their Happiness as if themselves had done and suffered what Christ did Reader were these Men duly tender or honest when they pervert Words â—o plain and ascribe to me what is as directly contrary to my Words as yea and no. They say I affirmed what I do deny and that I denied the very thing I affirmed But the Turn could not be served without these Methods 3. The Ground of Jealousie I 'll give and judge you how just it is 1. I did affirm that Christ did bear the Punishment of our Sins yea and he bare the Guilt of our Sins which is that respect of Sin to the threatning of the Law whereby there is an Obligation to bear the Punishment of Sin But I denied that Sin it self as to its Filth and Fault was transacted on Christ and that Christ was made and accounted by the Father the very Transgressor the Adulterer and Blasphemer Gospel-Truth p. 10 11. Here 's my Crime for Mr. M. hath oft preached up the later 2. I affirm as thou seest of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness but my Fault is that I deny that God accounts that we legally died and obeyed that we made Satisfaction to God though I grant that Christ died for us yea in our Place and stead 3. I have through the Goodness of God lived to declare in this Book enough to confute his Prophesie and his Opinion too though I think he should pray for a more calm and charitable Spirit before he prâ—tend to Predictions concerning his Brethren 4. Will he repent of his rigid censorious Slander For I 'll here declare that I assent to his own Words p. 18. By imputed I mean that it Christ's Righteousness is looked on by God as belonging to us in order to our being judicially dealt with according to the Merit thereof This I have oft affirmed but it 's far short of what elsewhere he strains it too 4 Charge The Son of God was united to an Embrio which is a Piece of ignorant Blasphemy Repl. My Words were Oh! For God-Man to be at any time unactive as an Embrio or Child in the Womb for him to be born of a Woman I said not that the Son of God was united to an Embrio unactive as an Embrio is another thing And I 'll â—â—ing him twice Ten to oppose his two Witnesses But had I said it where is the Blasphemy when the divine Nature I hope was united to Christ's dead Body in the Grave as all grant And very many say that the divine Nature was united to the Flesh before it was organized or animated of whom Turretin's Instit. Theol. p. 372. Etsi anima infundi non potuit in Corpus nisi jam organizatum c. Non sequiter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non potuisse carnem statim sibi unire cum Opus ejus non possit aut praesente aut absente anima sibi coarctari Pierson and Multitudes are Blasphemers with this bold Man But supposing that though the Virgin conceived by the Power of the Holy Ghost and went her usual Time and that Christ was like other Children and the Faetus had Matter and Nourishment ministred thereto by the Virgin who conceived by the Power of the Spirit Yet that the Divine Person was not united to the Flesh before it was animated But are not many Phisicians so ignorant as to judge the Soul is united to the Body unorganized and if so either the humane Nature of Christ had a separate Subsistence from the Divine Person which is false or the Divine Person assumed it when the Body was unorganized But it 's a Theme not fit for me to pursue who must confess my Ignorance therein in Comparison of Mr. M. who can tell us how the humane Nature of Christ leans on the God-head in the Son and hath the eternal Power of the Deity clasping about it and holding it in that Vnion p. 63. May not this seraphical yet very dull Author call what he please in this Point a Piece of ignorant Blasphemy whatever greater Divines or skilful Phisicans say to the contrary 5 Charge Because I would wash off all his Dirt at once I 'll give you one Charge out of his Book that he forgets in his Postscript though it hath been their best Tool viz. That I lick up Bellarmin's Vomit in my Exposition of Phil. 3.8 9. Repl. This is as true as the rest for when I expounded that Text I plainly affirmed thaâ— 1. We are justified by Christ's imputed Righteousness only 2. That all Holiness compared with winning Christ is to be esteemed as Dung 3. The best thing in us is vile compared with Christ's Righteousness And indeed if that Text speaks only of Justification and that the Apostle designes to oppose his own Righteousness to Christ's then his own and ours are as unfit as Dung to be found in 4. But I then judged and still do that the Apostle there designed to proclaim the Preferrableness of Christianity to Judaism and what was Pharasaical yea or self-invented And therefore as he enumerates all the Dignities of Judaism so he ascribes to Christ the whole Glory of his entire redeemed State shewing that not only his Justification but his Sanctification too came from and by Christ both which were of a diviner Nature as well as appointment than what he arrived to whiles he was a Stranger to Christ and therefore expected and pressed after a Perfection therein whiles he despised all Things Priviledges and Attainments which stood in Competition with Christ Yea was glad he had lost them all for Union with him a Perseverance in whom with higher Communications from him was the very main Aim of his Life and Endeavours I am sure this Sense best agrees with the Context and is far enough from Bellarmin's Sense neither want I Reasons sufficient to prove it had I room yea my Exposition of that Text is so far from militating against Justification by Christ's Righteousness that it proves it strongly 2. I come now to consider Mr. M's Defence of his own Errors He confines them to two Saying I kept Silence as to more When others read this Book they 'll see a greater Number though it seems he could not perceive them when he read my Notes and hath left out of his printed Sermons many obnoxious Passages yet he 'll meet with his Suretiship Righteousness the Debtor being as clear as the Surety P. 24. With his limiting so far Christ's Merit to his active Obedience p. 13. With his Position that all Graces of the Spirit are Effects of our being justified and not at all the Means thereof p. 32. That all our Obedience avails no more to our Justification than our worst Sins p. 71. Though he ascribes a Causality to Faith that the Crown of Glory is due to us in Justice p. 12. Even a remunerative Justice is exerted to us p. 15. c. But let us take what he thinks most concerns him the first whereof is that Christ's Incarnation was no
Clots of Blood and rendred him Sorrowful even to Death God hid his Face from him A Death in the manner of it accursed as well as shameful he tasted and endured He lay in the Grave for a time after he had thus wade◠through a Sea of Blood Shame and Terrour Alas Who can tell what he underwent whose Resentments of all must give them a weight beyond our conjecture One so Glorious to be thus Debased one so near to God to be thus Deserted c. How astonishing a sight was it to see Christ hang upon a Cross The purposes designed by it must be answerable to the wonder and so we shall acknowledge when we understand the Justice and Purity of God the Evil of Sin the Harmony of Divine Government the value of Pardon and Eternal Life the Honour of the Mediatour and the influence of his Obedience on Myriads of Angels At present we see the Pardon of Sin made consistent with Justice Our Lord endured that Punishment of Sin that God might be Glorious whilst the Believing Sinner escapes By this God declared the Righteousness of his Government whilst he Glorified his Grace in saving Transgressors Christs being Obedient even unto Death Honoured the Law above all that Men could perform in their best Condition yea sets it above Contempt when the Penitent is forgiven his greatest Enormities So that God as our Governor receives such Glory by Christs Subjection as it suffers nothing by the Impunity and Happiness of all who are saved Yea A Dying Christ is more fit to Awe every one against Rebellion and dispose to the exactest Obedience than any other Consideration For the further clearing of this Point I shall propose three Enquiries 1 Enq. Were Christ's Sufferings a part of the Obedience of Christ whereby we are made Righteous Ans. The Sufferings of Christ were a part of the Obedience of Christ whereby we are made Righteous No Precept could try his Obedience more than that he should make his Soul an Offering for Sin Herein he outdid the Loyalty of all Beings for the proof of this Point I shall give you some further Evidence that Christs Sufferings were a part of his Obedience 1. Whatever was endured by Christ was injoyn'd on him in a way of Authority upon supposition he would be Redeemer He agreed to be a Subject and Servant He learned whât Obedience was even by what he endured Heb. 5.8 and still acknowledged an Authority over him as Mediatour This Commandment I have received of the Father 's John 10.18 Not as I will but as thou wilt were his Words when the Human Nature hinted so much Reluctancy as expressed the Cup to be truly bitter Mat. 26.29 2. Christ's Sufferings were endured by him in a way of Obedience he obeyed in whatever he endured Isa. 50.5 6. The Lord God hath opened my Ear and I was not Rebellious I gave my Back to the Smiters c. Mat. 26.42 He shews the most Obediential regard Thy Will be done Phil. 2.8 He was Obedient unto Death The Law of Mediation injoin'd it his Will exerted its true consent even giving up the Ghost 3. The efficacy of Christ's Sufferings much depended on their being acts of Obedience had they been against his Will or had he Repented after he had first agreed Men had fail'd of Salvation Heb. 10.9.10 Lo I come to do thy Will O God By the which Will we are Sanctified through the Offering of the Body of Iesus Christ one for all The Will of God appointing and accepting this Atonement and the Will of Christ obeying and freely performing what was appointed are that we are Saved by The Obedient Heart of Christ in all gives a Power thereto Hence there 's a Stress laid on his Voluntariness in his Work He gave Himself Gal. 14. Tit. 2 14. And he offered Himself Heb. 7 27. He testified this in being the Priest that offered himself as well as the Sacrifice that was offered These being such amazing instances of Obedience tended much to glorify Gods Government how sacred is that Authority and how binding are its mandates ◠When the Son of God in Flesh will observe them even when they require such Sufferings to be endured and submitted to These are harder precepts than Angels or Men were ever called to obey and therefore how chearful should they be in observing such Commands as be less humbling and difficult especially when the Authority of Gods precepts are founded in his absolute Dominion over them But Christ could be under no Law till by his own consent he was willing to be a Subject I infer then that if Christs Sufferings were a part of his Obedience then we are made Righteous thereby or we are made Righteous by only some part of his Obedience which I suppose you 'l not affirm 2. Christ's Sufferings are a part of Christ's meriting Righteousness this will both prove that they are part of Christs Obedience and that we are made Righteous thereby Unless any should surmize we are made Righteous by some what of Christs besides his Obedience or that his meriting Righteousness doth not conduce to make us Righteous That Christs Suffering are apart of his Righteousness might be demonstrated many ways as First They were part of the condition whereupon Christ had a right to Mens Pardon and Salvation Isaiah 53.11 12. Second Christ pleads and interceeds in the virtue of his Sufferings 1 Iohn 2.1 2. Third We are justified by his Blood Rom. 5 9. Four They are meritorious of what blessings we receive but these things will be insisted on in the third Enquiry 2. Enquiry Was Christ's Incarnation a part of his Humiliation Ans. Christs Incarnation was a part of his Humiliation To argue this point with evidence I must mind you that the subject of this proposition must be taken as it naturally lieth I would think it of no use to you and in it self a vain question to ask had Christ assumed our Nature in another State than it is since the Fall or had Christ become incarnate in another manner than by being Conceived in the Womb of the Virgin Whether then his Incarnation had been a part of his Humiliation thô I know some Popish Schoolmen ungroundedly affirm that Christ would have taken our nature into union with him if Adam had not fallen and so there would not have been that place for his Humiliation yet I think not hard to prove that for the Eternal word to become Incarnate in any manner would have been a great Humiliation and there must have been somewhat that would have rendred it so or he would not have assumed our Nature But we have nothing to do with such Chimaeras Christ was Incarnate he hath assumed our Nature the Word of God tells us in what manner he assumed it and to what ends and in what State Therefore we must in our Question speak of Christs Incarnation as it was and not as it was not and which ever way it be decided every one must
confine his Conceptions according as the Subject in the Question is Stated unless they will deceive others and themselves I shall offer these Reasons to prove that Christs incarnation was a partt of his Humiliation 1 R. The Word of God in express Terms affirms this Phil. 2.7 But made himself of no Reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant and was made in the likeness of Men. Let us for the better apprehending the force of this Text consider 1. The Context 2. The Words in the Verse 3. The Objection that can be offered to enervate it from V. 8. For if the Context tend to prove that Christs Incarnation was a part of his Humiliation and the text in plain Words affirm it and there be nothing in the whole against it the Proof must be express only let me give you the 7 verse as it is in the Original which by our translation is Darkened Christ emptied Himself taking on him the force of a Servant being made in the likeness of Men. 1. Le ts consider the Context The Apostle had commanded Self-denial Charity and Humility ver 3 4. This charge he inforceth by Christs example ver 5. Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus lhat he might give this instance the greater Advantage 1. He shews the glorious dignity of Christ as God ver 6. Who being in the form of God thought it no Robbery to be equal with God He was equally glorious he that assumed our Nature and suffered in it was as excellent and the Beams of his Glory as Illustrious as God himself being of one Essence and Nature with God and having no other Nature besides his Divine 2. He then proceeds to tell them how this Glorious One humbled and debased himself v. 7. of which presently and thereby lets them see how meet it was that they should not grudge at denying themselves or being the most lowly and humble when Christ so infinitely more Glorious was content to become so low and mean as to take our Nature and suffer in it You see the Context requires that whatever is affirmed in this seventh Verse must refer to Christ's Debasement or it cannot answer the plain scope of the Apostles Reasoning which is to perswade Men to be Self-denying from this Example of Christ's humbling himself 2. The words of the seventh Verse are next to be considered He made himself of no reputation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is the first Expression if you regard the derivation of the word it amounts to this He rendered himself such as if his Perfections and Glory were vain or useless The word is consonantly translated 1 Cor. 9.15 Make my glorying void It 's render'd by Tertullian Se Exhausit c. Of all made himself nothing By Beza Quasi ex omni seipsum ad nihil redegit Zanthius raiseth it higher Se Evacuavit omni gâ—oria aequalitate cum patri He emptied himself of all Glory and Equality with the Father Indeed who can comprehend the utmost of this Examinition Now these words must refer to his Incarnation as what let in and made him â—â—pable of all the subsequent Sufferings The next words are He took on him the form of a servant or taking on him the form of a Servant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherein was this I answer In taking our Nature For by assuming this Nature he became God's Servant and subject to his Authority as if not his own Master thô a Servant to Man he never was He that was in the form of God that is truly so was in the form of a Servant that is truly so that is the sense the next words confirm and was made or being made in the likeness of Man Not likeness in opposition to the reality of the Humane Nature but a conformity in Nature and the natural Operations thereof He assumed our very Humane Nature I hope then the plain order and import of the words appear to be this The Lord Iesus did greatly empty and humble himself in taking our Nature by the very assumption of which Nature he was a Servant And lest you should think that by being a Servant is meant some Servile Debasement after he assumed this Nature and not his meer Incarnation the Apostle explains it yet more Being made in the likeness of a Man is added after the form of a Servant Nay lest any one should deny his Incarnation to be part of his Humiliation by inverting the order of the words He proceeds v. 8. And being found in habit or fashion as a man he humbled himself q. d. Being thus emptied and debased in taking our Nature and being to observance in a State common with other meer Men he went on to undergo those sensible Sufferings which his Humane Nature rendred him capable of enduring Which leads me 3. To the Objection from v. 8. Being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself becoming obedient unto death even the death of the cross Whence may be objected That his Humiliation is confined to his dying in the Humane Nature after he had assumed it A. Christ's Dying was a great part of his Humiliation but that doth not argue that it was all his Humiliation Christ's Death and lying in the Grave finished his Humiliaiton but it doth not follow that was the beginning of it His Incarnation did begin it thô he proceeded to Consummate it by obeying unto Death And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Emptying himself which is ascribed to his Incarnation doth as truly express an Humiliation as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render Humbled Yea the former denotes a far greater Humiliation as to the significancy of the word To conclude this I cannot conceive how the Apostle could more expresly assert that Christ's Incarnation was a part of his Humiliation nay he seems to lay a very great stress upon it and variously expresseth Christ's assuming our Nature as that wherein the Wonder consisted most Oh that he who had a Glory shining equally with the Father should so submit to the with-holding of it as to be made a Man Let me mind you that the Socinians will thank any Man that denies the sense I give of this Text. 2. R. Christ did in his very Incarnation in obedience to God's Command voluntarily submit to the concealing and suspending of his manifestative Glory that he might be capable to suffer the utmost Punishments he had engaged to endure This Argument will appear in greater strength if we consider it in its several Parts 1. By shewing what a concealing and suspending of Christ's Manifestative Glory there was in his very Incarnation 2. That submiting and enduring this in obedience to God and for the Ends he thus assumed our Nature was truly a Degree of Humiliation 3. I shall answer an Objection that may be offered against the Son of God being capable of being humbled 1. There was a great suspending and concealing of Christ's Manifestative Glory in his very Incarnation Our
Superfine Distinctions of Christ's Assuming our Nature being another Thing than his Conception the Thing and the Manner of the Thing though that Manner was a Cause of it the Conception and the being Conceived being Self-conscious that he had offered no Arguments fit to Proselite any his Admirers not being able to understand them and such as could guess at what they did signifie being sure to despise if not abhor them he comes down to offer a Proposal from his own Choice For my own part I would chuse to refer Christ's Conception to the Things that made him allied in Blood to us and so fit to act as our Surety rather than to his actual performing the Work of Suretiship as antecedently standing in that Relation to us P. 75. Reply Designeth he by this to leave others to chuse for themselves without a Damning Sentence That 's unlike the Heighth and Heat of the Man But what can we make of this Jargon as connected with what past before Was not Eve allied in Blood to Adam though she was not Conceived a Daughter of Man or Woman And therefore Christ might have been allied without Conception Again was not Christ allied in Blood to us by his Incarnation which he saith is another thing than Christ's Conception It seems by our Author's words That his abstracted Incarnation was Christ's taking the Humane Nature or Flesh but not Specifically our Humane Nature or Flesh Or was his Assuming the Humane Nature as distinct from Conception an Assuming a Humane Soul not allied to our Souls as he is allied to us in Blood by Conception and he doth here confine it thereto Here we meet with another Distinction sufficient to argue him still a Designing Man but not a very Distinct or Discerning one Here 's a Humane Nature and yet not a Humane Nature allied to us a Humane Flesh and Blood and not a Flesh and Blood allied to ours By Christ's Incarnation he took a Humane Nature a Flesh and Blood not allied to us By Conception he became allied to us in Flesh and Blood and in Nature too unless he hath it in his Mind that Christ hath not a Humane Soul allied to ours Those words also are very uncertain Antecedently standing in that Relation to us Doth he mean that Christ was not related to Men as their Surety before his Incarnation How then were all the Saints Saved before his Coming Or is it that the Son of God did not perform any Suretiship-Act in Assuming our Nature or being Conceived If so then he had not undertaken to Assume our Nature before he took it though all that he did or suffered had it been possible would not have availed us unless so done and suffered in our very Nature And can you suppose he engaged not that as a Surety or Sponsor without which nothing had been Payment Or doth he intend that Christ wa◠not allied to us in Blood before his Conception It 's true and yet as true That he was allied to us in Blood by his very Incarnation as well and as soon as by his Conception Christ did not Assume a Humane Nature before nor otherwise than as he was by his Conception allied to us in Blood and Soul too At last we are gotten out of this Labyrinth made up of nothing but ripe blown Thistles His Authorities when examined avail him little I have but room to examine one yet he is at the Front of them Ames Medulla Cap. 20. P. 94. Humiliatio est qua subditus est justitiae Dei ad illa omnia perficienda c. The Humiliation of Christ as Mediator is that whereby he was subject to the Justice of God for finishing all those things which were required for Man's Redemption Phil. 2.8 Here he confineth Humiliation to one part viz. a subjection to Justice not Authority and this to finishing not beginning what was necessary to the Redemption of Man which by the Text he quotes refers to his Death or Passion on the Cross of which besure he was not capable as God But that he confined not all Christ's Humiliation to this which excludes his Incarnation is not evident for the next words are Humiliatio ista non fuit c. that Humiliation was not properly of the Divine Nature or Person considered in themselves but of the Mediator God-Man Therefore the Assumption of the Humane Nature simply and in it self considered non est Humiliationis hujus pace is not a part of this Humiliation That Humiliation and of this Humiliation do indicate that he had an Eye to somewhat else that might be called by this Name Humiliation at least it doth not prove that Christ's Incarnation was not a part of any Humiliation of the Son of God because it was not a part of this Humiliation Dr. Ames limits it to this part Mr. M. concludes against any other Our Author at last having bungled so at Demonstration he falls to suspicion-work which I confess his Talent renders him much more expert in as if thinking no Evil were no part of Charity or at least want of Charity were no Challenge to Faith But what hath his Jealous Head brought forth after so oft tumbling the word Conception Even this his own Doctrin of Imputation is lost if Christ's Incarnation be a part of his Humiliation Well it 's a point I never thought of before and it 's a comfort to me the Gospel Doctrin of Imputation will suffer nothing but be availed thereby I hope to find much more of Christ imputed to me as done for me than what I was personally obliged to do by the Law or was esteemed legally to perform though I own as well as Mr. M. that Christ died in my stead yea and so obeyed too as you 'll see in this Book But with him farewell all Christ's Obedience or Humiliation if we did not legally do and endure all the very same and if so he must take his leave of the greatest part of the price of Redemption viz. the value given to all Christ's Obedience by the Divine Nature for I hope the Law never required that in Man's Obedience And since he lays such stress on his point of the Incarnation being no part of Humiliation let us Appeal to Competent Judges Phil. 2.6 7 8. Christ Iesus who being in the form of God thought it no robbery to be equal with God but be emptied himself of his Glory taking on him the Form of a Servant being made in the Likness of Man And being found in Fashion as a Man he humbled himself and became obedient unto Death even the Death of the Cross. I have rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 emptied himself of his Glory and left out the two Copulatives which are not in the Original The main Matter is reducible to these 1. Is emptying himself of his Glory any Humiliation I answer it signifies more Humiliation than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is rendred humbled Vers. 8. The Word is as much as rendring all Glory
Publick-spiritedness Godliness Integrity and whatever makes a Gospel-spirit and the Image of Christ upon a Man to say nothing of Humility good Nature Freedom from Envy and Malice c. Yea God blessed him more to the real Conversion of Souls than a hundred Mr. Mather's notwithstanding his charging him with rejecting the Counsel of God against himself P. 10. And to hold pernicious Soul-destroying Errors for it 's him whose Words he puts in a broken Light P. 46. 4. He very oddly evades the Charge of the Assembly Confess Chap. 26. A. 3. viz. This Communion which the Saints have with Christ doth not make them in any wise Partakers of the Substance of his God-Head or to be equal with Christ in any respect either of which to affirm is impious and blasphemous This Place I cited but would not repeat the Words at Pinners Hall To this he tells us P. 76. This must be taken in a limited Sense c. for taken absolutely it will not hold Believers are Menequally with Christ c. Rep. True for he hath almost told us we are hail Fellows with Christ he was not humbled in being a Man nor is he dishonoured in our being as righteous as he He saith P. 7. Christ's Incarnation may as justly be said to be a Part of his Exaltation as of his Humiliation But though they intend not the being of a Man in what they so severely brand yet they mean nothing if they exclude what is so great a Perfetion of Christ as his Righteousness is when they fix Blasphemy on saying we are equal with Christ in any respect they must think his Righteousness such a Prerogative that who will equal Christ in this may next ask of him his Kingdom also and Mr. M. hath given us a Handle for that upon our very being as Righteous as Christ. For P. 25. He at large shews that Christ hath two Titles to Glory a natural one and an accumulated one viz. An acquired Title as our Surety and if you ask what Glory that is you 'll find P. 56. It 's that special Revenue of Glory and Praise which the Father who began his Son from Eternity and loving him with an infinite Love designed him Now then if Christ's Title to all his acquired Glory be his Suretiship Righteousness and as to that we are as Righteous as he in Equality what can hinder us not only to have that very same Title to Heaven and Glory as Christ hath as he is our Sponsor But I say what can hinder Believers Claim and Title to the very same high Throne in Heaven and the very same Degree of Glory as Christ as their Surety hath a Title to since Christ hath it For that very Righteousness which they have as much of as he himself and that God gives or rather payâ— them all of remunerative Justice and that they are one mystical Person with Christ all which this modest Author affirms P. 55. Reader â—â—â—ge is this no other Equality than in being Men as well as Christ 5. Though he talks so much of Suretiship Righteousness he gives an uncertain Sound of that Bond wherein Christ and Believers come into that legal Oneness 1. One while he was constituted a Surety in that Covenant between God and him P. 10. Thereby there was a legal Vnion and this Vnion was from everlasting and it was of supercreation Grace and perfected in the Transaction between God and Christ. P. 50 60. Reader know That I grant there was a Covenant of Redemption beforetime and that therein Christ undertook to redeem and save elect Sinners c. But yet I deny that by that Covenant Christ and the Elect were eternally one legal Person or that he is their Surety in such a Sense as will render them legally esteemed to do and suffer all that Christ did pursuant to that Covenant or that thereby they are as Righteous as he Thou wilt find my Arguments in this Book at present it 's enough to say we were never Principals in that Covenant and therefore Christ could not be such a Surety The thing insisted on in that Covenant was Redemption Work and the Salvation of Sinners as fallen but the redeeming and saving of Sinners or our selves as Sinners was never proposed to us as our Duty it was inconsistent and impossible to our State as fallen and with his Leave as it looks strange the Elect should have two legal Heads at once viz. Christ and Adam so if Christ and Men were eternally one legal Person I doubt it may as well be proved that Christ legally broke the Law in the Elect's breaking it as the Elect kept the Law in Christ's keeping it Well thus far here 's a Surety without a Principal and a Work or Debt which none was ever bound to but him that is called a Surety in a Sense that many must be said to do and pay as much as he 2. Another while Christ's Name was put into the original Bond in which we by the Law and Covenant of our Creation were bound P. 10. He told us before he was constituted a Surety in another Bond viz. The Eternal Compact if so then his Name is put into this Bond in performance of his antecedent Suretiship and not made a Surety by putting his Name in this Bond then it follows that what he doth pay of this Bond can be said to be paid by us no otherwise than according to the Nature of his Suretiship in the former Bond wherein we have seen he was principal and sole Undertaker I am glad by this that I need not argue with him that if Christ was a pecuniary proper Surety with us in the Covenant of Works then it was either absolutely or disjunctively if absolutely that he would keep it then we were not Parties at all engaged If disjunctively viz. That either we or he would keep it then it was never broken for he hath kept it and his Obedience without any Suffering sufficed to fulfill it c. But Mr. M. granting and that truly that Christ was constituted Surety in the Covenant of Redemption prevents my insisting on such things Only still note as I have elsewâ—ere proved that Christ being made under the Law which he means by putting his Name in the Bond was the Effect of Christ's Suretiship 3. Yet inconsistently enough P. 14. Christ was made our Surety his Name was not only put into the Covenant of Works but into it as a broken Covenant Here all is ruffled again and how shall we unriddle it He was but now constituted a Surety in the eternal Bond but he is here made a Surety in the broken Bond He that distinguished between assuming our Nature and being conceived no doubt will find some Difference between constituted a Surety and made a Surety for that he must do or he contradicts himself Well I grant that Christ came in our Nature to obey the Law we had broken and bear the Punishment we had deserved and answer the End of
a way of Satisfaction Impetration Merit or Intercession it were true but as he words it it may be very Erronious and it is to Scrue an Error he doth thus express it Hence because he finds Repentance and Faith are so necessary to our Salvation he hath in his Pulpit endeavoured to inform Men how Christ repented and that he repented for us and though he doth not-publish it in this Sermon as he did elsewhere That Christ believed for us yet you 'll see presently how much he endeavours to convince us that he did so for if he believed whilst humbled it was for us and it 's imputed to us as he oft in this Book affirms Had I Mr. M's liberty what would I call this Error for though it 's in Christ's Strength and Grace that we Repent Believe turn to God and do good Works yet if we do not these as our Personal Acts Misery will be our Portion If you not I believe not you shall die in you Sins John 8. 24. Except you not I repent you shall all perish saith Christ Luke 13. 3. I say Except your Righteousness not mine exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees you shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Matt. 5.20 Had Mr. M. been an Auditor he had not said Lord thou understandest not the Gospel it 's thou art to do these things this is the deep Counsel of God however legally thou speakest He might as well say it 's thou Christ shall perish as thou Christ art to repent 2. Faith is a prime and principal part of our Being conformable to the Image of Christ c. He is the first Pattern and original Copy of Believing P. 62 63. Reply Is Christ's Faith the Pattern of Faith in Christ I remember somewhere Dr. Goodwin speaks of God's trusting Christ till he was Incarnate and of Christ's trusting the Father since the time of his Sufferings Yea we may easily grant that Christ believed God's Promise and as a Man depended and relied on God's Power and Truth But this is no other Faith than Adam in Innocency acted than the Law of Works directed to By this account we may think better of the State of Pagans than most do for without Gospel-Revelation they may believe in God trust him and depend on him But what is this to the account the Scripture gives of Faith in Christ Did Christ come to himself as a Saviour Did he receive himself as a Crucified Redeemer Did he eat his own Flesh and drink his own Blood for Eternal Life Did he plead his own Merits and rely on his own Righteousness for Pardon and restored Peace Did he consent to be married to himself Did he look to himself for Healing Or to use Mr. M's account of Faith in this very Page Did he go out of himself unto himself for all Yea take part of his Description of Faith in Christ p. 39 40.1 The Subject of Faith is the Heart of a convinced broken-hearted Sinner c. The very Nature of Faith and the acting of the Soul in it is such as doth imply and include a Sight and Sense of Sin and Misery and a lively heart-influencing Conviction of utter Helplesness in a Man's self and unworthiness to be helped by God c. Reader Doth Christ's Faith in the Nature of it imply a Sense of utter Helplesness and Unworthiness in himself or of his Sin and Misery The Reason he gives for Justling out such as Abram and setting up Christ for the original Copy of believing in himself is this The Humane Nature of Christ lives and subsists in the second Person leaning on the Eternal Deity of the Son of God it hath its Subsistence in the Bosom of the Godhead c. and hath the Eternal Power of the Deity clasping about it P. 63. The Apostle did not know this Faith when he said that Charity was greater than Faith Well as Sublime as this Reason seems to be I will venture to say This is not that Faith in Christ which the Gospel requires of Sinners 1. I will give you a Reason of Mr. M's which besure is none of the best P. 7. Christ's dwelling in our Nature is no part of the Punishment of Sin for then the Divine Nature only is punished and not the Humane at all nor the Person It 's a bad one for what he brings it since that Assuming the Nature and dwelling in it differ and I have answered it before and it needs a great Allowance to keep it from But if the Sufferings or Acts of only one Nature be not the Sufferings or the Acts of the Person of Christ then the acting of Faith of the one Nature on the other Nature is not acting of Faith upon the Person of Christ and consequently not Gospel-Faith which is to be acted on the Person of Christ here the Humane Nature believes but that is not with him Christ that believes it believes on the Divine Nature and that with him is not Christ who is believed on What now is become of Christ's Believing even by his own Reasoning 2. The Object of Faith in Christ is God-Man Mediator a Crucified Christ c. but the Deity of the Son of God abstractedly considered is not God-Man Mediator c. Truly if our Gospel-Faith is specified by this I see not the need of Christ's Incarnation or Death yea or regard thereto 3. This leaning and especially to the purposes assigned to this Act of Christ's Humane Nature is not all that which is Essential to the Faith in Christ which the Gospel requires But why should I Scribble the little Paper left It 's like the Reasons he gave for Christ's Repenting viz. The reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me and he was a Man of Sorrows and acquainted with Grief 3. He plainly discovers his Mind to be that Faith is an Act of the Soul whilst spiritually dead and unregenerate P. 61. He joins with such as say Faith is the means and way of our being made spiritually alive rather than our acting Life as being already brought into a state of Life as the Bodies Clasping hold on the Soul by the animal Spirits which are Corporeal things is rather the means of Life than an act of Life c. P. 62. Suppose that the principle of Grace begotten and created in us in Regeneration contain in it the Habit of Faith which I will not now call in question Yet c. P. 32. All our new Obedience and all the Graces of the Spirit comprized under that one word Love are the Effects and Fruits of our being justified P. 60. In Vnion by Faith which is the cause of this Union we are brought immediately into a state of Spiritual Life first Relative then Qualitative c. Repl. Here with the Arminians he denieth the habit of Faith necessary to the actings of Faith He is contrary to the Assembly of Divines who tell us That God in effectual Vocation takes away