decree of Grace 't was absolutely necessary that Infinite Wisdom be in exercise for the work was stupendious too great for finite capacities to engage in a work no way beneath God himself A Holy Good and just Law unto which was annexed a severe threatning is transgressed mankind is become unholy and unclean altogether filthy and polluted liable to to the greatest miseries the Lord still Just and Righteous True and faithful a God of purer eyes than to behold iniquity or delight in sin or in the unreconciled sinner Sin must be punished justice must be satisfied Holiness and Truth Glorified but Man in the circumstances he then was unable to do either He cannot appease Gods Wrath nor satisfy Justice nor purifie or cleanse his own heart to perfection how then can he become the object of everlasting love or how is it possible that the Gracious decree be executed I answer Whoever considers these things seriously cannot but cry out and say if this work be accomplished it must be the Lords own doing and marvelous in our eyes The contrivance must be the effort of infinite wisdome and the Glory of that Grace for which such a work must be carried on is Unspeakable and verily the Lord hath shewn himself to be God even in that he hath found out a way for the doing this Wisdom dwelt with Prudence and found out the knowledge of this witty invention Prov. 8.12,30 3. God the Father consulted with God the Son and it rejoyced their soul that Grace might be magnified that Justice and Mercy might greet each other That the Love of God might be made known unto man without the impeachment of the honour of his other Attributes But what was the contrivance 't was this God the Father entred into a Covenant with God the Son in which Covenant there is observable 1. What the Father required from the Son 2. What the Father Promised the Son 1. What the Father required the Son to do which more generally was the exalting Free-Grace in the actual Salvation of some even in a way agreable with the other glorious perfections of God But more particularly several things in order to the obtaining this end must be done 1. A body must be prepared for the Son he must assume humane nature it being necessary that he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified should be of one of one common Parent Adam and therefore God the Son took on him the flesh and blood viz. The nature of the Brethren the humane but not corrupt nature Heb. 2.11,14,16 And therefore a body was prepared for the Son Heb. 10.5 c. 2. In this nature God the Son must come into the World Prov. 8.30,31 And suffer fâ—… mans sin Isa 53.5 He was wounded for our transgressions he was bruised for our iniquities Gal. 3.13 John 10.18 3. He must render a sinless a full compleat and perfect obedience to Gods Law being made under the Law Gal. 4.4 It became him to fulfil all Righteousness Math. 3.15 He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it Math. 5.17 In doing which the end of the Law was answered the honour of Gods Justice and governing wisdom conserved and the door of grace opened to believing repenting returning sinners who were givens to the Lord Jesus 4. The Lord Christ was obliged to keep and preserve these given him This is the Fathers Will that of all that he hath given me I should lose nothing but shall raise it up at the last day John 6.39 2. God the Father moreover doth make rich promises unto the Son on the Sons performing the required conditions The Son shall be greatly rewarded he shall be exalted and made very high Isa 52.13 Yea God highly exalted him giving him a name above every name Philip. 2.9 c. Again God gives him a select number who shall in process of time be actually with him in the eternal glory He shall see his seed and the travel of his soul and be satisfied Isa 53.10.11 yea a select number among the Heathen Psal 2.8 Nations shall run unto him Isa 5.5 Who are called Children given unto Christ Heb. 2.13 So John 10.29 The Lord Jesus Christ speaking of his sheep that is of those that were ordained to eternal life doth say my Father which gave them me Thus you see the terms of the Covenant all ordered for the exaltation of infinitely free Grace The USES 'T is wonderful that the thoughts of God should from all eternity be concerned for faln man's salvation 3. That the Lord Christ God-man must engage in this great work that he who was eternally in the bosom of the Father should empty himself of the Glory of God and take upon him the form of a servant is mightily surprizing That God should humble himself so infinitely as to undergo the wrath of the Father Oh what manner of love what manner of Grace is this Read believingly and considerately the account given in the Scriptures of our Lord Jesus his fulfilling his part of the Covenant in the particulars thereof and you cannot but see free-grace highly exalted 1. God assumes humane nature What a wonder is this and how many miracles were wrought for the effecting it considering humane nature was by sin Corrupted and yet it must be assumed and united unto the divine without Corruption 2. God in this nature suffers not that the divine nature as such is capable of the least sufferings and therefore 't is the humane nature that is the immediate subject of sufferings but passions as well as actions being of persons we may safely say That he who is God suffered for our iniquities were laid on Christ Isay 53. Christ was made sin as 't is 2 Cor. 5.21 yea and a curse that such as do believe might be delivered from an eternal curse Gal. 3.13 But how was Christ made sin or in what sense were the iniquities of any laid on him was the filth of sin laid on Christ CHAP. IV. The difficulty proposed in the last Chapter spoken unto Sin with reference unto its FILTH GUILT and PUNISHMENT distinctly considered and Explained The punishment and Guilt of Sin laid on Christ asserted Concerning the Filth of Sin The sense of some Antonomians reduced to three particulars proposed Their first Error in saying the Filth of Sin was laid on Christ detected and confuted That the Filth of Sin be laid on Christ impossible The consequences of this Error dreadful and unscriptural The Purity and Holiness of Christ asserted and vindicated The Antinomians abuse of the Grace of God hinted IN giving a truely Scriptural a full and satisfying answer unto this difficulty we shall have a fair occasion of shewing How and after what manner Free-Grace is in its Excellencies displayed But that we may entertain right conceptions concerning this thing we must carefully distinguish between the Filth the Guilt and Punishment of sin 1. There is the Sin it self formally considered which is a transgression of a holy good and
sinful Defections Propensions Words and Actions must pass from us into Christ but if this be not also impossible what is But 2ly T is Absurd and false For 2. If the Filth of our sin be laid on Christ then surely the Lord Christ is thereby made really filthy for as Guilt is laid on Christ and thereby Christ is made really guilty that is really guilty of another mans sin even so if the Filth of sin be laid on Christ then Christ must be really filthy for in quocunque inest abstractum de eo dicitur concretum the denomination is à forma denominante Filth on whomsoever 't is doth give the denomination of filthy but was our Lord Christ really filthy Was there any sin in any respect in him who knew no sin and in whom there was no guile Guilt is an extrinsecal respect of sin to the threatning of the Law and a man may be guilty of sin that is of anothers sin who hath no sin in him of his own but Filth the fault it self is so intrinsecal to sin that in whomsoever the Filth of sin is in him sin must be and were it a thing possible that the sin of the elect should pass from the elect to Christ it would make the Lord Christ a real sinner really Unclean Impure Filthy and Corrupt but who can entertain such a thought without abhorrence For 1. The Scriptures never assert that the Filth of sin was laid on Christ T is true our iniquities were laid on Christ that is the Punishment and Guilt of our iniquities as hath been proved but not the Filth of our iniquities neither was it necessary that any more should be laid on Christ than the Punishment and Guilt For the Lord Christ came only to exempt us from wrath to bring us into a state of Grace and to purchase a right to glory for us by his sufferings and perfect righteousness But 2. The Scriptures do most vehemently conclude that there was no spot in Christ 1. As Christ is God we cannot say that any Filth was on him without blasphemy surely that God who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity could never be so in love with the filth the worst of iniquity as to take it on himself Neither 2 Durst we aver that the Lord Christ with respect to his Humane Nature had the least Filth of sin either in or upon him For he was born an Holy thing Luke 1.35 therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God He was born with holy inclinations and propensions yea and all his Thoughts Words and Actions were holy all his lifetime for he fulfilled all Righteousness Matth. 3.15 ch 5.17 and at his death his blood was the pretious blood of him who was without blemish and without spot 1 Pet. 1.19 He did not sin neither was guile found in his mouth Ch. 2.22 For such an High Priest became us who is Holy Harmless Undefiled Separate from Sinners Heb. 7.26 Which could not be had he the least spot or blemish on him Note well Isa 53.9 3. In what part of Christ was the filth of sin laid or what was there in Christ that was either faulty or filthy was there any flaw in his understanding or were the inclinations of his soul after evil were his thoughts irregular or his words or actions dissonant from Gods Law The Filth of sin is a spiritual filth polluting the Soul but which part of his righteous soul was polluted was our Ignorance laid on Christ making Christ Ignorant or our Pride Stubbornness Uncleanness Sinful anger and Undue Passions in Christ was the Lord Christ Ignorant Proud Passionate or Unclean what sound believer doth not tremble at such thoughts as these But for the Filth of sin to be laid on Christ and yet the Filth of no one particular sin to be found on him is strange Oh that men who presume to contradict the Generation of the Just would shew what they mean by the filth of sin as 't is distinguished both from Guilt and Punishment and what they understand by the Fathers laying the Filth of sin on Christ or what by the words transacting the filth of sin on Christ For methinks 't is impossible that any truly gracious soul should conclude that the filth of sin the fault it self as distinguished from Guilt and Punishment can in any respect be laid on Christ Wherefore then consider 't is a great dishonor to Free-Grace to say that the Father laid the filth of sin on Christ for this is inconsistent with the Holiness and Wisdom of God and to set up Free-Grace to the reproach of Divine Holiness or Wisdom is to abuse it CHAP. V. A second Error of the Antinomians viz. The Elect made holy by Christ's Holiness Somewhat concerning Justification premised Several reasons against the Error Wherein its tendency to the subversion of a great part of the Christian Religion is evinced The third error considered its destructiveness to all Religion proved particularly To the Second THat as Christ is our Justification by the imputation of his Righteousness even so he is our Sanctification through the imputation of his holiness For 't is suggested that they must be perfectly Holy before their entrance into Heaven and that they are not made so in this life by the sanctification of the Spirit therefore it must be by the imputed Holiness of Christ That I may be the more clear in considering this I humbly apprehend it very necessary that I do acquaint the vulgar with the true notion of Justification and Sanctification In order unto which t is requisite that we remember the distinction that is between the guilt and the filth of sin Justification respecting the guilt Sanctification the Filth of sin Guilt of sin is an external respect of it with regard unto the sanction of the Law only and is separable from sin as the Reverend Dr. Owen also hath shewn of Justification pag. 285. But the Fault it self or the filth the transgression of the preceptive part of the Law is the formal nature of sin and is so intrinsecal thereunto as to be inseparable from it Justification then makes only an external relative-change by removing guilt and giving us a right to life and as it regards guilt it respects the past State Sanctification imports an internal and a physical change by introducing new light into the the heart and new principles inclinations and propensions towards God and regards the future state weakning the habits of sin strengthening the habits of infused Grace and thereby preventing much sin that otherwise would pollute the soul whereby the man is in part sanctified Justification is through the blood and righteousness of Jesus Christ Sanctification is through the working of the Spirit of the same Lord Jesus Christ is our Justification by his blood and Righteousness and the same Christ is our sanctification by his Spirit For God hath chosen you to salvation through the
just Law and accordingly regarding sin as it is either contrary to or different from this Law t is somewhat impure unclean and polluting In Sin there is a dissonancy or disconformity to the preceptive part of the Law an irregularity or a want of conformity unto it an obliquity which is filth pollution a blot or stain the fault it self In whomsoever there is this fault or this irregularity or obliquity there is a deformity there is filth and defilement and that person is truly faulty for he hath transgressed the Law there is so much in him either contrary unto or dissonant from the Law which is sin whence he may be said to be formally or in a proper and strict sense a sinner * More expresly to declare what is this Filth is somewhat difficult although Maeratius the Jesuite disp in sum Th. tract de pec dis 13. Sect. 5. c. asserts that the Macula peccati formaliter est ipsa malitia peccati actualis to which he adds quatenus moraliter durat perseverat etium transacto Physice actu peccati c. This he gives as the general sentiment of the Modern Schoolmen concluding that the actual sin though as Physically considered immediately passeth away yet as morally it remains called actual as you respect the moment in which 't is committed called the Macula as it remains until by Repentance or the infusion of grace it be blotted out But I cannot comprehend How the Filth of sin which remains should be the same Numerically with the Act which so suddenly ceaseth to be it seeming to be little less than an Implication to assert that the same Numerical act is and is not in one and the same instant I should therefore rather humbly conclude it to be thus Actual sins being contrary to the Pure Law of God are Filthy and Impure which Filthy and Impure Acts leave behind them much Filth which consists in vitious habits which habits are strengthned by a frequency of sinful filthy Acts and consequently the soul thereby the more filthy and polluted whence the remaining Filth is the continued blindness and habitual aversion of the heart from God 2. There is Guilt which doth immediately attend this sin where ever it is so that whoever sinneth contracts Guilt which Guilt is a liableness to punishment an Obnoxiousness thereunto for some fault Guilt as t is distinguished from the fault it self is the immediate effect of the Fault or of the sin and is not properly or in a strict sense sin but only Metonymically and Improperly so In which sense as I shall hereafter shew 't is frequently in Scripture called sin It being sins respect unto the threatning part of the Law For as the inclinations thoughts words and actions as dissonant from or disconform unto the Precept of the Law are formally sins even so as sin regards the threatning part of the same Law 't is guilt Guilt then is sin's extrinsecal respect unto the threatning the sanction of the Law To be liable to the threatning is to be Guilty To be judged liable unto it is to be judged Guilty or to be judged a sinner I think not my self obliged to insist on the distinction inter Reatum culpae poenae For where-ever there is the dignitas poenae there is the obligatio ad poenam Whatever Maeratius and others say to the contrary and there can be no obligatio ad poenam where there is not Dignitas poenae propter culpam 3. The punishment is the evil threatned for sin 't is an evil or somewhat painful and grievous inflicted for sin 'T is malum passionis propter malum actionis or malum naturale propter malum morale which is also an effect of sin and frequently beareth the name of sin it 's cause And so the word that signifies Sin is used in the sacred writing to denote punishment as in Gen. 4.13 * Note Gen. 47. Where Cain said my punishment is greater than I can bear that is in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mine Iniquity or my sin the like also in Gen. 19.15 Lest thou be consumed in the Iniquity of the City is saith Ainsworth in loc The Punishment for Iniquity Hereupon is that usual Phrase of bearing Iniquity for suffering Punishment Lev. 28.17,19,20 Numb 14.34 To Punish is to inflict evil on the Guilty as such for evils inflicted on the Innocent as Innocent are not punishments Whence observe that when 't is said our Iniquities were laid on the Lord Christ we may safely understand it of the punishment and guilt of sin 1. That the punishment of our sin was laid on Christ is most evident in that the Lord Christ was made a Sacrifice for sin All his fufferings being Penal he being wounded and bruised for our sins our griefs laid on him and he made a curse for us 2. That the Guilt of Sin was also laid on Christ is a truth most agreable unto the Scriptures In order to the confirming which I shall attempt to shew 1 That this is Possible the Guilt may be laid on Christ without the laying any stain on his most pure nature 2 that this was really so 1. That this may be viz. That the Guilt of sin may be laid on Christ and the Lord Christ remain pure and free from the least blemish appears from this that the Guilt of sin doth not contain in it the formal nature of sin that is so Polluting it being somewhat extrinsecal thereunto and consequently separable from sin yea and from the actual sinner I know that Bellarmine who denies the Guilt of sin to have been laid on Christ doth assert Guilt to be inseparable from the sin it self for saith he speaking of the Reatus culpae Reatus ut rectè docet Philippus est Relatio cujus proximum fundamentum est actus malus sive iniquitas Non potest autem Relatio à fundamento proximo separari quia ex ipso fundamento naturaliter necessario sequitur Bell. de amiss Grat. Stat. peccat l. 5. c. 7. But what more evident than that although sin ever contracts Guilt and Guilt ever attends sin Which is the whole Bellarmine proves in saying that Relatio ex ipso fundamento c. yet Guilt is not an Inseparable Consequent of sin even according to the sense of the Schoolmen yea and of Bellarmine himself Do not the Schoolmen generally distinguish between the Guilt and Filth of sin Malderus in 12 ae Thomae q. 85. art 1.2 mentions eight different sentiments that the Learned entertain concerning the Macula the Filth of sin and 't is the opinion of but a few that the Macula and the Reatus is the same These Schoolmen commonly discoursing of the Fault it self the Macula and the Reatus culpae and Reatus poenae as distinct so Maeratius the Jesuite disp in sum tract de pec disp 13. sect 5. and Bellarmine They mostly agreeing in this That the Reatus culpae or the Dignitas poenae is
not the same with the filth of sin neither doth this Guilt contain within it the formal nature of sin For saith Maeratius ubi supra Quare cum ex omni peccato sequatur poenae Dignitas dignitatem obligatio si Dignitas haec obligatio sit formaliter peccatum ex iis altera dignitas obligatio sequetur quae vel erit peccatum vel non si secundum habemus intentum si primum dabitur processus in infinitum yea and they farther conclude That the guilt is separable from the fault it self Dignitas obligatio luendae poenae possunt in eo esse qui caret peccato yea and Bellarmine ubi supra c. 19. asserts that Reatus culpae non est propriè peccatum sed effectus necessario consequens aliquid manens post actum peccati non enim homo est dignus odio praecisè quia peccavit alioqui nunquam talis dignitas auferri posset peccatum esset Irremissibile sicut fieri non potest ut qui peccavit non peccaverit praeterea talis dignitas c. non est aliquid recedens à lege non deformat vel occidit spiritualiter animam non est privatio boni neque habet aliquid aliud eorum quae propriè peccato conveniunt So plain 't is that Guilt the Guilt of the Fault is not properly or formally sin 't is somewhat distinct from the Fault for it doth not pollute or deform the soul yea Guilt is separable from the fault it self otherwise the Guilt of Adam's actual sin could not be made ours for if his actual sin and the guilt thereof had been inseparable there could have been no passing of the guilt of his sin to us unless his actual sin had been removed also from him unto us Again the pardon of sin which consists in the removing the guilt of sin would also become an Impossibility to the unspeakable horrour of all the Children of fallen Adam But that the Guilt is separable from the filth of sin is easily illustrated by the Metaphor of a Debtor Creditor and Surety according to the Rules of Law A Debtor is liable to pay one thousand pounds unto his Creditor This liableness is Guilt Inde Reus constitutus dicitur qui se obligavit Which Guilt may be the product of his own extravagancy or Fault But this debtor becoming Insolvent another who voluntarily undertaking the payment thereby becomes liable to pay the debt i.e. He becomes Guilty For Interdum Reus Expromissorem significat i.e. eum qui alienam in se obligationem vel novatione vel delegatione suscepit Schard in verb. but Guilty of anothers Fault Venia namque digni sunt qui alienâ tenentur Culpâ cujusmodi sunt Fide-jussores pro alieno debito obligati Schard in verb. Fidejuss So plain it is That the Fault and Guilt are so separable that the Fault may remain on the one when the Guilt passeth to the other 2. But secondly That the Guilt of our sins passed from us unto Christ is now to be considered But before I proceed to do so it must be duly remembred That what hath been already said doth with the greatest clearness shew That the laying the Guilt of sin on Christ may be without the casting any Filth on the face of this our blessed Lord. But to the Proof 1. This may be evinced from the consideration that Jesus Christ suffered for our sins as a surety The Lord Jesus voluntarily offered up himself and most freely undertook to pay what sinful man the Debtor could not On which account He was immediately liable to pay the Debt or undergo the punishment i.e. He was Guilty as has been already intimated Man was faulty in contracting so great a debt but Christ was innocently merciful in taking it on himself to satisfy the Father whereby Christ became Guilty of anothers Fault But 2. God the Father's inflicting evil on Christ as Penal most righteously doth necessarily infer this truth It being unjust to punish any but the Guilty to which add those Scriptures that make mention of the Lords bearing our iniquities his being wounded for our transgressions his being made sin and a curse Isa 53.4,5,6 2 Cor. 5.21 Gal. 3.13 That which will give light unto these texts and strength unto my arguments is a truth of great importance concerning the guilt and punishment of sin viz. That although the Faul and the Guilt are separable yet the Guilt and Punishment are not Whence whosoever is found Guilty at the Bar must be sentenced yea and punished as such If Guilt and Punishment had not been by the unalterable determination of God as he is a Righteous Lawgiver so fixedly united unto each other as never to admit of the least separation the Justice and Righteousness of God might have been sufficiently glorified in the pardoning sin without any regard unto a sacrifice yea it might have been possible for that bitter cup to have passed according unto the Lord Jesus his desire and man notwithstanding might have been most happy But since Laws would appear to be but ludicrous and feeble things without a due execution of the threatned evil casting the worst of reflections upon the Lawgiver God who is Infinitely Wise Holy Just and Righteous giveth most illustrious instances of the Excellency of his Laws in that there is a day in which search shall be made after the transgressour and when all such as are found guilty shall be condemned to the threatned punishment for God will by no means clear the guilty Exod. 34.7 They that shall presume to Justifie the wicked or condemn the Righteous even they both are an abomination unto the Lord Prov. 17.15 Whence 't is a thing most unjust to punish the Innocent and permit the Guilty to go free which being so it follows that whoever is justly punished must be really guilty of his own or of anothers fault to punish any as not guilty or as innocent is as great an act of injustice as 't is not to punish those who at the Judgment-Seat are found Guilty These truths carry their own evidence with them proclaiming this other namely That if the Lord Jesus Christ did bear the Punishment of our iniquities it was because antecedently thereunto the Guilt of our iniquities was laid on him And that the Lord did undergo the punishment of our sins can never be denied by any that believe the fore-mentioned texts it being so express That he hath born our griefs and carryed our sorrows he was wounded for our transgressions he was bruised for our iniquities yea the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all he was made sin and a Curse But in what sense if not in this That at least the punishment of our iniquity was laid on Christ Is not this so plain that neither Arminian nor Papist do presume to deny it Bellarmine I am sure asserts it and if the Punishment of sin be laid on Christ since 't is done by the Lord who is
Just it must be because antecedently to the infliction of punishment Guilt was laid on him for otherwise not only the Innocent would be punished but moreover as Innocent which is injustice for although an Innocent Person may justly undergo severe punishments yet not as Innocent but as guilty of another's Faults For the fuller clearing this Truth I 'le only attempt to prove that the bearing sin or Iniquity or the being made sin and a Curse doth signify both the being Guilty and as such the being punished That Punishment by a Metonymy bears the name of sin I have proved out of Gen. 4.13 ch 19.15 and which may be further confirmed from that in 1 Sam. 28.10 Where Saul sware to the Witch that there shall no Punishment happen unto her In the Hebrew 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there shall no Sin or Iniquity happen So also in Zechar. 14.19 This shall be the Punishment of Aegypt and the Punishment of all nations In the Hebrew 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sin of Aegypt c. In like manner to bear sin is to bear the Guilt or Punishment of sin Ezek. 18.20 The Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father i.e. the Son shall not bear the Guilt nor the Punishment of the Fathers sin but the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him i.e. the Guilt and Punishment of the wicked shall be upon him whence that word which in the Hebrew doth signify Guilt doth also signify Sin t is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 42.21 we are Guilty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same word is elsewhere translated sins and trespasses as in Psal 68.21 God will wound the hairy scalp of such an one as goeth on still in his trespasses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Again to have iniquity laid on us is the same with the bearing iniquity that is the bearing the guilt of sin In fine The being made sin and the being made a curse are terms much of the same import denoting the Guilt and Punishment and as I humbly conceive more properly the guilt of sin because the wicked even on their sinning are immediately accursed are abnoxious though not immediately Punished q. d. Since to be obnoxious is to be guilty to be cursed is to be guilty but that the being made a curse doth not as formerly considered signify the being made formally sin is evident in that 't is an evil threatned for what is strictly sin and therefore as such denotes somewhat distinct from sin taking sin in a strict sense for the very fault or transgression it self Thus I have in some weak measure performed what I engag'd to doe and have prov'd That Guilt is separable from Sin the formal Nature and Filth thereof and consequently may pass from us to Christ even when it must not be concluded as if Christ had been for such a reason formally a sinner I have further shewn That the Guilt as well as Punishment of sin is laid on Christ These being so inseparable that a Righteous Judge in doing Right cannot omit the Punishing the Guilty nor presume to inflict any evil penally on such as are not in any wise Guilty But 3. To consider the Filth of Sin The Filth of Sin being of a Polluting and Defiling Nature was not laid on Christ as some very boldly have asserted who not distinctly minding what the Filth of Sin is how distinguished from Guilt c. have under the notion of exalting Free-Grace faln into Dangerous Errors which I will essay to demonstrate by shewing the falseness Absurdity and Impossibility thereof But before I do so 't will be necessary that I acquaint you with the sense of those men that assert it which is this God doth not only lay the Punishment and Guilt of Sin on Christ but simply the very Fault it self that men commit that is The Transgression it self is become the transgression of Christ so that in respect of the Reality of being a Transgressor Christ is as really a Transgressor as the person that did commit the sin Yea Christ Jesus by vertue of Gods laying sin on him is as really a Transgressor as if he himself had actually committed Transgression The very Erring Straying and Transgressing of the Elect is passed from them and laid on Christ Hast thou been an Idolater Blasphemer c. If thou hast part in the Lord Christ all these Transgressions of thine become actually the Transgressions of Christ and so cease to be thine and thou ceasest to be a Transgressor from that time they were laid on Christ to the last hour of thy life Thy Sins being laid on Christ are taken from thee If God himself say thy sins lye upon thee and withal say he did before lay them on Christ how much is this better than a Contradiction The Sin it self or the Filth is removed from the Elect by being laid on Christ and the soul made Perfect God doth not wash them by halves nor doth he leave some spots and blemishes and stains behind Christ's holiness is imputed unto the Elect as well as his Righteousness otherwise they could not be perfect in this life since the Spirit 's work in their Sanctification is but imperfect in this life 't is Christ therefore who by bearing our sins carries away all the Abhorrency and loathsomness of sin otherwise God could take no pleasure in us God is a God of so much Purity that he cannot endure that Person where the least SPOT of Sin is found This and much more is asserted by Dr. Crisp in his Sermons on Isaiah 53.6 as also by some others which for the greater clearness I 'le sum up in these following particulars 1. That these men conclude that the Filth of sin is laid on Christ and made really his Filth 2. That Christ is our Justification by the Imputation of his Righteousness even so he is our Sanctification by the Imputation of his Holiness 3. That the Filth of sin being laid on Christ the Elect are thereby totally and perfectly delivered from every loathsome Spot and blemish of sin To all which I reply distinctly 1. To the first That the Filth of sin is laid on Christ and made really his Filth as they say this is Impossible Absurd and False 1. Impossible for by the Filth of sin we must understand either Irregular Oblique and disorderly defections or inclinations or words or actions For sin is a moral relation which cannot be but in a subject and as the Person sinning is the Remote Subject even so the Disposition Thought Word or Action or some defection must be the nearest Subject whence then since sin cannot be and not be in some Subject the sin in its filth cannot pass from us to Christ but in transity i.e. in its passage from one Subject to another it must be considered as in no Subject i.e. as what is destroyed For the Relation must pass without its Subject which is impossible or with the nearest Subject it self that is All our
every man from the evil of his way Jer. 36.2,3,6 7. And is a may be a peradventure powerful enough to raise the hearts of men to great undertakings as to the things of this life and yet not sufficient to oblige us to act for God and glory or doth this may be prove a motive sufficient to engage the Ministers of Christ to endeavour the salvation of precious and immortal souls and yet insufficient for the moving you to the doing any thing for your selves surely this may be doth not argue only a Possibility but moreover a great Probability Thou art therefore O man inexcusable if thou neglectest thy duty and wilt not strive to enter in at the strait gate since by striving thou mayst have an entrance into the heavenly glory given thee 't is possible 't is probable but if thou wilt not strive for Heaven nothing more sure than that Hell will be thy portion Oh consider these things and remember * Si ergo à Justitia pietate quis desicit suo in praeceps fertur arbitrio suâ concupiscentià trahitur sua persuasione decipitur Aug. Resp ad Art sibi impos ad Art 13. That if you die in your sins your destruction will be of your selves you will be found self-condemned sinners to whom the Lord may say How often would I have gathered you together but you would not Man's sin and consequently his ruine is from himself and not from the Lord so Quae mala cum homines admittunt suis concupiscentiis cupiditatibus serviunt quas ab illa prima voluntariae praevaricationis labe traxerunt 4. Such is the corruption of humane nature since the fall as engageth all mankind to slight neglect scorn contemn and obstinately to despise all the common helps offered us It must be acknowledged that man after the fall remains a man whence whatever is essential unto the humane nature as such is to be found in him i.e. man is still a living rational creature his soul is still ennobled with the powers or faculties of understanding and will he is capable of knowing and willing These faculties are not totally eradicated or rooted out of the soul for that would be to destroy it Man is still man but a corrupt man that is though the natural powers and faculties remain yet they are sadly vitiated in that they are become the seat of vicious propensions dispositions and habits For the Understanding hath not only lost its primogeneal directive light and become darkness but the will is also strangely corrupted not in the Arminian sense alone as the Remonstrants express it * Act. Scrip. Synod min. Remonst in Explic. 3. et 4. art de Grat. c. who say Quare libertatem volendi indifferenter tam bonum salutare quam malum in statu lapsûs voluntati adesse negamus quin potius liberum Arbitrium ad bona istiusmodi non modo vulneratum sauciatum infirmatum inclinatum attenuatum est sed Captivatum perditum amissum viresque ejus non modo debilitatae cassae nisi restaurentur à gratia sed nul Free-will to what is savingly good say they is not only wounded and weakned but without a gracious restauration altogether lost i.e. the Understanding having lost its directive light and the will being a blind power cannot embrace what is savingly good not because of any weakness in the faculty of the will but for want of a a Guide to direct it In lapsu boni salutaris et salvifici cognitione destituta mens nequaquam illud ut volendum voluntati monstrare potuit nec voluntas illud velle But this is unsound for the weakness of the will is not meerly because of the blindness of the understanding but because 't is so subjected unto vitious propensions dispositions and habits The heart of man naturally runneth out after sin 't is bent to commit evil 't is obstinately resolved against what is savingly good and therefore morally impotent men sin because they will sin as appears both from Scripture and experience You will not come unto me that ye may have life you will have none of my counsel you will not return you are a stiff-neck'd people obstinate and rebellious whence the common assistances of Gods Spirit proves ineffectual and if God did not Glorify Free-Grace any further none not the Elect would return unto God for although Common Grace given unto all is sufficient to leave all men without excuse their non-improvement being their sin yet none are thereby effectually engaged to turn unto God in Faith no not the Elect who while unregenerate are as sinfully obstinate as any their souls being as much polluted with Ignorance sinfull defections inclinations and habits as others who are by nature Children of Wrath as others and for the same reason who are by nature as sinful and rebellious as others Who more vile than Manasseh in unregeneracy and who made more havock of the Church of Christ than Paul did in the days of his Ignorance Should the Lord leave all the Sons of men to themselves they would notwithstanding the Common Grace afforded them run on in sin to their eternal ruine Wherefore 5. As God did from Eternity in himself determine and by Covenant engage to give unto our Lord Jesus a Select number even so in time God glorifieth the freeness of his grace and shews himself faithful in giving some unto Christ Whoever duly observes what hath been already said concerning Election and the Covenant of Reconciliation made between the Father and the Son cannot believe the Lord to be a God of truth the faithful one and not consent unto this 6. That those who are given to the Lord Jesus Christ are by SPECIAL grace most powerfully yet sweetly drawn unto him by the Father For none cometh unto Christ but whom the Father draweth 7. God the Father giving this Select Number unto Christ they are by Faith through the Spirit united unto Christ For God in drawing and giving them unto Christ gives Christ the Spirit and Faith unto them They by being given unto Christ are taken into Covenant with Christ they are Christs and Christ is theirs the Union between them and Christ being a Covenant Union that is real but mystical That Lord Christ that is offered unto all upon their believving is actually given unto these and as all may have Christ if they believe these believe that they may have Christ God of his infinitely Free-Grace makes these a willing People in the day of his power Whence all that do turn from the evil of their ways they must ascribe the whole glory to God even to the praise of his Grace * Pâ—…inde quoniam Demino in te misericorditer opeâ—… jam cidicisti in abundantia divitiarum tuarum non Gloriari hoc superest ut non confidas in virtute tua i.e. ne depâ—…tes vâ—ripus tuis quod seculi facultates divitiasque contemans quod viam mandatorum Dei
currere 〈◊〉 Haec enim omnia nullatenus haberes nisi a Deo manere Gratuitae Donationis acciperes Non hoc homini dat natura sed Gratia Non hoc ex qualâ—… te condition is humanae habetur sed ex benignitate divinae illuminationis acquiritur Again Quicquid habes bonae voluntatis vel bonae operationis Deo assigna qui dedit Fulgent de convers ad Theod. Epist 6. towards the end 8. To assert That any while in unregeneracy may be united unto Christ or that any who savingly believe may not be united unto Christ is most false unsound and dangerously absurd 1. To be unregenerate is to abide in a state of sin altogether Unclean Filthy and Polluted at a distance from God and Jesus Christ how then can these be One what is Christ joyned to an Harlot or can light have any Union or Communion with darkness 2. A believer doth close with Christ which cannot be without Union 9. T is both unnecessary and unprofitable to dispute about a moment or instant of nature as to the precedency of Faith unto Union or of Union unto Faith e. g. whether Faith or the Union is in order of nature first it being evident that there is no instant supposable in which a soul who hath saving Faith is not united unto Christ or in which One united unto Christ hath not sound saving Faith But 10. This Faith and this union is in order of nature antecedent to an actual imputation of Christs Righteousness and consequently before our actual Justification in the sight of God Communion presupposeth Union and therefore Union must precede an actual imputation which is but the Communication of Christs Righteousness unto us Faith and Union being Simultanecus and at one and the same instant as Union even so Faith must precede the Communication of Christs Righteousness and our actual justification in the sight of God thereby 11. This Faith which doth so necessarily precede and go before the actual justification of a sinner is the †Fidem autem hominum Donum Dei esse fateamur sine enjâ—s Gratiâ 〈◊〉 currit ad gratiam Prosper Aq. Resp ad Gal. Object ad Obj. 8. gift of God infus'd into the soul by the holy Spirit that doth irresistibly carry on its work 1. Grace being the gift of God the first thing which the soul is capable of in the work of Regeneration or conversion is the receiving the gift or infused habit the soul doth recipere effectum agentis which is as much as Pati whence the soul the first instant or moment of conversion must be considered as passive 2. This Converting Grace is irresistible which may be evinced to any unprejudiced mind that will but consider that antecedently unto conversion the soul is obstinately bent towards sin The inclinations of the will are continually evil averse to what is good and both actually and habitually determined to vanity for which reason the Spirit in carrying on the work of conversion meets with great opposition from the sinner yea with such opposition as would altogether impede and hinder the Spirits work had not the power of the Spirit been great enough to conquer and overcome this habitual obstinacy of the will but the power of God's Spirit being greater than that of the Sinner the Sinner is overcome and converted How but by that Grace that is Irresistible it being most evident that 't is naturally impossible for finite power to prevail against what is infinite So clear 't is that converting grace is irresistible And surely had it not been so never one obstinate sinner no not one child of Adam since all are by nature obstinately rebellious sinners would be converted for such is the nature of our corrupt wills that they will never yield until overcome by an overstrong and irresistible power 12. This infused Irresistible grace is given unto the Adult ordinarily in the use of means as the preaching of the word c. Whence man though passive in the first moment of his conversion yet not so passive as some suggest 1. It must be noted that Man in conversion is not so passive as a Stone when thrown up into the Air For the infusion of Grace being into a Soul that is active life to the end the Soul may be the better prepared for action the Soul must be also active in the great work of conversion The infusion of Grace into the soul that is active life is not like the infusion of the soul into the body that is antecedently to its receiving the soul wholly unactive purely passive No the Lord doth consider the nature he hath given beings and his actions towards such beings are suitable to their natures As a meer passive thing is purely passive in its receptions even so what is essentially active cannot but be active in its receptions To insist on niceties concerning the opposition that is between action and passion and consequently on the seeming inconsistency some may judge to be in this expression active reception q. d. active passion is but to quibble since 't is impossible to suppose an Essentially-active-being to be in every regard as passive as pure matter is God carries on the work of conversion on man in a way agreeable unto that nature God hath given him which is by inlightening the understanding and by suscitating and stiring up the powers of the soul to their being duly conversant about their proper objects influencing and enabling the will to close with what is proposed in the word as good and accordingly understood and believed to be so Although we cannot comprehend how yet nothing more evident than that God doth irresistibly and yet most sweetly without laying any violence on our faculties draw us from sin unto Jèsus Christ * This notion is agreeable to the Sentiments of the Schoolmen as Marius Scrib de lib. Arb. disp 19. qu. 8. doth assert Dionys Carthusianus in 2. d. 39. q. 2. Capreolus d. 45. q. 1. Concl 5. Ferrariensis primo contr Gent. c. 88. Dreido opusc lib. de concordia Lib. arb et praed estinationis 2. p. c. 3. ad primum All these reconciling humane Liberty with the Irresistable Divine Will thus Dicunt enim Dei voluntatem et providentiam Dei tantae esse virtutis efficaciae ut licet et nulla potentia libertas refistere valeat omnes tamen causas quibus cooperatur suaviter moveat infinitae siquidem est virtutis sapientiae cum fit infinitae Sapientiae scit omnia suaviter disponere licet nobis videantur factu impossibilia cum verò infinitae sit virtutis attingit à fine usque ad finem fortiter ita ut per infinitam suam virtutem sciat etiam quae videntur dissonantia concordare et propter Sapientiam sine praejudicio humanae libertatis effectum suae voluntatis semper sortiri Et Cajetanus iisdem pene id videtur profiteri 1. p. q. 4. a 23. 9.19 ar 8.
sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thes 2.13 1 Pet. 1.2 Thus the filth and guilt of sin are distinguished and accordingly Justification and Sanctification But such as confound the guilt and filth of sin with some * 'T is said by one I do not think as some do that Guilt dissers from sin as that which is an obligation or a binding over to the Punishment of sin rather than sin it self being past and gone to be guilty and to commit a sin is all one they are but two words expressing the same thing Dr. Crisp on Isaiah cannot but confound Justification and Sanctification and consequently fall into the Popish error about this point for the great error of the Papists in this lyeth much in their considering Justification and Sanctification promiscuously as though the being Justified did import the same with the being sanctified Whence 't is that it must be seriously considered that Justification doth no way regard the filth of sin as its object Neither is the soul cleansed from filth even in that 't is Justified for Justification as such doth not consist in the renewing of our minds or the making any internal-physical-change on our hearts for that is the Spirits work in our Sanctification and therefore it must be acknowledged That we are not made holy by Christ's Holiness by the imputation of it i.e. God doth not judge the elect to be really and perfectly holy because Christ is really and perfectly so for Holiness in whomsoever 't is imports an inward work on the soul No one can be really and perfectly holy but he in whom are the habits of holiness He whose Propensions Dispositions and Habits are not holy cannot be reputed perfectly holy Christ's Holiness therefore cannot be made ours but by a transfusion of Christs Habits into our souls 't is true Christs Righteousness may be given us and after the Donation or gift thereof be truly reputed and reckoned as ours and we may be dealt with accordingly but there can be no giving the Holiness of Christ unto us in a way distinct from the imputation of Righteousness but by transfusing it into us which is as impossible as the transfusing of sin from one into another a So that understanding the course of Scripture and the common use of the phrase of Reckoning and Accounting you shall find that Imputing is nothing but Gods determination and conclusion that he doth pass upon things as really and truly things are without any Imagining and fancying things to be so and so when indeed and Truth they are not so Dr. Crisp on Isaiah whence if the Elect are Reputed perfectly holy by Christs holiness the holiness of Christ must be indeed and in Truth in them for De quocunque dicitur concretum ei inest abstractum Dici de sequitur esse in For the clearing this remember that as sin guilt and Punishment are to be distinctly considered even so Holiness Righteousness and the Reward But before I proceed to shew how Holiness Righteousness and the Reward are to be distinctly considered it will be meet I prove That although Holiness and inherent Righteousness are the same yet there is a Righteousness somewhat distinct from Holiness which is done by a due observation of the import of the words Righteous and Holy for if to be Righteous is somewhat distinct from the being Holy then surely Righteousness is somewhat distinct from Holiness in that the Denominatives Righteous and Holy are from Righteousness and Holiness their Denominating Forms for which reason if Righteousness and Holiness be the same since Denominativum Denominans conveniunt in re significatâ quia significant eandem formam essentialiter to be Righteous and to be Holy must be the same The same denominating Form ever giving the same denomination And if to be Righteous be not the same with the being Holy Righteousness and Holiness cannot be the same But to be Righteous is somewhat distinct from the being Holy To be made Righteous is to be declared pronounced judged esteemed and reputed in the eye of the Law to be just i.e. to be not guilty not liable unto the curse due to sin but to have a right unto the Reward He is Righteous that is not guilty He is Righteous i.e. He hath a right unto the Reward But to be made Holy is another thing it is to be Sanctified which is by the infusion of Habits into the Soul To be sanctified is to be Physically and internally changed to be inherently Holy So that 't is most apparent that there is a great difference between the being Righteous and the being Holy or between the being made Righteous and the being made Holy the one being our Justification the other our Sanctification which do greatly differ And therefore Righteousness as Formally and strictly considered differs from Holiness for otherwise the imputation of Righteousness would be the same with the imputation of Holiness or our being made Righteous would be our being Holy i.e. by a Righteousness imputed we should be sanctified which is most untrue it being a confounding Justification and Sanctification A thing not to be admitted by sound Protestants which confusion cannot well be declined but by our distinguishing between Holiness and Righteousness as well as between sin and guilt That there is a difference between these and the Reward is no way doubted by any This premised I proceed to the shewing how Holiness Righteousness and the Reward are distinguished 1. Holiness which is opposed unto the formal nature of sin consists in the souls conformity to the preceptive part of the Law When the inclinations propensions thoughts words and actions are exactly agreeable to Gods most holy Law then 't is that the man is Holy Formally Holy Christ's Holiness then consists in the consonancy agreeableness and conformity of Christ's propensions dispositions and habits unto that Law given him by the Father and is subjectively in Christ The Lord Jesus Christ exactly answering the whole Law in his life was perfectly holy 2. Righteousness as 't is condistinguished from Holiness regards rather the promissory part of the Law than the preceptive it being in an especial manner opposed unto Guilt as Holiness is unto sin whence as to be Guilty and Unrighteous imports one and the same thing even so to be Guiltless or Innocent and to be Righteous For saith the Apostle as by one mans disobedience many are made Sinners i.e. guilty even so by the obedience of one shall many be made Righteous i.e. Guiltless or Innocent free from wrath having a Right unto the Reward Righteousness being holiness's respect unto the promissory part of the Law and is somewhat extrinsecal unto holiness and therefore can as easily pass from one unto another as Guilt can and as the sin of one cannot be imputed unto another but in its Guilt even so the holiness of one cannot be imputed unto another but in its Righteousness 3. The Reward is the good thing promised unto Holiness as the
Punishment is the evil threatned against sin And the Reward necessarily presupposeth a Righteousness as the Punishment doth Guilt And as no punishment but for guilt so no Reward but for Righteousness for as Reatus is dignitas poenae propter culpam so Righteousness is dignitas praemii propter obedientiam perfectam and the Reward is for righteousness From the whole it must be noted That as Guilt which is sins extrinsecal respect unto the threatning of the Law may pass from the actual sinner and be made the guilt of him who knew no sin without a passing of the actual sin even so Righteousness which is the extrinsecal respect of Holiness unto the promissory part of the Law may pass from Christ who is perfectly Holy to another that is not so This being so 't is easy to conclude 1. That the Reward of Christs obedience may be actually given out unto all such as are united unto Christ As the punishment of mans sin was laid on Christ even so the Reward of Christs Holiness shall be given unto the believer The Reward considered strictly and in an eminent manner is the product of Christs Righteousness and Holiness it being given out as the great effect of Christs fulfilling the Law of Innocency and not as the merit of our obedience 2. The Righteousness of the Lord Christ is given unto all such as are born of God as do savingly believe Even as their guilt is made Christs so Christs Righteousness is made their Righteousness In which there is a non-imputation of sin and an actual imputation of Righteousness God doth not proceed in Judgment with them as with guilty sinners but treats them as Righteous giving them a Right to Impunity and Glory so that the freedom from Punishment and the eternal life is the effect of this Righteousness of Christ which Righteousness is given unto and reckoned judged and esteemed to be the Righteousness of the believer which can easily be made theirs as hath been already shewn But 3. The Holiness of Christ was never designed by God the Father or the Son for the formal Sanctification of any For as the being justified or made Righteous by Christ's Righteousness denotes an extrinsecal an outward and a relative change only even so the being sanctified by Christs Holiness must import an internal and physical change which cannot be but by the transfusion of the acts or habits of Holiness from one unto another For Sanctification which most certainly is somewhat distinct from justification consists in a real internal physical change done by the infusion of new habits dispositions c. Whence then it will follow that if we are Sanctified by Christs Holiness the Holiness of Christ must be transfused into us for Holiness is seated in the soul as in its most proper Subject Yea the Holiness of Christ is seated in the soul of Christ and if any are truly and perfectly holy by Christs holiness this holiness must be removed from Christs soul into the souls of such as are esteemed by the Lord to be Holy by such an Holiness which is 1. Impossible in that the â—…s that are in Christ cannot migrate or pass from Christ to us without their destruction 2. Absurd and false for 1. If the habits of Christs Holiness be removed from Christ Christ ceaseth to be holy and consequently cannot remain a Meet Intercessor or Advocate on the behalf of the sincerely humbled soul 2. The Elect are hereby set up above the Lord Jesus in that they are perfectly holy even when the Lord Jesus is void of holiness * That a thing should be taken away and yet be lest behind is a flat Contradiction saith Dr. Crisp But if it be said that the habits of Christs Holiness pass from Christ unto the Elect and yet remain in Christ then an Accident may in one and the same instant contrary to the fullest evidence desirable pass from one Subject to another without destruction and remain in two distinct Subjects at one and the same time yea in a thousand and can continue in being without any Subject that is without what is essential to its Being but if this be once granted 't will follow that Transubstantiation Consubstantiation and the grossest of Errors and plainest of Popish contradictions may be easily admitted as he greatest truths Moreover what is more dangerous If the Elect be made perfectly Holy by Christ's Holiness then 't will follow that the Sanctification of the Spirit is an useless things that conversion Faith in Christ and repentance towards God are no way necessary to our actual Salvation for a man may be both holy and happy without them For consider 3. The third thing The Elect are totally delivered from the filth of sin no one spot remaining on them If they were made holy by Christs holiness and every spot removed by Christ without the Spirit what remaineth to be further done by the Spirit Your Sanctification being already perfected without the Spirit the Spirit must run over the same work and actum agere or set idle which is gross what greater despight can be done against the Spirit of God wherein can you offend him more Oh consider it and tremble 2. If this be true Our Preaching is in vain Praying of no use Ordinances unprofitable things though designed by our Lord Jesus Christ for conversion and edification yea for the helping on and promoting the work of Holiness on the Heart But what use can preaching be of if this be true must it be for the inlightening you in the knowledg of Christ and for the turning you from the power of Satan unto the most High how can this be since when you were in the Womb Christs holiness was made yours and can you be perfectly holy or can you be without the spot and filth of sin even when the spot of Ignorance is on your understandings and the Filth of obstinacy rebellion and pride on your wills * It must be here remembred That the Filth of sin remains on us until the habitual blindness and stubbornness of our hearts be removed for since this Ignorance on the Understanding and the Depraved habits of the Will c. is the Filth of the soul the Filth the Spot remains as long as these abide About this consult Bellar. de justif lib. 2. c. 16. Who saith Quemad nodum ex aversione à lege Dei orta est Macula ita ex conversione tollitur Again why will you pray and draw near to the Lords Supper for strengthening grace and fuller measures of holiness even when you are perfect and want nothing Remember that it hath been sufficiently proved that we are Sanctified by the Spirit CHAP. VI. A digression concerning the actual imputation of Christs Merits c. to all the Elect in the Womb. The unsoundness of this notion The absurd consequences that naturally slow from it The plain Scripture notion about our actual Justification declared Faith in Christ antecedent thereunto The convinced