The Imputation of Christs Righteousness, Polemic 1 · Chapter 2
CHAP. II. Of the true ſtating of the Controverſie, and the explication of the ſeveral points contained or meerly implyed in it.
I take explication to be here more uſeful than argumentation: And therefore I ſhall yet fullier open to you the ſtate of our differences▪ and my own judgment in the point, with the reaſons of it, in ſuch neceſſary Diſtinctions, and brief Propoſitions, as ſhall carry their own convincing light with them. If any think I diſtinguiſh too much, let him prove any to be needleſs or unjuſt, and then reject it and ſpare not. If any think I diſtinguiſh not accurately enough, let him add what is wanting, and but ſuppoſe that I have elſewhere done it, and am not now handling the whole doctrine of Juſtification, but only that of Imputation, and what it neceſſarily includeth.
THough a man that readeth our moſt Learned Proteſtants, profeſſing that they agree even with Bellarmine himſelf in the ſtating of the caſe of Imputation, would think that there ſhould need no further ſtating of it. I cited you Bellarmine's words before with Vaſſeurs conſent: I here add Johan. Crocius de Juſtif. Diſp. 10. pag. 500.501. Vide hominis ſive vertiginem ſive improbitutem, clamat fieri non poſſe ut Juſtitia Chriſti nobis imputetur eo ſenſu qui haereticis probetur — Et tamen rectam vocat ſententiam, quam ſuam faciunt Evangelici. Quod enim cum rectâ ratione pugnare dicit, nos per Juſtitiam Chriſti formaliter juſtos nominari & eſſe, nos non tangit: Non dicimus; Non ſentimus: Sed hoc totum proficiſcitur e Sophiſtarum officinâ, qui phraſin iſtam nobis affingunt, ut poſtea eam exagitent tanquam noſtram: (yet ſome of our own give them this pretence.) Nos ſententiam quam ille rectam judicat, tenemus, tuemur; ſic tamen ut addamus, quod Genti adverſariae eſt intolerabile, non alia ratione nos juſtos cenſeri coram Deo.] But by Juſtification the Papiſts mean Sanctification: And they count it not intolerable to ſay that the penalty of our ſins is remitted to us, by that Satisfaction to the Juſtice of God according to the Law of Innocency, which Chriſt only hath made. But though many thruſt in more indeed, and moſt of them much more in words; yet you ſee they are forced to ſay as we ſay whether they will or not: For they ſeem unwilling to be thought to agree with us, where they agree indeed.] And the following words of Joh. Crocius pag. 506, 507. &c. ſhew the common ſence of moſt Proteſtants, [When Bellarmine obſerveth that Imputation maketh us as righteous as Chriſt, he ſaith, [If we ſaid that we are Juſtified by Chriſts eſſential righteouſneſs. — But we ſay it not. Yea above all we renounce that which the Sophiſter puts in of his own, even that which he ſaith of Formal Righteouſneſs: For it is not our opinion, that we are conſtituted formally Righteous by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, which we rather call the Material cauſe. — § 32. Chriſts ſatisfaction is made for all: But it is imputed to us, not as it is made for all, but as for us. I illuſtrate it by the like. The Kings Son payeth the debt of a Community deeply indebted to the King, and thence bound to perpetual ſlavery. This payment gets liberty for this, and that, and the other member of the Community: For it is imputed to them by the King as if they had paid it. But this Imputation transferreth not the honour to them, but brings them to partake of the Benefit. So when the price paid by Chriſt for all, is imputed to this or that man, he is taken into the ſociety of the Benefit, — Pag. 503. Diſtinguiſh between the Benefit, and the Office of Chriſt. The former is made ours, but not the latter, —Pag. 542. The Remiſſion of ſin is nothing but the Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs. Rom. 4. Where Imputation of Righteouſneſs, Remiſſion of Iniquities, and non-imputation of ſin, are all one, — Pag. 547. God imputeth it as far as he pleaſeth, — Pag. 548. Princes oft impute the merits of Parents to unworthy Children, —Pag. 551. He denyeth that we have Infinite Righteouſneſs in Chriſt, becauſe it is imputed to us in a finite manner, even ſo far as was requiſite to our abſolution.
But I will a little more diſtinctly open and reſolve the Caſe.
1. We muſt diſtinguiſh of Righteouſneſs as it relateth to the Preceptive part of the Law; and as it relateth to the Retributive part: The firſt Righteouſneſs, is Innocency contrary to Reatus Culpae: The ſecond is Jus ad impunitatem & ad praemium (ſeu d…num,) Right to Impunity and to the Reward.
2. We muſt diſtinguiſh of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, which is either ſo called, formally and properly, which is the Relation of Chriſts perſon to his Law of Mediation impoſed on him. 1. As Innocent and a perfect obeyer; 2. As one that deſerved not puniſhment, but deſerved Reward. Or it is ſo called materially and improperly; which is, Thoſe ſame Habits, Acts and Sufferings of Chriſt, from which his Relation of Righteous did reſult.
3. We muſt diſtinguiſh of Imputation, which ſignifyeth (here) 1. To repute us perſonally to have been the Agents of Chriſts Acts, the ſubjects of his Habits and Paſſion in a Phyſical ſence. 2. Or to repute the ſame formal Relation of Righteouſneſs which was in Chriſts perſon, to be in ours as the ſubject. 3. Or to repute us to have been the very ſubjects of Chriſt's Habits and Paſſion, and the Agents of his Acts in a Political or Moral ſenſe, (and not a phyſical); as a man payeth a debt by his Servant, or Attorney, or Delegate. 4. And conſequently to repute a double formal Righteouſneſs to reſult from the ſaid Habits, Acts, and Paſſions; one to Chriſt as the natural Subject and Agent, and another to us as the Moral, Political, or reputed Subject and Agent (And ſo his Formal Righteouſneſs not to be imputed to us in it ſelf as ours, but another to reſult from the ſame Matter.) 5. Or elſe that we are reputed both the Agents and Subjects of the Matter of his Righteouſneſs, morally, and alſo of the Formal Righteouſneſs of Chriſt himſelf. 6. Or elſe by Imputation is meant here, that Chriſt being truly reputed to have taken the Nature of ſinful man, and become a Head for all true Believers, in that undertaken Nature and Office in the Perſon of a Mediator, to have fulfilled all the Law impoſed on him, by perfect Holineſs and Obedience, and Offering himſelf on the Croſs a Sacrifice for our ſins, voluntarily ſuffering in our ſtead, as if he had been a ſinner, (guilty of all our ſins) As ſoon as we believe we are pardoned, juſtified, adopted for the ſake and merit of this Holineſs, Obedience and penal Satisfaction of Chriſt, with as full demonſtration of divine Juſtice, at leaſt, and more full demonſtration of his Wiſdom and Mercy, than if we had ſuffered our ſelves what our ſins deſerved (that is, been damned) or had never ſinned: And ſo Righteouſneſs is imputed to us, that is, we are accounted or reputed righteous, (not in relation to the Precept, that is, innocent, or ſinleſs, but in relation to the Retribution, that is, ſuch as have Right to Impunity and Life,) becauſe Chriſt's foreſaid perfect Holineſs, Obedience and Satisfaction, merited our Pardon, and Adoption, and the Spirit; or merited the New-Covenant, by which, as an Inſtrument, Pardon, Juſtification and Adoption are given to Believers, and the Spirit to be given to ſanctifie them: And when we believe, we are juſtly reputed ſuch as have Right to all theſe purchaſed Gifts.
4. And that it may be underſtood how far Chriſt did Obey or Suffer in our ſtead, or perſon, we muſt diſtinguiſh, 1. Between his taking the Nature of ſinful man, and taking the Perſon of ſinners. 2. Between his taking the Perſon of a ſinner, and taking the Perſon of you and me, and each particular ſinner. 3. Between his taking our ſinful perſons ſimply, & ad omnia, and taking them only, ſecundum quid, in tantum, & ad hoc. 4. Between his ſuffering in the Perſon of ſinners, and his obeying and ſanctity in the Perſon of ſinners▪ or of us in particular. 5. Between his Obeying and Suffering in our Perſon, and our Obeying and Suffering in his Perſon (Natural or Political.) And now I ſhall make uſe of theſe diſtinctions, by the Propoſitions following.
Prop. 1. The phraſe of [Chriſt's Righteouſneſs imputed to us] is not in the Scripture.
2. Therefore when it cometh to Diſputation, to them that deny it, ſome Scripture-phraſe ſhould be put in ſtead of it; becauſe, 1. The Scripture hath as good, if not much better, phraſes, to ſignifie all in this that is neceſſary. 2. And it is ſuppoſed that the Diſputants are agreed of all that is expreſs in the Scripture.
3. Yet ſo much is ſaid in Scripture, as may make this phraſe [of Imputing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us] juſtifiable, in the ſound ſence here explained: For the thing meant by it is true, and the phraſe intelligible.
4. Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed to Believers, in the ſixth ſence here before explained; As the Meritorious cauſe of our Pardon, Juſtification, Righteouſneſs, Adoption, Sanctification and Salvation, &c. as is opened.
5. Chriſt did not ſuffer all in kind (much leſs in duration) which ſinful man deſerved to ſuffer: As e. g. 1. He was not hated of God; 2. Nor deprived or deſerted of the ſanctifying Spirit, and ſo of its Graces and Gods Image; Nor had 3. any of that permitted penalty by which ſin it ſelf is a miſery and puniſhment to the ſinner. 4. He fell not under the Power of the Devil as a deceiver and ruler, as the ungodly do. 5. His Conſcience did not accuſe him of ſin, and torment him for it. 6. He did not totally deſpair of ever being ſaved. 7. The fire of Hell did not torment his body. More ſuch inſtances may be given for proof.
6. Chriſt did not perform all the ſame obedience in kind, which many men, yea all men, are or were bound to perform. As 1. He did not dreſs and keep that Garden which Adam was commanded to dreſs and keep. 2. He did not the conjugal offices which Adam, and millions more, were bound to. 3. Nor the Paternal Offices to Children. 4. Nor all the offices of a King on Earth, or Magiſtrate: nor of a Servant, &c. Nor the duty of the Sick. 5. He did not repent of ſin, nor turn from it to God, nor mortifie or reſiſt in himſelf any ſinful luſt; nor receive a Saviour by Faith, nor was circumciſed or baptized for the Remiſſion of his ſins; nor loved God or thanked him for redeeming or pardoning him; nor obeyed God in the uſe of any Ordinance or Means, for the ſubduing of ſin, and healing or ſaving of his Soul from any ſin or deſerved wrath of God; with much more ſuch.
7. Chriſt did perform much which no man elſe was bound to do: As to redeem Souls, to work his Miracles and the reſt of the works, peculiar to the Mediator.
8. That Law which bound us to Suffering, (or made it our due) bound not Chriſt to it, (as being innocent); But he was bound to it by the Fathers Law of Mediator, and by his own voluntary ſponſion.
9. The Law obliging every ſinner himſelf to ſuffer, was not fulfilled by the Suffering of Chriſt our Sponſor: But only the Lawgiver ſatisfied by attaining its Ends. For neither the letter nor ſence of it ſaid, [If thou ſin, thou or thy ſurety ſhall ſuffer.]
10. Chriſt ſatisfied Juſtice and obeyed in Humane Nature, which alſo was Holy in him.
11. He did not this as a Natural Root, or Head to man, as Adam was; to convey Holineſs or Righteouſneſs by natural propagation, as Adam ſhould have done; and did by ſin: For Chriſt had no Wife or natural Children; But as a Head, by Contract as a Husband to a Wife, and a King to a Kingdom, and a Head of Spiritual Influx.
12. No as being Actually ſuch a Head to the Redeemed when he Obeyed and Suffered; but as a Head by Aptitude and Office, Power and Virtue, who was to become a Head actually to every one when they Believed and Conſented; Being before a Head for them, and over thoſe that did exiſt, but not a Head to them, in act.
13. Therefore they were not Chriſts members Political, (much leſs Natural) when he obeyed and died.
14. A Natural Head being but a part of a perſon, what it doth the Perſon doth. But ſeeing a Contracted Head, and all the members of his Body Contracted or Politick, are every one a diſtinct Perſon, it followeth not that each perſon did really or reputatively what the Head did. Nay it is a good conſequence that [If he did it as Head, they did it not (numerically) as Head or Members.]
15. Chriſt Suffered and Obeyed in the Perſon of the Mediator between God and man; and as a ſubject to the Law of Mediation.
16. Chriſt may be ſaid to ſuffer in the perſon of a ſinner, as it meaneth his own perſon reputed and uſed as a ſinner by his perſecutors, and as he was one who ſtood before God as an Undertaker to ſuffer for Man's ſin.
17. Chriſt ſuffered in the place and ſtead of ſinners, that they might be delivered, though in the perſon of a Sponſor.
18. When we are agreed that the Perſon of the Sponſor, and of every particular ſinner are divers; and that Chriſt had not ſuffered, if we had not ſinned, and that he as a Sponſor ſuffered in our ſtead, and ſo bore the puniſhment, which not he, but we deſerved ▪ If any will here inſtead of a Mediator or Sponſor call him our Repreſentative, and ſay that he ſuffered even in all our Perſons reputatively not ſimpliciter, but ſecunduùm quid, & in tantum only; that is, not repreſenting our Perſons ſimply and in all reſpects, and to all ends, but only ſo far as to be a ſacrifice for our ſins, and ſuffer in our place and ſtead what he ſuffered; we take this to be but lis de nomine, a queſtion about the name and words: And we will not oppoſe any man that thinketh thoſe words fitteſt, as long as we agree in the matter ſignified. And ſo many Proteſtant Divines ſay that Chriſt ſuffered in the perſon of every ſinner, (at leaſt Elect,) that is, ſo far only and to ſuch effects.
19. Chriſt did not ſuffer ſtrictly, ſimply▪ abſolutely, in the perſon of any one elect ſinner, much leſs in the millions of perſons of them all, in Law-ſence, or in Gods eſteem. God did not eſteem Chriſt to be naturally, or as an abſolute Repreſenter, David, Manaſſeh, Paul, and every ſuch other ſinner, but only a Mediator that ſuffered in their ſtead.
20. God did make Chriſt to be ſin for us; that is, A Sacrifice for our ſin, and one that by Man was reputed, and by God and Man was uſed, as ſinners are, and deſerve to be.
21. Chriſt was not our Delegate in Obeying or Suffering: We did not commiſſion him, or depute him to do what he did in our ſtead: But he did it by God's Appointment and his own Will.
22. Therefore he did it on God's terms, and to what effects it pleaſed God, and not on our terms, nor to what effects we pleaſe.
23. God did not ſuppoſe or repute Chriſt, to have committed all or any of the ſins which we all committed, nor to have had all the wickedneſs in his nature which was in ours, nor to have deſerved what we deſerved: Nor did he in this proper ſence impute our ſins to Chriſt.
24. The falſe notion of God's ſtrict imputing all our ſins to Chriſt, and eſteeming him the greateſt ſinner in the World, being ſo great a Blaſphemy both againſt the Father and the Son, it is ſafeſt in ſuch Controverſies to hold to the plain and ordinary words of Scripture. And it is not the Wiſdom nor Impartiality of ſome men, who greatly cry up the Scripture perfection, and decry the addition of a Ceremony or Form in the Worſhip of God; that yet think Religion is endangered, if our Confeſſion uſe not the phraſes of [God's Imputing our ſin to Chriſt, and his Imputing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us] when neither of them is in the Scripture; As if all God's Word were not big or perfect enough to make us a Creed or Confeſſion in ſuch phraſes as it is fit for Chriſtians to take up with▪ Countenancing the Papiſts, whoſe Faith is ſwelled to the many Volumes of the Councils, and no man can know how much more is to be added, and when we have all.
25. God doth not repute or account us to have ſuffered in our Natural perſons what Chriſt ſuffered for us, nor Chriſt to have ſuffered in our Natural perſons.
26. Though Chriſt ſuffered in our ſtead, and in a large ſence, to certain uſes and in ſome reſpects, as the Repreſenter, or in the Perſons of ſinners; yet did he not ſo far repreſent their perſons in his Habitual Holineſs and Actual Obedience (no not in the Obedience of his Suffering,) as he did in the ſuffering it ſelf. He obeyed not in the Perſon of a ſinner, much leſs of millions of ſinners; which were to ſay, In the perſon of ſinners he never ſinned. He ſuffered, to ſave us from ſuffering; but he obeyed not to ſave us from obeying, but to bring us to Obedience. Yet his Perfection of Obedience had this end, that perfect Obedience might not be neceſſary in us to our Juſtification and Salvation.
27. It was not we our ſelves who did perfectly obey, or were perfectly holy, or ſuffered for ſin in the Perſon of Chriſt, or by Him: Nor did we (Naturally or Morally) merit our own Salvation by obeying in Chriſt; nor did we ſatisfie Gods Juſtice for our ſins, nor purchaſe pardon of Salvation to our ſelves, by our Suffering in and by Chriſt; All ſuch phraſe and ſence is contrary to Scripture. But Chriſt did this for us.
28. Therefore God doth not repute us to have done it, ſeeing it is not true.
29. It is impoſſible for the individual formal Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, to be our Formal perſonal Righteouſneſs. Becauſe it is a Relation and Accident, which cannot be tranſlated from ſubject to ſubject, and cannot be in divers ſubjects the ſame.
30. Where the queſtion is, Whether Chriſts Material Righteouſneſs, that is, his Habits, Acts and Sufferings themſelves, be Ours, we muſt conſider how a man can have Propriety in Habits, Acts and Paſſions who is the ſubject of them: and in Actions, who is the Agent of them. To Give the ſame Individual Habit or Paſſion to another, is an Impoſſibility, that is, to make him by Gift the ſubject of it. For it is not the ſame, if it be in another ſubject. To make one man really or phyſically to have been the Agent of anothers Act, even that Individual Act, if he was not ſo, is a contradiction and impoſſibility; that is, to make it true, that I did that which I did not. To be ours by Divine Imputation, cannot be, to be ours by a falſe Reputation, or ſuppoſition that we did what we did not: For God cannot err or lie. There is therefore but one of theſe two ways left, Either that we our ſelves in perſon, truly had the habits which Chriſt had, and did all that Chriſt did, and ſuffered all that he ſuffered, and ſo ſatisfied and merited Life in and by him, as by an Inſtrument, or Legal Repreſenter of our perſons in all this; Which I am anon to Confute: or elſe, That Chriſts Satisfaction, Righteouſneſs, and the Habits, Acts and Sufferings in which it lay, are imputed to us, and made ours; not rigidly in the very thing it ſelf, but in the Effects and Benefits; In as much as we are as really Pardoned, Juſtified, Adopted by them, as the Meritorious cauſe, by the inſtrumentality of the Covenants Donation, as if we our ſelves had done and ſuffered all that Chriſt did, as a Mediator and Sponſor, do and ſuffer for us: I ſay, As really and certainly, and with a fuller demonſtration of Gods Mercy and Wiſdom, and with a ſufficient demonſtration of his Juſtice. But not that our propriety in the benefits is in all reſpects the ſame, as it ſhould have been if we had been, done, and ſuffered our ſelves what Chriſt did. Thus Chriſts Righteouſneſs is ours.
31. Chriſt is truly The Lord our Righteouſneſs; in more reſpects than one or two: 1. In that he is the meritorious Cauſe of the Pardon of all our ſins, and our full Juſtification, Adoption, and right to Glory: and by his Satisfaction and Merits only, our Juſtification by the Covenant of Grace againſt the Curſe of the Law of Works is purchaſed. 2. In that he is the Legiſlator, Teſtator and Donor of our Pardon, and Juſtification by this new-Teſtament or Covenant. 3. In that he is the Head of Influx, and King and Interceſſor, by and from whom the Spirit is given, to ſanctifie us to God, and cauſe us ſincerely to perform the Conditions of the Juſtifying and ſaving Covenant, in Accepting and Improving the mercy then given. 4. In that he is the Righteous Judge and Juſtifyer of Believers by ſentence of Judgment. In all theſe Reſpects he is The Lord our Righteouſneſs.
32. We are ſaid to be made the Righteouſneſs of God in him: 1. In that, as he was uſed like a ſinner for us, (but not eſteemed one by God) ſo we are uſed like Innocent perſons ſo far as to be ſaved by him. 2. In that through his Merits, and upon our union with him, when we believe and conſent to his Covenant, we are pardoned and juſtified, and ſo made Righteous really, that is, ſuch as are not to be condemned but to be glorified. 3. In that the Divine Nature and Inherent Righteouſneſs▪ to them that are in him by Faith, are for his Merits, given by the Holy Ghoſt. 4. In that God's Juſtice and Holineſs Truth, Wiſdom, and Mercy, are all wonderfully demonſtrated in this way of pardoning and juſtifying ſinners by Chriſt. Thus are we made the Righteouſneſs of God in him.
31. For Righteouſneſs to be imputed to us, is all one as to be accounted Righteous, Rom. 4.6, 11. notwithſtanding that we be not Righteous as fulfillers of the Law of Innocency.
34. For Faith to be imputed to us for Righteouſneſs, Rom. 4.22, 23, 24. is plainly meant, that God who under the Law of Innocency required perfect Obedience, of us to our Juſtification and Glorification, upon the ſatisfaction and merits of Chriſt, hath freely given a full Pardon and Right to Life, to all true Believers; ſo that now by the Covenant of Grace nothing is required of us, to our Juſtification, but Faith: all the reſt being done by Chriſt: And ſo Faith in God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoſt, is reputed truly to be the condition on our part, on which Chriſt and Life, by that Baptiſmal Covenant, are made ours.
35. Juſtification, Adoption, and Life eternal are conſidered; 1. Quoad ipſam rem, as to the thing it ſelf in value. 2. Quoad, Ordinem Conferendi & Recipiendi, as to the order and manner of Conveyance and Participation. In the firſt reſpect, It is a meer free-gift to us, purchaſed by Chriſt: In the ſecond reſpect, It is a Reward to Believers, who thankfully accept the free-Gift according to its nature and uſes.
36. It is an error contrary to the ſcope of the Goſpel to ſay, that the Law of Works, or of Innocency, doth juſtifie us, as performed either by our ſelves, or by Chriſt. For that Law condemneth and curſeth us; And we are not efficiently juſtified by it, but from or againſt it.
37. Therefore we have no Righteouſneſs in Reality or Reputation formally ours, which conſiſteth in the firſt ſpecies; that is, in a Conformity to the Preceptive part of the Law of Innocency; we are not reputed Innocent: But only a Righteouſneſs which conſiſteth in Pardon of all ſin, and right to life, (with ſincere performance of the Condition of the Covenant of Grace, that is, True Faith.)
38. Our pardon puts not away our Guilt of Fact or Fault, but our Guilt of, or, obligation to Puniſhment. God doth not repute us ſuch as never ſinned, or ſuch as by our Innocency merited Heaven, but ſuch as are not to be damned, but to be glorified, becauſe pardoned and adopted through the Satisfaction and Merits of Chriſt.
39. Yet the Reatus Culpae is remitted to us Relatively as to the puniſhment, though not in it ſelf; that is, It ſhall not procure our Damnation: Even as Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is, though not in it ſelf, yet reſpectively as to the Benefits ſaid to be made ours, in as much as we ſhall have thoſe benefits by it.
40. Thus both the Material and the Formal Righteouſneſs of Chriſt are made ours; that is, Both the Holy Habits and Acts, and his Sufferings, with the Relative formal Righteouſneſs of his own Perſon, becauſe theſe are altogether one Meritorious cauſe of our Juſtification, commonly called the Material Cauſe.
Obj. But though Forma Denominat; yet if Chriſts Righteouſneſs in Matter and Form, be the Meritorious Cauſe of ours, and that be the ſame with the Material Cauſe, it is a very tolerable ſpeech to ſay, that His Righteouſneſs is Ours in it ſelf, while it is the very matter of ours.
Anſ. 1. When any man is Righteous Immediately by any action, that action is called the Matter of his Righteouſneſs, in ſuch an Analogical ſenſe as Action, an Accident may be called Matter, becauſe the Relation of Righteous is founded or ſubjected firſt or partly in that Action. And ſo when Chriſt perfectly obeyed, it was the Matter of his Righteouſneſs. But to be Righteous and to Merit are not all one notion: Merit is adventitious to meer Righteouſneſs. Now it is not Chriſts Actions in themſelves that our Righteouſneſs reſulteth from immediately as his own did; But there is firſt his Action, then his formal Righteouſneſs thereby; and thirdly, his Merit by that Righteouſneſs which goes to procure the Covenant-Donation of Righteouſnaſs to us, by which Covenant we are efficiently made Righteous. So that the name of a Material Cauſe is much more properly given to Chriſts Actions, as to his own formal Righteouſneſs, than as to ours. But yet this is but de nomine. 2. Above all, conſider what that Righteouſneſs is which Chriſt merited for us, (which is the heart of the Controverſie.) It is not of the ſame ſpecies or ſort with his own. His Righteouſneſs was a perfect ſinleſs Innocency, and Conformity to the preceptive part of the Law of Innocency in Holineſs. Ours is not ſuch. The diſſenters think it is ſuch by Imputation, and here is the difference. Ours is but in reſpect to the ſecond or retributive part of the Law; a Right to Impunity and Life, and a Juſtification not at all by that Law, but from its curſe or condemnation. The Law that ſaith, Obey perfectly and live, ſin and die, doth not juſtifie us as perſons that have perfectly obeyed it, really or imputatively▪ But its obligation to puniſhment is diſſolved, not by it ſelf, but by the Law of Grace. It is then by the Law of Grace that we are judged and juſtified. According to it, 1. We are not really or reputatively ſuch as have perfectly fulfilled all its Precepts: 2. But we are ſuch as by Grace do ſincerely perform the Condition of its promiſe. 3. By which promiſe of Gift, we are ſuch as have right to Chriſts own perſon, in the Relation and Union of a Head and Saviour, and with him the pardon of all our ſins, and the right of Adoption to the Spirit, and the Heavenly Inheritance as purchaſed by Chriſt. So that beſides our Inherent or Adherent Righteouſneſs of ſincere Faith, Repentance and Obedience, as the performed condition of the Law of Grace, we have no other Righteouſneſs our ſelves, but Right to Impunity and to Life: and not any imputed ſinleſs Innocency at all. God pardoneth our ſins and adopteth us, for the ſake of Chriſt's ſufferings and perfect Holineſs: But he doth not account us perfectly Holy for it, nor perfectly Obedient. So that how-ever you will call it, whether a Material Cauſe or a Meritorious, the thing is plain.
Obj. He is made of God Righteouſneſs to us.
Anſ. True: But that's none of the queſtion. But how is he ſo made? 1. As he is made Wiſdom, Sanctification and Redemption as aforeſaid. 2. By Merit, Satisfaction, Direction, Preſcription and Donation. He is the Meritorious Cauſe of our Pardon, of our Adoption, of our Right to Heaven, of that new Covenant which is the Inſtrumental Deed of Gift, confirming all theſe: And he is alſo our Righteouſneſs in the ſenſe that Auſtin ſo much ſtandeth on, as all our Holineſs and Righteouſneſs of Heart and Life, is not of our natural endeavour, but his gift, and operation by his Spirit; cauſing us to obey his Holy precepts and Example. All theſe ways he is made of God our Righteouſneſs: Beſides the Objective way of ſenſe; as he is Objectively made our Wiſdom, becauſe it is the trueſt wiſdom to know him; So he is objectively made our Righteouſneſs, in that it is that Goſpel-Righteouſneſs which is required of our ſelves, by his grace, to believe in him and obey him.
41. Though Chriſt fulfilled not the Law by Habitual Holineſs and Actual Obedience, ſtrictly in the Individual perſon of each particular ſinner; yet he did it in the nature of Man: And ſo humane nature, (conſidered in ſpecie, and in Chriſt perſonally, though not conſidered as a totum, or as perſonally in each man,) did ſatisfie and fullfil the Law and Merit. As Humane Nature ſinned in Adam actually in ſpecie, and in his individual perſon, and all our Perſons were ſeminally and virtually in him, and accordingly ſinned, or are reputed ſinners, as having no nature but what he conveyed who could convey no better than he had (either as to Relation or Real quality): But not that God reputed us to have been actually exiſtent, as really diſtinct perſons in Adam (which is not true.) Even ſo Chriſt obeyed and ſuffered in our Nature, and in our nature as it was in him; and humane ſinful nature in ſpecie was Univerſally pardoned by him and Eternal life freely given to all men for his merits, thus far imputed to them, their ſins being not imputed to hinder this Gift; which is made in and by the Covenant of Grace: Only the Gift hath the Condition of mans Acceptance of it according to its nature, 2 Cor. 5.19, 20. And all the individuals that ſhall in time by Faith accept the Gift, are there and thereby made ſuch as the Covenant for his merits doth juſtifie, by that General Gift.
42. As Adam was a Head by Nature, and therefore conveyed Guilt by natural Generation; ſo Chriſt is a Head (not by nature but) by Sacred Contract; and therefore conveyeth Right to Pardon, Adoption and Salvation, not by Generation, but by Contract, or Donation. So that what it was to be naturally in Adam, ſeminally and virtually, though not perſonlly in exiſtence; even that it is, in order to our benefit by him to be in Chriſt by Contract or the new Covenant, virtually, though not in perſonal exiſtence when the Covenant was made.
43. They therefore that look upon Juſtification or Righteouſneſs, as coming to us immediately by Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs to us, without the Inſtrumental Intervention and Conveyance or Collation by this Deed of Gift or Covenant, do confound themſelves by confounding and overlooking the Cauſes of our Juſtification. That which Chriſt did by his merits was to procure the new Covenant. The new Covenant is a free Gift of pardon and life with Chriſt himſelf, for his merits and ſatisfaction ſake.
44. Though the Perſon of the Mediator be not really or reputatively the very perſon of each ſinner, (nor ſo many perſons as there are ſinners or believers,) yet it doth belong to the Perſon of the Mediator, ſo far (limitedly) to bear the perſon of a ſinner, and to ſtand in the place of the Perſons of all Sinners, as to bear the puniſhment they deſerved, and to ſuffer for their ſins.
45. Scripture ſpeaking of moral matters, uſually ſpeaketh rather in Moral than meer Phyſical phraſe: And in ſtrict Phyſical ſence, Chriſts very perſonal Righteouſneſs (Material or Formal) is not ſo given to us, as that we are proprietors of the very thing it ſelf, but only of the effects (Pardon, Righteouſneſs and Life,) yet in a larger Moral phraſe that very thing is oft ſaid to be given to us, which is given to another, or done or ſuffered for our benefit. He that ranſometh a Captive from a Conquerer, Phyſically giveth the Money to the Conquerer & not to the Captive, & giveth the Captive only the Liberty purchaſed: But morally and reputatively he is ſaid to give the Money to the Captive, becauſe he gave it for him. And it redeemeth him as well as if he had given it himſelf. He that giveth ten thouſand pounds to purchaſe Lands, & freely giveth that land to another; phyſically giveth the Money to the Seller only, and the Land only to the other. But morally and reputatively we content our ſelves with the metonymical phraſe, and ſay, he gave the other ten thouſand pound. So morally it may be ſaid, that Chriſts Righteouſneſs, Merits and Satisfaction, was given to us, in that the thing purchaſed by it was given to us; when the Satisfaction was given or made to God. Yea when we ſaid it was made to God, we mean only that he was paſſively the Terminus of active Satisfaction, being the party ſatisfyed; but not that he himſelf was made the Subject and Agent of Habits and Acts, and Righteouſneſs of Chriſt as in his humane nature, except as the Divine Nature acted it, or by Communication of Attributes.
46. Becauſe the words [Perſon] and [Perſonating] and [Repreſenting] are ambiguous (as all humane language is,) while ſome uſe them in a ſtricter ſenſe than others do, we muſt try by other explicatory terms whether we agree in the matter, and not lay the ſtreſs of our Controverſy upon the bare words. So ſome Divines ſay that Chriſt ſuffered in the Perſon of a ſinner, when they mean not that he repreſented the Natural perſon of any one particular ſinner; but that his own Perſon was reputed the Sponſor of ſinners by God, and that he was judged a real ſinner by his perſecuters; and ſo ſuffered as if he had been a ſinner.
47. As Chriſt is leſs improperly ſaid to have Repreſented our Perſons in his ſatisfactory Sufferings, than in his perſonal perfect Holineſs and Obedience; ſo he is leſs improperly ſaid to have Repreſented all mankind as newly fallen in Adam, in a General ſenſe, for the purchaſing of the univerſal Gift of Pardon and Life, called, The new Covenant; than to have Repreſented in his perfect Holineſs and his Sufferings, every Believer conſidered as from his firſt being to his Death. Though it is certain that he dyed for all their ſins from firſt to laſt. For it is moſt true, 1. That Chriſt is as a ſecond Adam, the Root of the Redeemed; And as we derive ſin from Adam, ſo we derive life from Chriſt, (allowing the difference between a Natural and a Voluntary way of derivation.) And though no mans Perſon as a Perſon was actually exiſtent and offended in Adam, (nor was by God reputed to have been and done) yet all mens Perſons were Virtually and Seminally in Adam as is aforeſaid; and when they are exiſtent perſons, they are no better either by Relative Innocency, or by Phyſical Diſpoſition, than he could propagate: and are truly and juſtly reputed by God to be Perſons Guilty of Adams fact, ſo far as they were by nature ſeminally and virtually in him: And Chriſt the ſecond Adam is in a ſort the root of Man as Man, (though not by propagation of us, yet) as he is the Redeemer of Nature it ſelf from deſtruction, but more notably the Root of Saints as Saints, who are to have no real ſanctity but what ſhall be derived from him by Regeneration, as Nature and Sin is from Adam by Generation. But Adam did not repreſent all his poſterity as to all the Actions which they ſhould do themſelves from their Birth to their Death; ſo that they ſhould all have been taken for perfectly obedient to the death, if Adam had not ſinned at that time, yea or during his Life. For if any of them under that Covenant had ever ſinned afterward in their own perſon, they ſhould have died for it. But for the time paſt, they were Guiltleſs or Guilty in Adam, as he was Guiltleſs or Guilty himſelf, ſo far as they were in Adam: And though that was but in Cauſâ, & non extra cauſam; Yet a Generating Cauſe which propagateth eſſence from eſſence, by ſelf-multiplication of form, much differeth from an Arbitrary facient Cauſe in this. If Adam had obeyed, yet all his poſterity had been nevertheleſs bound to perfect perſonal perſevering Obedience on pain of Death. And Chriſt the ſecond Adam ſo far bore the perſon of fallen Adam, and ſuffered in the nature and room of Mankind in General, as without any condition on their part at all; to give man by an act of Oblivion or new Covenant a pardon of Adams ſin, yea and of all ſin paſt, at the time of their conſent, though not diſobliging them from all future Obedience. And by his perfect Holineſs and Obedience and Sufferings, he hath merited that new Covenant, which Accepteth of ſincere, though imperfect, Obedience, and maketh no more in us neceſſary to Salvation. When I ſay he did this without any Condition on mans part, I mean, He abſolutely without Condition, merited and gave us the Juſtifying Teſtament or Covenant. Though that Covenant give us not Juſtification abſolutely, but on Condition of believing, fiducial Conſent. 2. And ſo as this Ʋniverſal Gift of Juſtification upon Acceptance, is actually given to all fallen mankind as ſuch; ſo Chriſt might be ſaid to ſuffer inſtead of all, yea and merit too, ſo far as to procure them this Covenant-gift.
48. The ſum of all lyeth in applying the diſtinction of giving Chriſts Righteouſneſs as ſuch in it ſelf, and as a cauſe of our Righteouſneſs, or in the Cauſality of it. As our ſin is not reputed Chriſts ſin in it ſelf, and in the culpability of it (for then it muſt needs make Chriſt odious to God) but in its Cauſality of puniſhment: ſo Chriſt's Material or Formal Righteouſneſs, is not by God reputed to be properly and abſolutely our own in it ſelf as ſuch, but the Cauſality of it as it produceth ſuch and ſuch effects.
49. The Objections which are made againſt Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs in the ſound ſenſe, may all be anſwered as they are by our Divines; among whom the chiefeſt on this ſubject are Davenant de Juſtit. Habit & Actual. Johan. Crocius de Juſtif. Nigrinus de Impletione Legis, Bp. G. Dowman of Juſtif. Chamier, Paraeus, Ameſius and Junius againſt Bellarm. But the ſame reaſons againſt the unſound ſence of Imputation are unanſwerable. Therefore if any ſhall ſay concerning my following Arguments, that moſt of them are uſed, by Gregor. de Valent. by Bellarm. Becanus, or other Papiſts, or by Socinians, and are anſwered by Nigrin…s, Crocius, Davenant, &c. Such words may ſerve to deceive the ſimple that are led by Names and Prejudice; but to the Intelligent they are contemptible, unleſs they prove that theſe objections are made by the Papiſts againſt the ſame ſence of Imputation againſt which I uſe them, and that it is that ſenſe which all thoſe Proteſtants defend in anſwering them: For who-ever ſo anſwereth them, will appear to anſwer them in vain.
50. How far thoſe Divines who do uſe the phraſe of Chriſts ſuffering in our perſon, do yet limit the ſenſe in their expoſition, and deny that we are reputed to have fulfilled the Law in Chriſt: becauſe it is tedious to cite many, I ſhall take up now with one, even Mr. Lawſon in his Theopolitica, which (though about the office of Faith he ſome-what differ from me) I muſt needs call an excellent Treatiſe, as I take the Author to be one of the moſt Knowing men yet living that I know.) Pardon me if I be large in tranſcribing his words.
Pag. 100, 101. [If we enquire of the manner how Righteouſneſs and Life is derived from Chriſt, being one unto ſo many, it cannot be, except Chriſt be a general Head of mankind, and one Perſon with them, as Adam was. We do not read of any but two who were general Heads, and in ſome reſpect virtually, All mankind; the firſt and ſecond Adam. Mark, Virtually.— The principal cauſe of this Repreſentation whereby he is one perſon with us, is the will of God, who as Lord made him ſuch, and as Lawgiver and Judge did ſo account him. But, 2. How far is he One perſon with us? Anſ. 1. In general ſo far as it pleaſed God to make him ſo,Not abſolutely. and no further. 2. In particular, He and we are one ſo far 1. As to make him liable to the penalty of the Law for us. 2. So far as to free us from that obligation, and derive the benefit of his death to us. Though Chriſt be ſo far one with us as to be lyable unto the penalty of the Law, and to ſuffer it, and upon this ſuffering we are freed; yet Chriſt is not the ſinner, nor the ſinner Chriſt. Chriſt is the Word made fleſh, innocent without ſin, an univerſal Prieſt and King: but we are none of theſe. Though we be accounted as one perſon in Law with him,Mark by a Trope. by a Trope; yet in proper ſence it cannot be ſaid that in Chriſt's Satisfying we ſatisfied for our own ſins. For then we ſhould have been the Word made fleſh, able to plead Innocency, &c. All which are falſe, impoſſible,Mark how far. blaſphemous if affirmed by any. It's true, we are ſo one with him, that he ſatisfied for us, and the benefit of this Satisfaction redounds to us, and is communicable to all, upon certain termes; though not actually communicated to all: From this Unity and Identity of perſon in Law (if I may ſo ſpeak) it followeth clearly that Chriſt's ſufferings were not only Afflictions, but Puniſhments in proper ſenſe. —Pag. 102, 103. That Chriſt died for all in ſome ſence muſt needs be granted, becauſe the Scripture expreſly affirms it (vid. reliqua.) —
There is another queſtion unprofitably handled, Whether the Propitiation which includeth both Satisfaction and Merit, be to be aſcribed to the Active or Paſſive Obedience of Chriſt? Anſ. 1. Both his Active, Perſonal, Perfect and Perpetual Obedience, which by reaſon of his humane nature aſſumed, and ſubjection unto God was due, and alſo that Obedience to the great and tranſcendent Command of ſuffering the death of the Croſs, both concur as Cauſes of Remiſſion and Juſtification. 2. The Scriptures uſually aſcribe it to the Blood, Death, & Sacrifice of Chriſt, and never to the Perſonal Active Obedience of Chriſt's to the Moral Law. 3. Yet this Active Obedience is neceſſary, becauſe without it he could not have offered that great Sacrifice of himſelf without ſpot to God. And if it had not been without ſpot, it could not have been propitiatory and effectual for Expiation. 4. If Chriſt as our Surety had performed for us perfect and perpetual Obedience, ſo that we might have been judged to have perfectly and fully kept the Law by him, then no ſin could have been chargeable upon us, and the Death of Chriſt had been needleſs and ſuperfluous. 5. Chriſts Propitiation freeth the Believer not only from the obligation unto puniſhment of ſenſe, but of loſs; and procured for him not only deliverance from evil deſerved, but the enjoyment of all good neceſſary to our full happineſs. Therefore, there is no ground of Scripture for that opinion, that the Death of Chriſt and his Sufferings free us from puniſhments, and by his Active Obedience imputed to us we are made righteous, and the heirs of life. 6. If Chriſt was bound to perform perfect and perpetual Obedience for us, and he alſo performed it for us, then we are freed not only from ſin, but Obedience too: And this Obedience as diſtinct and ſeparate from Obedience unto death, may be pleaded for Juſtification of Life, and will be ſufficient to carry the Cauſe. For the tenor of the Law was this, Do this and live: And if man do this by himſelf or Surety, ſo as that the Lawgiver and ſupreme Judg accept it, the Law can require no more. It could not bind to perfect Obedience and to puniſhment too. There was never any ſuch Law made by God or juſt men. Before I conclude this particular of the extent of Chriſts Merit and Propitiation, I thought good to inform the Reader, that as the Propitiation of Chriſt maketh no man abſolutely, but upon certain terms pardonable and ſavable; ſo it was never made, either to prevent all ſin, or all puniſhments: For it preſuppoſeth man both ſinful and miſerable: And we know that the Guilt and Puniſhment of Adams ſin, lyeth heavy on all his poſterity to this day. And not only that, but the guilt of actual and perſonal ſins lyeth wholly upon us, whileſt impenitent and unbelieving and ſo out of Chriſt. And the Regenerate themſelves are not fully freed from all puniſhments till the final Reſurrection and Judgment. So that his Propitiation doth not altogether prevent but remove ſin and puniſhment by degrees. Many ſins may be ſaid to be Remiſſible by vertue of this Sacrifice, which never ſhall be remitted.] So far Mr. Lawſon.
Here I would add only theſe Animadverſions.
1. That whereas he explaineth Chriſts perſonating us in ſuffering by the ſimilitude of a Debtor and his Surety who are the ſame perſon in Law: I note 1. That the caſe of Debt much differeth from the caſe of Puniſhment. 2. That a Surety of Debt is either antecedently ſuch, or conſequently: Antecedently, either firſt one that is bound equally with the Debtor; 2. or one that promiſeth to pay if he do not. I think the Law accounteth neither of theſe to be the Perſon of the principal Debtor (as it doth a Servant by whom he ſends the Debt.) But Chriſt was neither of theſe: For the Law did not beforehand oblige him with us, nor did he in Law-ſence undertake to pay the Debt, if we failed. Though God decreed that he ſhould do ſo; yet that was no part of the ſence of the Law. But conſequently, if a friend of the Debtor when he is in Jayl will, without his requeſt or knowledg, ſay to the Creditor, I will pay you all the Debt; but ſo that he ſhall be in my power, and not have preſent liberty (leſt he abuſe it) but on the terms that I ſhall pleaſe; yea not at all if he ungratefully reject it] This Conſequent Satisfyer, or Sponſor, or Paymaſter, is not in Law-ſence the ſame Perſon with the Debtor: But if any will call him ſo, I will not contend about a word, while we agree of the thing (the terms of deliverance.) And this is as near the Caſe between Chriſt and us, as the ſimilitude of a Debtor will allow.
2. I do differ from Mr. Lawſon and Paraeus, and Ʋrſine, and Olevian, and Scultetus and all that ſort of worthy Divines in this; that whereas they make Chriſts Holineſs and perfect Obedience to be but Juſtitia perſonae, neceſſary to make his Sacrifice ſpotleſs and ſo effectual: I think that of it ſelf it is as directly the cauſe of our Pardon, Juſtification and Life, as Chriſts Paſſion is; The Paſſion being ſatisfactory and ſo meritorious, and the perſonal Holineſs Meritorious and ſo Satisfactory. For the truth is, The Law that condemned us▪ was not fulfilled by Chriſts ſuffering for us, but the Lawgiver ſatisfied inſtead of the fulfilling of it: And that Satisfaction lyeth, in the ſubſtitution of that which as fully (or more) attaineth the ends of the Law as our own ſuffering would have done. Now the ends of the Law may be attained by immediate Merit of Perfection as well as by Suffering; but beſt by both. For 1. By the perfect Holineſs and Obedience of Chriſt, the Holy and perfect will of God is pleaſed: whence [This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleaſed.] 2. In order to the ends of Government, Holineſs and perfect Obedience, is honoured and freed from the contempt which ſin would caſt upon it; and the holineſs of the Law in its Precepts is publickly honoured in this grand Exemplar; In whom only the will of God was done on Earth, as it is done in Heaven. And ſuch a Specimen to the World is greatly conducible to the ends of Government: So that Chriſt voluntarily taking humane nature, which as ſuch is obliged to this Perfection, He firſt highly merited of God the Father hereby, and this with his Suffering, went to attain the ends that our ſuffering ſhould have attained, much better. So that at leaſt as Meritorious, if not ſecondarily as ſatisfactory, I ſee not but Chriſts Holineſs procureth the Juſtifying Covenant for us, equally with his Death. A Prince may pardon a Traitor for ſome noble ſervice of his Friend, as well as for his ſuffering: much more for both. This way go Grotius de ſatisf. Mr. Bradſhaw and others.
3. When Mr Lawſon ſaith that the Law binds not to Obedience and Puniſhment both, he meaneth as to the ſame Act: which contradicts not what Nigrinus and others ſay, that it binds a ſinner to puniſhment for ſin paſt, and yet to Obedience for the time to come: (which cannot be entire and perfect.)
So pag. 311. Cap. 22. Qu. 2. Whether there be two parts of Juſtification, Remiſſion and Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs. 1. He referreth us to what is aforecited againſt Imputation of Chriſts Active Righteouſneſs, ſeparated or abſtracted for Reward from the Paſſive. 2. He ſheweth that Paul taketh Remiſſion of ſin and Imputation of Righteouſneſs for the ſame thing.] So ſay many of ours.
In concluſion I will mind the Reader, that by reading ſome Authors for Imputation, I am brought to doubt whether ſome deny not all true Remiſſion of ſin, that is, Remiſſion of the deſerved puniſhment. Becauſe I find that by Remiſſion they mean A non-Imputation of ſin under the formal notion of ſin; that God taketh it not to be our ſin, but Chriſts; and Chriſts Righteouſneſs and perfection to be ſo ours, as that God accounteth us not as truly ſinners. And ſo they think that the Reatus Culpae as well as Poenae ſimply in it ſelf is done away. Which if it be ſo, then the Reatus Poenae, the obligation to puniſhment, or the dueneſs of puniſhment, cannot be ſaid to be diſſolved or remitted, becauſe it was never contracted. Where I hold, that it is the Reatus ad Poenam, the Dueneſs of puniſhment only that is remitted, and the guilt of ſin not as in it ſelf, but in its Cauſality of puniſhment. And ſo in all common language, we ſay we forgive a man his fault, when we forgive him all the penalty poſitive and privative. Not eſteeming him, 1. Never to have done the fact. 2. Or that fact not to have been a fault, and his fault; 3. but that puniſhment for that fault, is forgiven him, and the fault ſo far as it is a cauſe of puniſhment. We muſt not feign God to judg falſly.
This maketh me think of a ſaying of Bp. Ʋſhers to me, when I mentioned the Papiſts placing Juſtification and Remiſſion of ſin conjunct, he told me that the Papiſts ordinarily acknowledg no Remiſſion. And on ſearch I find that Aquinas and the moſt of them place no true Remiſſion of ſin, in Juſtification: For by Remiſſion (which they make part of Juſtification,) they mean Mortification, or deſtroying ſin it ſelf in the act or habit. But that the pardon of the puniſhment is a thing that we all need, is not denyable; nor do they deny it, though they deny it to be part of our Juſtification. For it's ſtrange if they deny Chriſt the pardoning power which they give the Pope. And as Joh. Crocius de Juſtif. oft tells them, They ſhould for ſhame grant that Chriſts Righteouſneſs may be as far imputed to us, as they ſay a Saints or Martyrs redundant merits and ſupererogations are.
But if the Guilt of Fact and Guilt of Fault in it ſelf conſidered, be not both imputed firſt to us, that is, If we be not judged ſinners, I cannot ſee how we can be judged Pardoned ſinners; For he that is judged to have no ſin, is judged to deſerve no puniſhment. Unleſs they will ſay that to prevent the form and deſert of ſin, is eminenter, though not formaliter, to forgive. But it is another (even Actual) forgiveneſs which we hear of in the Goſpel, and pray for daily in the Lords prayer. Of all which ſee the full Scripture-proof in Mr. Hotchkis of Forgiveneſs of ſin.