Aphorisms of Justification, Thesis 8 – Thesis 12
THESIS VIII.
(1) WHerefore the Father hath delivered all things into the hands of the Son; and given him all power in heaven and earth, and made him Lord both of the dead and living. Ioh. 13. 3. Mat. 28. 18. Ioh. 5. 21, 22, 23, 27. Rom. 14. 9.
EXPLICATION.
(1) FOr Explication of this there are several Questions to be debated.
1. Whether the extolling of Christ the Mediator, or the restoring and saving of the offendors, were Gods more remote end, and principal intention?
2. Whether this Authority and Dignity of Christ, be by Original Natural Right? or by Donation? or by Purchase?
3. Whether Christs Lordship over all, do imply or prove his redeeming of all? or of all alike?
4. Whether God hath delivered things out of his own power in any kinde, by delivering them into the power of his Son? or whether it be only the substituting him to be Vicegerent to the Father?
To the first, I answer: That the saving of sinners was the end both of the Father and the Son, is plain through the Gospel and that the exalting of Christ to his Dominion was another end, is plain in Rom 14. 9. But which of these was the principal end, I think is an unwarrantable question for man to propound: I dare not undertake to assert a natural priority or posteriority in any of Gods Decrees, de mediis ad finem ultimum; much less to determine which hath the first place, and which the second, Phil. 2. 9.
To the second question I answer: 1. The Divine Nature of Christ being one with the Godhead of the Father, had an absolute soveraignty over all things from their first being: and so derivately had the humane nature as soon as assumed by vertue of the Hypostatical Union.
2. But there is further a power given him as Mediator to dispose of all at his pleasure, to make new laws to the world, and to deal with them according to the tenor of those laws: This power is partly purchased, and partly given (but not gratis:) that is, Though God might have refused the tendered fatisfaction, and have made the sinner bear the punishment yet he willingly accepted the merits of his Son as a full ransom, and delivered up all to the Purchaser as his own: And so well was he pleased with the work of Redemption, that he also gave a further power to his Son, to judge his Enemies: and save his people with a far greater Judgment and Salvation. So that this power may be said to be [given] Christ, as it was the free act of God, without constraint: and yet to be [purchased,] because it was given upon a valuable consideration.
To the third Question, I answer. This Authority of Christ implieth the purchasing of all things under his power or dominion, as is explained in the last: But what redemption or benefit is procured to the party, I shall shew you more, when I come to treat of universal Redemption by it self.
To the fourth Question, I answer. This is more then a substituting of Christ to be the Fathers Vicegerent. It is also a power of prescribing new terms of Life and Death, and judging men according thereto, as is said before. Yet is nothing properly given out of the Fathers power or possession: but a power to suspend or dispense with the strict Covenant of Works is given to the Son; and so God having parted with that advantage which his Justice had against the sinning world, and having relaxed that Law, whereby he might have judged us, is therefore said to judge no man, but to give all judgment to the Son. Ioh. 5. 22, 27.
THESIS IX.
(1) IT was not the inten… either of the Father or Son, that by this satisfaction the offenders should be immediately delivered from the whole curse of the Law, and freed from the evil which they had brought upon themselves, but some part must be executed on soul and body, and the creatures themselves; and remain upon them at the pleasure of Christ. Rev. 1. 18. 1 Cor. 15. 26.
EXPLICATION.
THe Questions that are here to be handled for the Explication of this Position are these.
1. Quest. Whether the redeemed are immediately upon the price payd, delivered from any of the curse of the Law? if not from all?
2. Quest. Whether the sufferings of the Elect before conversion are in execution of any part of the curse of the Law?
3. Whether the sufferings of Beleevers are from the curse of the Law? or only afflictions of Love, the curse being taken off by Christ?
4. Whether it be not a wrong to the Redeemer, that the people whom he hath ransomed are not immediately delivered?
5. Whether it be any wrong to the redeemed themselves?
6. How long will it be till all the curse be taken off the Beleevers, and Redemption have attained its full effect?
To the first Question I answer:
In this case the undertaking of satisfaction had the same immediate effect upon Adam, as the satisfaction it self upon us, or for us: To determine what these are, were an excellent work; it being one of the greatest and noblest questions in our controverted Divinity, What are the immediate effects of Christs Death? He that can rightly answer this, is a Divine indeed; and by the help of this, may expedite most other controversies about Redemption and Justification. In a word, The effects of Redemption undertaken, could not be upon a subject not yet existent, and so no subject, though it might be for them: None but Adam and Eve were then existent. Yet as soon as we do exist, we receive benefit from it. The suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the Law, is the most observable immediate effect of Christs death; which suspension is some kinde of deliverance from it. Of the other effects elsewhere.
To the second Question. The Elect before conversion do stand in the same relation to the Law and Curse as other men, though they be differenced in Gods Decree, Eph. 2. 3… …2.
To the third Question. I confess we have here a knotty Question. The common judgment is, That Christ hath taken away the whole curse (though not the suffering) by bearing it himself; and now they are only afflictions of Love, and not Punishments. I do not contradict this doctrine through affectation of singularity, the Lord knoweth; but through constraint of Judgement: And that upon these grounds following.
1. It is undenyable, that Christs taking the curse upon himself did not wholly prevent the execution upon the offendor, in Gen. 3. 7, 8, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19.
2. It is evident from the event, seeing we feel part of the curse fulfilled on us: We eat in labour and sweat; the earth doth bring forth thorns and bryars; women bring forth their children in sorrow; our native pravity is the curse upon our souls; we are sick, and weary, and full of fears, and sorrows, and shame, and at last we dye and turn to dust.
3. The Scripture tells us plainly, that we all dye in Adam, (even that death from which we must at the Resurrection be raised by Christ,) 1 Cor. 15. 21, 22. And that death is the wages of sin, Rom. 6. 23. And that the sickness, and weakness, and death of the godly is caused by their sins, 1 Cor. 11. 30, 31. And if so, then doubtless they are in execution of the threatening of the Law, though not in full rigor.
4. It is manifest, that our sufferings are in their own nature evils to us, and the sanctifying of them to us taketh not away their natural evil, but only produceth by it, as by an occasion, a greater good: Doubtless so far as it is the effect of sin, it is evil, and the effect also of the law.
5. They are ascribed to Gods anger, as the moderating of them is ascribed to his love, Psal. 30. 5. and a thousand places more.
6. They are called punishments in Scripture, and therefore we may call them so, Lev. 26. 41, 43. Lam▪ 3. 39. & 4. 6, 22. Ezra 9. 13. Hosea 4. 9. & 12. 2. Lev. 26. 18, 24.
7. The very nature of affliction is to be a loving punishment, a natural evil sanctified, and so to be mixt of evil and good, as it proceedeth from mixt causes: Therefore to say that Christ hath taken away the curse and evil, but not the suffering, is a contradiction, because so far as it is a suffering it is to us evil, and the execution of the curse. What reason can be given, why God should not do us all that good without our sufferings, which now he doth by them, if there were not sin, and wrath and Law in them? Sure he could better us by easier means.
8. All those Scriptures and Reasons that are brought so the contrary do prove no more but this, That our afflictions are not the rigorous execution of the threatning of the Law, that they are not wholly or chiefly in wrath; but as the common Love of God to the wicked is mixt with hatred in their sufferings, and the hatred prevaileth above the love, so the sufferings of the godly proceed from a mixture of love and anger, and so have in them a mixture of good and evil; but the Love overcoming the Anger, therefore the good is greater then the evil, and so death hath lost its sting, 1 Cor. 15. 55, 56. There is no unpardoned sin in it, which shall procure further judgment, and so no hatred, though there be anger.
9. The Scripture saith plainly, That death is one of the enemies that is not yet overcome, but shall be last conquered, 1 Cor. 15. 26, and of our corruption the case is plain.
10. The whole stream of Scripture maketh Christ to have now the sole disposing of us and our sufferings, to have prevented the full execution of the curse, and to manage that which lyeth on us for our advantage and good; but no where doth it affirm that he suddenly delivereth us.
To the fourth Question: It can be no wrong to Christ, that we are not perfectly freed from all the curse and evil as soon as he had satisfied: 1. Because it was not the Couenant betwixt him and the Father. 2. It is not his own will, & volenti non fit injuria. 3. It is his own doing now to keep us under it, till he see the fittest time to release us. 4. Our sufferings are his means and advantages to bring us to his Will. Mankind having forfeited his life, is cast into prison till the time of full execution: Christ steppeth in, and buyeth the prisoners, with a full purpose, that none of them yet shall scape but those that take him for their Lord. To this purpose he must treat with them, to know whether they will be his subjects, and yield themselves to him, and his terms. Is it not then a likelier way to procure their consent, to treat with them in prison, then to let them out, and then treat? and to leave some of the curse upon them, to force them to yield, that they may know what they must expect else, when the whole shall be executed.
To the fift Question: It is no wrong to the sinner to be thus dealt with; 1. Because he is but in the misery which he brought upon himself. 2. No man can lay claim to the Satisfaction and Redemption upon the meer payment, till they have a word of promise for it. 3. Their sufferings, if they will be ruled, shall turn to their advantage.
To the sixth Question: The last enemy to be overcome is death, 1 Cor. 15 26. This enemy will be overcome perfectly at the Resurrection; then also shall we be perfectly acquit from the charge of the Law, and accusation of Satan: Therefore not till the day of Resurrection and Judgment, will all the Effects of Sin and Law, and Wrath be perfectly removed▪ 1 Cor. 15. 24.
THESIS X.
(1) MAn having not only broken this first Covenant, but disabled himself to perform its Conditions for the future, and so being out of all hope of attaining Righteousness and Life thereby, (2) It pleased the Father aud the Mediator to prescribe unto him a new Law, (3) and tender him a new Covenant, (4) the Conditions whereof should be more easie to the Sinner and yet more abasing, (5) and should more cleerly manifest, and more highly honour the unconceiveable Love of the Father and Redeemer.
EXPLICATION.
(1) WHether Man were only the meritorious Cause of this his disability, or also the Efficient, is a great dispute, but of no great moment; as long as we are agreed that Man is the only faulty cause. Whether he cast away Gods image? or whether God took it from him for sin? whether God only could annihilate it? Or whether Man may annihilate a Quality, though not a Substance? I will not meddle with. But too sure it is, that we are naturally deprived of it, and so disabled to fulfill the Law. If Christ therefore should have pardoned all that was past, and renewed the first violated Covenant again; and set Man in the same estate that he fell from, in poynt of guilt, yet would he have fallen as desperately the next temptation: yea though he had restored to him his primitive strength and holinesse, yet experience hath shewed on how slippery and uncertain a ground his happiness would have stood, and how soon he was likely to play the Prodigal again with his stock.
(2) God the Father and Christ the Mediator, who have one will, did therefore resolve upon a more suitable way of happines.
(3) This way, as the former, is by both a Law and Covenant. As it is a Law, it is by Christ, prescribed, and flatly enjoyned; and either obedience, or the penalty shall be exacted. As it is a Covenant, it is only tendered and not enforced. It is called a Covenant as it is in Scripture written and offered (as is said before) improperly, because it containeth the matter of the Covenant, though yet it want the form: Even as a Bond or Obligation before the sealing or agreement is called a Bond: Or as a form of prayer as it is written in a book, is called a prayer, because it containeth the matter that we should pray for: though to speak strictly, it is no prayer, till it be sent up to God, from a desiring Soul.
(4) Though without Grace we can no more beleeve, then perfectly obey, (as a dead man can no more remove a straw then a mountain) yet the conditions of the Gospel considered in themselves, or in reference to the strength which God will bestow, are far more facile then the old conditions. Mat. 11. 29, 30. 1 Ioh. 5. 3. And more abasing they are to the sinner, in that he hath far lesse to doe in the work of his salvation: And also in that they contain the acknowledgement of his lost estate, through his own former self destroying folly.
(5) Such incomprehensible amazing Love of God the Father, and of Christ, is manifested in this New Covenant, that the glorifying thereof doth seem to be the main end in this design. Oh sweet and blessed End? should not then the searching into it be our main study? and the contemplating of it, and admiring it, be our main employment? Rom. 5. 8. Tit. 3. 4. 1 Ioh. 4. 9. Eph. 3. 18. 19. Ioh. 15. 13. No wonder therefore that God did not prevent the fall of man, though he foresaw it, when he could make it an occasionall preparative to such happy ends.
THESIS XI.
NOt that Christ doth absolutely null or repeal the old Covenant hereby: but he super-addeth this as the only possible way of Life. The former still continueth to command, prohibite, promise, & threaten. So that the sins even of the justified are still breaches of that Law, and are threatned and cursed thereby.
EXPLICATION.
I Acknowledge that this Assertion is disputable and dificult: and many places of Scripture are usually produced which seem to contradict it. I know also that it the judgement of learned and godly men, that the Law, as it a Covenant of works, is quite null and repealed in regard of the Sins of beleevers: yea, many do beleeve, that the Covenant of works is repealed to all the world, and only the Covenant of grace in force.
Against both these I maintain this Assertion, by the Arguments which you finde under the following Position 13. And I hope, not withstanding that I extoll free Grace as much, and preach the Law as little, in a forbidden sence, as though I held the contraty opinion.
THESIS XII.
THerefore we must not plead the repeal of the Law for our Iustification; but must refer it to our Surety, who by the value and efficacy of his once offering and merits doth continually satisfie.
EXPLICATION.
I Shall here explain to you, in what sence, and how far the Law is in force, and how far not: and then prove it in and under the next head.
You must here distinguish betwixt,
1. The repealing of the Law, and the relaxing of it. 2. Between a dispensation absolute and respective. 3. Between the alteration of the Law, and the alteration of the Subjects relation to it. 4. Between a Discharge conditional, with a suspension of execution, and a Discharge absolute. And so I resolve the question thus;
1. The Law of Works is not abrogated, or repealed, but dispensed with, or relaxed. A Dispensation is (as Grotius defineth it) an act of a Superior, whereby the obligation of a Law in force is taken away, as to certain persons and things.
2. This Dispensation therefore is not total or absolute, but respective. For, 1. though it dispence with the rigorous execution, yet not with every degree of execution. 2. Though the Law be dispenced with as it containeth the proper subjects of the penalty, viz. the parties offending, and also the circumstances of duration, &c. Yet in regard of the meer punishment abstracted from person and circumstances, it is not dispenced with: for to Christ it was not dispenced with: His satisfaction was by paying the full value.
3. Though by this Dispensation our Freedom may be as full as upon a Repeal, yet the Alteration is not made in the Law, but in our estate and relation to the Law.
4. So far is the Law dispenced with to all, as to suspend the rigorous execution for a time; and a Liberation or Discharge conditional procured and granted them. But an absolute Discharge is granted to none in this life. For even when we do perform the Condition, yet still the Discharge remains conditional, till we have quite finished our performance. For it is not one instantaneous Act of beleeving which shall quite discharge us; but a continued Faith. No longer are we discharged, then we are Beleevers. And where the condition is not performed, the Law is still in force, and shall be executed upon the offender himself.
I speak nothing in all this of the directive use of the Moral Law to Beleevers: But how far the Law is yet in force, even as it is a Covenant of Works; because an utter Repeal of it in this sence is so commonly, but inconsiderately asserted. That it is no further overthrown, no not to Beleevers, then is here explained, I now come to prove.