§ 10. Whereas there is such an exact Harmony between all the Confessions of the Reformed Churches in the Articles of Satisfaction and Iustification that he that believes one believes all yet we see they are drawn in great Variety of Expressions and Phrases and Penned Diverso stylo non diversâ fide a strict Conformity there is in the Sense no Uniformity in the Words Now what a Confusion would it make in Mens Consciences to suppose a Christian sound in the Faith that believes according to the Confession of the Church of Scotland and yet Heterodox again assoon as he sets his Foot over the Tweed because he has not yet formed his Thoughts according to the Words of the Church of England Or that a Professor should have been sound in the Faith at Westminster and yet by that Time he could walk as far as the Savoy he should be unsound again Truth is Truth all over the World Whereas Phrases are of no farther use than to express our Conceptions properly to others and that they be adapted to signifie the Orthodoxy of our Minds § 11. I must insist upon it still that this Phrase A Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners does really carry a Mutual and Reciprocal Sense If Grammar may have leave to judge thus it sounds to English Ears let 'em be of what Bore they will 'T is not long that this Phrase was common amongst us There is a Commutation of Prisoners between France and England And not one Man no not an Antinomian but understood it that the English Prisoners were exchanged for French and the French for English mutually and reciprocally and that the Transport Ships passed mutually and reciprocally between Plymouth and St. Malo's St. Malo's and Plymouth And I doubt not but our Lawyers will stand by us If Articles of Agreement be drawn that there shall be an Exchange or Commutation of certain Lands between A. and B. they will Construe it That A. shall exchange Black-acre with B. for White-acre and that B. shall exchange mutually White-acre with A. for Black-acre And if we should walk the Exchange of London where a Bargain is driven thorough between C. and D. of certain Goods Wares Commodities and Merchandises to be exchanged between them It s supposed that if C. Exchanges his Mault for Hops D. does Exchange his Hops for Mault And the Story is famous in Homer of an Exchange of Armour between Glaucus and Diomedes where the former Commuted his Armour of Gold for the latters of Brass and was sufficiently laught at for his Fools Bargain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But let us seriously apply our Thoughts to the Phrase A Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners Here are Two Persons expresly in the Phrase here is a Commutation between these Two Persons That which is Commuted is their Persons for here 's mention of nothing else If therefore the Commutation be not mutual what Necessity is there that the Phrase should import Christs being exchanged for Sinners and not that Sinners were exchanged for Christ. Against this the Defence rouzes up all his Zeal Where is the Man says he that ever gave such a Sense Be patient Sir He shew you the Man no worse a Man I assure you than Dr. Crisp the Man of your Counsel who makes the Sense mutual We must reckon our selves in Christs Person and Christ in ours Where the Dr. speaks like an honest plain-hearted Man the Sense of whose Words is conformable to his Phrase whereas our fine Sparks have couched a Sense under a Phrase that will not bear it Now tho' I can be Content that every one should abound in his own Sense yet if I could help it no Man should abound in his own Non-sense Ay but says the Defence The Learned Witsius is persuaded that no Man in his Wits did ever Dream of such a Sense pray Mark the elegant Quibble Witsius and Wits To which I say 't is not my fault that Men run out of their Wits but this makes my Argument so much the stronger If no Man in 's Wits will say it why should any Man not out of his Wits say that which inferrs it All will say Christ suffered in our stead none will say we suffered in Christs stead pray then invent a Phrase that will express Christs suffering in our stead and not ours in his but then you must resign all your Right Title and Interest in a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners for that signifies either both or neither We might therefore justly wonder but that we must wonder at nothing in such a Writer that he should take this for a good Answer I affirm that if there be a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners this must according to Grammar be Construed mutual and reciprocal O but says he none ever affirmed the Consequent why then do you affirm the Antecedent from which by just Consequence the Consequent follows If an Argument be brought which by clear Consequence brings the Respondent into a gross absurdity impossibility or blasphemy He that brings it shall not be responsible for the absurdity or blasphemy which follows but he that asserts that which if true would infer it I can easily from hence Retort upon himself that Charge of Blasphemy which he would fasten upon me p. 33. The Blasphemy is his own not mine 'T is not the Result of my Assertion but of his own Phrase Thus my Argument proceeds if there be a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners that Commutation according to the Letter of the Phrase must be mutual If it be mutual then as Christ suffered and died in our stead Sinners must be supposed to suffer in Christs stead O but the Consequent is Blasphemy Is it so Then thank your own Self and your Antecedent that inferred it For if there was a Commutation of Persons between A. and B. then A. was commuted for B. and B. for A. and other Grammar of this Phrase nor he nor you nor I nor any Man else can make 12. Lastly And yet after all this as we have told him so we tell him now again If a proper Orthodox Sense which shall express neither more nor less than that Christ died in our place or stead to make Satisfaction to Divine Justice can be setled and entail'd upon this Phrase and that the Truth be not betrayed either to a Socinian or Antinomian Construction I could be Content to admit the use of it though otherwise I would chuse one of a more determinate Sense and obvious Meaning And this I would do not for the sake of the Phrase which I look upon as improper but for the sound Meaning which may be if it can be setled upon it As suppose my Subscription was demanded to this Sentence in the Polaski Acciam croc solerouch Alla Moustaph gidelum a manahem varakini onssere Carbutath Of this now do not I understand one Word more or less but our Learned Divine who is
receiving of these words by others without examining either the Truth of what by those Words or Phrases they intend to signifie or express Or the Propriety of those Expressions themselves as to their Accomodation for the signification of those things I plead not for them It is not in the power of Man to make any word or expression not found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture to be Canonical and for its own sake to be imbraced And this we further grant that if any one shall scruple the receiving or owning any such Expressions so as to make them the way of Professing that which is signified by them and yet do receive the Thing or Doctrine which is by them delivered For my part I shall have no contest with him For instance The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was made use of by the first Nicene Council to express the Unity of Essence and Being that is in the Father and the Son the better to obviate Arius and his Followers with their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the like forms of speech no where found in Scripture and invented on set purpose to destroy the True and Eternal Deity of the Son of God If now any Man should scruple the receiving this Word but withal should profess that he believes Jesus Christ to be God equal with the Father one with him from the beginning and doth not explain himself by other Terms not found in the Scripture viz. That He was made a God and is one as to Will not Essence and the like He is like to undergo neither Trouble nor Opposition from me Thus far that great Man And surely we come under the equitable Construction and Benefit of this Paragraph 1. The Phrases questionable are not Canonical nor found in Scriptnre 2. We question the Propriety of these Phrases to express the things they are pretended to signifie 3. Some of them express more than any Scripture Phrase doth express 4. Whatever Truth can be really contained in them we readily receive 5. These Phrases are not to be compared nor nam'd in the same Year with the expression of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which has a place in the Nicene Creed whereas these never shew'd their Face in any Creed whatever 6. These Phrases stand justly suspected of Hiterodoxy and carrying an Antinomian sense and therefore we are not obliged nay Be it known to all Men by these Presents we will not be Compelled to subscribe to them without better security 3. Reason You ought never more to insist upon these Phrases because after all your windings and turnings all the rounds you have run all the circles you have made you are forced to come to me and the Truth at last And your Commutation of Persons between Christ and sinners His taking upon him the Person of sinners amounts to no more in good earnest than that Christ died suffered satisfied in our place and stead Will you be persuaded to peruse your own Words p. 80. It was Objected by the Rebuke that if you look into all the Confessions at Home and Abroad you should not there find any of these Phrases c. To this you answer What though I cannot Why then say I you should have let them alone and not trouble and divide us more who are but too much divided already with these Arbitrary Expressions which if they signisie and so far as they do signifie any thing of Truth are already owned by us in owning those Confessions O but say you Is it not enough that the Controverted Phrases are included in the acknowledgment of Christ's making a proper satisfaction to God's Iustice for us Why truly Sir it 's enough for us but not enough for you For we contend for the Necessary Truth but your Zeal is for the Unnecessary Phrase And though I cannot agree with you that these Phrases are included in that Truth yet if they be and so far as they be we must necessarily own them because we own the Truth which you say contains them But how I pray are these Phrases contained in the Grand Truth A Man may Meditate upon that Truth and beat it out to its utmost length and yet these Phrases may never come in his way nor his thoughts fall upon any one of them And when our B. Saviour when the Apostles Preach'd this Truth when the Churches in all Ages bore their Testimony to it yet not one of these ever hit upon any of these Phrases But still you go on They are all virtually included in the sundry Confessions which have openly Received the Phrase of Christ's suffering in our stead But why then do you Revile and Rail at us more than the Compilers of those Confessions For we own the Confessions as well as they and if those Phrases be really though but virtually contained in them we by owning the Confessions do own virtually whatsoever is contained in them Whereas therefore you tell us p. 4. Def. that A desire to Accommodate so far as possible upon the bottom of Truth lyeth so much upon your heart I earnestly beg of you never to intermeddle more with Accommodation of matters Really Sir 't is not your Talent your special Gift is to embarras confound and perplex whatever you meddle with And assure your self He that is born in a storm will never live easily in a calm If the Fire was the Element of which you were made and in which you have been bred you 'll never endure to dwell out of the Flames Every Creature we see dies when removed out of its proper Element To remove you out of the Quarters of Division and Contention into the milder Regions of Peace and Union will be your immediate Dissolution what is the peaceable soul's Temper is your Distemper what is his Food will be your Poison and what is his Life will be your present Death § 3. I will not complain of you that you call me Brother and sometimes for Variety sake your Reverend Brother But yet I will complain that whilest you Complement with Ioab Art thou in health my Brother You discover the Byonet in your other hand and aim at the fifth Rib to shed my Bowels out to the ground And what more Mortal Blow could you aim at my soul with all that palpable Hypocrisie than to Represent me an Unitarian a Socinian thereby to blast what of Reputation God has given me and which I value chiefly on the Account of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ that I may yet be further serviceable to the Interest of my Blessed Redeemer and yet there 's nothing you more studiously drive at nothing you more industriously prosecute than to take and make occasions to misrepresent me to the thoughts of all sober and sound Christians Had I left out of my Creed Christ's perfect satisfaction given to Divine Justice as you have left Regeneration and Repentance out of yours Or had omitted the Necessity of Christ's Righteousness imputed by the Father and received
Presbyterians Such a Cyphar would have given you a great Figure I have read that these two Letters S. L. which you have now stampt upon your Book were once Printed with a Red Hot Iron upon the Cheeks of a famous Patriot who was a Confessor and hugely Ambitious to be a Martyr for his Countrey His Enemies did Interpret S. L. to stand for slanderous Libel and one of the Wits of that Time would needs give us the Etymology of the Word Libel that is A lie with a â—ell hung about the Neck to Ring the scandalous Story up and down to his Friends in the Country and really it would as decently have set upon your Front as his Cheeks I wonder not at your Desultory Humour that Ebbs and Flows like the Euripus in frequent Vicissitudes and is constant in nothing but Inconstancy Sometime you are so smooth as if you would cut my Throat with a Feather And by and by so cruelly severe as if you would saw off my Head with an old rusty Hand-saw It is some Comfort to be rail'd at in handsome Language but it s the worst of Deaths to be Assassinated with dull insipid Reflections destitute of Wit and Truth So that when we can meet with nothing but ill chosen Words dark Phrase ill-turn'd Periods and the Language all over Leprous and Scabbed the best Defence I can Recommend to the Reader against your Defence is a good Pair of sharp-long-Nails Sir I have appealed to you but because I understand I must expect no Redress of Greivances I do hereby Appeal from you to the Impartial Reader At present I take my Leave of you and Rest as you see Your Servant c. A Vindication of the Faithful Rebuke from the Rude Cavils of the Pretended Defence of the late Report THE Author of the Defence has so strongly immur'd himself and intrench'd his Cause in Dung that we have more occasion for the Scavenger than the Schollar for the Shovel than the Pen to remove it § I. And the first Nuisance I must remove is an Invidious Misrepresentation of his Rebuker as if he charged the Congregational in the bulk without a Salvo to the Reputation of any one of them Def. p. 82. Now to give some colour to this Calumny he has recourse to his wonted Artifice a piece of pure impure Forgery from Reb. p. 56. The true Reason of their the Congregational Brethren severe Displeasure against the third Paper is that it has so clearly and fully born its Testimony against the Antinomians A single Observation will remove this Dirt that those Words the Congregational Brethren are his own Gloss no part of my Text His own Suppositious Antecedent obtruded upon my Relative and I would leave it to his Conscience to determine of the Honesty of this dealing had I not had too frequent experience of its partiality I have ever embraced the Orthodox and Godly of both Denominations with equal Affections nor could I ever yet see cause from their Principles or Practices to Abate those Affections Tho the same Notions in the hands and management of those of a due Temper are clear another thing when they 're got into the power of those of a fiery Spirit and bigotted Zeal But yet more particularly 1. I return this There needed no Exception where there was no general Impeachment nor was there occasion for a Salve where there was no Wound given to any but the Reporter and his few Antinomian Partizans 2. And yet whether it were from my own good Nature or a foresight of this Objection I had timously and sufficiently obviated this Cavil Rebuke pag. 23. It 's an unquestionable Truth that some of them had vented such strange Doctrines that it gave Umbrage to them the United Brethren that there might be found among them one or two or so that had dipt very deep in the Crispian Heterodoxies 3. Nor ought he to take himself to be of that Consideration and Bulk bulky enough tho he be as if the whole Body of the Congregational was stowed in his Prominent Belly For although his Discourse generally runs in the Style of We we yet 't is no other Language than what Emperors and Reporters Princes and Defences do use when yet they design no more than a single Person 4. He will hardly allow the same liberty to interpret his own words in his Preface where he scandalously exposes the Discourses from the Pulpit of late Years to have been Adjusted to move the Affections rather than to inform the Iudgment And yet this he has done without any salvo either to Presbyterian or Congregational Learned or Unlearned Ordained or Un-ordained Linnen-drapers Barbers or Taylors 5. I will add that I know many of the Congregational Brethren who are sound in the Faith holy in their Conversation eminently useful Ministers of Christ in the great Work of the Gospel and wholly remote from all Antinomian Tincture But he shall pardon me if I say that others have more grievously corrupted themselves their Doctrine their Hearers with these Speculations A brief Specimen whereof was given Reb. p. 25. A much larger by the Answer to the Report p. 22 23. and a much larger yet remains ready to be given in due time This filth it 's true affects not the Cause in the least but was thrown to cast an Odium upon the Person of the Rebuker which being removed the Reader may now breath in a freer and fresher Air I dismiss it therefore with this short Note That the Defence in this Paragraph has proved himself a Person hugely versed in the Oriental Tongues for the second Language spoken in Paradice by the grand Enemy of Mankind was the Lying and Slandering Tongue and the elegant Figure with which our Author has imbellisht his whole Discourse is Purus putus Satanismus § II. There is one gross Mistake more in the Defence p. 85. If it be proper to talk of one more when the whole is but one grand continued complicated Mistake when he would perswade us that the Reporter about seventeen Years ago wrote a Book against Antinomianism meaning no doubt that well meaning Piece The Glory of Free Grace display'd I will now once for all rectifie his Error and evince that the Display and the Report could not possibly be Indited from one Head nor conceived in one Heart nor written by one Hand and Pen. Display p. 30. assures us That God's punishing Sin is founded in and upon his Rectoral Iustice the Excellency of his Laws but the Report grounds it upon his Essential Iustice. Again Display p. 75. asserts That Faith and Union with Christ is in order of Nature antecedent to an actual Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and consequently before our Iustification in the sight of God But the Report tells us quite another Story for tho Believing is allowed some place in escaping Wrath to come and having Everlasting Life yet he assigns it no Service no Interest no Concern at all in the Iustification of
these Matters in their Thoughts but only take up with a set of Phrases and common Expressions among those they converse with which they look on as the Standard and Measure of Truth about these Matters From this Day forward I give up the B as a lost Man among all the Antinomians but tho they can easily despise his Authority they cannot so readily answer his Reasons And yet there is one Argument against their Notion of a Money-Surety which will probably prevail more with them because it 's drawn from the Prejudice it does their own Interest than twenty drawn from the mischief it does to the Cause and Concern of God or Christ. There is a Notion that obtains among the Antinomians That God in that black and sorrowful juncture when our Saviour bore the Punishment of our sins hated his Son as a Man hates a Toad Now if Christ paid the uttermost Farthing of that Debt whereof all the Sons of Adam were non-solvent not able to pay the least Farthing what reason can be assigned why God should hate him or be angry with him I am well assured of our Author 's good Nature in this case that if any one would pay him the desperate Debt of a sorry hundred Pounds on the behalf of a Decocted Bankrupt that was not worth a Groat he would love him so far as ill Nature is capable of love as long as he lived Yet still the Defence adheres to the Good Old Cause p. 16. That Satisfaction taken strictly and properly is solutio Debiti the Payment of a Debt wherein I take the liberty to differ from him and that Satisfaction and Solution are two things and differ as much as the giving the idem and the Tantundem do but in this unnecessary Quarrel I have no call to engage and yet after all the Defence seems to stagger and totter as if he had no plerophory in the Case but that this very Solutio Debiti is nothing but a suffering the Punishment due to our Sins It may be seasonable to hearken to the Reverend and Learned Dr. Owen upon this Subject in his Appendix to the Doctrine of Satisfaction p. 221. It is otherwise in Personal guilt than in Pecuniary Debts In these the Debt it self is only intended the Person only obliged with reference thereunto In the other the Person is firstly and principally under the Obligation And therefore when a Pecuniary Debt is paid by whomsoever it be paid the Obligation of the Person himself unto Payment ceaseth ipso facto Let the Reader hence see the true Reason why all our Antinomians contend so earnestly that sin must be considered as a Pecuniary Debt because then upon Christ's Satisfaction which they call the Payment of the Debt all the Elect must be discharged and then indeed there 's no need of Faith or Repentance in order to the Pardon of sins but the Doctor goes on But in things criminal the guilty Person himself being firstly immediately and intentionally under the Obligation to Punishment when there is introduced by Compact a vicarious Solution in the substitution of another to suffer tho he suffer the same absolutely which those should have done for whom he suffers yet because of the Acceptation of his Person to suffer which might have been refused and could not be admitted without some Relaxation of the Law Deliverance of the guilty Persons cannot ensue ipso facto but by the intervention of the Terms fixed on in the Covenant or Agreement for an admittance of the Substitution It appears from what hath been spoken that in this matter of Satisfaction God is not considered as a Creditor and Sin as a Debt and the Law as an Obligation to the Payment of the Debt and the Lord Christ as paying it c. To subjoyn any thing of my own to the Reason of two such great Men would be but to light a Candle to the Sun and yet it may be permitted to observe a few things about Christ's Suretiship 1. The Term Surety is Sacred Canonical not to be violated with profanc and unwasht Hands We therefore give that Reverence to it which we owe to Divine Revelation and if those other Terms and Phrases about which the Quarrel has been so scalding-hot could plead the same priviledge that they had the Stamp of Ius Divinum upon them it had prevented or soon silenced the Debates about Words tho some diversity of Thought might have arisen about the extent of the Signification 2. The Apostle is express Heb. 7. 22. Iesus was made a Surety of a better Covenant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And yet the same Apostle continuing to intreat of the same Subject in the next Chapter Heb. 8. 6. stiles the same Jesus the Mediatour of a better Covenant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which would tempt one that is used to search out the Mind of God by comparing one Scripture with another to think that a Mediatour of a better Covenant and the Surety of a better Covenant are Expressions of the same Latitude and exactly equivalent one to the other 3. This better Covenant whereof Christ is Mediator or Surety being a Mutual Covenant wherein God engages to be our God and engages us as we engage our selves to be his People Christ undertakes on the behalf of both for Gal. 3. 20. A Mediator is not a Mediator of one He therefore undertakes with both and for both nor can any be meet to bring God and Man into one Covenant and preserve them both inviolably in that one Covenant but he who is God and Man in one Person 4. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is but once found in the New Testament as applied to Christ receives no prejudice thence as to its Divine Authority as to whatever Truth is contained therein for even the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of Divine Inspiration 5. Yet that it is but once used is some inconvenience to our understanding the just and adequate import of it for when we meet with a word frequently used it stands in divers References to the Antecedents and Consequents which by a due comparing them may reflect much useful light into its signification 6. We have not much relief from its Etymology only that he that is our Surety must be one near or near of Kin to us for seeing that Sin was committed in the Humane Nature it seems reasonable that if God will so far Relax the Law as to admit a Surety or Mediator yet that he must be of the same Nature with the Offenders for whom he is so Heb. 2. 14 16. For as much as the Children were partakers of Flesh and Blood he also took part of the same For he took not on him the Nature of Angels but the Seed of Abraham he took And the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is parallel to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes one near of Kin who thereby had a Right to Redeem Ruth 3. 13. 7. It is a most
literal and Grammatical sense you must avoid the Blasphemy as well as you can And now for his Argument If there be not a Change of Persons between Christ and us there cannot be a Substitution of Christ's Person in our room To which I softly return I deny the Consequence There may be a Substitution of Christ's Person in our Room and yet no Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners and that upon these Reasons There may be a Substitution of one Person for another where there 's no Commutation between those two Persons Substitution and Commutation are not Terms of equal latitude the latter is larger than the former and therefore the granting the former will never infer the latter But still he argues If there be no Substitution of Christ's Person into our Room Christ could not suffer in our Stead I readily grant the whole And he might have concluded that if there be no Substitution of Christ in our stead Christ could not suffer in our room and so again if no Substitution in our Place then no Suffering in our stead and these are all Meridian Demonstrations But yet he is resolved to give this a more Genteel Turn Here is the very natural and irrefragable Consequence which flows from my Brothers denying a change of Persons between Christ and us Truly the Rebuke is not willing to invade any one of his just Titles much less that of the Irrefragable Doctor which is the due of the Defender but he does absolutely deny that his denial of a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners does infer that there 's no Substitution no Suffering no Satisfaction for the Reason before given However let 's hear him argue if Christ suffered not in our stead he could not make satisfaction for us Well! 't is allowed Go on If there was not a Substitution of Christ in our place he suffered not in our place As true as Gospel and much truer than our Authors Gospel If he had not been in our place he could not have suffer'd in our place Now comes the mortal blow If there was no change of Persons between Christ and us there could not have been a Substitution of Christ in our place And here again I deny the Consequence That though there was a Substitution of Christs Person in our place there was no need that there should be a Commutation of Persons between Christ and us Thus much is true if Christ had not suffered in our stead he could not have satisfied for our Sins if he had not been substituted in our stead he could not have suffered in our stead and if an exchange of Christ for us had not been allowed by the Father and consented to by himself he could not have been substituted in our stead but that a Commutation of Persons is necessary to support any of these Conclusions I utterly deny In a word the Doctrine of Satisfaction has stood firm on its own Basis many Centuries before this untoward Phrase was known and shall stand unshaken when this and all arbitrary Expressions shall be banisht out You see Sir Our confident Defender for all his Hectoring has not been able to produce one Article of any one Confession to vouch for his great Phrase A Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners and whereas in other Cases when his Common-Place-Book will furnish him he uses to press us to Death with Quotations from Learned Men Yet upon this Head he is modest and sparing and has only named not cited three mighty Names the Bishop of Worcester Hugo Grotius and Dr. I. O. three great ones I confess and might have formed the Tresviri de Republicâ Literariâ Constituendâ but now as for the Bishop he has cleared himself out of their Hands and for the two other I will do them the same Service 1. For Grotius He is indeed named in the first Paper named in the Defence but yet not quoted no Words of his alledged that own a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners And there 's a mighty Reason for it because there 's no such Sentence to be found in him I mean in his Book De Satisfactione a Commutation of Christs Person for Sinners that I find that Christ suffered and dyed in our room that I find that he was substituted in our room for this end I find too And all these fully and solidly cleared and vindicated from the Cavils of Socinus I find but a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners I can no where find In cap. 9. de Satisfact he mentions a Surrogation As when Christ is said Heb. 2. 9. To tast Death for every Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To die for the People John 11. 50. That he suffered for us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 2. 21. And whereas Socinus had pleaded that the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latine pro are ambiguous and oftentimes denote no more than for the Benefit of another Grotius answers that as to those two Words it may be true yet the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 utterly rejects that Evasion and signifies properly a Substitution in the room of another or the Commutation of one for another So Math. 20. 28. Mark 10. 45. Thus when it s said Math. 2. 22. That Archelaus reigned in Iudaea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the room of Herod his Father there must be imported a Substitution of one in the Place of another And thus says he it s taken in prophane Authors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one in the room of many I may add that of Virgil Unum pro multis dabitur Caput And this says Grotius Socinus cannot deny but that the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Commutationem quandam indicat It does imply that there is some sort of Commutation But Grotius contends earnestly that the Expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes veram Commutationem a true Commutation Now the only Question with us is this What that Commutation is Whether it be a single or a double Commutation And through that whole Chapter he carries it thus to the diligent Observer that he means only a Commutation of Christs Person for us in our stead which is the Truth we contend for but yet is an utter stranger to that Phrase of a Commutation of Persons between Christ and Sinners and this is most evident from his concluding Words of the whole Discourse Ea autem quae de Commutationis â—â—gnificatione in Particula pro a nobis hactenus dicta sunt ex sacrificii expiatorii natura multum illustrantur What we have hitherto discoursed of the meaning of a Commutation in the Particle Pro is very much illustrated from the Nature of an expiatory Sacrifice Now then we appeal to all Mankind whether there was not a Substitution of the Sacrifice in the room of the Offender but withall we deny that it could be said there was Commutation of Persons between the Offender and the Sacrifice 2. Consider we next his
yours to the same faithful Hand to whom I have committed my Good Name and my All. Sir I am yours intirely c. LETTER X. Of Matter of Fact SIR For your Satisfaction in this Point I must refer you to the Rebuke who has faithfully and to Mr. W's his Answer who has more fully and yet with equal faithfulness given you an Account of it And I judge it to be a safe Rule by which to govern our belief in Matters of this Nature never to give Credit to him that Writes a Report not from Principles but from Ends or if you please whose Ends are the commanding Principles from which he writes For as you know we had a Company of designing Folks who in the last Age contended earnestly for the Reunion of Protestants and Papists and with that sort of Men all our Differences were Minutes and inconsiderable Trifles so in this present Age we have been plagued with a Generation of People who were all for Division and with these all Differences were Fundamental every Scratch was Mortal an Atome was a Beam a Wart was a Wen and a Mole-hill a Mountain But my Present Province is only to clear those Accounts you have already received from those few Exceptions the Defence has made against them § 1. The Rebuke p. 13. Objected to the Integrity of the Report which affirms That the most Learned of each Party received Satisfaction viz. in the first Paper That it gave no Satisfaction at all to Mr. Cole and Mr. Mather Now to this he Replies thus That their Hands were not to the first Paper was not because they approv'd not the Doctrines therein contained for they both in the hearing of many declared their approval though for some other Reasons they declined Subscription Sir I desire you would seriously consider it whether this Answer satisfies the Objection 1. What is it to the Ends of Peace and Union what they approved or disapproved in their own Souls It s our Publick Approval must compose our Publick Differences if ever they be composed It s not secret thinking or opining that will serve this turn but open Subscription If they had openly subscribed it had Contributed more to Peace than openly to refuse and secretly to Comply The Rule hold good in this Case De non Apparentibus non existentibus eadem est Ratio and what if all the rest had approved only at this Rate who would have call'd it an Approbation 2. But is not this the wildest Answer that ever was given to an Objection which does not refute but strengthen it It was objected that they did not subscribe and approve and he gives you a Reason why they did not It was enough for the Objection to say they did not and he will be so officious as to give us a Reason why 3. He says the Reason was not because they did not approve the Doctrines No doubt of that the Doctrinal Part was so contrived that it could not stumble or give offence to an Antinominian The Doctrines were exactly calculated for their Meridian but yet there might be and there were other Reasons drawn from some other Parts of the Paper that prevail'd with them to refuse Subscription 4. And to what purpose does he talk of other Reasons which they reserved to themselves when there are no Reasons no not one Reason offered to our view I had thought that other Reasons should have presupposed some at least one single Reason that had preceded What those other Reasons were the Defence has not given us and perhaps the Refusers have not given them to him but I can help him out at a pinch Those Gentlemen were both of them Dissenters to the Union and it was not this or that Union but all Unions they disapproved unless they could have met with such ductile Souls as would have complied with their little narrow Sentiments and yet none could ever get it out of them what those were There was once a Meeting at Pinners-Hall to compose the Differences arisen about Mr. Williams's Book where I heard Mr. M. say openly Away with your Union And away he offer'd to be gone in a great Huff Now that Reason which was then openly avowed might be no and now doubt was secretly reserved 5. That they declined Subscription is a Term to sweeten and mollisie a harsh and rugged Matter but the Truth is they both of them refused to Subscribe all the Days of their Lives nor will they ever do it to the Worlds end § 2. Whereas the Reporter's Words sounded very high and big That this Instrument was gladly embraced by the Congregational and gave satisfaction to the most Learned of each Party The Rebuke asked modestly and humbly as became him Whether it had Redintegrated the violated Union And that all Differences and Distances were removed And whether a Coalition between both Parties had hereupon ensued For what could those pompous swelling Expressions suggest less But he was assured that not one word of all this was true To this the Defence replies P. 3. We had no reason to judge thus but the quite contrary To what end then was all this Pother However this is honestly spoken For now it appears That the design of this Paper was not Falling in but a farther Falling out It was not to stitch up the Rent but to tear it wider They expected the quite contrary 't was not Peace but a more Bloody War Not a Coalition but a Collision To make the Differences which had already smoaked now to flame and blaze out before the whole World It is honestly done I say to confess under his Hand that in his Heart he meant not honestly I will never go about to confute him in this particular because his words do irrefragably prove what one of the Number spoke That they never intended to enter into an Union with the Presbyterians § 3. But the most pleasant account he gives is this That the Re-union was but in prospect This Gentleman must have a long Head and a longer Reach with his Eye that could have that in the prospect of his Eye which he never had in the Thoughts of his Heart but the quite contrary Thus our Water-men Look one way and Row another and from this sort of Men he has borrowed both his Rhetorick and his Conscience He had it in prospect not as Moses who had a Pisgah-prospect of that good promised Land of Rest and Peace but like Balaam who saw afar off what he hated and wherein he had no Interest § 4. It was objected to the Reporter That he had given a lame account of matters of Fact and nibbled off things at both ends Whereas a faithful Narrative should speak the Truth the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth To which he answers That he never pretended it What a Faithful Reporter is he like to prove that never intended Union in what he did nor never pretended Integrity in what he said But I intend and pretend too