated is levied from the Vinculum and Bond by which the Scripture reports Christ and Believers to be copulated and brought into cohesion one with another As every Union implies such a Relation in the virtue whereof there resulteth an Oneness between the connected Extremes so as the Nature and Quality of the Unitive Principle or Cement is such is the Genius of the Union it self and of the oneness that thereupon emergeth Now by consulting the Scripture which alone ought to regulate and bound our conceptions in the Matter before us we find the Spirit to be the Vital Ligature of the conjunction and coherence that is between Christ and Christians The very Spirit that resides in Christ being communicated to us we do thereby in a secret but sublime and real manner become knit and ligu'd
God and those Notions which we have engraven in our Consciences of it Nor can I imagine how the Covenant of Grace can be so much as necessary to the promising Remission of Sins much less that the Death of Christ was needful to procure it to that End providing what our Author sayes in another place do obtain The passage I referr to is this The whole Mystery of the recovery of mankind consists only in the repairing the Divine I-age which was defaced by sin that is in making all men truly good and virtuous· Sin is our Apostasie from God and doth as naturally make us miserable as it makes us unlike the most happy Being But Holiness restores us to our Primitive state to the perfect Constitution of our Natures and makes us Good and therefore happy as God is Now if this be true although the Covenant of Grace might be necessary upon other accounts namely to mold and frame our souls to the Love of God and practice of obedience to ingenerate piety in us to make us inherently Righteous yet I do not see how it was needful to the promising remission of sin Neither can I satisfie my self how forgiveness of Sin is at all necessary if the whole mystery of our Recovery consists only in the repairing the Divine Image which was defaced by sin I have observed of the Arminians that however somtimes they acknowledg the New Covenant to be gratuitous and fâ—ee yet by some principle or other which they have imbib'd they do in effect make it an Act of necessity in God and not of favour Thus that I may give one instance upon Corvinus's admitting all mankind by the fall of Adam to be discharged from that Obedience which the Original Law required it necessarily follows either that Gods soveraignty and Rectorship over man had been supplanted Mankind had been under no law at all and consequently no wayes capable of offending or else God behoved to enact the new Covenant This being suggested which I leave Mr. Sherlock at his leasure to think of I now address to enforcing the Charge I have loaded his Opinion about Justification with namely that as it imports our absolution by and before God from the accusation of the Law it occurrs not in a proper sense in the whole Scripture but must every where be susceptive of a Metaphorick one if his Notion of it be admitted I do not here dispute whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Justify and to be Justified be not sometimes taken in a Moral Sense for justifacere that I may use Davenants phrase the making an inherent Change in our Persons as well as at other times in a forensick Sense for the making a Change in our state by absolving and acquitting us when accused Though I must say that I know not one place in the whole New Testament where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of necessity to be interpreted as expressive of Sanctification and purgation from Vice though Rom. 8.30 1 Cor. 7.11 Tit. 3.7 be produced to that purpose unless it be Rev. 22.11 and it is certain that some ancient Copies instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there Let him be further justified still have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let him do Righteousness still Nor will I here discourse how inconsistent it seem's with the Wisedom and Sapience of God to introduce a perfect Righteousness such as that of his Son was meerly to make way for his justifying us upon an imperfect Righteousness such as that of our Obedience is Nor shall I argue how that the Righteousness of Christs Life and Sacrifice of His Death must be imputed to us for Justification in a proportionableness to our Sins having been imputed to Him in order to his expiatory Suffering To attribute Christs Sufferings meerly to Gods Dominion without any respect to sin is the grossest of Socinianism and repugnant to the Scripture in a hundred places To say that our sins were imputed to Christ in the effects of them but not in the guilt is to contradict all Principles of Reason For Guilt and Obnoxiousness to punishment being Equipollent phrases he cannot be supposed to have been made liable to the last upon the account of our Sins without haveing been brought under the first Nor is it imaginable how without submitting to the guilt of our sins he could have been punished should it be granted that without respect to them he might have suffered Though without any habitude to sin his sufferings might have been Dolorous yet they could never have been Penal 'T is a thing utterly unintelligible how Christ could be made sin for us and have our punishment transferred to him without a previous imputation of Sin and the derivation of its Guilt upon him Now by proportion if our Sins were imputed to Christ otherwise than meerly in the Effects of them so must likewise the Righteousness of his Life and the Sacrifice of his Death be otherwise imputed to us than meerly in the benefits of them Nor will I press how that secluding not only the Righteousness of Christ's Life but the satisfaction of his Death as the matter and the imputation of it as the Formal Cause of Justification it seem's repugnant to the immutability and Essential Holiness of God to justify us upon an imperfect Obedience the Law which requireth a perfect remaining still in force and denouncing Wrath in case of every failure Neither shall I here urge how there can have been no surrogation of Christ in our room nor can we properly be said to be Redeemed by him as our substitute if all redounding to us by his Death be only the procurement of the Gospel-Covenant in which God upon such Conditions as he there requires undertakes to pardon our Iniquities and Sins A surrogation in our room and stead to Acts and Sufferings which are not in a Law-sense accounted ours I am so far from Understanding that without admitting injustice in the Rector who allowe's the substitution it seem's to me a thwacking Contradiction especially if we consider that Christ was our substitute to make satisfaction to the Demands of the Law and not of the Gospel and that by his Obedience and Death He hath only freed us from what we were obnoxious to upon failure of perfect Obedience but not at all from what we are liable to in case of Unbelief and want of sincere Obedience That the Righteousness of Christ is some way or other ours yea that it is in a certain sense the very cause of our Justification the Socinians themselves do not deny Nec enim ut per Christi justitia justificemur opus est ut illius justitia nostra fiat justitia sed sufficit ut Christi justitiam Causa sit nostra justificationis hactenus possumus tibi Concedere Christi Justitiam esse nostram Justitiam quatenus nostrum in bonum justificationemque redundat says Schlich tingius