fact came death and by man came the resurrection of the dead As in Adam all die as many as die so in Christ all shall be made alive as many as shall be made alive 1 Cor. 15.21,22 Who reading these very words sees not that this saying to the Corinthians is exactly answerable to that to the Romans Therefore the Discourse is concerning Death that is common to the Posterity of Adam and from which they do rise again which rise again Wherefore also this place being compared with that to the Romans we say the Discourse is here concerning Adam a sinner for what he said here by man there he said by sin The Animal Condition of Adam is discoursed upon in Twenty Verses and more by the Apostle on a very different occasion for here Death is opposed to the Resurrection but there the Qualities of the Body at the first created and afterwards raised again are compared with one another of which that had joined with a natural possibility of dying by the bounty of God a possibility also of living but this shall so have life in it self that it shall be without any natural possibility of dying Here I cannot omit the adding of an excellent place of the very excellent Writer of the Book of Wisdom which though it is not in the Hebrew Canon yet it hath a venerable Antiquity and was always had in estimation among Christians So then saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1.13 And next 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2.23 God made not Death neither doth he delight in the destruction of living Creatures for he created all things to have Existence and their Generations are healthful and the Poison of destruction is not in them neither is the dominion of Hell upon Earth But Righteousness is immortal But the ungodly with their hands and words called it to them and thinking it to be their Friend were consumed and made a Covenant with it because they are worthy to have a portion with it God created Man for uncorruption and made him the Image of his own Deity but by the Envy of the Devil Death came into the World and they have Experience of it that are on its side Here he shews that any kind of Death is understood which Death God is said not to have created nor to desire to wit with a will going before sin in opposition to uncorruption for the hope whereof Man is said to be created and that hope is not obscurely declared to have been a part of the Divine Image or at least a Consequent thereof But Uncorruption excludes all Death whether it is violent or not violent And what the Apostle said That by Man and by Sin Death entred this Author said no less truly That Death entred by the Envy of the Devil For all these Expressions signify the same Fact to wit That the first Sin of Man was committed by the Suggestion of the Devil Neither doth it hinder that this Author observes a certain special Effect of Death upon the Wicked for Death having entred by the first sin and gained power over all Men gets a certain peculiar strength by the great and continual sins of every Man in which sense sin is called the sting of death 1 Cor. 15.56 Therefore those from whom after their death all passage to life is shut up are deservedly called the Confederates of Death or its Bondslaves and peculiar Possession It might very easily be demonstrated if this were the thing that is treated upon that this was the constant Opinion both of Jews and Christians that any kind of death of a Man is a punishment of sin so that the Christian Emperours not without cause disallowed that Opinion besides others in Pelagius and Celestius that they said That Death did not flow from the snare of sin but that the Law of an unchangeable Appointment required it But that we may gather the things that hitherto have been said into one because the Scripture saith That Christ was chastised by God that is was punished That Christ did bear our sins that is the punishment of our sins That he was made sin that is subjected to the punishment of sin That he was made a Curse unto God or liable to the Curse that is the punishment of the Law But the Passion of Christ it self having been full of Torments bloody and ignominious is a very fit matter of punishment Moreover because the Scripture saith That these things were inflicted on him by God for our sins that is our sins so deserving because Death it self is called the wages that is the punishment of sin verily it cannot be justly doubted that in respect of God the Passion and Death of Christ was a punishment Neither are the Interpretations of Socinus worthy to be regarded which deviates from the constant use of words without Example especially because no just reason hindereth to retain the signification of the words which shall appear more evident afterwards Therefore in God the punishment is actively in Christ passively yet to whose Passion a certain voluntary Action is joyned to wit the undertaking of the Penal Passion The end of the thing that is discoursed upon according to the Intention of God and Christ which being placed in act may also be called an Effect is twofold to wit a Demonstration of the Divine Righteousness and the Remission of Sins in respect of us that is our Impunity For if you take the exacting of punishment impersonally it 's end is the Demonstration of Divine Righteousness but if you take it personally that is wherefore Christ was punished the end is that we might obtain freedom from punishment The former end is expressed by Paul when he saith concerning Christ Whom God hath appointed for a Propitiation in his Blood for the demonstration of his Righteousness for the pardoning the foregoing sins in the forbearance of God Afterwards he adds repeating almost the same words To declare his Righteousness at this time that he may be the justifier of him that is of the Faith of Jesus Rom. 3.25,26 Here next unto his Blood that is his bloody Death is joyned the end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to declare his Righteousness By this Name of the Righteousness of God that Righteousness should not be understood that God works in us or which he imputeth unto us but that which is in God for it follows That he may be just that is that he may appear to be just This Justice of God that is Righteousness according to its divers Objects hath divers Effects About the good or evil Deeds of a Creature the Effect thereof amongst others is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reward unto which Paul having respect said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is it is just with God to reward Affliction to them that afflict you And elsewhere Every Transgression and Disobedience received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a just Recompence of Reward And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3.8 the Syrian translated it Whose Condemnation
declare to have went before For neither did the Angels make mention of Enmity when they proclaimed that Peace was to come upon the Earth Luke 2.14 nor the Apostle when he said We have peace with God Rom. 5.1 And as the Hebrews put Sin for Punishment as it appears besides other places now alledged Zachar. 14.19 and Gen. 4.13 so also the same call him sin who suffers the punishment as also the Latines take piaculum both for the Crime and also for him that suffers the punishment of the Crime Whence it is that instead of peccatum sin the Scripture calls the Piacular Host or Propitiatory Sacrifice Sin Lev. 4.29 and 5.6 Therefore Isaiah following this form of Speech said concerning Christ Tashim asham naphsho he made his Soul sin that is he made his Soul obnoxious to the punishment of sin Neither did Paul speak otherways For God made him that knew no sin to become sin that we might be the righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5.2 It appears in the words of Paul that in both Members the Adjunct is taken for the Subject Socinus that he may invalidate the authority of that place of Paul by the word sin would have to be understood a man supposed by men to be a sinner First without Example for no where is the Hebrew or Greek word so taken Moreover Paul attributes this Action to God that he made Christ sin But yet that the Jews and others did judge of Christ as if he had been a wicked and flagitious man God is in no ways the Author of that thing yea on the contrary by a Voice from Heaven and by working Miracles he did that which made the Innocency of Christ manifest unto all men Moreover that new Interpretation of Socinus can in no ways agree to the words of Isaiah which contain the like Phrase for that which Paul said God did Isaiah attributes the same to Christ to wit that he made his soul sin or that he made himself sin Moreover Paul opposeth sin and righteousness We are made the righteousness of God that is we are justified or delivered from Divine punishment but Christ that that might come to pass was made sin that is he suffered Divine punishment There is also another Antithesis to be observed in these same words of Paul for God made him that knew no sin that is who deserved no punishment to become sin that is he would have him suffer punishment Christ was innocent not only towards the Humane but also the Divine Law Therefore the force of the opposition requires that he should also have suffered the punishment of the Divine Law Moreover it is a thing that daily comes to pass that the Innocent are evil entreated by the Wicked but here the Apostle observes some excellent thing And what other thing can this be but that God laid punishment on him that deserved it not Not unlike those former places is that of Paul to the Galatians 3.13 Christ redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us for it is written Cursed is he that hangeth on a Tree that the Blessing of Abraham in Christ Jesus might come unto the Gentiles Here we have the less difficulty in understanding the sense of Paul's words when he says Christ was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a Curse or Execration because he himself interprets himself and alledges Moses the Author of his saying he shews that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Curse he understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paul himself being Interpreter is he that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under the Curse Execration saith Socinus in this place is the very punishment of Execration which is true For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Curse in many places signifies the punishment proceeding from the sanction of the Law 2 Pet. 2.14 Matth. 25.41 And here the mention of the Law being added forbids the Curse to be otherways taken And the same Socinus confesseth That this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Curse was in Christ the Cross it self Therefore the Cross of Christ signifies punishment and that is it which we say Perhaps Socinus will grant that the Cross was a punishment because it was laid upon Christ by Pilate the Judge in way of a punishment But this doth not contain all that Paul said For that he may prove that Christ was made liable to punishment he cites Moses openly saying That those who are hanged to wit according to the Law of God are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed of God Wherefore the same word also is to be supplied in Paul citing Moses and referring these words to Christ as if he had said That Christ was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed of God that is liable to the punishment inflicted by God and that very ignominious For the Apostles when they refer the Passion of Christ to our uses they do not therein look at the deeds of men but at the fact of God himself as is manifest by many places before mentioned To all these things this also may be added That Death it self that is the destruction of that person which is made up of a Body and Soul inasmuch as it is inflicted by God hath always some signification of punishment Not that God hath no power otherways to inflict it upon man for he is Lord of the Creature but because it seemed good otherways to his Goodness That the state of this peculiar Controversy may be rightly understood we deny not that Man when he was created was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 earthly who had a certain vital strength but not a life-giving strength as Paul teacheth us 1 Cor. 15.45,46 and therefore that was the Condition of the Body that it would have perished unless God sustained it yet we contend that by the decree of God he was not to die if he had continued in Innocency The nobleness and eminency of that Creature proveth this as being the only Creature that is said to be made after the Image of God that is endued with a Mind and Free-will which is the Foundation of his Dominion over other Creatures for he cannot be Lord of other things who is not Lord of his own Actions Therefore this Excellency above other Creatures is an Argument that something more than a Temporal use was regarded in the Creation of Man And now what is more clear than that Divine Word If thou eatest thou shalt die Here the Discourse is concerning the Act of Death whether it was to be violent or without violence Therefore Death it self would not have happened unto Man unless the Condition of Sin had been No less clear and general is that of Paul The wages that is the punishment of sin is death Rom. 6.23 Before he had said By sin came death and so death passed upon all men All men saith he therefore he treats of the common event of all Mankind Therefore by man that is by human
A DEFENCE OF THE Catholick Faith Concerning the Satisfaction of Christ Written originally By the Learned HVGO GROTIVS And now Translated by W. H. A Work very necessary in these Times for the preventing of the Growth of Socinianism LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers Chappel and Jonathan Robinson at the Golden Lyon in St. Paul's Church-yard 1692. TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL Sir CHARLES WOOSELEY Knight and Baronet Much Honoured Sir THE Translation of this worthy Labour of the great and famous Grotius may boldly Claim the Honour of being Dedicated to your Patronage for many Causes The Excellency of this Subject being a Defence of one of the most Fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith requires a Patron of Worth and Excellency and such a one I may speak it without flattery is your self who are eminent for Learning and exemplary for Piety Your Works that are published in the World which are both greatly approved for their Piety and justly admired for their Profundity are an invincible Argument how Greatness and Goodness are joyned together in you by a a lovely Union But there is also a peculiar Encouragement to Dedicate this Book to you because you were the first that encouraged the Translation and Publication of this Work And verily if the seasonableness of a thing adds to its beauty as Solomon hath testified this Work hath found a fit time for its Impression For at this time that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 damnable Heresie or Heresie of Destruction as the word in the Original signifies that Root of Bitterness the hellish Error of wretched and blasphemous Socinus who trampled under his Feet the Blood of Jesus the Mediatour of the New Covenant is now beginning to spread it self in England and to infect whole Houses with a worse and more dangerous than any Egyptian Plague If the Son of Croesus who had been dumb all his days before was so wonderfully affected with the danger his Father's Life was in that the bands of his Tongue through the vehemency of Natural Affection were dissolved so that he that never spake before suddainly cried out Kill not my Father King Croesus how much more zealously may I that have been a great while lurking in Darkness as those that have been long dead now appear in the Light against those Enemies of my Redeemer who by their horrid Blasphemies are not ashamed to spit in the Face of my Lord Jesus with greater Impudence than ever did the Jews at his Crucifixion I am very glad that my blessed Redeemer hath honoured me to be Instrumental for the Confutation of that filthy Error of Socinianism which is as ready a way to Hell as ever the Devil of Hell found out since he was a Devil Methinks the very mention of the name of Socinus may make the heart of a gracious Christian to rise with holy Indignation and his hair to stand with amazement that such a blasphemous Wretch could be found upon the Earth How did this Blasphemer strive to vilifie the Blood of Christ Jesus as if thereby our Sins had not been expiated as if thereby no Satisfaction had been made to the Justice of the holy God as if the Death and Sufferings of this Lamb of God had not taken away the sins of the World and had been no Propitiation for our sins Those wicked Blasphemies are throughly Confuted both by invincible Arguments of sound Reason and evident Testimonies of Scripture in this Learned Work of Grotius God hath exhorted all Christians by the holy Apostle Jude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contend vehemently or to contend as men that are striving for the mastery as the Original Word signifies for the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints therefore I may justly hope that this Work will be acceptable to all good Christians into whose hands it shall come And that your self as you were the first Encourager of its Publication will now also willingly Patronize its being published Worthy Sir I recommend you to the Grace of the Lord Jesus and I beg of God that he may prolong your Life to the glory of his Name and after you have passed the time of your Mortality that an Entrance may be ministred to you abundantly into the Everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ I am Your much obliged Servant W. H. A DEFENCE OF THE Catholick Faith Concerning the Satisfaction of Christ AGAINST FAVSTVS SOCINVS Written by Hugo Grotius CHAP. I. The State of the Controversy is shewed and the true Opinion is Explained in the Words of Scripture BEfore we come to this Dispute we will first set down that Opinion which being taken out of Sacred Writings the Church of Christ hath hitherto defended with an unwavering Faith that afterwards it may evidently appear what is the difference between this and the Opinion of Socinus Therefore we shall explain the same Opinion bringing some Testimonies of Scripture which because Socinus wrested to another Sense by the way the true Interpretation of them shall be vindicated Therefore the Catholick Opinion is thus God being moved by his own Goodness to be signally beneficial unto us but our sins standing in the way which deserved Punishment he appointed that Christ being willing of his own free Love towards men should suffer punishment for our sins by enduring very grievous Torments and a bloody and ignomious Death that without prejudice to the demonstration of the Divine Righteousness we should by Faith Interposing be delivered from the punishment of Eternal Death The first Efficient Cause of the Thing whereof we treat is God God gave his only begotten Son that he that believeth in him should not perish John 3.16 God spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all Rom. 8.32 God laid upon Christ the sins of us all Isai 53.6 God made Christ sin 2 Cor. 5.21 The former Cause that moved God is Mercy or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Love to Mankind So God loved the World that he gave his Son John 3.16 God commends his Love to us that when we were yet sinners Christ died for us Rom. 5.10 The other Cause which moved God is our Sins deserving Punishment Christ was delivered for our sins Rom. 4.25 Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with an Accusative which amongst the Authors of the Greek Tongue Sacred and Profane is a very usual sign of an impulsive Cause As when it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For these things the wrath of God comes upon the Children of Disobedience Eph. 5.6 And as oft as that Phrase propter peccata for Sins is joined to Sufferings it admits no sense different from an impulsive Cause I will punish you seven times for your sins Levit. 26.28 For those Abominations the Lord God casts them out from your sight Deut. 18.12 and in several other places of Scripture neither is it any where other ways And that other Phrase pro peccatis for
sins hath the same force as oft as it is join'd with Sufferings Hitherto belong those Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for our sins 1 Cor. 15.3 Christ suffered once 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for sins 1 Pet. 3.18 Christ gave himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for our sins Gal. 1.4 Christ offered a Sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for sins Hebr. 10.12 And yet in these places Socinus would have the final Cause and not the impulsive to be denoted Yea which is more he adds That by the word pro for and the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for there was never an impulsive Cause declared but always a final Many places do evince that this latter on which Socinus relies is not true For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 use to signifie no less the impulsive Cause than the final Cause The Gentiles are said to praise God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Mercy Rom. 15.9 that thanks may be given on our behalf 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith Paul 2 Cor. 1.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for you Eph. 1.16 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5.20 We pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Christ's sake 2 Cor. 5.21 Great is my glorying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on your behalf 2. Cor. 7.4 and 9.2 and 12.5 straits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Christ 2 Cor. 12.10 I give thanks to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for you 1 Cor. 1.4 God will rebuke the wicked 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all their ungodly Deeds Jude 15. So also the Latines say Pro beneficiis gratias agere aut reddere to give or render thanks for benefits as Cicero doth very often The same said Vlcisei pro injuriis To revenge for Injuries Pro magnitudine sceleris poenas persolvere To suffer punishment for the greatness of the Crime Supplicia pro maleficiis metuere To fear punishments for evil Deeds As Plautus Castigare pro commerita noxia To chastise for a deserving Crime And Terentius Pro dictis factis ulcisci To take vengeance for Words and Deeds In all these places pro for signifies not the final Cause but the impulsive So also when Christ is said pro peccatis passus aut mortuus to have suffered or died for sins the Matter it self suffers not the final Cause to be understood as Socinus would have it for because there is a twofold End 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The End to whom and the End for whom As the End to whom the Medicine is made is the diseas'd Man the End for the sake whereof is Health and neither of them agree to sin For whether you say with Socinus that it is the end of Christ's Death that we should be drawn back or removed from our sins or whether also that we may obtain the remission of sins that we may omit that this End according to his opinion could not be attributed unto Death but very remotely neither of them can be expressed by these words propter peccata for sins or pro peccatis for sins for the End to whom will be Man but the End for what is not for sins but for that which is most contrary to sins the destruction or remission of sins Who ever said a Drug or Medicine was taken for Death that is to prevent Death But it is therefore said to be taken for the Disease because the Disease drives us thitherto It follows therefore that the impulsive Cause should be understood here Wherefore when also the Particle Min amongst the Hebrews denoted the Antecedent or impulsive Cause as Psal 38.9 and elsewhere often that place of Isai 53.5 cannot be translated better and more agreeably to other Scriptures than Dolore afficitur ob defectiones nostras atteritur ob iniquitates nostras he is afflicted for our faults he is bruised for our iniquities And that Romans 6.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 died unto sin what other thing can it signifie but Mortuus est ob peccatum he died for sin But the impulsive Cause though it may be manifold yet in this place it must be taken for meritorious for the Discourse is of Punishment as we shall presently shew Now sins are the cause of punishment no otherways than by way of merit Neither can it be shewed that these words ob peccata for sins or propter peccata for sins are any otherways taken in the holy Scriptures than in this signification of Merit especially when they are joined with Sufferings That place doth not prove the contrary 1 Kings 14.16 God will deliver Israel for the sins of Jeroboam for the sins of Jeroboam in that place signifie the kind it self of the sin to wit Idolatry unto which Jeroboam stirred up the People for the following words make that evident quibus peccavit quibus peccare fecit Israelem which he sinned and which he made Israel to sin For this is the truer Interpretation than that brought by Socinus Qui peccavit qui peccare fecit Israelem Who sinned and who made Israel to sin Therefore those sins whereof Jeroboam was the Author and the People the Followers deserved that Punishment of being delivered up Though I may also mention that Sacred Writings do testify that the followers of other mens sins are justly punished not only for their own but also for other mens sins which is so evident that Socinus himself is compelled to confess that a man may be punished for other mens sins if he is partaker of the Crime But that place of Psalm 39.12 which Socinus citeth makes evidently against him In increpationibus propter iniquitatem corripuisti aliquem liquefieri fecisti ut tineam desiderium ejus With rebukes thou hast corrected man for iniquity and hast made his beauty to consume like a Moth that is If thou would'st punish a man as much as his sin deserves verily that man's life would not be worth the enjoying of it for by this Argument he endeavours to move God to pity As elsewhere If thou mark iniquities that is if thou strictly requirest punishment for them who shall stand or endure Psal 130.3 Therefore that remains unshaken that the Phrase ob peccata for sins doth denote the Impulsive Cause and indeed the Meritorious for that Socinus somewhere seeks this way of escape that he says It is sufficient for the truth of this Phrase that any kind of occasion be signified First That is contrary to his Position in which he had said that the word pro for was never referred to an Impulsive Cause but always to a Final Cause because an Occasion is no way a Final Cause but if it deserves to be called a Cause it ought to be referred to an Impulsive Moreover both the Custom of Scripture and Usual Speech doth clearly confute such an Exposition of the words pro peccatis for sins and ob peccata for sins Hence it may be understood how erroneously Socinus denies That there may be found an Antecedent Cause of the
Death of Christ besides the Will of God and Christ Which is manifestly contrary to the saying of Paul If there is righteousness by the Law then Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vain Gal. 2.21 where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vain by the acknowledgment of Socinus signifies without Cause but there should have been added without an Antecedent Cause which is the original and most frequent signification of this word The original of it is from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Gift that is such a Gift as hath not an Antecedent Cause of Right whence it began to be translated also to other things in which the Antecedent Cause is not found So David Psalm 25.19 speaking of his Enemies says They hated me hinam in vain that is when I had given them no Causes of hatred Which Christ applying to himself John 15.25 says They hated me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a cause just in the same signification The place of Paul it self of which we are treating suffers not another Cause than an Antecedent to be understood For the Cause which Socinus deviseth to wit That they who mend their lives should be assured of the pardon of their sins this Final Cause appertains unto the Preaching and the Resurrection but not to Death which when Socinus saw here he would have Christ understood by the name of Death and also that Preaching and the Resurrection are included both wrestingly and contrary to the mind of Paul for Paul denying that Christ died for all signifies that there is some peculiar Cause which should belong to the Death of Christ for otherways he could have preached for a certain Cause and for a certain Cause have received a Reward for according to Socinus the Resurrection is only referred hither and not have died Moreover that Paul had a peculiar respect to the Death of Christ that which goes before makes it sufficiently evident who gave himself for me for that Giving every where in the Scripture signifies Death And Paul calling this same thing the Grace of God denies that that is despised or rejected by him and immediately gives a Reason For if righteousness came by the Law Christ then died in vain signifying by the contrary that this is the peculiar Cause why Christ gave himself and died because we by the Law were not just but guilty of punishment therefore our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iniquity is the Antecedent Cause of the Death of Christ The other Efficient Cause is Christ himself and that a willing Cause I lay down my life saith Christ no man taketh it from me but I lay it down of my self John 10.18 Christ gave himself for us for the Church Gal. 2.20 Eph. 5.2 and 5.25 The Cause that moved Christ was his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Love to Mankind This is saith he my Command that ye love one another as I loved you Greater love than this hath no man that a man should lay down his life for his Friends Ye are my Friends John 15.13 In the Faith of the Son of God that loved me and gave himself for me Gal. 2.20 Who loved us and washed us from our sins in his blood Apoc. 1.5 Christ loved us and gave himself for us an Oblation Eph. 5.2 Christ loved the Church and gave himself for her Eph. 5.25 The Matter is both the Torment going before Death and chiefly Death it self Isaiah calleth Torments by a pathetical name haburah a Wound Isai 53.5 And 1 Pet. 2.24 calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stripes Therefore we also see mention made of the Cross where this Argument is handled He reconciled both to God by the Cross Ephes 2.16 Having made peace by the blood of the Cross 1 Col. 12. Neither should only those Corporal pains be understood by the name of Torments but chiefly those very grievous Sufferings of Mind which the Evangelists signifie by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be sorrowful to be astonished to be heavy in respect of which chiefly Christ cried out that he was forsaken of God The other part of the Matter Death it self is urged in many places I lay down my life John 10.18 He reconciled us by Death Coloss 1.22 Death coming between for the Redemption of Transgressions Hebr. 9.15 This Death in the holy Scriptures is considered chiefly with two qualities as Bloody and as Ignominious That quality of bloody Death is denoted by the word Blood This is the Blood of the New Covenant which is poured forth for many for the remission of sins Matth. 26.28 Luke 22.20 God purchased the Church with his own blood Acts 20.28 God hath appointed Christ for a Propitiation by Faith in his Blood Rom. 3.25 Justified in his Blood Rom. 5.9 We have redemption by his Blood the remission of sins Eph. 1.7 Ye that sometimes were afar off are made near by the Blood of Christ for he is our peace Eph. 2.13 We have redemption by his Blood Col. 1.14 Having made peace by the Blood of the Cross Col. 1.14 Not by the Blood of Bulls or Goats but by his own Blood he entred into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption Hebr. 10.12 Without shedding of Blood there is no remission Hebr. 10.22 Ye are come to the Blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel Hebr. 12.24 According to the purification of the Blood of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 1.2 The Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin 1 John 1.7 Christ washed us from our sins in his Blood Apocal. 1.5 But the other quality of an Ignominious Death is signified by the very Name of the Cross for in that very punishment there is great ignominy whence it is said He suffered the Cross having despised the shame Hebr. 1.2 And by the name of Contempt which Isaiah used Isai 53.3 Here by the by it may be observed That not only in the places now alledged and others like them that either only or chiefly treat of the remission of sins there is mention made of Death Cross Blood but that in very many places the Apostles did profess they knew nothing they taught nothing but Christ and him crucified 1 Cor. 1.23 and 2.2 and that therefore the Gospel it self is by them called the Word of the Cross 1 Cor. 1.12 Moreover Christ appointed the Sacred Sacrament of his Supper not peculiarly for a Commemoration of his Life or Resurrection but of his Death and the shedding of his Blood 1 Cor. 11.26 Which things having been so often repeated do manifestly shew that some proper and peculiar Effect should be attributed unto this Death and Blood which Socinus cannot do For the whole Life of Christ gave an Example of Holiness more than his Death it self which was compleated in a short time But the Confirmation of that Promise of Celestial Life consists properly in the Resurrection of Christ unto which Death is only as a way
So that the Scripture looking towards this should have made mention of the Resurrection not of Death verily not so often and with Marks of Emphasis adjoined Socinus himself lib. 1. cap. 3. endeavouring to shew that the way of Salvation was confirmed by the Effusion of Blood when he had taken away the true Cause which we defend could not substitute any other probable Cause of that Confirmation neither could he bring any other true Difference why that ought to be attributed to the Death of Christ only and not to the Death of other Martyrs also Neither can Socinus ever explain how Christ obliged God to us which he himself grants to be true in some sense if God hath promised nothing for the shedding of Blood The Form is the suffering of Punishment for our Sins which Socinus lib. 3. cap. 9. and lib. 2. cap. 4. stifly denies Wherefore we will briefly prove this very thing The Hebrews that they may signify that which the Latins call poenas pendere to suffer punishment they have no phrase more usual than this ferre peccatum to bear sin Like unto which is an expression of the Latins lucre delicta to suffer sins that is the punishment of sins If any do not discover the Blasphemer he feret peccatum shall bear his sin Lev. 5.1 Qui nuditatem Sororis sue retexit peccatum suum ferto He that hath uncovered his Sisters nakedness let him bear his sin Lev. 20.17 So Expiatory Sacrifices are said to bear the Iniquities of them that offer them Lev. 10.17 because their Blood is for the soul of man Lev. 17.11 Neither only conjunctly but also separately these words are found in the same sense So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bear Judgment is said Gal. 5.10 Ferre ob peccata to bear for sins Ezech. 18.20 And sin is said to overtake a man that is the punishment of sin And by the same phrase Peter said Christ carried up our sins in his Body unto the Gross 1 Pet. 2.24 He could have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he carried but because he would also signify his ascent up to the Cross therefore he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he carried up that is he carried up in going which doth diminish nothing from the said phrase but adds something to it therefore the Syrian translated it portavit ascendere fecit he carried and made to ascend Socinus that he may weaken the strength of this place first says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies he took away but contrary to the nature and use of the word for neither doth the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suffer that interpretation neither hath any Greek Author so used that word Also in the New Testament it no where occurs in that signification but it signifies either to carry up Luke 24.51 or to lead up Matth. 17. Mark 9.2 And because the Sacrifices were carried into an upper place that is into an Altar therefore they also are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be carried up Hebr. 2.27 James 2.21 Whence also Christ himself is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have carried up himself Hebr. 7.27 and we are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to carry up Praises or spiritual Sacrifices Hebr. 13.15 And 1 Pet. 2.24 Socinus cites one place only Hebr. 9.28 where he would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to carry up sins to be nothing else but to take away but without Cause and without Example and the sense of the place not requiring it For the two Comings of Christ are opposed the one against the other the former in which he did bear our sins the other in which he is to come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without sin that is not loaded not burdened with any sins but set at liberty and freed from them But these are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposite to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without sin and peccata auferre to take away sins but to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without sin and peccatis oneratum esse to be burdened with sins Whence it appears that in that place to the Hebrews also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is either to carry up to wit unto the Cross as in the place of Peter and that appositely for here also is an allusion to Sacrifices but the Cross was as an Altar or simply to suffer as in Thucydides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to suffer dangers Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies ferre to bear not auferre to take away which the Text of Peter it self proves For the Discourse is not concerning any Benefit of Christ but concerning his great Patience which is shewed not by taking away but by suffering That Socinus adds That with this sense whereby Christ is said to bear our sins that which follows doth not rightly enough cohere it is said without cause for Peter doth manifestly declare That Christ did so bear our sins that he might deliver us also from punishment whence he presently adds By his wounds ye are made whole But these cohere very well together If Christ underwent such hard things that he might obtain the pardon of sins verily ye that have obtained it ought to beware of sins in time to come God hath given to us that being freed from the hand of our Enemies we should serve him in all holiness and righteousness Luke 1.74 Behold thou art made whole sin no more John 5.14 Ye are bought with a price glorify therefore God in your Body 1 Cor. 7.20 Neither doth Paul any other thing in the Seventh and following Chapters to the Romans but shew that we ought to be stirred up by the great Benefits of God and Christ to live holily like unto that place of Peter yea whither Peter certainly had an eye as it also appears by the words following Ye were healed by his stripes is that of Isai 53.11 My righteous Servant shall justify many and shall bear their sins In Hebrew it is Ve avonotam hou jisbal Now the word avon signifies Iniquity and also the punishment of Iniquity as 2 Kings 7.9 but the word sabal signifies to bear or sustain and as oft as to bear is put with the name of sin or iniquity that in every Tongue and especially in Hebraism signifies to bear punishment For indeed nasha sometimes signifies to take away but sabal signifies not so therefore here apparently Christ is said that he will bear the punishment of them that are justified This Phrase admits of no other Interpretation neither doth it hinder that this bearing of iniquity seems to be put by the Prophet after death for it is verily after death not in time but in order as the Effect the Cause existing together with it But Socinus says that this word sabal being joined to sin doth not always include some imputation but that it is enough if it signify a man's being afflicted upon any occasion of another man's deed He proves that by no Example neither doth the Holy Scriptures speak so at any time
Yea also Greek and Latin Authors when they use that Phrase do always include imputation Socinus for the confirming of this Exception cites a place of Jeremiah which is thus Our Fathers sinned and are not and we bear their punishment neither doth he suffer here any imputation to be understood But by what Argument doth he prove that that Phrase signifies another thing here than in all other places where it is put Socinus himself is compelled to confess that as oft as the Sons follow their Fathers footsteps not only their own but their Fathers sins are imputed unto them for the Word of God is evident Exod. 20.5 But that those concerning whom Jeremiah speaks were like their Fathers that makes it evident which follows in the Prophet Wo to us that we have sinned verse 16. Neither is this different from the intent of Jeremiah for that he may aggravate the Misery of those that then lived he saith That the punishment both of their own and their Ancestors sins redounds upon them and that therefore the lot of their Fathers was much better than their lot who being alike guilty were yet taken out of life before that those very bitter punishments heaped up as if it were in the Treasure of Divine Wrath were at length poured forth together But though the signification of these words ferre peccata to bear sins were ambiguous in Sacred Writings yet both in this place of Isaiah and in that of Peter the joint mention of the Sufferings of Christ and our Deliverance would make the Interpretation certain For to bear sins by suffering and so that others may be delivered from them cannot signify another thing but the undertaking of anothers punishment And in the same Isaiah vers 6. and 7. it is God cast or laid on him the punishment of us all he is punished and he is afflicted Here Socinus moves every stone that he may wrest the genuine sense from the words and deviseth a new Interpretation God did by him or with him go against the iniquity of us all But the Hebrew word doth manifestly contradict Hiphgiah being of that Conjunction which signifies not a single but twofold Action wherefore seeing Phaga properly signifies to go against it follows that Hiphgiah signifies he made to go against and by Metaphor he deprecated because a person that deprecates doth as it were interpose his Prayers To deprecate here hath not place for then God should be said to have deprecated for Christ for that is the signification of this word the Particle Beth following Jer. 15.11 Neither doth fecit deprecari he made to deprecate agree here both because bo on him follows when otherways it ought to have been said He made him deprecate and also because all things that next go before and follow pertain to Affliction not to Deprecation Therefore these words do not bear another sense but this God did make the sins of us all occurrere illi to go against him that is impegit incussit he inflicted or he did cast upon him Sin is required exigitur peccatum that is according to Scripture phrase the punishment of sin Et ipse affligitur and he is afflicted Here Socinus objects unto us that place of Lev. 16.21 and 22. where sins are said to be put upon the Goat of Atonement and the Goat himself is said to carry the sins of the people into a waste Wilderness For he thought that nothing is more manifest than that it could in no ways be said that this Goat suffered punishment for the sins of the People which by what right he takes upon him I see not For verily Punishment taken in the general befals Beasts also The blood of all your Souls will I require Of every Beast will I require it Gen. 9.5 When an Ox shall push a Man or a Woman that he die let that Ox be stoned Exod. 21.28 If any man lie with a Beast let him be put to death also slay the Beast it self Lev. 20.15 The Earth was cursed with a Deluge for man's sake Gen. 8.21 The Creature was subject to vanity Rom. 8.20 Neither is there Cause why Socinus should object that this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scape-Goat did not use to be killed but that the shedding of blood or death was required for the remission of sins For though the Scripture doth not expresly declare that that very Goat was thrown headlong from a high place in the Wilderness and so slain the Hebrew Interpreters agree about it which though it were not so yet what other thing did that driving into a waste Wilderness threaten but a death not at all natural either of hunger or the tearings of wild Beasts Also the word Nagash is to be marked in Isaiah for it is very certain that Nagash Schin having a point in the left-horn doth properly signify exigere to require as appears 2 Kings 23.35 Zach. 9.8 but metaphorically is taken for opprimere to oppress therefore the Passive Nagash is either opprimitur he is oppressed or exigitur he is required Opprimitur he is oppressed hath no place here because it follows in the same vehou Sentence ipse affligitur and he is afflicted whence it appears that this Verb is referred to another Noun than that unto which the word affligitur he is afflicted is applied Therefore it remaineth that that word should be taken properly that it may signify exigitur is required and may be referred to the Noun immediately going before Now to require sin is or can be nothing else but to require the punishment of sin therefore the requiring of Punishment and Christ's Affliction are joined together There went before in the same Prophet these words The Chastisement of our peace was laid upon him and by his stripes we are healed In the Hebrew Chastisement is called Musar which word signifieth not every Affliction but that which hath a relation to Punishment whether it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplary or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admonitory only by which words of old Taurus the Philosopher did aptly distinguish the kinds of Punishment And thence it came to pass that any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admonition per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the figure Catachresis was signified by the word Musar But because the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rebuke hath no place in Christ especially seeing the discourse is concerning Afflictions including Death it remains that we should understand Affliction that hath joined together with it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplary punishment for the use of that Hebrew word is not found separated from all respect unto a fault But here if by the subject matter we understand the good of Impunity it will appear that Christ's Punishment and our Impunity are very well opposed the one against the other Though nothing hinders Reconciliation to be understood by the name of Peace though there was no mention made of Enmity which the matter it self and the following words of the Prophet do abundantly
is reserved for Justice Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Day of Wrath and the Day of just Judgment is the same Rom. 2.5 And it is said That the last Judgment will be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Righousness Acts 17.3 And elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to judge in Righteousness is severely to punish which is shewed by adding the word pugnare to fight and much more those things that follow a little after Out of his Mouth shall proceed a sharp Sword that he may smite the Nations for he shall rule them with an Iron Rod and he it is who shall tread the Lake of the Wine of the Indignation and Wrath of Almighty God Apoc. 19.11 and 15. So God is called just and his Judgments just because he severely punished sin Apoc. 16.5,7 when also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Righteousness is called both that very punishing Justice of God Acts 28.4 and also the Punishment brought in by it 2 Thess 1.9 Jude 7. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Righteousness of God is declared by Paul to be this That those which do or approve Evil are worthy of Death Rom. 1.31 his paronyma are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 punitor a just Punisher Rom. 13.14 1 Thess 4.6 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the requiring of punishment Luke 21.22 1 Thess 1.8 1 Pet. 2.14 the signification whereof is declared by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to reward Rom. 12.19 Hebr. 10.30 We know that by the Name of Justice often Veracity and often also Moderation is understood But because by that word as hath been already shewed by many Testimonies also that property of God is expressed which moveth God to punish sin and which is demonstrated in the very punishment of sin we say that this signification is proper to this matter for divers times are opposed before Christ and Christ's time To the former time is attributed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peccatorum the passing by of sins which is also expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not remission but transmission to which is rightly added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forbearance by which word also the Greeks call truce because thereby for a time War is forborn To this Transmission and Inhibition is opposed the Demonstration of such Justice whereby God is just that is appears to be just Of old when God passed by most sins unpunished his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarding Justice did not enough appear At length he shewed what a just 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarder he was when it pleased him that his own Son should die for this cause That he might be a Propitiation for Mankind and might Redeem all those that ever had believed or that should afterwards believe in God So the Apostle joined together the manifest declaration of the Grace that is the Goodness of God which is conveyed unto Creatures and of his Justice which is the keeper of right order and also of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 recompense Verily the very name of Blood the name of Propitiation and also of Redemption do shew that the Discourse here is not of the testifying of Goodness only he joyned also Obtaining with Application Obtaining is by Blood Application is by Faith And that very Justice of God of which we treat is said to be made manifest by Faith to wit that Justice by which the Blood of Christ is believed to have been shed for the appeasing of the Wrath of God Which Faith doth wholly exclude all glorying of Works and all confidence in the Law This end to wit the demonstration of Divine Righteousness is also rightly gathered from the form of the thing concerning which we treat For the end of punishment is the demonstration of justicia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarding Justice about sins also from the Antecedent Cause which we shewed above to be meritorious But the moving Cause of any Action cannot be meritorious unless the End also be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to reward The other end as we said is our Freedom from Punishment This Paul said significantly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Being justified by his Blood we shall be saved from Wrath Rom. 5.10 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Anger of God as also Socinus acknowledged signifies the desire if it is allowable so to speak of punishing John 3.36 Rom. 1.18 and often the punishment it self Mich. 7.9 whence it is expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destruction Rom. 9.22 Hence the Law is said to work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wrath that is to bring forth punishment Rom. 3.5 And the Magistrate is said to be appointed for a taker of vengeance on evil doers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for wrath that is for the inflicting of punishment Rom. 13.4 and that he should be obeyed not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is for fear of punishment but also for conscience But freedom from Punishment is opposed to Punishment Punishment is Eternal Death or a detention under Death whose Serjeant is the Devil who therefore having the power of Death is said to be destroyed by the Death of Christ Hebr. 2.14 for the mention of deliverance from the fear of Death which follows shews that the Discourse is here rather of the Impetration of Pardon than of the Mortification of Sin And Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that delivereth us from the wrath to come 1 Thess 1.10 This same freedom from Punishment by a very usual Phrase of holy Scripture is called Remission of sins which properly follows the Death of Christ as many places shew Such as these are This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins Matth. 26.28 We have in him redemption by his Blood the remission of sins Eph. 1.7 Col. 1.9 Without shedding of Blood there is no remission Hebr. 9.22 Which places do interpret that place of Paul above mentioned Being justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus whom God hath set forth for a propitiation through Faith in his Blood for a declaration of his Justice for the pardoning of the sins by-past through the forbearance of God for a declaration of his Righteousness that he might be just and the justifier of him that is of the Faith of Jesus where he expressed the same things in many words signifying the same thing Rom. 23,24,25,26 For as he expressed the demonstration of his Justice twice and thirdly added that God might be just that is that he may appear just which appertain to the former End so he expressed the other End also both by repeating the word Justification and the word Redemption Justification as is known in many places of holy Writings but chiefly in the Epistles of Paul signifies Absolution which sin being presupposed consists in the remission of sins Paul himself clearly explaining himself chiefly Rom. 4.2 and 6. wherefore unto these places
which ascribe the remission of sins to the Blood of Christ that place should be joyned which we just now cited Being justified in his Blood Rom. 5.9 Also those that attribute the washing away of sins to Blood or Death Te Blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin 1 John 1.7 For the purging of the Blood of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 1.2 Christ washed us from our sins in his Blood Apoc. 1.5 For though to wash away to cleanse and the like words may signifie either to cause that sins may not be committed in time to come or that being committed they may not appear yet the other Interpretation is more agreeable to the Phrase of Scripture So to abolish sins is expounded not to remember sins Isaiah 43.24 and to cleanse from Iniquity is shewed to be the same thing with forgiveing Jer. 33.8 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that sins may be blotted out hath evidently the same sense Acts 3.19 And these are taken wholly for the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to forgive sins and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cleanse from all inquity 1 John 1.9 and elsewhere these are put as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 synonimous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to be cleansed and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that pardon may be Hebr. 9.22 Wherfore also Socinus is forced to confess that in John's Apocal. cap. 1. vers 5. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cleanse is attributed to Blood deliverance from punishment is more rightly understood than the cleansing of the Soul To these may be joyned that of Isaiah just now cited The chastisement of our peace was upon him that is his punishment procures us peace with God concerning which peace the Angels speak Luke 2.14 And that of the same Isaiah By his stripes we are cured that is by his punishment we have freedom from punishment By these Testimonies therefore it is manifest that the impunity of our sins is the End of the Death of Christ and also an Effect of the same Death Socinus who is not willing to acknowledge this Connexion of Death with the Remission of sins performed unto us brings others wonderfully different from the words and scope of the Scripture But all these that he hath here and there scattered in his Book seem to be reducible to these four Heads The first is That Christ when he preached that the remission of sins lyes open to the Penitent did not refuse Death to give testimony to that Preaching But this sense makes the Death of Christ an Effect of remission more than remission of Death For the Existence of a thing is the cause of a Testimony not contrariways But the Scrripture says that we obtain remission by Blood Ephes 1.7 Coloss 1.14 And that Blood blots out our sins 1 John 1.7 Also that the shedding of Blood is a thing Antecedent without which there is no Remission Hebr. 9.22 Moreover if this Interpretation were true the Martyrs also might be said to have shed their Blood for the remission of sins and that we obtain remission by that Blood when yet the Scripture gives this priviledge to Christ only Moreover the Cause of the Killing of Christ in respect of men was not properly the preaching of Repentance and Remission of Sins but that he called God his Father making himself equal to God John 5.18 and consequently that he did profess himself to be God For which cause his Death gave properly a Testimony to this Profession not to the preaching of Pardon And also a Testimony concerning the Doctrine was given no less but more by the Miracles than by the Death of Christ But no where is this Effect attributed unto Miracles that by them we obtain Remission of sins The second thing that Socinus brings is That Christ by his Death obtained the power of giving Remission But Socinus himself overturns this Position who sheweth that Christ living on Earth had and exercised this Power But that which is cannot be any more made mine And lest any man should so mistake which Socinus doth more hint at than affirm as if this Power of Christ had only respect to Punishments Temporal and of this Life it must be observed That when Christ is said to have had power upon earth to forgive sins the Effect is not restrained by that Addition on Earth but the place of the Action is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 emphatically expressed For it is also said to the Apostles Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth where though to loose is to declare to be loosed yet that Expression on the Earth signifies only the place of the Action for it follows they shall be loosed in Heaven For that is it which Christ signified that that Power though so eminent and Celestial belonged to him living on the Earth Neither do the People wonder at any other thing but that so great power was given to men that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by enallagy to one of the number of men Christ himself also first forgives the sins of the man that had the Palsy before he takes away the Palsy which was a Temporal Punishment and manifestly distinguishing both Powers he proves the one by the other to wit the invisible by the visible Then Christ did not at length obtain the power to forgive sins by his Death and consequently those sayings which ascribe the Effect of the remission of sins to his Death cannot be drawn to this sense Moreover the Scripture explains the way of the Connexion between Death and Remission by the word Propitiation and other such like words which cannot be applied to the power of giving Pardon The third thing is That in the Death of Christ an Example of Patience and Obedience is proposed to us But this Example in some respect pertains to Sanctification and that which follows it Eternal Glory but not any ways to the remission of sins for Christ by his Patience and Obedience obtained no pardon to himself as having no sin Wherefore when Christ is proposed for Imitation that we keeping that way which he went may come to the same Mark nothing would be more unseasonable than to make any mention of remission of sins And the Phrases of Scripture Blood cleanseth us By his Blood we have Remission do utterly reject this sense The fourth thing remains which most pleased Socinus So that in very many places he inculcates this as the support of his Cause and it is this That the Death of Christ perswades us to that very thing that is required for the obtaining remission of sins to wit Faith or as Socinus explains himself the hope of obtaining Eternal Life But verily what is more disagreeable unto truth than that so bloody a death of a most innocent man doth of it self conduce unto this that it may perswade us that great Joys are prepared by God for us living holily Wherefore Socinus seeing the absurdity of this Invention saith That the Death of Christ doth not this but his Resurrection
and those things that followed his Resurrection But that it was requisite Death should go before But if the Scripture had signified so it would have mentioned perpetually the Resurrection or rather the Exaltation unto Heaven and sitting at the right hand of God where forgiveness of sins is discoursed of not Death and Blood at least not so often and in words so significant For that so frequent and usual joyning of Blood with Remission signifies some Effect not common but proper not far remote but near hand For what By-ways are these The Remission of sins is granted unto none but them that live holily for so speaks Socinus Faith and a certain hope of reward makes for holiness of Life This Faith is begotten by the Example of Christ raised from the Dead and glorified for holiness of Life as Socinus would have it Death went before that raising up therefore rightly and fitly is Remission said to be obtained by the Death of Christ Is not this it really which he finds fault with in others Alas That the Pine-tree was cut in the Pelian Wood for that is brought for a cause which is not some near thing or at least not far distant but that which is most remote from the Effect What if this had been in one place of Scripture it would perhaps have been less wonderful But what man that is in his right wits can believe that the Scripture speaks so often so obscurely and so coldly That Saying of Paul is very unlike Christ was raised from the dead for our justification Rom. 4.25 Which that it may be explained there is no need to fetch so long a compass of Socinus For the Resurrection of Christ begets in us Faith and Reliance on God and Christ to which Faith is promised Remission of sins And this Series is manifestly shewed Acts 13.33,38 Rom. 1.4 and 10.9 for Death is so far from being fit to beget Faith that on the contrary it most affrighteth men from that Faith And therefore in preaching the Gospel the Apostles do always oppose the Resurrection to the Ignominy of the Cross and the Misery of Death But that by Death and the shedding of Blood which the Scripture frequently expresseth in this Argument which is not properly a Cause of the Resurrection but only an Antecedent he would have the Resurrection it self to be expressed What is it else but to name Night that thereby Day may be understood Moreover if Death did not belong to the Remission of sins except because of the Resurrection that followed how could it have happened that Remission of sins was very seldom referred to the Resurrection but to Death in innumerable places Now add this also that Paul doth attribute to Death it self apart that is as it is abstracted from the Resurrection and Glory of Christ the Effect of Redemption purchased For he says If when we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Rom. 5.10 Death is opposed unto a glorious Life and as Reconciliation is ascribed distinctly unto that so is Preservation unto this Reconciliation is obtained for Enemies by Death as a Sacerdotal Act being reconciled they are kept by his Kingly Power unto which Resurrection made access So also elsewhere the same Apostle puts Reconciliation before Preaching which begets Faith God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself not imputing their sins unto them and did put in us the Word of Reconciliation therefore we are Ambassadours for Christ and as if God were requesting by us we beseech you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled unto God 2 Cor. 5.19,20 Here a twofold Reconciliation is put the former which is declared by the Word the other that is made by the Word that is the Reconciliation of Impetration this of Application that is before the Word this is after the Word We treat of that former and do justly deny that it can be referred to the Ingeneration of Faith which comes by the Word That also may be added John 3.16 where Christ is said to be given to wit unto death that they who believe may not perish Therefore it is profitable for another thing than that they may believe And verily if you please to attend the same thing is not obscurely shewed in that very place of Paul which is by Socinus cited for to confirm his own Opinions to wit that of which we discoursed who was delivered to wit unto death for our sins and rose again for our justification Because Sins are an evil thing and Justification a good thing it appears that the word propter for is not taken alike in both Members and it is convenient that the final Cause should be expressed in the latter Member if I am not mistaken we sufficiently shewed above that in the former the Impulsive Cause is signified Just as if I say that a Medicine is taken for a Disease and for Health Therefore Justification is the end proposed unto the Resurrection to wit by the Ingeneration of Faith by the Confession of Socinus Though verily I know not whether the Resurrection in this place is looked upon as an Argument to perswade Faith or whether it rather signifies the whole glorious state of Christ who hath this end proposed to himself amongst others that the Preachers of the Gospel may be sent and that their Endeavour may be promoted with a very plentiful Influence of the Spirit and Faith being made after that manner men may obtain the Remission of sins for so said Christ himself All Power is given to me in Heaven and in Earth Therefore go ye and teach all Nations Behold I am with you always to the end of the World Matth. 28.18,19,20 Before as John saith the Spirit was not to wit poured forth with that efficacy and abundance the cause is added because Jesus was not yet exalted to Glory John 7.39 Paul also said of Christ When he had ascended on high he led Captivity captive and gave gifts to men He gave some Apostles others Prophets and others Evangelists and others Pastors and Teachers to the perfecting of the Saints Ephes 4.8,12 But whether of these two ways you take it it appears that some peculiar and is ascribed to the Resurrection inasmuch as it is distinguished from Death On the other side it is ascribed unto Death apart or deliverance unto Death that it happened for sins but that very thing is no where ascribed unto the Resurrection and in this place it is not obscurely taken from the same But the Death of Christ in this Affair is both to be separated from the Resurrection and from the Ingeneration of Faith and in these places which deduce the Remission of sins from the Resurrection of Christ a certain distinct Effect is to be understood which the very simplicity of the Words import agreeing with other words of Scripture which say That Christ for our sins died a bloody death and that the
is a sign of the immutableness of the thing to which it is added Psal 95.11 110.4 Hebr. 3.11 6.17 7.21 And a Promise gives power to a Party which cannot without injury be taken from it Therefore though to promise is free yet there is not a freedom to break Promises therefore that ought to be referred to those things that have immutable pravity in themselves Therefore God cannot do this who is therefore called faithful because he keeps his Promises 1 Thess 5.24 Therefore let us see whether there is in the said Penal Law any thing that utterly disallows Relaxation And first it may be objected That it is just naturally that the Guilty themselves be punished with such a punishment as is answerable to their Crime and therefore that it is not subject to Free-will nor is relaxable That this Objection may be answered it must be known that unjust doth not follow of any denial of just no not at that very time when the same Circumstances are put for as it doth not follow if a King should be called Liberal who gave to some Man a thousand Talents that he should therefore not be Liberal if he gave them not so it is not perpetual that that which is performed justly cannot be omitted but unjustly Now a thing is called natural as in Physicks so in Morals either properly or less properly Natural in Physicks properly is that which necessarily coheres to the Essence of every thing as for a living Creature to have sense but less properly that which is convenient and as it were fitted for any Nature as for a man to use his right hand So then in Morals there are some things properly natural which follow necessarily from the relation of the things unto rational Natures as that Perjury is unlawful but some improperly as that a Son succeeds the Father Therefore that he that hath offended deserves Punishment and therefore is punishable this follows necessarily from the relation of the sin and sinner to the Superior and it is properly natural But that any sinner should be punished with such a Punishment as is answerable to the Fault is not neceslary simply and universally Neither is it properly natural but agreeable enough unto Nature whence it follows that nothing hinders why the Law commanding this same thing should not be relaxable The sign of a definite Decree or Irrevocability appears not in that Law of which we Discourse neither is it a promising Law therefore none of those things hinder a Relaxation for it should not be admitted that a threatning should be equallized to a Promise for by a Promise some right is acquired to him to whom the Promise was made But by threatning only the merit of Punishment in the sinner and the right of punishing in the Threatner are more openly declared Neither is it to be feared least something be detracted from the Veracity of God if he doth not fulfil all his Threatnings for it must be understood that all threatnings that have not with them a sign of Irrevocability by their own nature do diminish nothing of the right of the Threatner to relax as before was declared and it appears manifestly by the Example of the Divine Clemency towards the Ninevites It must not be here omitted that the ancient Philosophers by Natural Light judged that no matter was more relaxable than Penal Law Therefore Aristotle says that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Sopater in an Epistle to Demetrius saith so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which is called moderate Justice comfortably interpreting the austere voice of the Laws seems unto me an innocent pretence of the true and free Graces but correcting Justice in mutual Exchanges wholly shuns the nature of the Graces But that which consists in Accusations doth not abhor the meek and courteous face of the Graces It appears by these things which hitherto have been said that that Positive and Penal Law of God was dispensable But this hinders not but that there were certain Reasons which might disswade that I may stammer after humane manner this Relaxation And these may be taken either from the nature of all Laws or from the proper matter of the Law It is common to all Laws that by relaxing something seems to be taken away from the Anthority of a Law It is a property of this Law that though that Law as we said hath not an inflexible Rectitude yet it is very agreeable to the Nature and Order of things from which things it follows That the Law was not to be wholly unrelaxable but not easily nor for a light Cause And the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infinitely wise Lawgiver did according to that For he had a very weighty Cause when Mankind fell into sin to relax the Law because if all sinners had been to be given up to Eternal Death two very beautiful things had utterly perished out of the World on Mens part Religion towards God on God's part the Testimony of his special Bounty towards Men. Neither did God in relaxing the Law observe Causes only and that very weighty ones but also did set a singular Bounds to the Relaxation concerning which there will be a fitter place to Discourse afterwards CHAP. IV. Whether it is unjust that Christ should be punished for our sins And it is shewed that it is not unjust THE Arguments whereby Socinus goes about to disprove this Doctrine having not been placed by him in a right enough Order seems to us that they ought to be digested in this manner That the first rank be of those Reasonings which gather that That which we defend to have been performed is unjust The second of those that deny there was cause for so doing The third of those which deny that God did that which we assert For if the thing it self hath Unrighteousness in it in vain is the Cause thereof sought for because there can be no reasonable Cause of that which is unjust In vain also is it disputed Whether it hath been because no unjust thing can be done by God Also the Examination of the Cause because by nature it goes before the Question of the Fact should also first be handled therefore that we may come to the Question of Just and Unjust first these things are to be separated Whether it was just that Chirst should be punished for our sins And if that could any thing Conduce to obtain a pardon for us For this latter must be referred to the second rank that disputes of the Cause of the Fact but it belongs not properly to this first For though such a Cause of Punishment had not been it would not thence follow that some Injury is contained in the Punishment But it seems that an Injury may be sought either in the Matter it self that is in the very heavy Afflictions and Death compared with the Innocency of him who suffered those things or in the Form that is in the Punishment compared with other mens Sins
as the meritorious Cause Therefore we shall shew that there is Injury in neither First then Socinus confesseth That it is not unjust that Christ most Innocent should suffer from God very heavy Punishments and Death it self that hence no help can come to his Cause And the thing it self demonstrates the same very evidently For Sacred History shews that Christ suffered very grievous things and that he died also The Scripture no less evidently says that God did this very thing But without blaspheming the Sacred Deity it cannot be denied that God doth nothing unjustly Therefore passing over to the other part I affirm That it is not simply unjust or against the nature of punishment that a man should suffer for other mens sins When I say unjust it is manifest that I speak of unjustice which riseth out of things not which riseth out of Positive Law as whereby Divine Liberty cannot be diminished I prove this that I said Exod. 20.5 and 34.7 God visits the Iniquities of the Fathers upon the Sons Nephews and Nephews Children Our Fathers sinned and we bear their punishment Lam. 5.7 For the Fact of Cham Canaan is subjected to a Curse Gen. 9.25 For the Fact of Saul his Sons and Nephews were hanged God approving of it 2 Sam. 21.8,14 For the Fact of David 70000 perish and David cries out I have sinned and done wickedly but what have these sheep done 2 Sam. 24.15 and 17. So for the Fact of Achan his Sons are punished Jos 7.24 and for the Fact of Jeroboam his Posterity 1 King 14. These places manifestly shew that some are punished by God for other mens sins He that hath time may see Chrysostom Homil. 29. on Gen. chap. 4. Tertullian against Marcion Socinus objects that in Ezechiel The Soul that hath sinned it shall die The Son shall not bear the Iniquity of the Father neither shall the Father bear the Iniquity of the Son But in these words God teacheth not what he must necessarily do but what he hath decreed freely to do Therefore it doth no more follow hence that it is wholly unjust that the Son should bear any punishment of his Father's fault than that it is unjust that a sinner should die The place it self proves That God doth not here discourse of a perpetual and immutable Law but of the ordinary Course of his Providence which he professeth he will after that time use towards the Jews that he may break off all occasions of Calumny Neither is that more to the purpose that is written Deut. 24.16 Let not the Fathers be put to death for the Sons nor the Sons for the Fathers but let every man be put to death for his own sin Of which also there is mention made 2 Kings 14.6 for this Law is in part Positive whereunto God is not tied as having no where made that Law to himself neither indeed can he be tied to any Law Also the diversity of the Reason is manifest because the power of Men is narrower than that of God which shall be more clearly explained afterwards though now also I may intimate that the abuse of Power is feared in men but it is not feared in God Socinus replies That no where in Scripture the Innocent are found punished for the sins of the Guilty But this Reply is not to the purpose For seeing we read that some were punished not only for their own sins in respect whereof they were guilty but also for other mens sins it follows that they were also punished as they were not guilty But if a man may in part be punished as he is not guilty the nature of the thing doth not hinder but that he may be punished in the whole for the right of the parts and the whole is the same Add also that the Posterity of Saul were wholly innocent as to that sin for which they were punished But if a man may be punished in a respect wherein he is innocent he may also be punished being innocent And if a man rihtly consider Innocence hindereth not punishment more than Affliction yea it hindereth not that at all but for this Therefore the distinction of Guilty and Innocent belongs to the Question Whether any man may be justly Afflicted but not to this Whether his Affliction may have the force of Punishment For it being granted That Relation to a man 's own Sin is not of the Essence of Punishment it being also granted that the Innocent may be afflicted as Socinus confesseth God may do for a while no Reason verily can be given why by the very nature of things for here we treat not of Positive Law it should be unjust that an innocent Person should be punished for another man's Fault with such Affliction especially if he hath of his own accord obliged himself to such a Punishment and hath power in himself to undertake it which shall be handled afterwards Socinus urgeth That at least between the Guilty and him that is punished there ought to be some Conjunction which he acknowledges between Father and Son but between Christ and us he doth not acknowledge It might be said here that man is not without relation to man that there is a Natural Kindred and Consanguinity between Men because Christ took upon him our Flesh But another much greater Conjunction between Christ and us was decreed by God for he was appointed of God that he should be the Head of the Body of which we are Members And here it must observed that Socinus did erroneously confine to the Flesh that Conjunction which is sufficient for the laying Punishment upon one for the sins of another because here the Mystical Conjunction hath no less power which appeareth most in the Example of a King and People There was cited above the History of the People of Israel punished for the sin of David Concerning which thing the Ancient Author of Questions and Answers to the Orthodox which are carried about with the Name of Justinus discoursing wisely said thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As a man consists of a Soul and Body so a Kingdom consists of the King and People and as a man having sinned a sin with his hand if he be struck upon the back he that struck him doth no injustice so God doth no injustice in punishing the People for the Faults of their Kings At length Socinus comes to this that he saith That at least this is not found in the Scripture that an Innocent Person was punished for those Faults for which the Guilty Person himself was not punished But this also is not to the purpose For because it is not of it self and universally unjust to grant Impunity to a guilty Person which Socinus confesseth neither is it unjust to punish a man for another man's sins there cannot be injustice in these no not when they are joyned together Yea the Scripture makes manifest that that very thing is not unjust by the Example of Achab who received the impunity of his sins
ascribes the Death of Christ as appears to any man which are not joyned with that Effect by any necessity What if it sufficeth to him to alledge Causes not cogent that I may so say but inviting and perswading Equity suffers not that he should give a harder Law to them that dispute with him But it will not be difficult to us to give a sufficient Cause and that very weighty out of the Scriptures whether we ask this Why God would forgive Eternal Punishment to us or Why he was not willing otherways to forgive the same but by punishing Christ The former hath Cause in his Goodness which of all the Properties of God is most proper to God for every where God describes himself chiefly by this Attribute that he is bountiful and gracious Exod. 34.7 Josh 4.2 2 Chron. 30.9 Psal 86.4 and 14. 103.8 111.4,5 Isai 55.7 Jer. 31.20 Joel 2.12 Luke 6.36 Rom. 2.4 Therefore God is forward to help man and make him happy But this he cannot do while that horrible and eternal Punishment remains Moreover if Eternal Death should have been inflicted upon all men all Religion had perished through Despair of Happiness therefore there were great Causes of sparing On the other side those Testimonies of Scripture already brought by us which say that Christ was for our sins delivered up suffered died do prove that God had cause Why he laid punishment on Christ For these kinds of speaking as we there shewed signifie an Impulsive Cause But by these things that we have said of the end it may be understood that there was not only a Cause but also what the Cause was to wit that God would not pass by so many and so great sins without a remarkable Example But this is therefore because every sin doth greatly displease God and so much the more how much greater it is Prov. 11.20 Psal 5.5 Isai 66.4 Rom. 1.18 Zech. 8.17 Psal 45.8 Hebr. 11.2 But because God is active and created Creatures using reason for that purpose that he should make his Properties more manifest it is convenient for him to testifie by some act how much sins displease him but the act most agreeable to that thing is punishment Hence is that in God which Sacred Writings call Anger because there is no other word more significant Exod. 32.10,11 Numb 11.1 16.22 25.3 Psal 2.5,6 1 John 3.36 Rom. 1.18 2.8 Eph. 5.6 Coloss 3.6 Apoc. 5.16 By this Anger God testifies that he is hindered from doing Good to men Gen. 6.7 Jer. 5.25 Isai 59.2 Deut. 32.29,30 Moreover all impunity of sin of it self hath this that sins are thereby esteemed to be of less value as on the contrary the most expeditious way of driving from sin is fear of punishment Hence that by bearing a former Injury thou invitest a new one therefore Prudence upon this account stirs up a Governour to punishment Moreover the Cause of punishment is augmented when any Law is published which threatneth punishment for then the omission of punishment for the most detracts from the Authority of the Law amongst Subjects Hence that Precept of the Politicians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keep strongly the appointed Laws Therefore God hath very weighty Causes of punishing especially if you please to consider both the magnitude and multitude of sins But because amongst all Gods Properties the love of Mankind hath the pre-eminence therefore God when he could justly and was moved to punish the sins of all men with a deserved and legal punishment that is with Eternal Death he would spare them that believe in Christ But when he was to spare by making some or no Example against so many and so great sins most wisely he chose that way by which many of his Properties should be manifested to wit both Clemency and Severity or the hatred of Sin and care of keeping the Law So Aelianus praising the Fact of Zaleucus mentions two Causes thereof that the young man may not be wholly blinded and that that which once was authorized might not be destroyed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which Causes the one looks thitherward that something of the Law may be changed through Clemency and the other that it should not be changed too much They that have written concerning the Relaxation of Laws observe that those are the best Relaxations unto which Commutation or Compensation is annexed to wit because that way very little of the Authority of the Law is destroyed and in some respect that Reason which is the Cause of the Law is obeyed as if he that is obliged to restore a thing be freed by paying the price for the same and so much are very near a-kin Such Commutation is sometimes admitted not only among things but also sometimes among Persons providing that may be without hurt to the other party So Fathers are permitted to succeed into the Prison of the Son as Cimon succeeded Miltiades and that we may not go out of Penal Judgments and those Divine there are extant express Footsteps of the like Fact in Sacred Scriptures Nathan at the command of God pronounced to David being a Murtherer and Adulterer Thy sin that is the punishment of sin is translated from thee for thou shalt not dye which otherways the Law required but because thou hast given the Enemies of God occasion to blaspheme God that Son which is born to thee to wit very near unto thee and Vicar of thy punishment shall surely die 2 Sam. 12.13,14 Achab defileth himself both with Murder and Robbery God denounceth to him by Elias That it should come to pass that the Dogs should lick his Blood Nevertheless the same God seeing his Fear and a certain Reverence to the Deity said I will not bring the Evil to wit which himself had deserved and I had threatned in his days In the days of his Son who besides his own shall also bear his Father's punishment I will bring the Evil upon his House In both God relaxeth the Law or Threatning of Punishment but not without some Compensation by translating the Punishment upon another And so he evidenceth both his Clemency and Severity or Hatred of Sin So then God willing to spare those that were to believe in Christ had sufficient just and great Causes why he exacted the punishment of our sins of Christ being willing to wit that I may use the words of Aelianus That that which was once ratified may not be disanulled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and least sins should be less regarded if so many and so great should be passed over without an Example Moreover by this very thing God did not only testifie his hatred against sins and so by this Fact terrified us from sins for it is easily gathered if God would not forgive sins no not to them that repent unless Christ succeeded into the pâ—…shment much less will he suffer the Impenitent to be unpunished but also in a signal manner declared his great Love and Good-will
towards us to wit that he spared us to whom it was not a thing indifferent to punish sins but who thought it a thing of so great Concernment that rather than he would suffer them to be wholly unpunished he delivered up his only begotten Son to punishment for those sins So that as it was said by the Ancients 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither according to the Law nor against the Law but above the Law and instead of the Law That is very true of Divine Grace It is above the Law because we are not punished for the Law because Punishment is not omitted And therefore is Remission given that we may in time to come live to the Divine Law These things being rightly understood all those things fall which Socinus objects concerning the Defect of a Cause So that it is not necessary to go through all particulars in which nevertheless not a few Errours may be observed As when in the first Chapter of the first Book also in the first Chapter of the third Book â—…e says That punishing Justice doth not reside in God but is an Effect of his Will Verily to punish is an Effect of the Will but that Justice or Rectitude out of which proceeds both other things and also Retribution of Punishment is a Property residing in God for the Scripture concludes God to be just because he renders Punishment to Faults gathering the Cause from the Effect But Socinus seems to have been led into this Errour because he believed that any Effects of the Properties of God are altogether necessary whereas many of them are free to wit a free Act of the Will interveening between the Property and the Effect So it is an Effect of the Goodness of God to communicate his own Goodness but this he did not before the Creation It belongs to the same Goodness to spare the Guilty but scarcely will any man say that God spares those whom he punisheth with Eternal Punishment Therefore there are some Properties of God the Exercise whereof both as to the Act and also as to the Time and Manner of the Act yea also as to the Determination of the Object depends upon his free Will over which nevertheless Wisdom presides Neither can God therefore be said because he hath the free use of these Properties to do what he doth without a Cause when he useth them For God did not therefore make the World in vain because he had liberty not to make it neither because it pleased God to punish some which Socinus confesseth to be true chiefly in those whose Repentance God waits for doth he therefore punish without cause where he punisheth for many things are performed freely and yet for a weighty cause The other Errour is also above mentioned that he would make God forgiving sins to do just the same thing that men do who give up their own right It hath been shewed that punishment is not in Property or Debt or that it can be equallized to them in all things To give a man 's own to forgive Debt is always honourable of it self When we say of it self we exclude those things which are present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by accident such as is the Poverty of the Giver himself which also cannot have place in God But to forgive Punishment sometimes would not be honourable no not to God himself as Socinus acknowledgeth Therefore there is a wide difference here but the rise of the difference is thence that the next Foundation of Lordly Power and Debt is a certain Relation of a thing to a Person but the next foundation of Punishment is the Relation of a thing to a thing to wit the Equality of a Fault with some Hurt agreeing to Order and common Good wherefore that is not true which Socinus asserted as most certain That the Common-wealth will commit no unjustice if it absolve a Guilty Person except it also be injurious to the proper right of some private Person or break God's Law For by the name of Common-wealth he either understands the Multitude that governs or is governed The Multitude that is governed as it hath not the power of making Laws so neither hath it the power of moderating them But a Multitude that Governs as a Senate in the State of Peers or the greater part of a Parliament in a Popular State cannot do more than other chiefest Governours as for example free Kings in a Kingdom and Fathers in respect of a Family But it is part of the Justice of a Governour to keep Laws yea those also that are positive and given by himself which Lawyers prove to be true as well in a free University as in the highest King The Reason of both is because the Act of Making or Relaxing a Law is not an Act of Absolute Lordship but an Act of Empire which ought to tend to the Preservation of Good Order That also which Socinus says deserves Reprehension That besides the Will of God and Christ himself there can be no lawful Cause given of the Death of Christ unless we say Christ deserved that he should dye For Merit is in the Antecedent Cause as we said above but Impersonally for our sins deserved that Punishment should be required But that Punishment was conferred upon Christ this we so refer to the Will of God and Christ that that Will hath also its own Causes not in the Merit of Christ who when he knew no sin was made sin by God but in the great fitness of Christ to shew a signal Example which consists both in his great Conjunction with us and in the unmatched dignity of his Person But that Collection of Socinus is confuted by manifest Testimonies of Scripture The Antecedent Cause Why the Infant of David died is made manifest because David by sinning heinously gave occasion to the wicked to insult over the Name of God blasphemously Here there is Merit but not in the Infant And in punishing the Posterity of Achab beyond their own Merit God had respect to the Merit of the sins of Achab. Whence it appears that the Antecedent Cause of Punishment is Merit but not always the Merit of the Person that is punished CHAP. VI. Whether God willed that Christ should be punished And it is shewed that he willed it And also the Nature of Satisfaction is Explained THese two Questions having been handled Whether God could justly punish Christ being willing for our sins And Whether there was some sufficient Cause why God should do it The third remains Whether really God did this or which signifies the same willed to do it For Socinus denies it both in many places elsewhere and also in a set Discourse upon it Lib. 3. cap. 2. We together with Scripture maintain that God willed this and did it For Christ is said to have been delivered up to have suffered and died for our sins Rom. 4.25 1 Pet. 3.18 Isai 53.5 The Chastisement of our Peace was laid upon
Christ God laid upon Christ our sins that is the punishment of sins which were so required that he upon that account was afflicted Christ did bear our sins that is again the punishment of sins Isai 53.5,6,7 1 Pet. 2.24 Christ made himself Sin and a Curse that is liable to the punishment of sins Isai 53.10 2 Cor. 5.21 Gal. 3.13 The Blood of Christ was shed for the Remission of sins so that that Remission did not come to pass without the shedding of Blood but by it Matth. 26.28 Hebr. 9.22 and elsewhere in many places Here Socinus opposeth many things Some Examples and Promises before Christ some sayings concerning those things that God said he gave by Christ The word remittere and cordonare to forgive and pardon and the very nature of Liberality from which he thinks it follows that God willeth to grant Impunity to us repenting requiring no punishment of any man upon that account As touching the Examples of Indulgence besides that no universal thing is rightly concluded from them it must be observed that these belong either to Temporal Punishment or Eternal If they belong to Temporal Punishment only the difference is manifest for as it is proverbially said That which is deferred is not taken away Now add this that in the very Fact of Achab as also in the Fact of David the contrary appears of that which Socinus would infer alledging them for himself for the Temporal Punishment was so taken away from David and Achab that it was translated unto others And in the Law it self sins are not forgiven except the Blood of the Sacrifices be poured out as shall be explained afterwards But if the remission of Eternal Punishment be the matter of Discourse Socinus proves by no Argument that it was made to any man without a respect of God to Christ The same must be said of Promises that hath been said of Examples and by the way it must be observed That when God promiseth to them that repent that he will forgive Temporal Punishments that should not be understood always of the whole punishment but of so much for God often useth to punish them also that repent but fatherly and gently So God restored his people when they repented from the Babylonish Captivity unto their Country but restored not the former Liberty and Glory of the Kingdom But as touching Eternal Punishment there is no Promise of Remission which excludes a respect to Christ Hitherto belong those sayings of Sacred Scripture which shew that Christ tasted death for all men without any difference of time that he gave himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ransom for all Heb. 2.9 1 Tim. 2.6 and much more those that by a Comparison being added admit no restriction of time as when all are said to have sinned and to be justified by Redemption in Christ Rom. 3.23 and when Righteousness is said to have come by one Christ upon all to wit as many as are justified as by one Adam Condemnation came upon all men Rom. 3.12 5.17,18 1 Cor. 15.22 Hence it is that Christ is called the Lamb slain from the foundation of the World Apoc. 13.8 which place is sufficiently vindicated from the Interpretation of Socinus both by the very coherence of the words and also by a like place of Peter where Redemption is said to be made by the Blood of Christ the unblameable and unspotted Lamb that was foreknown before the foundation of the World but made manifest in the last times 1 Pet. 1.19,20 Wherefore elsewhere the Death of Christ is said to have interposed for the Redemption of those Transgressions that had been under the former Covenant Hebr. 9.15 and the Righteousness of God is said to be declared by his Blood for the pardoning of sins that went before which God is shewed to have tolerated and suffered at that time the declaring of Righteousness being deferred to the time of Christ Rom. 3.25 Hereunto belongs that famous place to the Hebrews 3.25 not that he should often offer up himself as the Chief Priest entered once a year into the Sancturry with the Blood of another or else he should have suffered often from the Foundation of the World but now he hath been made manifest once in the end of the World to take away sin by the offering up of himself and as it is appointed for all men once to die and after this the Judgment so Christ was once offered that he might carry up the sins of many c. The whole coherence of which place if it be rightly considered and especially if that place of Peter be compared 1 Pet. 1.19 where the same thing is discoursed of almost in the same words it will appear that in this the Sacrifice of Christ differs from the Levitical because the Efficacy was limited within the time of a year but the Efficacy of that extends it self through all Ages for his Passion was esteemed with God as performed before all Ages though really it was performed in a certain time and so the decree of God was very manifestly revealed unto us And unless it had been so Christ must often have underwent Sufferings not after he began to preach but from the beginning of the World Which words have no signification at all unless the Efficacy of the Death of Christ extend it self to all sins which have any time been forgiven to men from the very beginning of the World Just as the Judgment after Death extends it self to all sins that a man committed during life But the contrary Interpretation of Socinus doth not only render the words vain but weakens the Argument of the Writer for it doth not follow if it were granted that Christ should have often been offered that he ought to have suffered not only often but often from the Foundation of the World unless you put together that Christ should have been often offered from the Foundation of the World for these have a coherence with one another for the Effect of the Oblation is not stretched farther than the Dignity of the Sacrifice But that Christ should have been offered oft-times from the Foundation of the World if the parity of the Sacrifice of Christ and the Levitical were granted which the Writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews opposeth it would not follow from any other thing but because the Effect of the Oblation of Christ is extended unto those sins that were at any time committed and forgiven from the Foundation of the World For if it were equal to the Levitical that is of a vertue limited within a certain time verily its Efficacy could not reach from the time that Christ died unto the most ancient sins But it would have been altogether necessary that many Acts of that kind should have been interposed between both times Now let us come to those Testimonies that seem to Socinus properly to belong to the time of Christ and the New Covenant Jeremiah indeed says God will be propitious to sins but denies not
of a Hebraism or Syrianism or to epitomize in a perspicuous compend of words those things which belonged to the same Matter the Scripture hath delivered in several places So that which the Scripture said That Christ was delivered to death for sins and to have suffered sins that is the punishment of sins and that his blood was shed for the remission of sins is expressed in elegant Latine and significantly by the word satisfaciendi of satisfying for that word in Law or common use signifies the exhibition of a Fact or Thing from which Deliverance followeth not ipso facto but an Act of the Will being joyned And it useth to be taken in this sense not only in pecuniary Debts but also in Crimes which Languages that are derived of the Roman Language with depravation call contentare to content But that it may appear that Expressions of the same value yea those very Expressions that Socinus rejects are found in Sacred Scripture we shall add some other Testimonâ—…s unto those that were drawn out of the Sacred Book above in the first Explication of this Sentence and we shall refer them to four Classes The first Class shall be of those Expressions that signifie the turning away of Anger The other of those that declare Deliverance made by Redemption or the paying of a price The third of those that signifie Subrogation The fourth of those that ascribe unto the Death of Christ the vertue of an Expiatory Sacrifice That we may enter upon the first Class it is very well known that to turn away the wrath of a man is called in the Greek Language 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Latine placare pacare conciliare reconciliare also propitiare to appease to pacify to reconcile to propitiate Both the act it self and also that by which the act is properly performed is called by the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the Latines placamen In God Anger as we said above is called by anthropopathy as it were the affection of punishing which the Apostle saith is revealed from heaven upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men that detain the Truth in unrighteousness that is that go against the known Commands of Christ But no man is excepted because we are all by nature the sons of wrath that is liable to the anger of God This anger abides upon some Joh. 3.26 and it is turned from them upon whom it abides not Christ by his Death attains this Aversion and therefore it is very rightly called Propitiation So John the Apostle calls him twice when he says If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous and he is a Propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but for the sins of all the world Epist 1. cap. 2. vers 2. Also in this is love not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his son to be a Propitiation for our sins cap. 4. vers 10. with which place that of Paul must be compared God commendeth his love that when we were yet sinners Christ died for us Rom. 5.8 for both Paul and John prove by the same Argument that we did not first love but were beloved of God and that which Paul calls he died John calls he was made a Propitiation Moreover that place of Paul must be added We are justified freely by the Redemption in Christ Jesus whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation by Faith in his Blood Therefore Christ was made a Propitiation in his own blood which what is it else but that very thing that Socinus denies That God was reconciled in Christ for that he interprets in John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expiation and by the word Expiation understands the destruction of sin he doth that for no cause and guarded by no example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all Greek Writers Poets Historians and others is to propitiate and useth to be construed with an Accusative signifying the person whose anger is turned away neither is it otherways taken in the Septuagint and Luke 18.13 In one place only which is Hebr. 2.17 Christ is said to be appointed a Chief Priest to propitiate the sins of the people where there is an Enallagy coming from the Hebraism to propitiate the sins when it should have been said according to custom to propitiate God for the sins of the people Therefore he there signifies Expiation but that which is made by Reconciliation Otherways this use of the word should have nothing common with the nature of the word and the perpetual signification of the same Wherefore that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to propitiate and the word thence derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propitiation cannot signifie such an Expiation as Socinus deviseth that is the destruction of sin which is performed without atonement But Socinus interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned by Paul that in which God sheweth himself appeased We deny not that this signification may agree to the word and for some such reason the covering of the Ark is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Writer to the Hebrews But because words of that Termination signifie properly a certain effective Vertue and improperly a declarative no reason suffereth us here to depart from property for it is evident that Christ is so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Paul as he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by John But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verily signifies atonement not the testimony of atonement wherefore Scripture interpreting Scripture the word also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be expounded of Christ actively not declaratively Moreover the word blood being joyned with it shews the same to which the virtue of reconciling is attributed because without shedding blood there is no remission These are well known Sanguine placastis ve'ntos virgine coesa Ye pacifi'd the Winds with blood and a Virgin slain and the like in Poets concerning which there will afterwards be place to discourse more accurately The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is like the word appeasing to procure favour and reconcile which Paul useth in this very Argument Rom. 5.10 and 11.292 Cor. 5.18 and Eph. 2.16 and Col. 1.10 Socinus opposeth That it is written that God was not reconciled to us but we to God and that upon that account because God was not angry at us but we were turned away from God For the word reconciling as also the word appeasing promiscuously assigns sometimes the Dative sometimes the Accusative to either party both the party that is angry and also the party that is not angry at all or less angry Therefore it hath the same signification that we are reconciled to God and God to us Sophacles in Ajax 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But he goes being turned to the best Opinion That he may be reconciled to the Gods from his anger Where the Quire expresseth that which Ajax had said
after we are justified by Faith Rom. 5.1 Before we are sons o wrath Eph. 2.3 for our sins are the cause of separtion that is they make God averse from us Isai 59.2 This Anger excludes Peace or Friendship but not any kind of Love generally so called as appears John 3.16 and 1 John 4.10 And verily Socinus himself supposeth That sins are not forgiven to men before repentance But he cannot be said to be reconciled or as Socinus expresseth it throughly reconciled who yet imputes sins Which thing that it may be more clearly understood there are verily three moments that I may so say of Divine Will to be distinguished The first is before the coming to pass of the Death of Christ either really or in the decree and foreknowledge of God In this moment God is angry at a sinner but so as he doth not abhor all ways and reasons of laying down his wrath The second moment is when Christ's Death is now come to pass In which God doth not only appoint but also promise that he will lay down his wrath The third is when a man believes with a true faith in Christ and Christ according to the form of the Covenant commends the Believer to God Here now God lays down his anger and receives a man into favour But because Verbs Active and Passive answering to the same use to have a twofold signification either that they are confined within Vertue and Efficacy or that they include Effect also it follows that in the first moment neither of these have place and therefore in respect thereof God may be called only reconcileable In the second and third he is rightly said to be reconciled the two Senses that I mentioned being distinguished In the former sense God is said to have reconciled the world to himself and we reconciled to God when we were Enemies In the latter is that Be ye reconciled to God and we received Reconciliation and the same is the signification of the words Redemption and Expiation and that expression whereby Christ is said sometimes to have died for all sometimes for some Moreover that must be observed that the word Reconciliation doth not exclude Satisfaction or all Performance and Expence For in Livius there is That by that gift he might reconcile unto himself the minds of his Country men and elsewhere in many places the like may be seen so that upon that account Christ should no less be called our Reconciler which very thing the Scripture also shews when it adds to Reconciliation the mention of Blood CHAP. VIII Concerning our Redemption purchased by the Death of Christ THat we may come to the second Class of Testimonies which is of Redemption before all things it must be put beyond Controversie that Redemption and the like words in holy Scripture are applied to our deliverance from deserved Punishment which appears to be so Gal. 3.13 Rom. 3.24 and especially Eph. 1.7 and Coloss 1.14 neither doth Socinus deny it Yea also those places which say that we were redeemed from iniquity and vain conversation as Tit. 2.14 and 1 Pet. 1.18 belong to the same for it is a very frequent thing for sin to be put for the punishment of sin And in that place to Titus the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being added that is to expiate which we shall afterwards explain and after that in the place of Peter the mention of a Lamb that is a Sacrifice make this evident because the Scripture in many places bears witness that this Redemption is ascribed to the Death of Christ as the cause as Eph. 1.7 Rom. 3.24 Hebr. 10.12 Socinus could not deny it But how the Death of Christ is the cause of Redemption this is it that is in Controversie For we say That the Death of Christ is therefore the cause of Redemption because thereby he moved God to deliver us from punishment but Socinus denies this thing But though there were something ambiguous in these Testimonies in which mention of Redemption is made it would be sufficient to bring other places of the same Argument for interpreting them of which sort we have cited many which signifie not obscurely that Christ died for our sins suffered punishment for us and so obtained us the remission of sins to wit God being reconciled by his Death yet we hope that the same Opinion may be proved clearly enough by these places which use the word Redemption and other like it Now there is a twofold phrase in Scripture one which names the Redemption of sins another which names our Redemption by a divers kind of speaking but with the same signification That former phrase Hebr. 9.15 where the Death of Christ is said to have been caused 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the redemption of transgressions but that by this kind of speaking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Latine culpas delicta crimina redimere to redeem faults offences crimes there is not only signified the Cause moving to deliver but such also as includes Compensation or Satisfaction it is so manifest that Socinus ought to have confessed that also Therefore sith this is the most usual signification of that word it is not allowed us to recede from it except two things be proved that sometimes though less frequently another thing is signified by that expression and that there is here just cause why the less usual signification should be preferred before the more usual Neither of these is proved by Socinus For he brings no place of Sacred or Profane Writer where to redeem transgression sins faults offences signifies any other thing but that which we said In the Sentence of Solomon Prov. 16.6 there is a Hebrew word Chaphar which doth not properly answer the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which very thing Socinus also acknowledgeth when he saith Expiation rather than Redemption is signified by that word It may be added that the most native signification of that word is to cover and thence it is drawn to other things by a certain resemblance Neither doth it follow because the word Chaphar which among the Hebrews as many others because of the penury of primitive words in that tongue is of many significations so that it may signifie both other things and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to redeem that therefore likewise the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should have all the significations that Chaphar hath because the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is simple among the Greeks answering its own Original but other words of the Greeks express other significations of the word Chaphar In Dan. 4.24 there is a Hebrew word Pharak which is not of equal force with the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but both properly and frequently it signifies to tear to break to pluck up and for this also to deliver Howbeit though we should interpret redimere in this place with the Ancients nothing compels to take this word out of the signification that we defend
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as the Pagans in a thing falsly believed so the Apostles in a thing truly believed used in the same sense So in the Epistle to the Hebrews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are put for the same thing as it appears Chap. 9. v. 12,14,15,22,23 Neither is it only there inferred that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this Argument should be taken properly because no efficacious reason compels us to go to improperty but hence also much more because no place is brought either out of Sacred or Profane Writer in which the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is stretched beyond the description set down by us Socinus brings no place out of Greek and out of Hebrew he brings one place only Prov. 13.8 in which is Chaphar But besides that Chaphar may be of a larger extent than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to deliver whereas Chaphar as we said before is a word of many significations it cannot by any Argument be proved that in that place any other thing is signified by the word Chaphar but that which can move him that was about to hurt that he hurt not whether he have only the power and affection of hurting or whether he have also the right and authority For that of Solomon Chaphar or if you would have it so the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a man are his Riches is like the Sentence in Job 2.4 All that a man hath will he give for his life For this amongst other things is the use of Riches that they can pacifie either the just or unjust anger of many and so turn away the punishment that hanged over according to that Munera crede mihi placant himinesque Deosque Believe me Gifts appease both Gods and Men. And verily in that Sentence there is an elegant comparison of the Advantages that both Fortunes bring with them The rich man hath that wherewith he may appease the angry man the poor man is less liable to another man's anger What if it were very true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken for any charges yea for such also by which no man is moved to deliver which hath been proved by no example yet the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Paul useth 1 Tim. 2.6 is more significant than to admit such a cold interpretation For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in composition signifies either contrariety or change here contrariety hath no place therefore compensation is signified Neither are they called in another sense in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who devote themselves unto death for another that they may deliver him So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which the deliverer undergoes something like that evil that hanged over the head of him that is delivered and there is as it were an excellent periphrasis of that word Galat. 3.13 Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 redeemed us from the curse being made a curse for us concerning the sense of which place we treated before Moreover Peter compares the Blood of Christ to Gold or Silver as being something greater than them upon that very account that it is a price 1 Pet. 2.18 But Gold and Silver use to be a price truly and not figuratively wherefore it is necessary that blood should be as truly or also much more truly a price Now a price is that by the expence whereof some thing or right is acquired and that is the nature of a price that by its worth or estimation it moves another to grant some thing or priviledge as impunity To these may be added those places that shew that Christ gave his flesh or himself for the life of the world and that he might deliver us John 6.51 Tit. 2.14 for this phrase to give something for something is very sutable to a true price Socinus cannot invalidate these and many other places in which the Death and Blood of Christ are called the price of our deliverance but by saying that ou◠deliverance from punishment is indeed an effect of the death of Christ for here is no place of treating of the deliverance from the bondage of sin but in respect of us not in respect of God that is that God is not thereby perswaded to deliver us but we that we may come to the deliverance But both the things that we have said and also many other things shut up this refuge from him For first the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and much more the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of that nature that they signifie a thing the effect whereof is about the deliverer before the delivered Moreover though to buy is taken sometimes simply for to acquire as to sell for to enslave but the word price being added to the word buying as 1 Cor. 6.20 and 7.23 requires a nearer similitude For it most proper to a price that it should be esteemed by any man to be of as great worth as the thing Moreover the Apostle expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3.24 But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an act that is exercised about the deliverer before the person to be delivered And elsewhere to wit Hebr. 9.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is expiation concerning the force of which word we shall afterwards treat Add to these things that when an effect is attributed to a thing very frequently and so that it was never found attributed to other things as the effect of Redemption is referred to the Death and Blood of Christ Gal. 3.13 Matth. 20.28 Mark 10.45 Tit. 2.14 Hebr. 9.15 Apoc. 5.9 and 20.28 Rom. 3.24 Eph. 1.7 then it is necessary that an end more proper and near than common and remote should be understood But about us the effect of deliverance is both removed many degrees from the Death of Christ and also so far from being proper that is agrees much more to other things to which it useth not to be ascribed For any thing that Socinus saith of the connexion of our deliverance with the Death of Christ may be summarily explained thus Deliverance as he thinks follows from holiness of life holiness from the hope of reward Hope firstly and chiefly proceeds from the Resurrection but it is attributed unto Death either in respect that it is a way to the Resurrection and compared with it it confirms the same hope Whence it follows Socinus also confessing it that we are much more delivered by the Resurrection then by the Death of Christ Yea if we acknowledge the truth Death is only joyned with that effect by accident for the Resurrection makes not Faith but as it is a part of the Glory of Christ but the greatest glory could have happened to Christ though he had not been dead But that Christ by suffering shewed us an example
that we should follow that cannot at all be applied to the remission of sins that happened not to Christ Wherefore then is that so often repeated mention of Death in this business of Redemption Socinus brings two things first because in Death there is some Expence which is not in the Resurrection therefore the mention of Death is fitter for Redemption also because the Love of God and Christ is more declared by Death As touching the first we go back to the same thing for if by the Death of Christ the effect of our deliverance did not follow of it self which is the profession of Socinus himself expressed in manifest words there was no need that Christ and his Apostles should have mentioned either Redemption or Price especially so often sith Deliverance might be expressed more conveniently in other words But that other consideration though it may belong to those Sentences that commemorate the Love of God yet is not very sutably brought to explain other Sentences which do not nor yet the very word Redemption It may also here be mentioned that Love is not shewed by this thing because it was not so much the cause as the naked occasion of our good Socinus thinks he pursueth our Opinion when he says That the Scripture so treats of the Redemption purchased by the Death of Christ that it sets something manifest before the eyes but not that it may declare some hidden Vertue such as he thinks that to be which we deduce from Scripture But when he says this he wounds not us but rather furnishes us with a Dart against themself For those things which are God's who knows but the Spirit of God and he to whom he will reveal them 1 Cor. 2.10,11 But that the Death of Christ is procured by God for this purpose that the punishment of our sins might be required of him and that he might become our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isaiah said it long before Christ himself said it neither did the holy Rites in the Old Covenant signifie any other thing So that he who should take notice of these things could not be ignorant of God's Will and Decree about this business though I may now also say that Nature it self says that Death is the wages of sin This Will of God being known by Oracles there is afterwards gathered the great love of God towards us as John speaks 1 Epist 4.10 and Paul Rom. 5.10 Neither is it any other thing that is signified by the word witness 1 Tim. 2.6 as it is easie to understand by those things that go before vers 4. And verily the words of Scripture themselves simply understood bring these things with them whereas it is so impossible for any man to gather that consequence of deliverance from Death which Socinus deduceth through so many Degrees and so variously from the words of Scripture themselves that it cannot be easily understood out of Socinus himself what he would have to be the proper sense of Scripture in these Expressions Therefore true Redemption hath been proved by us as just now true Reconciliation hath been proved But either of those being proved that which is intended is proved to wit That we are delivered by the punishment of Christ which he paid for our sins Not that all Redemption and Reconciliation is such but because the subject matter admits of no other Therefore it is vain and nothing to the purpose that Socinus so often says both that a man may be appeased though nothing is performed and also that a man may be truly redeemed that owes nothing and therefore without payment For we treat of that Propitiation and Redemption which the Scripture declares to be made by the performance of something to wit by Death and of that Redemption by which the same Scripture testifies that we are delivered from deserved punishment but such a performance which frees the Debtor of punishment from punishment is both rightly and properly called Satisfaction which Socinus seeing that he might take away Satisfaction he took away also Propitiation and true Redemption Here I think good to censure some other things which he did not discourse of whilst he handled the Argument of Redemption yet he discoursed of them elsewhere as belonging to this Argument He would not have the word Mediator to signifie any other thing in the holy Scripture but the Interpreter of God Two places do perswade me of another thing the one 1 Tim. 2.5 where there is said to be one Mediator of God and Men Jesus Christ who gave himself an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all The other Hebr. 9.15 where Christ is called the Mediator of the New Covenant that Death intervening for the Redemption of Transgressions they that are called might obtain eternal life To which fitly may be added a third Hebr. 12.24 which shall be discoursed of afterwards it appears here that Mediation is placed in Redemption it self neither is the word contrary For it belongs no less to the Office of a Mediator to be in the room of Men with God than to be in the room of God with Men. Neither is a Mediator only among the unlearned called he that appeaseth a man but also amongst those who speak elegantly Whence Suidas interpreted that word Peace-maker Elsewhere Socinus says The dignity of the Person makes nothing for the estimation of the punishment and consequently that the Divine Nature of Christ and his great Perfection brings no value to the punishment But we believe otherways to wit that this punishment was thence to be esteemed that he who suffered the punishment was God though he suffered not as God For hitherto belongs that Expression whereby God is said to have purchased the Church with his own Blood Acts 20.23 After which manner also elsewhere the Lord of Glory is said to have been crucified 1 Cor. 2.8 Also the Dignity of the whole Person that is Christ contributes not a little to this estimation Therefore in the Scripture it is called emphatically the Blood of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.27 the Blood of Christ Hebr. 9.14 The blood of Jesus Christ the Son of God 1 John 1.7 both the most perfect innocency and holiness of Christ comes into the same estimation Hence it is called precious blood to wit of the Lamb without blame 1 Pet. 1.19 making allusion to the custom received not only by the Hebrews but also the Gentiles that they sacrificed Beasts excellent for whiteness and all beauty of Body which because they were exempted from the whole Flock thence by a word invented in holy things but presently translated to prophane they were called eximiae excellent To the same purpose belong these also My righteous servant shall justifie many Isai 53.11 He made him that knew no sin to become sin 2 Cor. 5.21 But that Socinus disputes because the Divinity it self doth not suffer therefore that this comes not into the consideration of punishment it is just as if you should say that it is the same
peculiar which cannot be communicated to the Apostles But it could if the benefit of Christ's death were distinguished only by degree from the death of the Apostles and not also in its proper end So also in the Epistle to the Hebrews 2.10 there is an example in it that Christ came to glory by Sufferings the special manner is in that that Christ suffered for every man vers 9. And as in those places patience so in other places love is commended to us by the same example of Christ but the special manner doth more openly express the deed of Christ Though if you will look more exactly into those places we shall see that not so much the act of death as the danger of death is there regarded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which only John useth 10 11 15. and 1 John 3.16 as also John 13.37 and 38. also John 15.13 is not properly there to lose life but as it were to put it in pledge that is to undergo the danger of death Therefore in those places that very thing that is prescribed to us contains not only the benefit of another but also a certain exchange to wit in that sense which Horace expressed in these Verses Paratus omne Caesaris periculum Subire Moecenas tuo Being prepared to undergo all dangers of Caesar Mecenas with thine But in the saying of Caiaphas not only as a Prophesy dropt from him at unawares but also according to his Opinion a certain true substitution was expressed For he feigned the inevitable destruction of the Jews if Christ should be permitted to live and on the contrary if Christ should be slain that certain safety should be obtained for this very thing Therefore he desired to substitute really the death of Christ to a destruction otherways hanging over And so he would have the same in kind to befall Christ with that which was otherways to happen to the people and he believed that the death of Christ was a near cause of the deliverance of the People and fit of it self Which is the same thing as if you should say he would have Christ perish in the room of the People that was otherways that is under a contrary condition to perish Here it must be marked by the by that Caiaphas did put the first effect of the death of Christ not about the Jews whose deliverance he sought but about the Roman Governours whose Anger he desired to escape So that if it be true which Socinus urgeth that such an interpretation of the words of Caiphas should be taken which may answer both the mind of the Holy Spirit and his mind this dying for the people must needs signifie that safety was to be obtained from another but that other according to the mind of the Holy Ghost can be none but God whence it follows it is exercised about God before it is exercised about men which Socinus stubbornly denies But those things that have been hitherto said by us concerning the signification of exchange in the Particle pro for are much illustrated by the the nature of the Expiatory Sacrifice For in those the Scripture and common Opinion of Nations do witness that blood is given for life which shall now be made manifest CHAP. X. Concerning the Expiation made by the Death of Christ THere remains the last rank of Testimonies which signifie that Christ's Death is an Expiatory Sacrifice which because by the Artifice of Socinus they are involved in many Mists we reserved them for the last place that they might receive some light from these things that have been said before We and Socinus are agreed concerning the word that Christ's Death was an Expiatory Sacrifice or a Sacrifice for Sin the Divine Epistle to the Hebrews testifying the same especially cap. 9. But of the proper force of that word Socinus thinks one way and the Church of Christ another way The disagreement shall be briefly and perspicuously so explained if we say that according to Socinus the effect of expiation first and properly is exercised about sins to come because the Death of Christ by ingenerating Faith draws us from sins but in respect of by-past sins only secondarily and in that respect also all this action is exercised about us not about God that is that God is not moved to pardon but we are prepared to receive remission to wit by the Amendment of Life but according to the Opinion of the Church which agrees to Scripture the effect of expiation is properly exercised about by past sins and the first action is about God who is moved to forgive That the first action is exercised about God not about Men it is proved from the nature of Priesthood For a Priest is appointed for Men in the things of God Hebr. 5.1 but not for God in the things of Men which is the Office of a Prophet And because Sacrifice especially Expiatory Sacrifice is an act of the Priest as such for a High-Priest is appointed for this purpose that he may offer Sacrifices for sins Hebr. 5.1 8.3 it follows that Sacrifice belongs to those things which are performed for Man with God But the whole matter will be made more manifest by comparing the Sacrifices of the Old Law with this Sacrifice of which comparison the Writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews is an Author unto us and elsewhere the Prophets and Apostles The ancient Law is considered two manner of ways either carnally or spiritually Carnally as it was an Instrument of the Commonwealth of the Jews Spiritually as it had a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shadow of things to come Hebr. 10.1 As touching the former consideration the Expiatory Sacrifices of the Law sanctified unto the purifying of the flesh Hebr. 9.13 which of what sort it is we shall explain The Law of God had this sanction he is accursed that abides not in all the words of the Law Deut. 27.26 Gal. 3.10 therefore he shall be guilty of punishment whosoever in the least shall deviate from the Law as James shews James 2.10 This Punishment according to a carnal sense was violent death which is evident from the contrary because life is promised to him that fulfils the Law Lev. 18.5 Gal. 3.12 But as in every Commonwealth rightly governed the King requires punishment by his Judges and if they fail by himself So in the Hebrew Commonwealth which Josephus rightly called Theocratia because God was its King Judg. 8.23 1 Sam. 8.7 God ordinarily required the punishments of the Law by Judges yet so that he himself required the same punishment if the Judges failed in their duty Let the people saith he stone him or I setting my angry face against that man will cut him off Lev. 20.3 Neither did he only threaten this but also often performed it as it appears by many Examples of the Old Testament But because a Lawyer may somewhat relax his own Law especially Penal God the King of the Hebrews in some Crimes admitted Expiatory Sacrifices in the room
of the sinner himself and by these and no other ways would he free the sinner from the punishment of death He that swore rashly deserved death by the Law Exod 20.7 but it might be expiated by a Sacrifice Lev. 5.5 The Priest shall make Atonement for him saith the Law and it shall be forgiven him So he that had been unfaithful in a thing entrusted to him or in Society or had deceived another or had stollen any thing he was guilty saith the Law Levit. 5.23 to wit by the Edict which is extant Exod. 20.15,16 and 17 but the same guilty person besides the restitution of the damage to which he was obliged unto the person wronged he was expiated by giving a Sacrifice and that which he did was forgiven Lev. 5.26 and in many places these are joyned together Expiation and Remission Numb 15.28 Lev. 4.20 5.13,18,26 Therefore in some Crimes as touching carnal punishments there was admitted an Atonement a Redemption a Satisfaction also a Compensation made by the death of a Beast for the death of a man otherways due But the Law did not generally admit such a relaxation of carnal punishment in all Crimes unto which Paul having respect said that remission of sins was declared by Jesus to wit a spiritual remission and he that believes is justified in him from all things from which the Jews in the Law of Moses could not be justified no not carnally Acts 13.38 which an ancient Writer of Answers to the Orthodox explains which use to be ascribed to Justin But other Crimes having been committed to the hurt of the Commonwealth to wit great and less tolerable or of the life of men it gives not to wit the Law an Atonement of such Offences neither by washing nor the sacrificing of Beasts but gives a just and worthy recompence to them that offended by an equal punishment Life saith it for life eye for eye tooth for tooth but where the equality of the reward is unseemly there it renders to the Offenders death by fire or stone or sword for it destroys the daughter of the Priest committing whoredom by fire but the daughter of a Lay-man by stoning but the married by sword And the Law had no power through mercifulness to mankind to save any of such by Washings and Sacrifices And the Masters of the Hebrews observed not amiss Psalm 51.18 that David for Murder or Adultery promised no Sacrifice because the Law had set forth no Expiation for those Crimes But that which we said before that in Expiation the Death of a Beast was substituted for the death of a Man that same thing is manifest also by that which Deut. 2. is appointed that when the Man-slayer is not fouud the People should be expiated by the killing of a Beast where also the word to expipiate is explained Expiate thy people O God and impute not innocent blood unto them Otherways the Land could not be expiated from blood that was shed but by the blood of him that shed it as saith the Law Numb 35.34 Unto this place may be added the other Levit. 17.11 The life of all flesh is in the blood and I have appointed it for you on the Altar to make Atonement for your lives for it is blood that makes Atonement for the life Also a third Lev. 10.17 where the Sacrifice is said to bear their iniquities the force of which phrase we have elsewhere explained Socinus is not willing to acknowledge this subrogation or to confess that God was moved any way by Sacrifices that he might not punish sin And that he may prove that he brings these two things That the Errours of men could not be punished in Beasts because there is not a common Species between Men and Beasts and That nothing can be given to God who is Lord of all Of which the former is false for as an individual difference as they speak hinders not but another may suffer for another mans sin provided the inflicting of the evil is not of it self unjust as hath been shewed before so neither will the diversity of Species hinder a Beast which otherways also might be justly killed to be bestowed for an Example that in the death thereof it may appear what man hath deserved Neither are Man and Beast joyned only in the genus of a living Creature but also in that relation that is between a possessour and a thing possessed For a Beast is in the general under humane possession and he that was to be expiated was particularly commanded to give a Sacrifice of his own Lev. 5.6,7 But the other is nothing to the purpose For neither doth it follow that if nothing comes to God by Sacrifice therefore God is not moved by Sacrifice For by this very thing God is well-pleased that a man defrauds himself of a thing granted unto him for the honour of the Name of God and it was elsewhere shewed that Satisfaction useth to be made as by punishment so by some acceptable and pleasing action But that in Sacrifice not only the thing is rewarded but the mind of the Offerer both Scripture declares and the Heathen themselves believed Neither in Sacrifices saith Seneca though they be fat and overshine Gold is the honour of the Gods but in the pious and right will of the worshipper Whence also the Scripture treating of the Death of Christ makes mention sometimes of Love sometimes of Obedience By these things which we have said it is now evident how Sacrifices for sin in the Old Covenant did expiate sins to wit by moving God to forgive a Carnal punishment and that by a certain Satisfaction But what the Types performed carnally this Christ the Antitype performs spiritually and what the Types did in some sins that Christ did in all to wit by moving God to forgive a Spiritual punishment and that by a most perfect Satisfaction For there is always more and not less in the thing signified by the Type than in the Type as reason shews That is common to the Expiatory Sacrifice of the Law and the Sacrifice of Christ that there is no remission without shedding of blood Hebr. 9.22 The Divine Writer in the same place calls this obtaining of remission by blood sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sanctification vers 13. sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Purification vers 14. and 22 and 23. But in the Old Law the Sacrifices were Beasts vers 12. in this of ours Christ himself is not only Priest but Sacrifice vers 14. and 24. That Legal Expiation was a Representation and Antitype of this Celestial and Spiritual How because that brought cleanness to the flesh that is the taking away of guilt but not to the Spirit or Conscience but this brings it to the Conscience it self because that which was in the Old Law a Temporal Death this in the New Covenant is Eternal Death Hebr. 10.29 and therefore there was there a Temporal Deliverance but here an Eternal Redemption Hebr. 9.12 Wherefore as in the
Town with Cursings that all the Evils of the City might fall upon him and so he was sacrificed to the Immortal Gods All which being gathered together into one we shall see that Plinius not without cause cried out concerning these Sacrifices So those things agreed with all the World though it was at variance and unknown to it self Thus we have discoursed by the by concerning Humane Sacrifices in which the Heathen sinned not only that they sacrificed unto false Gods but also because they had no command to worship God after that manner such as Abraham had But that Custom of the Gentiles in Expiating the sins of Men or Sacrificing of Beasts brings no little light to the understanding of the nature of an Expiatory Sacrifice and the proper names of that Argument And so much the less can this labour be deâ—…iâ—…d because Socinus says That the Baptist when he called Christ the Lamb of God had respect unto Sacrifices in the general by which not only amongst the Hebrews but also among the Heathen sins were believed to be expiated And it is an undoubted thing that seeing the Divine Writer to the Hebrews in this very Argument of Expiatory Sacrifice often useth the Greek words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he used it in that sense which the Greek Tongue had received Whence it is easie to understand what that signifies that Christ is called a Sacrifice for sin or expiation For whereas Socinus brings three Interpretations the first That the Death of Christ by begetting Faith in us draws us from sins in time to come The second That Death it self is a certain thing antecedent to the obtaining remission of sins The third That it bears testimony as it were to the remission it self or the Decree made concerning it Of these three only the second belongs hereto Not that Christ did not also those other things and that much more effectually than Socinus thinks but because those things belong not to Sacrifices for sins for Socinus confesseth That the similitude of legal Sacrifices for sin and of the Sacrifice performed by Christ consists in Expiation To which may be joyned the like Sacrifices of the Gentiles considered not according to the thing but according to the opinion of the Gentiles But these Sacrifices did not withdraw from sin especially by procuring the belief of any thing neither did they bear testimony to remission performed or certainly decreed but as Socinus acknowledgeth they were a certain antecedent thing requisite unto remission which those words of the Law shew He shall make atonement and it shall be forgiven Therefore in this the Comparison consists and it is necessary that Expiation should signifie the same when it is applied to legal Sacrifices and when it is applied to Christ because the Writer to the Hebrews brings both from the same Decree to wit that without shedding of Blood there should be no remission but expiation must be made in blood Hebr. 9.21 It hinders not that it is said Hebr. 10.4 that it was not possible that the blood of Bulls and Goats should take away sins for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to conscience must be repeated from what was said before as appears manifestly if you compare the like places with this chap. 9. vers 9 and 14. The blood of beasts took away sins that is Temporal Guiltiness but not Spiritual Guiltiness as we shewe before Neither can you without a remarkable wresting interpret that in the Apocalyps who washed us from our sins as if it signified who declared that we are washed Or 1 John 1.7 where it is said The blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin as if it signified it declares us to be clean for both the property of the Words and the perpetual use of Scripture in this Argument contradicts it Socinus confesses That Guiltiness in many places is signified by the name of Vncleanness Hence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to take away that guiltiness or to make remission as the Writer to the Hebrews expounds the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 9.22 Christ by himself made this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 purification Hebr. 13. Christ purgeth the conscience from dead works Hebr. 9.14 that is as Socinus himself interprets He frees the conscience from guiltiness and punishment and the fear of punishment Also in the Old Testament tachar hath the same sense Psalm 51.9 But that which in these places is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cleanse The same upon a like account is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sprinkle 10.22 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to wash in the same verse Whereto belongs the Prophesy Zach. 13.1 There is no reason to go from the sense of the Apostle John in these places for though Jesus is called a faithful witness Apoc. 1.5 yet that washing should not therefore be referred unto bearing witness for those do not cohere immediately the faithful witness and he washed but the mention of his being the first-born from the dead comes between them and the mention of a Kingdom and afterwards of Love that it may appear to a blind man that many Offices and Benefits of Christ are joyned together to illustrate his Dignity But in the Epistle of John it is utterly absurd to interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the declaring of purification and not of purification it self because a little while after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are joyned The Apostle reasons from things joyned together If you walk in light you have cleansing that is remission by the blood of Christ because sins are imputed unto none that walk in the light And the preaching of the Baptist naming Christ the Lamb that taketh away the sins of the world seeing it respects the Expiatory Sacrifices both of the Hebrews and the Gentiles according to the acknowledgment of Socinus suffers us not otherways to interpret to take away sins than to take away guiltiness For Expiatory Sacrifices did this but did not withdraw from sinning Neither is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the putting away of sin Hebr. 9.26 any other thing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we may be cleansed that we may have remission as appears by vers 22. But this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 putting away of sin was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the sacrificing of himself verse 26. But though Socinus endeavours to pluck away some places from the true sense yet being convinced by many others he acknowledgeth That in the Sacrifice of Christ it is expressed that an Expiation was made which goes before the remission of sins as something requisite Yet he denies that God by that Sacrifice is moved to pardon but he say That a certain Faith is begotten in us by which being brought to amendment of life at length we obtain remission of sins In which first he did little remember that which he said That the figure should agree with
the thing fignified by the figure in that in which the Comparison is made Neither did he remember that which the Scripture shews that those words All things are cleansed by blood belong the same way to Legal Sacrifices and to Christ Hebr. 9.22 But Legal Sacrifices did not at all beget such a Faith neither is that Exposition of the word tolerable that to expiate is to do something that is requisite for remission For on the contrary all these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the like which the Apostles use of their own nature and by perpetual use design not only a precedency of order but also a certain efficacy The Scripture also furnisheth us with other most certain Arguments for the overthrowing this Interpretation invented by Socinus For it saith there was need of a new Priest after the Order of Melchisedec Hebr. 7.11 But the Levitical Priests also could preach Faith in God yea and confirm this preaching by their Death Wherefore if the Priesthood of Christ doth nothing more which Socinus would have it follows there was no need of him Moreover this very thing that Christ died for our sins is believed unto salvation 1 Cor. 15.2,3 therefore the Expiation of Christ was not chiefly procured for this that it might bring a man to believe seeing it self is among things to be believed For that which serves only to gain credit to a thing it is necessary that it should be different from the thing to be believed Moreover after the implantation of Faith the Expiation of Christ hath effect in us For Christ is a High Priest appointed to expiate the sins of the people that is of Believers Hebr. 2.17 Therefore to expiate cannot be to bring to Faith But now that we may not only beat down the false Interpretation of Socinus but also prove the true one which is this That God is moved by the Death of Christ to forgive sins Observe that place to the Hebrews where Christ's blood of sprinkling is said to speak better than the blood of Abel The blood of Abel cried unto God for vengeance The blood of Christ cries for pardon Socinus denies that God is reconciled by Expiatory Sacrifices But the Writers above alledged by us testifie the contrary who use the word reconciling to express those Sacrifices Whence also that phrase came in the Epistle to the Hebrews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placare peccata to reconcile sins that is to expiate sins by reconciling God Socinus acknowledgeth no Satisfaction in Expiatory Sacrifices Whereas the very word expiating signifies no other thing but making satisfaction by punishment and in many places the Authors cited when they would periphrastically express Expiating they call it to give blood for blood life for life soul for soul to purchase a thing with blood to obtain salvation by the death of another Neither do the Hebrew words disagree from this for Chaphar is not only to cover but also to redeem Exod 21.30 Psalm 49.7 and to appease Gen. 32.20 and thence to expiate Hata is to suffer punishment Gen. 31.39 whence this also began to be used for signifying Expiation Now Expiation is attributed first to Sacrifices as appears Hebr. 9.13 and 23. therafter to the Priest for the Sacrifices that he offers as often in Leviticus and then to God admitting that Satisfaction But as the word Redeeming began to be used improperly for any Deliverance so also it began to be called Expiation for the like effect yea where no Satisfaction intervenes Psal 51.8 But Expiation is attributed unto Christ as unto a Sacrifice and therefore the word blood is added but blood in Sacrifices as before was proved is given instead of the soul of a sinner whence of necessity this word Expiation must be taken properly here Add unto these things that if that were true which Socinus would have That Expiation was made much more by the Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven than by Death and shedding of Blood because those are fitter to perswade us to believe than Death it self at least in some place of Scripture Expiation would have been attributed unto those acts which it did no where It is false that Socinus saith That expiation or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 purification is attributed unto the manifestation of the Divine Will neither do the places alledged prove this For Hebr. 1.3 Christ is said to sustain all by his Word because all things are subject to his Dominion as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found in the same sense chap. 11. verse 3. and Luke 5.5 and chap. 10. verse 26 and 29. The knowledge of the Truth and sanctification by Blood are not put for the same but many Benefits are joyned together that the Crime of an unthankful man may appear the more odious There is added sometimes unto Blood the mention of a Covenant but much more oftner of a Sacrifice wherefore that Interpretation is to be taken that may joyn them together But this will be if we look unto that part of the Covenant in which Christ engaged that if he underwent death it should come to pass that their sins should be forgiven them that believed in him and God promised the same as appears Isai 53.10 But that Christ is said to offer his blood in Heaven that is to shew his death to his Father and as it were to put God in remembrance thereof which is also read to make intercession for us these things take not away the Expiation that was compleated upon the Cross For the Expiation performed upon the Cross moves God to forgive and acquires us a right but under a certain Condition and Manner in which is comprehended Intercession on Christ's part and on our part true Faith as hath been explained when Satisfaction was discoursed of But Socinus manifestly contradicts the Scripture when he denies that Expiation was made before Christ went into Heaven For in many places Scripture attributes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 redemption purification and sanctification and the putting away of sin to death and declares the same thing to be already performed an Oblation indeed was made in Heaven but so that Socinus should not have denied that title to the death that Christ suffered on Earth against the manifest words of Paul Eph. 5.2 where Christ is said to have delivered himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an offering for us The looking upon the coherence of the words is a sufficient refutation of his Interpretation In the same place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Offering and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrifice are joyned together And all the Books of Greek and Latin Authors declare That a Sacrifice is compleated when the thing to be sacrificed is put to death Whence it came to pass that mactare signifies both to sacrifice and also to kill any way the signification being extended from Sacrifices to other things Hence Ammonius distinguisheth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Appellations of
Genus and Species for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to kill for the honour of God but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to kill upon any account And Plutarch said That the French-men and Scythians believed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Gods delighted in the blood of slain men and that this was the most perfect Sacrifice Neither did the Scripture speak otherways in this Argument Abraham being commanded to offer his Son Gen. 22.2 prepares to kill him verse 10. And therefore because he had performed the sacrificing of him though not with his hand yet with his mind he is said to have offered his son Hebr. 11.17 Sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies simply and out of Sacrifice to kill as John 10.10 And Christ is called by John the Lamb slain Apoc. 5.6 12. and 13.8 which Paul so expresseth our Passover Christ is sacrificed for us 1 Cor. 5.7 But the Passover used not to be brought into the most holy place Hebr. 9.26 therefore the Sacrifice went before the Appearance followed So elsewhere in the same Epistle Christ is said to have entred into the Celestial Sanctuary by his own blood having obtained eternal Redemption Hebr. 9.2 and to have sat down at the right hand of the Divine Throne having made expiation for our sins In which places the words of by-past time do shew that Redemption or Expiation was made before Christ entred into the Celestial Palace Therefore though Christ is such a High-Priest that ought not to have remained on earth as the Levitical Priests Hebr. 8.14 but having entred into Heaven he ought to be higher than the Heaven Hebr. 4.14 and 7.26 as whose Priesthood ought to be eternal and intransitory 7.24 yet he was a true Priest and a true Sacrifice at that very time when he delivered himself on Earth up to Death And therefore he is said to have come into the world Hebr. 10.5 that is into the earth as the Scripture if self interprets John 18. 37. 1 Tim. 1.15 that he might do the will of God vers 7 and 9. that he might offer his own body being prepared by God that is sacrificed vers 6. to God vers 10. for sins vers 12. In which place it must be also observed that we are said to be sacrificed by an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oblation once whereas Christ intercedes as oft as there is need for us So that here not killing but intercession must be understood Therefore the Oblation of Christ as of certain Legal Sacrifices is twofold The first of killing the other of shewing the former Oblation of Christ was performed on Earth the later in Heaven but that former was not a preparation of a Sacrifice but a Sacrifice the later is not so much a Sacrifice as a Commemoration of a Sacrifice that was performed Wherefore seeing Appearance and Intercession are not properly Sacerdotal Acts but as they depend upon the virtue of the Sacrifice that was made he that takes away that Sacrifice allows not unto Christ a true Priesthood against the manifest Authority of Scripture which assigns unto Christ a Pontifical Dignity distinct from a Prophetical and Royal not figuratively so called but true for his Priesthood is opposed to the Levitical Priesthood which was a true Priesthood as a more perfect Species of the same Genus to another less perfect neither could it be rightly inferred that it was necessary that Christ should have what he might offer Hebr. 8.3 but from the truth of that Priesthood unto which he was appointed vers 3. But it is no wonder if they who have taken away from Christ his Natural Glory that is the Divinity of his true Name if they also diminish his Offices and are unwilling to acknowledge his chief Benefits To thee O Lord Jesus as the true God as the true Redeemer as the true Priest as the true Sacrifice for sins together with the Father and the Spirit one God with thee be Honour and Glory FINIS THE TESTIMONIES OF THE Ancients THE TESTIMONIES OF THE ANCIENTS IReneus lib. 5. cap. 1. For he would not really have had Flesh and Blood by which he redeemed us except he had restored the ancient Creation of Adam in himself Which place Theodoretus cites out of Ireneus in the Greek Language Dialog 2. cap. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For he had not really had Flesh and Blood by which he redeemed us Tertullianus against the Jews cap. 13. It behoved Christ to be a Sacrifice for all Nations who was led to the slaughter as a Sheep and as a Lamb is dumb before the shearer so he opened not his mouth Origen on Leviticus homil 3. almost at the beginning If any man remember well those things that have been said he may say to us that we asserted that the Sacrifice which we said the High-Priest offered for sin is a Type of Christ and it will not seem agreeable to the true Christ who knows not sin that he should be said to have offered Sacrifice for sin though the thing is acted by a Mystery and the same is put for the Priest and also for the Sacrifice See then if we may also solve this Objection after this manner That Christ indeed did no sin yet he was made sin for us whilest he that was in the form of God condescends to be in the form of a Servant whilest he that is immortal dies and he that is impassible suffers and he that is invisible is seen and because either Death or all other Frailty of the Flesh was brought upon us men by the condition of sin he himself also who was made after the likeness of men and found in fashion as a man undoubtedly he himself for sin which he undertook because he carried our sins did offer the Calf without blemish that is his immaculate Flesh a Sacrifice to God Origen homil 4. on Numbers If sin had not been it would not have been necessary that the Son of God should become a Lamb neither had it been needful that he being placed in the flesh should be slain but that which was in the beginning would have remained God the Word But because sin entred into this World and the necessity of sin requires a Propitiation and Propitiation is not made but by Sacrifice it was necessary that a Sacrifice for sin should be provided On Matthew cap. 16. Tract 11. A man cannot give any exchange for his soul but God gave an exchange for the souls of all men the precious blood of his own Son For we are not bought with corruptible silver or gold but with the precious Blood of the Lamb without blemish On the Epistle to the Romans lib. 2. cap. 2. Ye confess that it is undoubtedly true which is written in the Epistle of Peter because we are redeemed no with the corruptible price of silver and gold but with the precious blood of the only begotten If then we are bought with a price as Paul also jointly bears witness we are without
doubt bought from some person whose Servants we were who also demanded the price he would have that he might send from under his power them that he held but the Devil held us to whom we were in bondage by our sins Therefore he required our price the blood of Christ But until the Blood of Jesus was given which was so precious that it was sufficient alone for the Redemption of all men it was necessary that those who were instructed in the Law every one for himself should give his own Blood as it were in imitation of the future Redemption and therefore we for whom the price of the blood of Christ was fulfilled have no need to offer for our selves a price that is the blood of Circumcision Cyprian Epist 8 to Clem. and the People He prayed for us though he was not a sinner himself but bore our sins The same Epist 63. to Cecilius parag 9. Christ carried us all who also carried our sins The same in his Book to Demetrianus parag 22. Christ imparts this Grace he gives this gift of his mercy by subduing Death with the Triumph of the Cross by redeeming the Believer with the price of his Blood by reconciling man to God the Father by enlivening mortal man with the Celestial Regeneration The same or rather another Writer of the Book of the Cardinal Works of Christ to Cornelius the Pope Serm. 7. which is concerning the manner of Circumcision that one Oblation of our Redeemer was of so great Dignity that it was sufficient alone to take away the sins of the World who with so great Authority went into the holy place with his own Blood that afterwards no request of Suppliants needed the Blood of any other The same Serm. 16. which is concerning the Ascension of Christ Who for our sakes having been sold for thirty pieces of silver would have it to be understood how great an unequality there was in the price that was given for him and in that which he himself gave for the World Whereas he being bought and sold for a little silver redeemed us at so great a price so that it cannot be a doubtful case that the greatness of the price exceeded the bargain Neither could the damage that verily just damnation deserved be equallized to the Obedience of Christ which proceeded unto Death it self and over and above paid what it owed not Lactantius concerning the Benefits of Christ Whosoever thou art that art present and comes within the threshold of the middle Temple look on me who being guiltless suffered for thy sin c. And presently For thee and for thy life I entred the Virgins womb was made Man and suffered a dreadful Death c. Eusebius Coesariensis lib. 10. of the Demonstration of the Gospel For it behoved the Lamb of God that was taken up by the great High-Priest to be offered a Sacrifice to God for the other Lambs of the same kind and for all the Flock of Mankind For because by man came Death by man also came the Resurrection of the Dead The same lib. 10. cap. 1. And as when one Member suffers all the other Members suffer with it so also when many Members suffered and sinned he also suffered according to the ways of sympathy For forasmuch as it pleased God being the Word to take the form of a Servant and to be joyned to the common Tabernacle of us all he takes upon himself the pain of the suffering Members and makes our Diseases his own and suffers grief and pain for us all according to the Laws of Love to Mankind And the Lamb of God having not only performed these things but having been punished for us and having endured the sufferings that he himself did not deserve but we for the sake of the Multitude of them that trespassed he became to us the Author of the forgiveness of sins having undertaken Death for us and translated unto himself the stripes and reproaches and shame that was due to us and drawn upon himself the Curse that was due to us becoming a Curse for us and what other thing was this but the giving life for life Therefore the Oracle saith in our person we were healed by his stripes and the Lord delivered himself for our sins Eusebius concerning the Preparation of the Gospel lib. 1. cap. 10. And God had respect to Abel and his Gifts but unto Cain and his Sacrifice he had no respect Hence you may understand that he that offered Beasts was more acceptable than he that offered a Sacrifice of the Fruits of the Earth And Noah immediately offered upon the Altar Burnt-offerings of all clean Beasts and of all clean Fowl and the Lord smelled a smell of sweet savour But Abraham also is recorded to have sacrificed so that by testimony of sacred Scripture those that were lovers of God of old esteemed the Sacrifice of Beasts the chiefest of all But I suppose the reason of this thing was not accidental or found out by man's wit but taught by the Divine Wisdom for seeing they saw that they who in their manners were holy and conversant with God and inlightned in their souls by the Divine Spirit and that they needed to perform great service for the cleansing away of the sins of Mortals they supposed that the price of their Salvation was due to him that is Prince both of life and soul Moreover having nothing better nor more precious to sacrifice than their soul instead thereof they offered a Sacrifice of brute Beasts bringing them in the room of their own life thinking that they sinned not nor offended in this thing because they were taught that the soul of unreasonable Creatures was not equal to the reasonable and intellective faculty of Men and having been taught that their life is no other thing but their blood and the lively power in the blood which they also presented offering it as a life for a life unto God And Moses also evidently declares this same thing the life of all flesh is the blood thereof and I have given you the blood upon the Altar to make atonement for your sins for their blood shall make atonement for the life Therefore I have commanded the Children of Israel that no soul of you should eat blood therefore consider diligently of these things how it is said I gave you blood upon the Altar to make Atonement for your souls For blood shall make atonement for the soul For he doth manifestly say that the blood of slain Beasts makes atonement for the soul of man And the Law concerning Sacrifices gives him that looks into it attentively to understand this same thing Therefore he commands every man that sacrificeth to lay his hands upon the Head of the thing sacrificed and to bring the Beast that is to dye to the Priest as offering the Sacrifice instead of his own life Therefore he says of every one He shall present it before the Lord and shall put his hands upon the Head of the Offering
and so it was observed in every Sacrifice no Sacrifice being otherways offered For which things it is said that the Beasts were brought that their lives might be offered for theirs Antonius the Hermite Epist 2. in which also the Father of Creatures being moved in his Bowels for our wound which could not be heled but by his goodness only sent his only Begotten to us that by our Bondage he might take the form of Bondage and deliver himself up for our sins And our very sins humbled him but by his stripes we all were healed Macarius Bishop of Jerusalem Lib. 2. Act. Concil Nicen. But he came a Saviour of all men and undertook for our sake in his own flesh the punishments that were due to our sins Athanasius concerning the Incarnation of the Word of God And because it was necessary that that which was due from all should at length be restored for it was due that all men should dye as I said before for which chiefly he came For this cause after his manifesting of his Divinity by his Works it remained that he should offer a Sacrifice for all having given the Temple of his own Body unto Death for all men that he might make all men unblameable and free from the ancient Transgression and might declare himself also to be more powerful than death having shewed his own body uncorruptible as a First-fruits of the Resurrection of all And presently For there was need of Death and there was need that Death should be for all that that which was due from all might be performed whence as I said before the Word because it was impossible that he should dye for he was Immortal took upon himself a Body that could dye that he might offer it as being his own instead of all men And that he suffering for all men by entring thereinto he might destroy him that had the power of Death that is the Devil and might deliver those that through fear of Death were subject to Bondage The Saviour of all men having died for us we that believe in Christ do not now dye the death as of old according to the threatning of the Law The same in the same place And by such a manner of death Salvation came to all men and all the Creation was redeemed this is the life of all And as a Sheep he gave his Body unto Death instead of all men for their Salvation The same upon the Passion and Cross of Christ But beholding the visibleness of the wickedness and that the Mortal Generation was not able to stand against Death nor able to suffer the punishment of their sins for the excessive greatness of the evil exceeded all punishment and seeing the goodness of his Father seeing also his own fitness and power For Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God he was moved with love to Mankind and pitying our weakness he cloathed himself therewith for he himself as saith the Prophet took our Infirmities and carried our Diseases and pitying our Mortality cloathed himself therewith for Paul saith He humbled himself unto death and that the death of the Cross and seeing the impossibility of our bearing the punishment took it upon himself For Christ became a Curse for us and so being compassed about and cloathed with Humane Nature by himself brought us to the Father that he himself suffering may make mans suffering to be without damage and may exchange small things for great Hilarius Pictaviensis on cap. 14. Matth. in the Hymn on the Epiphany Jesus hath forth shin'd The gracious Redeemer of all Mankind Blest John with fear doth shiver To dip him in the River Whose Blood is able to purge out The sins of all the world throughout Optatus Milevitanus concerning the Schism of the Donatists against Parmenianus lib. 3. When ye say redeem your souls whence bought ye them that ye may sell them Who is that Angel who makes a fair of souls which the Devil possessed before his coming Christ the Saviour redeemed these with his Blood according as the Apostle said Ye are bought with a price for it is evident that all men were redeemed by the Blood of Christ Victor Antiochenus on the fifteenth Chapter of Mark. And wherefore sayest thou was the Lord and Maker of all things made Man for our sakes and suffered so much reproach and so great punishments He was made like unto us and took our Miseries and our Crosses upon himself that he might raise up our Nature that was fallen down by sin and might again restore it unto its ancient degree of Dignity Therefore the Advantages that have redounded unto us by his Torments are very many for he paid our Debts for us he bore our sins he both lamented and sighed for our sake Cyrillus of Jerusalem Catechis 13. But he set free all that were kept in Bondage under sin and redeemed the whole World of Mankind And you need not wonder that the whole World was redeemed for he was not a meer man but the only begotten Son of God who died for them And verily the sin of one man Adam was effectual to bring death upon the World But if Death reigned over the World by the sin of one man how much more shall life reign by the Righteousness of one man And if then they were thrown out of Paradise for the Tree of Food verily now by the Tree of Jesus Believers shall more easily enter into Paradise If the first man that was formed of the Earth brought Death upon the World certainly it must needs be that he that formed him of the Earth being Life himself should bring Eternal Life If Phinehas being zealous against the Evil-doer caused the Anger of God to cease doth not Jesus who slew not another but delivered up himself the Price of our Redemption take away the Anger of God that was provoked against men Basilius Homil. on Psalm 48. One thing was found that was worthy of all together which was given for the price of the Redemption of our Souls the holy and precious Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ Gregor Nazianz. in the two and fortieth Oration which is the second on the Paschal Lamb. That great thing and unsacrificeable that I may so speak in respect of the first Nature was mingled with Legal Sacrifices and not for a small part of the World nor for a little time but for all the World and it eternized the Purification The same in the same place A few drops of Blood renew the Creation of the whole World and they have united and gathered all men into one Body And in the same Oration It is therefore requisite to search into the Matter and Doctrine which hath been neglected by many but by me hath been very diligently searched after For unto whom was that great and much celebrated Blood of God and the High-Priest and the Sacrifice poured forth and upon what account for we were kept in Bondange by that wicked one under sin and
received the pleasure of Wickedness But if the price of Redemption belongs to no other but the Possessour I ask to whom was this offered and for what cause If you say that it was offered to that wicked one fie upon that Blasphemy whereas this thing proceeds from God only Yea if it were so a Robber would receive God for a price of Redemption and thereby a Reward over and above of his Tyranny for which it was just to spare us But if it was offered to the Father first how for we were not kept in Bondage by him But what a saying is that that the Blood of the only begotten delights the Father who did not accept of Isaac offered by his Father but he exchanged the Sacrifice delivering a Beast instead of the reasonable Sacrifice Or it is evident that the Father receiveth not having asked nor having been requested but for the dispensation and because of the necessity that man should be sanctified by the Humane Nature of God that he might deliver us having laid hold on the Tyrant by force and might bring us to himself by his Son being Mediator and dispensing this for the honour of the Father Gregory Nyssene to Olympius the Monk concerning the Form of a perfect Name But we learn that Christ is the price of Redemption having given himself a price for us This we are taught by such a saying that we should learn how he having paid a certain price for every man's soul made immortality the peculiar possession of them that were by him redeemed from Death unto Life Ambrosius lib. de Tobia cap. 10. Behold the Prince of this world cometh and findeth nothing of his own in me he owed nothing but he payed for all as he himself bears witness saying Then I restored that which I took not away The same in his Book concerning Joseph the Patriarch Joseph was sold in Egypt because Christ was to come to them to whom it was said Ye were sold for your sins And therefore he redeemed them whom their own sins had sold But Christ was sold by undertaking the Condition not the Fault And he owes no price for sin because he himself did no sin Therefore he drew on debt by our price not his own he took away the Hand-writing removed the Usurer freed the Debtor he alone paid that which was due from all Ambrose concerning Esau cap. 7. God therefore took flesh upon him that he might abolish the Curse of sinful flesh and was made a Curse for us that the Blessing might swallow up the Curse the Integrity the Sin the Indulgence the Condemnation and Life Death For he undertook Death that the Sentence might be fulfilled and that the Judgment due to sinful Flesh by the Curse might be satisfied unto the Death Therefore nothing was done against the Sentence of God because the Condition of the Divine Sentence was fulfilled for the Curse was unto Death and after Death came Grace The same Lib. 9. Epist 7. The Lord Jesus when he came forgave all men the sin which no man could avoid and blotted out our Hand-writing by the shedding of his own Blood that is as he saith Sin abounded by the Law but Grace superabounded by Jesus because after all the World was subdued the took away the sin of all the world Lib. 1. Epist. 11. See whether that is the saving Sacrifice which God the Word offered in himself and sacrificed in his own Body And a little after But that he pours out the Blood at the Altar thereby may be understood the cleansing of the World the remission of all sins For he pours out that Blood at the Altar as a Sacrifice to take away the sins of many For the Lamb is a Sacrifice but not a Lamb of an unreasonable Nature but of a Divine Power Concerning whom it was said Behold the Lamb of God behold him that taketh away the sins of the world for he hath not only with his Blood cleansed the sins of all but also endued them with a Divine Power The same upon Luke lib. 7. cap. 12. The Adversary esteemed us at a base rate as Captive-slaves but the Lord hath redeemed us by a great price as being beautiful Bond-slaves which he made after his own Image and Likeness who is a fit Judge of his own handy-work as the Apostle said For ye are bought with a price and well it may be called great which is not prized by Money but by Blood because Chrst died for us who delivered us by his precious Blood c. And well it may be called precious because it is the Blood of an unspotted Body because it is the Blood of the Son of God who hath not only redeemed us from the Curse of the Law but also from the perpetual death of Impiety The same Lib. 10. upon Luke Chap. 22. I have sinned because I have betrayed innocent Blood the price of Blood is the price of the Lord's Passion Therefore the World is bought by Christ with the price of Blood Lib. 3. concerning Virginity near the end We were put in pledge to an evil Creditor by sins we drew on the Hand-writing of the Fault we owed the price of Blood The Lord Jesus came he offered his own Blood for us And presently Therefore do thou also behave thy self worthy of such a price lest Christ come who hath cleansed thee who hath redeemed thee and if he find thee in sin he say unto thee What profit hadst thou by my blood What hath it profitted thee that I went down into Corruption Lib. 1. of the Apology of David cap. 13. The Apostle says excellently Because the Lord Jesus hath forgiven our sins blotting out the Hand-writing of the Decree which was against us and he hath taken it away saith he having fixed it to the Cross He blotted out the Ink of Eve with his own Blood he blotted out the Obligation of the hurtful Inheritance On the Epistle to the Hebrews cap. 9. But all the bodily cleansing of the Old Testament belonged to him but now there is a Spiritual cleansing of the Blood of Christ Therefore he saith This is the blood of the New Testament for the remission of sins In those there was an outside sprinkling and again the sprinkled person was rinsed for the People did not always walk besprinkled with blood But it is not so in the Soul but the Blood is mingled with its Essence making that clean Fountain and bringing forth unspeakable beauty For this cause was the killing of the Lamb and its blood was sprinkled on the Door-posts of them that were to be delivered For this cause also we read of all the Sacrifices of the Old Testament which were appointed to typifie this Sacrifice by which comes the true remission of sins and the cleansing of the Soul for ever The same or rather the Writer of the Commentary on the Epistles of Paul attributed to Ambrose on 1 Cor. cap. 6. Because we are bought with a dear price we
should serve the Lord more diligently lest being offended he should deliver us back to that death from which he redeemed us For he bought us with a very dear price that he might give his blood for us The same on the same Ep. c. 11. We take the mystical Cup of the blood for the preservation of our body and soul because the blood of the Lord redeemed our blood that is made the whole man safe For the flesh of the Saviour was for the salvation of our body and the blood was shed for our souls The same on the second Epistle to the Corinthians cap. 5. Because he was offered for sins he is not without cause said to be made sin because the Sacrifice in the Law which was offered for sins was called sin that we might be the righteousness of God in him who knew no sin as Isaiah says Who did no sin neither was guile sound in his mouth He was slain as if he had been a sinner that sinners might be justified before God in Christ Epiphanius Hoeres 55. First he offered himself that he might abolish the Sacrifice of the Old Testament having offered a more perfect living Sacrifice for all the world himself being the Temple himself the Sacrifice himself the Priest himself the Altar himself God himself Man himself a King himself an High-Priest himself a Sheep himself a Lamb becoming all in all for our sake that he might become life to us in all respects and might procure the unchangeable establishment of his Priesthood Andraeas Caesariensis on Apoc. cap. 1. Honour saith he Glory and Dominion becometh him who being inflamed with burning love by his own Death deliverec us from the bonds of Death and by the pouring forth of his Life-giving blood and water washed us from the filth of sin and chose us for a Royal Priesthood Prudentius on Roman Mart. This is the Cross the Salvation of us all saith Romanus this is man's redemption Chrysostomus in his Preface on the Comment on Isaiah How great is the Clemency of God towards us He spared not a Son that he might spare a Servant He delivered up his only Begotten that he might redeem Servants that were altogether unthankful he payed the blood of his own Son for their price Hieronymus lib. 1. against the Pelagians And saith he when he would enter in let him offer a Calf for sin and a Ram for a Burnt-Sacrifice and let him take two Goats for the People let him offer one of them for his own sin and one for the sin of the People and a Ram for a Burnt-Sacrifice One of the two Goats takes all the sins of the People upon him for a Type of the Lord our Saviour and carries them away into the Wilderness and so God is reconciled to all the Multitude The same on Isaiah He was despised and not regarded when he was hanged on the Cross and being made a Curse for us bore our sins and spake to the Father My God why hast thou forsaken me Augustine concerning the Trinity lib. 13. cap. 14. What is the righteousness where-by the Devil was overcome What other but the righteousness of Jesus Christ and how was he overcome because when he found nothing in him worthy of Death yet he killed him And verily it is just that the Debtors whom he held should be sent away free believing in him whom he slew without any Debt For so was that innocent blood shed for the remission of our sins And presently He goes on afterwards to his Passion that he might pay that which he owed not for us the Debtors And in the next Chapter Then that blood because it was the blood of him that had no sin at all was shed for the remission of our sins that because the Devil kept those deservedly in bondage whom being guilty of sin he bound over to a condition of Death he might justly set these free by him whom being guilty of no sin he punished with Death without his deserving The strong man was overcome by this righteousness and tied with this bond that his Goods might be taken away that whilst they were in his possession were together with him and his Angels Vessels of Wrath and that they might be turned into Vessels of Mercy The same on John Tract 41. We are not reconciled but by the taking away of sin which is the Medium of Separation but the Mediator is the Reconciler Therefore that the Wall of Separation may be taken away the Mediator comes and the Priest himself is made a Sacrifice Lib. 7. de Civ Dei cap. 31. God sent his Word unto us who is his only Son by whose Birth and Sufferings for us in the Flesh that he took we might know how much God prized man and might be cleansed by that one Sacrifice from all our sins and Love being spread abroad in our hearts by his Spirit having overcome all Difficulties we might come to everlasting rest In his Declaration on Psalm 95. Men were held captive under the Devil and served Devils but they were redeemed from Captivity For they could sell themselves but they could not redeem themselves The Redeemer came and gave the price shed his blood and bought the world Ask ye what he bought See what he gave and find what he bought The blood is the price What is of so great worth What but the whole world What but all Nations They are very unthankful to their own price or they are very proud who say that either it was so small a price that it purchased only Africans or that they themselves were so great that it was given for them only Therefore they should not insult nor be puft up with pride he gave for the whole as much as he gave He knows what he bought because he knows for how much he bought it and how much he gave for it On Psalm 129. Our Priest received from us what he might offer for us for he received flesh from us In the flesh he was made an Expiation he was made a whole Burnt-Offering he was made a Sacrifice Lib. 4. against the two Epistles of the Pelagians But how say the Pelagians that Death only passed unto us by Adam For if we therefore dye because he died and he died because he sinned they say the punishment passeth unto us without the Fault and that the innocent Infants are punished by an unjust Judgment in being liable to Death without the merits of Death Which the Catholick Faith acknowledgeth of one only Mediator between God and Men the man Christ Jesus who condescended to undergo Death for us that is the punishment of sin without sin For as he only was made the Son of Man that through him we might be made the Sons of God So he undertook punishment for us without evil merits that we throught him might obtain grace without good merits Because as there was not any good due to us so neither was any evil due to him Lib. 14. against Faustus
the Manich cap. 4. Christ undertook our punishment without guilt that thereby he might take away our guilt and also put an end to our punishment The same in the eight Sermon concerning Time There is a twofold cause chiefly why the Son of God became the Son of Man One is that as Man through suffering all things for us he might set us free from the bonds of Sins for so the Prophet Isaiah had foretold he bore our sins c. But the other cause of the Lord's Passion is that he might stir us up whom he redeemed from sins and wickedness by his own blood unto the study of Piety not only by the help of Doctrine and Grace but also by his own Example De Temp. Serm. 51. Death could not be overcome but by Death therefore Christ suffered Death that an unjust Death might overcome just Death and might deliver them that were jusâ—ly condemned whilst he was unjustly slain for them And Serm. 141. Our Lord Jesus Christ by partaking with us of the punishment without the sin hath taken away both the sin and the punishment De Serm. Dom. on Luke 37. It is thy fault that thou art unjust but it is thy punishment that thou art mortal He that he might be thy Neighbour he undertook thy punishment but he took not upon him thy sin or if he took it upon him he took it upon him to abolish it not to do it And presently after by taking upon him the punishment and not taking upon him the sin he abolished both the sin and the punishment Cyrillus on Leviticus lib. 10. Then all the People cried that he should let Barrabbas go free but delier up Jesus to Death Behold thou hast the Goat that was sent away alive into the Wilderness carrying with him the sins of the People crying and saying Crucifie Crucifie He then is the Goat was sent alive into the Wilderness and he is the Goat that was offered to the Lord for a Sacrifice to make Atonement for sins and he made a true Propitiation for the People that believe in him The same against Julian lib. 9. See therefore the Sacrament and how it is well delineated by the two Goats For the Goat was slain for the sins of the Priest and People according to that which was commanded in the Law And because Christ was sacrificed for our sins he is compared to a Goat For so saith the Prophet Isaiah We all went astray like sheep every man wandred in his own way and God delivered him up for our sins For two Goats are taken not that there are two Christs that is two Sons as some supposed But rather because it was requisite that he should be seen who was also to be slain for us dying indeed according to the flesh but living according to the spirit The same on John lib. 2. cap. 1. One Lamb is slain for all that he may offer all kind of men to God One for all that he may gain all and that all may no longer live to themselves but to Christ that died for all and that rose again for all For because we were in sin and were therefore a due debt to Death and Destruction the Father gave his Son for our Reddemption He gave one for all both because all are in him and he is better then all The same in the Homil. that was said at Ephesus against Nestorius Verily these wicked Hereticks are the Sons of Perdition and the wicked Seed which deny the Lord that bought them for we are bought with a price not corruptible as Gold and Silver but with the precious blood of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish and spot But how could the blood of a common man like us have been the Redemption of the World In the Exegesis to Valerianus concerning the Incarnation of the Word which is extant Concil Eph. 6. c. 17. He who was without a Body as God confesseth that he hath a Body prepared for him that being made an oblation for us he might heal us all by his stripes according to the saying of the Prophet But how could one dying for all pay a sufficient price for all if we say that was the suffering of any meer man But if the Word having suffered according to the Flesh translated unto himself the Sufferings of his own Flesh as if they were his own Sufferings and claimed them to himself then indeed we do very well affirm that the Death of one according to the Flesh was of greater value than the life of all men Theodoretus quaest 9. on Numb For the Lord Christ only as Man is unblameable and the Prophet Isaiah fore-seeing this cries out Who did no sin neither was guile found in his mouth For this cause also he took upon him the sins of others having none of his own for he saith he doth bear our sins and is in anguish for our sakes And the great John Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World For this cause he is free among the dead as having suffered Death unjustly The same Serm. 10. concerning Providence he brings in the Lord speaking thus For I have paid the Debt for that Generation for not owing Death I suffered Death and being made subject to Death I undertook Death and though being unblameable I was reckoned among them that were worthy of blame and being free from Debts was reckoned amongst the Debtors I therefore paid the Debt of nature and having suffered an unjust Death I abolish the just Death and I having been unjustly detained do free them that were justly detained from their bondage Behold the Nature's Bill of Indictment taken away O bitter Death behold it nailed to the Cross Behold it being a Bill of wickedness not received for the eyes of this very body have paid for the eyes that beheld wickedly the ears of this body for the ears that received pollution this tongue likeways these hands and the other parts for those Members that committed any manner of sin But the Debt being paid it is requisite that they who were kept in bondage upon this account should be freed from their bondage and receive their former liberty and return to the Country of their Father Proclus the Constantinopolitan Homil concerning the Nativity of Christ. The nature of man was deeply indebted through sins and was in distress about the Debt for through Adam all were made guilty of sin the Devil kept us in slavery The first Inventer of our Miseries stood up arguing the Debt upon us and demanded of us Justice Therefore it was necessary that one of these two things should be that either Death should be brought upon all according to the Condemnation because all have sinned or that such a price should be given in recompense that contained all Righteousness that was required Now then Man could not save us for he was liable to the Debt of Sin An Angel could not redeem the Human Nature for the was not capable to
pay such a price of Redemption Therefore it remained that the sinless God ought to dye for them that had sinned for this only way remained of deliverance from that Evil. What then he that brought every Nature out of nothing into being who was not in distress to find out a way of Deliverance he found out for them that were Condemned a most sure Life and a very honourable way of abolishing Death and he is born a Man of the Virgin after such a manner as he himself knows for speech cannot declare the wonderfulness thereof and he died in what he became and purchased Redemption by what he was according to the saying of Paul In whom we have Redemption by his Blood the remission of sins O glorious works he purchased Immortality for others for he himself was Immortal Leo concerning the Passion Serm. 12. What hope can they have in the safeguard of this Sacrament who deny the truth of Human Substance in the Body of our Saviour Let them tell by what Sacrifice they are reconciled by what Blood they are redeemed who is he that gave himself for us an Oblation and Sacrifice for a savour of sweet smell Or what Sacrifice was ever more holy than that which the true High-Priest laid upon the Altar of the Cross For though the Death of many Saints was precious in the sight of God yet the killing of no other Innocent person was the Propitiation of the World The Just receive Crowns but did not give them and from the Courage of the Faithful have arisen Examples of Patience but not Gifts of Righteousness for there were singular Debts in each one of them neither did any of them pay another man's Debt by his Death whereas it was only our Lord Jesus Christ that was found among the Sons of Men in whom all were crucified all died all were buried and also all were raised again Claudianus Mamertus concerning the State of the Soul lib. 2. Pictavus Hilarius in many of his high Disputations being somewhat different in his Opinion asserted these two things contrary to truth one of of which was this That he said nothing was created Incorporeal the other was this That he said Christ suffered no pain in his Passion whose Passion if it had not been true our Redemption also could not have been true Anastasius Sinaita Bishop of Antiochia concerning the Right Rules of the Catholick Faith lib. 4. concerning the Passion and impassible Deity of Christ His Blood was shed which was sufficient to redeem many Perhaps it would be better to say it was sufficient to redeem all for all are also many Procopius of Gaza on the 24th of Exod. Seeing Christ was by nature joyned to the Father if we are made partakers of him by the Spirit we will also by him be united to the Father coming into the Society of the Divine Nature Neither did they go up into the Mountain before they were crucified with the Blood of Christ who gave himself a price of Redemption for us offering his own Flesh as an unblameable Sacrifice to God and the Father Gregor M. lib. 3. Moral cap. 13. Another that was created for Paradise would proudly take upon him the similitude of Divine Power Nevertheless the Mediator paid for the fault of this Pride being himself without fault Hence it is that a certain wise man said to the Father because thou art just thou desposest all things justly also thou condemnest him that ought not to be punished But it must be considered how he can be just and dispose all things justly if he condemns him that ought not to be punished For our Mediator ought not to have been punished for himself because he had no contagion of sin But if he had not undertaken an undue Death he had never delivered us from a due Death Therefore the Father because he is just in punishing the just one he disposeth all things justly For hereby he justifies all in that he condemns him that is without sin for sinners Isychius on Levicic cap. 16. The Law made the Children of Israel liable to the Curse and to Death so that they had therefore a necessity of Expiation and the Sacrifice of the only begotten is slain for them principally but he is Sacrificed for all men so that Caiphas said It behoveth that one man should dye for the People and not the whole Nation perish And the Evangelist John confirming and also correcting what was said added But this he said not of himself but being High-Priest that year he prophesied that Christ was to dye for that Nation and not for that Nation only but that he should gather together into one the Sons of God that are scattered to wit the Gentiles Jesus was slain for Israel and he offered him for all Mankind to be an Expiation of our Uncleanness Antiochus in Exomologess Thy Word was discoloured with no sprinkling of sin at all whom thou sentest through the bowels of thy Mercy that he might call back his own handy-work into the way being made flesh he suffered himself for our sake to be crucified and abolished the Hand-writing that was against us being made a Propitiation for our sins Sophronius of Jerusalem Epist to Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople Christ condescended to dye for men and for their redemption shed his Divine Blood and laid down his Soul which was a Gift more Divine than all Dignity Elias Cretenses Christ was called Redemption because he set us at liberty that were sold under sin and gave himself as a price of Redemption for the Expiation of the whole World Nicephorus of Constantinople Epist to Leo 3. which is extant in Baronius Tom. 9. Annal. p. 587. Edit Mor. 2. I believe he was crucified not in that Substance wherein he shines with the Father though it is said the Lord of Glory was crucified but in our Earthly Nature in which he took upon him our Earthly Mass and was made a Curse for us that he might make us partakers of the Blessing that comes from him and he was content to suffer the Death of Malefactors according to the flesh that by suffering Death he might condemn the sting of Death in his flesh and might destroy him that had the Power of Death that is the Devil Mark the Hermite in his Book concerning them that think they are justified by Works Christ is Lord according to his Essence and Lord also according to Dispensation Because he made them that were not and hath redeemed them that died to sin by his own Blood and gave Grace to them that thus believed Theodorus Abucara Bishop of the Carians Disp 15. cap. 5. God in his just Judgment required all things of us that are written in the Law which because we were not able to pay therefore our Lord paid those things for us and freely took and received upon himself the Curse and Condemnation to which we were liable he himself suffered those things that we ought to have suffered The same in the
same place Now declare unto me who are those five Enemies from which Christ hath delivered us A. Death the Devil the Curse and Condemnation of the Law Sin and Hell B. As touching Death you said it was destroyed by the Obedience of Christ So also after what manner he delivered us from the slavery of the Devil Now declare how he redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us And after he had said a few words A. God in his just Judgment required of us all things that are written in the Law which because we were not able to pay therefore Christ our Lord paid those things for us and willingly took and received unto himself the Curse and Condemnation to which we were liable And And he himself suffered those things that we ought to have suffered being scourged besmeared with spittle beaten smitten on the cheek crucified and dyed for us Theophylact in the first Chapter to the Hebrews on these words procuring the Expiation of our sins by him When he had spoken concerning the Majesty of the Divinity of the Word afterwards he discourseth of his care that he takes for men by his flesh which is much more than that he beareth all things And here he asserts two things both that he cleansed us from our sins and also that he did this by himself For by the Cross and Death which he sustained he purged us not only because he dyed for our sin whereas himself was free of all sin and suffered punishment which yet he did not owe to us and delivered that Nature that was simply condemned for the sin and transgression of Adam On Cap. 9. For that cause Christ died that he might cleanse us and in his Testament bequeathed unto us the pardon of sin the use of his Father's Goods being made the Mediator of our Father For the Father would not let go the Inheritance to us but was angry at us as Sons rejecting him and estranged from him Therefore Christ becoming Mediator reconciled him unto us How what we should have suffered for we should have dyed that he suffered for us and made us worthy of his Testament Anselm concerning the Conception of the Virgin and Original Sin cap. 22. If every one hath not the sin of Adam saith some body how sayest thou that none is saved without Satisfaction for the sin of Adam For how doth the just God require of them Satisfaction for the sin they have not To which I say God exacteth of no sinner more than he oweth But because none can restore as much as he owes Christ only rendered more than is due for all that are saved Bernard Epist 190. to Innocentius It was a man that owed and it was a man that paid For saith he if one died for all them are all dead to wit that the Satisfaction of one may be imputed to all as he only did bear the sins of all and so there was not found one that purchased and another that satisfied because one Christ is Head and Body therefore the Head satisfied for the Members Christ for his own Bowels Arnoldus Carnotensis in his Work concerning the seven last words that were spoken by Christ upon the Cross He is forsaken with them that are forsaken and paid a Tribute for the Nature that he took and being to carry with him his own kindred beyond the Sea of this World paid the fare of his flesh to the plundering Pirates and deceived their greedy Teeth being glewed together and drew away and carried up both himself and his prey He offered himself to be a Debtor for Debtors and what he owed not of himself he refused not to owe of his own accord Therefore the Exacter required the sum of the whole Debt of him who gave himself for all Nicetas Choniates in the Annals in John Commenus Christ falling raised up the Carcase of our Nature stretching forth his hands upon the Cross and with a few Sprinklings bringing the whole World into Unity Nicalaus de Cusa Cardinalis excitationum lib. 10. Thus Christ acted for our Justification for we sinners in him suffered the infernal punishments that we justly deserve FINIS
punishment of our sins was exacted of him concerning which things we have already treated and with those words of Scripture which testifie not obscurely That God was appeased and reconciled to us by the Blood of Christ That his Blood was a price given for us That Christ died in our stead and was our Propitiation of which there will be occasion to speak afterwards CHAP. II. How God should be considered in this Affair and it is shewed that he should be considered as a Governour THe State of the Controversie being understood and that Opinion being confirmed by Scriptures on which the Faith of the Church is supported that the Objections which the Reason of Socinus or rather the abuse of his Reason furnish-him with may be routed it is requisite that it should be understood What is God's part or office in this matter to be discoursed of Socinus confesses That the Discourse is concerning Deliverance from Punishment We add That the Inflicting of Punishment is also treated of Whence it follows That God must needs be here considered as a Governour For to inflict Punishment or to Deliver a man from Punishment whom thou mayest punish which the Scripture calls to justifie is only the part of a Governour as such firstly and of it self As for Example Of a Father in a Family Of a King in a Common-wealth Of God in the Universe Though this is manifest unto all yet it may be easily proved because Punishment is the last thing in Compulsion but Compulsion belongs only to a Superior 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the higher Power whence Seneca called Clemency the meekness of a Superiour towards an Inferiour in appointing Punishment Neither doth it hinder that Revenge seems sometimes to be attributed to men private and furnished with no superior Power For that Revenge is either of fact not of right which is contrary to natural Justice it self or it signifies a certain right belonging to some man not first and of it self but by the concession of another whence the Father of the ravished Maid kills the Ravisher and any man kills the banished man or it signifies not the Act of Punishment it self but the requiring of the Punishment to be inflicted either by God himself or by another Governour Unto which ways of revenging so many ways of remission of sins or pardon are answerable which both Scripture and common Speech attributes to private men But this Assertion needs so much the less proof because Socinus himself somewhere confesseth That God should be looked upon as a Prince in punishing and absolving men then which nothing more true can be said Neither did James signifie any other thing when he said there is one Law-giver who can save and destroy James 4.12 Therefore in this matter we have a new 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habitude of God which being found it is easie to remove all others First then We grant this to Socinus requiring it That here God should not be looked upon as a Judge appointed under a Law for he that is such a Judge could not free the Offender from punishment by translating the punishment upon another Not because that of it self it is unjust but because it agrees not with the Law whereof he is chosen a Minister Which Lactantius expressed in these words concerning the Anger of God Chap. 19. A Judge cannot give pardon to Offences because he is subject to the Will of another But God can because he himself is the Decider of his own Law which when he appointed verily he took not away all power from himself but hath liberty to forgive Seneca says well Clemency hath a Free-will not under a Condition but judgeth according to justice and Goodness for Equity belongs to a Judge tied to a Form of Law but Clemency properly so called belongs only to the highest Governour in every Community The same Seneca bids a Prince think on this Any man may kill against the Law bur none can save against the Law but my self Augustinus took notice of this distinction It is appointed by the Judges that it should not be lawful to repeal a Sentence given against a guilty person Will the Emperour also be under this Law For it is lawful to him only to repeal a Sentence and absolve a person guilty of Death and to pardon him And Symmachus For there is one condition of Magistrates whose Sentences seem to be corrupted if they are milder than the Laws and there is another power of Sacred Princes whom it becomes to mitigate the sharpness of a severe Law Unto which also Cicero had respect when he said for Ligarius to Caesar I did not I thought not such Arguing useth to be before a Judge but I say to a Father I have erred I did rashly I repent I fly to thy Clemency I beg pardon of the fault I beseech you that you would pardon But Socinus though in the place above-cited he looks upon God as the highest Prince yet in many places in all this act he attributes another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habitude to him to wit of a Party offended And he would have every offended Party to be the Creditor of the Punishment and therein to have such a power as other Creditors have in things owing to them Which power he often calleth by the name of Lordship therefore he very often repeats that here God should be looked upon as a Party offended as a Creditor as a Lord putting these three as signifying the same thing This Error of Socinus because it is largely spread abroad through his whole Treatise and may be said to be in this matter his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chiefest lye must be confuted accurately That this may be performed this Assertion may be put first To punish is not an Act belonging to the Party offended as such this is proved because otherways the power of Punishment of it self would belong to every offended Party which appears to be false because we proved that to punish is an act 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Superiority By the Confession of Socinus himself when he says That God should be look'd upon as a Prince whence another firm Argument ariseth If God punisheth and taketh away punishment as a Prince then not as a Party offended for the same thing cannot be attributed to two divers things as such But at the same time we deny not that God who punisheth sins or lets them go unpunished is rightly called the offended Party But we deny that to punish or let go unpunished is attributed to him as an offended Party For it is very well known that a thing may be said of a man that doth not agree to him as such as a Counseller of Law sings not as a Counseller of Law but as a Musician Lactantius observed this rightly We rise to punishment not because we are injured but that Discipline may be preserved Manners may be corrected Licentiousness may be restrained This is just Anger which as it is necessary in man