Vindication of the Faithful Rebuke to a False Report, Letter 8
LETTER VIII. Of Christ's Sustaining the Person of Sinners.
SIR! There is indeed a small matter in Arrear upon this Chapter, which with good Husbandry, will furnish our this Paper, so that you shall not grudge the Postage.
One Caution will be necessary to guide your Thoughts herein; that it is not the Phrase of Christ's sustaining the Person of another, in every respect, that gave occasion to this Discourse, but his sustaining the Person of Sinners, of all Mankind as one Person, when he suffered, dyed, and satisfied the Iustice of God.
But our Author, Defence p. 25. gives us an account how one person may sustain the persons of others, according to the phrase of the Civil Law: One single Man being put into the different States and Conditions of many, puts on their Person: For instance, Ambassadors, Vice-Roys, Syndics; and in the more inferiour Stations, the Tutor sustains the person of the Pupil; the Guardian of the Minor—And they are such as do somewhat for the Advantage of them whose persons they b…ar, &c. When I read these words, I was surprised and startled into some warm Thoughts; What is this all the Fruit of his pompous Ostentation of the Civil Law? That to sustain the person of sinners, is to do somewhat for their Advantage? Why this is Socinus and Crellius all over; what they and the rest of that Bran and Leaven contend for; they will allow; nay, they plead that Christ acted in the Name, and for the sake, for the Benefit and Advantage of others; but by no means that he died properly in their stead: They readily grant, that Christ came as an Ambassador from God, to reveal his Will to the Sons of Men, and to treat with them about their Return to God; for this belongs only to his Prophetical Office; and herein Christ sustains not the Person of sinners, but of the Father who sent him: And because the R. R. B. of Worcester, has spoken so fully to this point, I will once again transcribe his words. There is (says this Learned Person) such a Change of Persons, as implies that one is appointed, and allowed to act for another, and for their Advantage: And this sort of Change of Persons the Socinians never deny'd. (N. B.) It is not therefore the Use of the Words, but the Sense of them that is to be inquired into: For some may affirm a Change of Persons, and yet be Socinians; and others may deny a Change of Persons, and be far enough from Socinianism, according to the sense in which they are understood.
But further: The Socinians will allow that Christ has undertaken to appear for sinners, to plead their Cause as an Advocate, and Intercessor; as a Guardian who takes care of the Affairs of a Minor in his Nonage; as a Tutor, who espouses the Concerns of his Pupil: But the Orthodox affirm, That Christ was our Priest, that he was so on Earth on the Cross; that he osfer'd himself up as a Sacrifice to Divine Iustice; and that he executes the other part of his Sacerdotal Function in Heaven, by Intercession; but the Socinians contend, that he was a Priest only in Heaven; and for any proper Sacrifice offer'd on the Cross, they are no more concern'd than our Author.
I come now to an Instance of the Defender's Vanity, which perhaps was never parallel'd; P. 23. This phrase Sustinere personam alterius, is Tully all over; Tres personas unus sustineo; Meam Adversarii & Iudicis: which I must render, if I will render it appositely. I Cicero, do act three Parts; my own, that of an Accuser, and that of a Iudge: What does the Orator intend by three persons? Surely, no more than three Relations, three Respects, three Parts, which all at once he acted; his own part, the Accusers, and the Judges. Well then: Tully alone acted three parts, sustained three persons; Christ alone sustained three Millions, and all these as one Person, Is not the Parallel most exact? Again, Christ suffer'd really properly in the place of all their persons for whom he suffered; but Tully sustained these three Persons Figuratively, Metaphorically; that is, in that very sense wherein Socinus would have Christ to be a Sacrifice, and make satisfaction.
But I shall not dismiss this Matter upon these cheap Terms; I would let the Reader know where he pickt up this Blasphemous Notion of sustaining three persons; for so I will call it, one moment before I prove it.
The Modern Socinians, especially those of our own Degenerate Nation, are risen up to the height of Blasphemy in exposing and ridiculing the Tremendous Doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, Three Persons in One, and the same undivided Essence: And this they have done in the most scurrilous manner that the Malice of Hell could suggest to Debauch'd Wits.
Now this very place of Tully, which our Author so much glories in, and values himself upon, is their Text from whence they preach their Blasphemies, and of which he could not be ignorant: Of which I will give you an account from the B. of Worcester, in his late excellent Vindication of the Trinity, Pref. p. 4, 5. The Socinians, (says he) have formed a Fivefold Trinity. 1. The Ciceronian. 2. The Cartesian. 3. The Platonick. 4. The Aristotelian. 5. The Trinity of the Mobile.
Now for the Ciceronian Trinity, they form it thus; because Tully had used the word personae for different Respects Sustineo ego tres personas. And according to this Acceptation, Three Persons in the Godhead signifying no more than Relations, Capacities, or Respects of God to his Creatures; which (say they) is downright Sabellianism, and is no manner of Mystery, but the most intelligible and obvious thing in the World. Now let the Considerate Reader observe what our Gentleman has made of Tully's Ego sustineo tres personas. That is, Christ bore, or sustained, or acted in three Capacities, three Relations, three Respects; but how will this come up to his sustaining the person of sinners, in the offering up of himself a Sacrifice to God?
And then secondly for the Cartesian Trinity, let us see a little how our Author falls in with that. The Cartesian Trinity (as the same Learned B. proceeds) is that which makes three Divine Persons, and three Infinite Minds, Beings and Spirits to be but one God.
Suppose we then that any person who has versatile Ingenium Rota figulari versatilius; one that can act all parts, and turn himself into all shapes, as they subserve his various Occasions; and that this Man so given to change, should personate a Life-guard Man, and together with his broad-lac'd Hat, his Blew-Coat, and swashing Blade by his side, should put on to humour the business more to the Life, the Spirit of him he represents: And when that Turn is served, should personate a Quaker, making Christ a meer Light within, denying the Scriptures to be the Word of God, vilifying Ordinances as poor Carnal things, and below the Dispensation of the Spirit; and all this only to do an odd Job, to come off with a Subscription, and save an Oath to the Government; and presently should assume and sustain the Person of an Antinomian, and give us their System of the Gospel as his own, to accommodate his Faith and Conscience to the present Juncture, and gratisie some special Friends. Here would be a Man of Three Minds, and to Morrow, if occasion call for it, he has a fourth to put on; only its happy, they would be far enough from Three Eternal Minds: This is surely a Person notoriously given to Change! De Te narratur Fabula!
I conclude with one Observation more from the same Learned Author, where he proves, That such a Change of Persons, and Christ's taking on him the Person of Sinners, has no foundation in Scripture; and that it's contrary to the Tenour of it: All that our Saviour saith to this purpose is, That he came to give his Life a Ransom for many, Matth. 20. 28. And that his Blood was shed for many, for the Remission of Sins, Matth. 26. 28. What other Change of Persons is here implied, but that of a Ransom, a S…crifice of Propitiation. He that knew best sor what ends he suffered, saith not one word of his taking upon himself the Person of Sinners in any other sense, than as he suffered in their stead, and for their Advantage.
There is yet an odd Farthing on the Score, which I must account for. This Phrase of acting in the person of another, or sustaining the Person of another, has ordinarily a sense not very creditable; and commonly signifies to personate, or represent the Person of another, or take on the Disguise, Mask, or Vizor of another: Thus Tully in that place so celebrated, so mistaken by our Author: Ego unus tres sustineo personas; I act three parts: So those Counterfeit Persons in the Roman Comedies, were called, Dramatis Personae; and those other which only appear'd, but spoke nothing, were called, foreign, Mutae Personae, Dumb Persons. Now this minded me of the Counter-scuffle between Salmasius and Milton, where the latter picks a Quarrel with the former, for this very expression in Persona. De parricidio apud Anglos in Persona Regis Admisso. Now there is no doubt but Salmasius intended it of a Parricide committed upon the Person of that King; but because he used that Phrase, Milton falls on him with his usual briskness. Quid, quaeso, est parricidium in Persona Regis admittere? Quid in Persona Regis? Quae latinitas unquam sic locuta est? But our Author to vindicate this expression, gives this Answer, p. 27. The Reason why Milton was so severe upon Salmasius, was not so much because Salmasius used the word Persona, as because he mistook the Ablative for the Accusative Case, and wrote in Persona, when it should have been in Personam Regis! Risum teneatis? Was ever any thing spoken more Ridiculously? I am satisfied Salmasius designed to write as he actually wrote, in Persona, and Milton had no Quarrel with him about the Case, but exagitates the Phrase as improper, and unbecoming so great a Grammarian as Salmasius had then the Vogue for in the Learned World. And so the Answerer to Milton, whether Father, or Son, p. 26. Ubi ille multiplex Barbarismus, non simplex? Fortasse an quod non dixerit Salmasius in Personam Regis, sed in Persona? O Barde! Where the Answerer rejects this supposal with Scorn and Indignation, that he should be thought to have mistaken the Ablative for the Accusative Case.
In a word; Milton was a Person whose excellent Latin, terse and smooth, has recommended his Style to all that understand the Language: The Merits of the Cause between him and his Antagonist I am not concern'd in, but this has been taken for granted by many, that his sharp and pungent Repartees pierced that great Critick's Heart, nor could he long out-live that stinging Phrase with which he was persecuted by Milton: 'Tis highly improbable to me, that the Old Man, under this discomposure of Spirit could dress up a formal Answer to his Enemy in that short time of Hurry that he lived. His Son might possibly out of his loose Papers stitch up that Cento, which in a Postumus Piece appear'd under his Name, which saw the Light when King Charles II. was Restored; but whether it turn'd to account from his Patron or Client, I am no more concern'd, than I am what becomes of all our PhraseDivinity, and this is particular, which our Author has so verbosely and operosely managed.
The Defender pretends highly to more than a smattering in the Civil Law, and accordingly makes a huge chattering with the Terms of it. The Socinians and our Author presume they have great advantage by 'em. My Opinion is this, that when they fall into judicious Hands, good use may be made of them against the Socinians: Our Gentleman has put 'em to the worst use that ever they were put to by any Protestant; he gives us many Instances of Persons representing others, managing and transacting the Cause of others, which may illustrate Christ's undertaking for his Church upon a Throne of Grace; for he has promis'd he will be their faithful Guardian, John 14. 18. And not leave them Orphans, foreign: But tho this Civil-Law tells us of Embassadors that act by Commission and Instruction, of Tutors and Pupils, &c. yet they do not furnish us with any Instance of any that laid down his Life in the stead of those they were intrusted by.
Nor indeed can we reasonably expect that the Body of the Civil-Law, which out of two thousand Manuscripts, or Fragments of MSS. was compiled into one, in Iustinian's Time, should have its Terms and Phrases adapted and suited to those sublime Mysteries; or that the Inspired Penmen of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament, should accommodate their Writings to that Body of Laws, which they had never seen, nor could have any Regard to.
But, Sir, I beg your pardon for this Digression, and will hardly give you the like Offence: However I am,
Sir, Yours, &c.