Universal Redemption of Mankind, Chapter 8 · Argument 2
The ſecond Argument againſt Univerſal Satiſfaction anſwered.
Arg. II. Chriſt hath purchaſed Faith infallibly to be given to all that he died (or ſatisfied) for: But Chriſt hath not purchaſed Faith infallibly to be given to all men, but only to the Elect, Therefore Chriſt died not for all men, but only for the Elect.
The Major is thus proved. Chriſt hath purchaſed all things neceſſary to the Salvation of all he died for: But Faith infallibly to be given, is neceſſary to their Salvation, Ergo, &c. The Major is thus proved, Chriſt is a perfect Saviour to all thoſe to whom he is a Saviour or Redeemer: Therefore he hath purchaſed for them all things neceſſary to their Salvation.
The Minor of the main Argument is proved by experience.
Anſ. The Major is not true, nor can be proved from Scripture; but the contrary may abundantly be proved. The argument by which they would prove the Major, is ſick of the ſame diſeaſe; viz. Its Major is falſe: and the Minor if not well explained is falſe too. To the Major I ſay▪
Firſt, Chriſt hath done all that belonged to him as a Redeemer by dying, or as a Satisfier, or all that for which properly an expiatory Sacrifice was required, for all thoſe for whom he died: But I ſhall anon ſhew that the thing in queſtion is not ſuch.
Secondly, Chriſt did not purchaſe all things neceſſary to Salvation, for all that he died for: I wait the proof of the affirmative. In the mean time I mind the arguers, that themſelves confeſs▪
1. He did not purchaſe Predeſtination.
2. Nor that Love which cauſed God to ſend Chriſt.
3. Nor Creation and our Natural Being.
4. Nor his own Death and Merits: He purchaſed not theſe for any man.
For the Minor, if it mean, [Perſonal Faith] which it ſaith is neceſſary to Salvation; It is not true of Infants: If it mean the ſame Faith, which now is neceſſary to our Juſtification (to believe that Jeſus is the Chriſt, that he Died, Roſe, Aſcended, &c.) this was not neceſſary to the Salvation of all before Chriſts Incarnation.
As to the Argument by which they would prove the Major, I anſwer to it.
I. To the Major, by diſtinguiſhing [Chriſt is called a perfect Saviour] in ſeveral reſpects.
1. As to his plenary Power and Authority: ſo we confeſs he is a perfect Saviour.
2. As to the ſufficiency of his Satisfaction, or expiatory Sacrifice, or of whatſoever he was to do as ſatisfier of Juſtice: and ſo I confeſs he is a perfect Saviour. And do not all the oppoſers confeſs that Chriſts Death was ſufficient for All men? and all till a few of late do confeſs that Chriſt died for all men quoad ſufficientiam pretii: And if it be ſufficient for all men, even for thoſe that periſh, then he is quoad ſatisfactionis vel pretii ſufficientiam a perfect Saviour to all men: For they periſh not through any Imperfection or Inſufficiency in Chriſts Satiſfaction or Sacrifice.
3. Or elſe it is in regard of the Application of his benefits, and conveyance of the fruits of his Death, that he is ſaid to be [a perfect Saviour to all that he died for.]
And ſo 1. Diſtinguiſh ſtill of the term [Saviour] as it ſignifieth [a ſatisfier of Juſtice, or Redemptor per ſacrificium expiatorium] Chriſt is perfect quoad opus, as to his Work; and not only in himſelf and ability, and the material ſufficiency of his Sacrifice: but, this is not to the preſent point.
2. A [a Saviour] ſignifieth, an actual Deliverer, by perſonal application and collation of his benefits; ſo again Chriſt is to be conſidered in a double Relation.
1. As Dominus Abſolutus ex novo Jure Redemptionis.
2. Ut Rector per leges ex eodem novo Jure: As he is become the Abſolute Owner or Proprietary of all: Or as he is become the Rector and ſo the Legiſlator, (for under one of theſe two reſpects he maketh over all his benefits.)
II. And accordingly you muſt diſtinguiſh of thoſe benefits which Chriſt is to convey as Rector per Leges; and thoſe which he is to convey as Dominus Abſolutus, and as above or beſides his Laws arbitrarily without pre-engagement. And ſo I anſwer, that Chriſt doth all that belongs to him as Legiſlator and Recto… according to the Tenour of the New Law and Covenant, perfectly to all, as well as to the Elect: But he doth not all that he may do, (and mans neceſſity requires that he ſhould do) as abſolute Proprietary or Owner; either to all, or equally to the Elect: yet is he not therefore an imperfect Saviour: For that belongs not to the making of him a perfect Saviour, though it belong to the perfection of the Sinners Salvation. And therefore the conſequence of this Enthymeme is denied on theſe grounds.
That theſe things may be yet more clear, I ſhall briefly open a little further, the Nature of theſe diſtinctions, and the difference between theſe ſeveral effects of Chriſts Death; and ſo ſhew you that he is a perfect Saviour though he give not Faith to all that he died for; having ſhewed you in what ſenſe Chriſt may be ſaid to have purchaſed for us the Habit or Act of Faith. For I find that a good explication lets in more light into the underſtanding, and prepares it more for the entertainment of Truth, than doth the moſt ſubtle Argumentation.
And 1. You muſt underſtand that the firſt main diſtribution of the Works of Chriſt in our Redemption (comprizing the whole) is into the work which he did for the ſatisfying of Gods Juſtice, in offering himſelf a Sacrifice for ſin.
2. And thoſe which were to be done hereupon, for the ſake of this: and that,
I. By God the Father.
1. To Chriſt, (accepting his ſacrifice, acquit…ing him, making him Owner and Ruler.)
2. To us, Delivering us,
1. From our Legal neceſſity of Periſhing.
2. To Chriſt as our Lord and Ruler, to be dealt with on terms that have a tendency to our recovery.
II. By Chriſt the Redeemer, who being thus made both Owner and Rector of us all, doth according to theſe two reſpects give out all the following Fruits of his death to Mankind.
So that Chriſt's firſt work of ſatisfaction which is terminated as it were on God, is a perfect entire work of it ſelf. And (as Dr. Ameſ. ſaith in the place before cited, Anti-Bellarm.) it is to the work of Grace, as Creation is to the work of Nature.
And therefore as none can deny but the Non-Elect have common grace, as Conditional Pardon, Illumination, the Holy Ghoſt, &c. (elſe how do they turn grace into wantonneſs?) ſo none can well deny but they have it from the general Fountain of Redemption.
Let us then conſider what is the proper uſe of ſatisfaction as ſuch, and what it was that made ſatisfaction neceſſary.
And it is evident that it was the juſtice of God Creator, as Rector according to the Law of Works, and the miſery of Man that ha… offended God by the breach of that Law, and was become liable to the Penalty, which he could not bear without his everlaſting undoing Theſe made ſatisfaction neceſſary.; God's Juſtice required that either the Sinner muſt periſ… or ſatisfaction by an Expiatory Sacrifice muſt b… made, by which the remote and main ends … the violated Law might be as well attained … by the Sinners Damnation they would have been; ſo that it was the death which was become due to Mankind which required the death of Chriſt their Sacrifice, (as on Man's part;) and God's Juſtice which would not remit ſin but on a valuable conſideration for the demonſtration of its ſelf, and of God's Holineſs, which required it on God's part; ſo that you ſee, that on our part, which required a Sacrifice was guilt, that is, obligation to everlaſting puniſhment. And it doth not belong to the ſatisfier as ſuch, to ſee that the guilt be actually done away quoad eventum, or that the Damnation be actually eſcaped: but that a ſufficient Sacrifice or ſatisfaction be given, on conſideration whereof Remiſſion and Salvation may be given on the terms as the Legiſlators and Redeemers Wiſdom ſhall appoint.
How Chriſt doth give out this Pardon we ſhall ſhew you anon, de quadruplici Remiſſione, ſo that it is apparent that the want of the act or habit of Faith, or the want of the Holy Ghoſt to effect Faith, is not the thing that required ſatisfaction to God's Juſtice directly; but that Faith is only a remote effect of this ſatisfaction, and ſuch an effect as hath no ſuch Natural Connection with this Cauſe, but that the Cauſe (materially) may be and oft is without that effect in many; and the effect might have been without that cauſe from another, if God had ſo pleaſed.
To manifeſt this (that it is not want of Faith that required ſatisfaction as ſuch; and that ſatisfaction may be made for thoſe that ſhall never believe) obſerve theſe things.
1. That Man's Suffering is not a thing pleaſing to God in and for it ſelf, but for its end, viz. The Demonſtration of Juſtice and Right Governing of the World. God profeſſeth that he hath no pleaſure in the death of a Sinner, Ezek. 18. nor in the death of him that dyeth, Ezek. 33. but rather that he repent and live. Much leſs hath he pleaſure in the death of the innocent, and leaſt of all in the death of his own Son. God is not blood-thirſty, who abhorreth the blood-thirſty man.
2 It is not therefore for Chriſt's Sufferings as in themſelves conſidered, that God doth give men either Faith or any Mercy. God doth not ſell his mercies for blood, as if he would give the World Remiſſion of Sins, on condition he might put his Son to ſo much torment.
And therefore Faith is not the immediate effect of Chriſt's death in ſenſu morali: It comes not from his death, as death or ſuffering; nor may it without Blaſphemy be conceived that ever God made ſuch an agreement with his Son, as to give Faith to Men meerly on Condition that Chriſt would ſuffer death without firſt conſidering ſomewhat elſe that required that ſuffering, and ſomething that put a value upon it.
3. So that the thing which did require Chriſts Suffering was (as is ſaid before) the obligation to puniſhment, called guilt, on mans part, and vindictive juſtice on God's part. Unbelief as Unbelief did not neceſſarily require it, but the guilt of unbelief, or any other ſin did require it, if ever it be pardonable.
4. So that the following effects of Chriſt's death do all preſuppoſe the ſatisfaction of Juſtice, and hence Chriſts death becomes ſo pleaſing to God, not as death, but as ſatisfaction, and ſo a means fitted to the attainment of his ends.
And becauſe this means ſo pleaſeth him, he eſteemeth Chriſts ſatisfaction meritorious of further benefits, (joyned with his meritorious obedience) upon which eſtimation and his own will (called the Covenant with Chriſt) he annexeth further benefits thereto. For the end why he ſatisfied his juſtice by the Sacrifice of his Son, was that he might honourably, wiſely, and juſtly give out the following benefits which he giveth out hereupon. So that Chriſts death is as to God, firſt ſatisfactory, and then meritorious of further benefits. Now Faith very remotely followeth all this, as ſhall be ſhewn.
5. The thing that God could not do without ſatisfaction, was the remitting of ſin, and freeing the delinquent from puniſhment: it was not directly, nor in its ſelf the beſtowing of Faith.
6. For I would deſire any Judicious Man to conſider, whether if Chriſt had by his death ſatisfied God's juſtice for mans guilt, and had not at all done any more by his death for the meriting of Faith, might not God have given man Faith at his own pleaſure, without the leaſt ſhew of injuſtice, or any other prohibiting inconvenience? though Chriſt de facto did merit more, yet we may well in diſpute for ſearching out the truth, ſeparate in our thoughts guilt of ſin, and want of Faith in Chriſt; and we may ſuppoſe that Chriſt had done no more by his death, than to ſatisfie God's juſtice for man's guilt, by bearing that which was due to man.
Now I would fain know▪ this being once done, why God or the Redeemer might not give Faith to whom he will: Is there a further neceſſity of any new death or ſuffering to merit Faith for us? If there be, what is that neceſſity? It is no injuſtice in God to do it: There is no Law ſtanding in the way by which he is obliged to the contrary.
Perhaps ſome will object, that the ſame may be ſaid of Pardon and Salvation, that there needs no new ſuffering to merit them, if once Juſtice be ſatisfied, and yet Chriſt dyed for our Juſtification, and Salvation.
To which I anſwer, All this is true, but then obſerve the difference; ſeparate in your thoughts Remiſſion, Juſtification, and Salvation on one ſide, from Faith in Chriſt on the other ſide, (as we by ſuppoſition may well do in diſputation;) and you will find that God could not give Remiſſion, Juſtification, and Salvation from Puniſhment without Chriſt's ſatisfaction; but he could have given Faith in Chriſt (if you will ſuppoſe it to go alone without the former benefits) without ſatisfaction, I ſay, he could not give the former; not by reaſon of any impotency or imperfection in God, but by reaſon of the perfection of his Wiſdom, Juſtice, and Holineſs.
For them that deny this (as Twiſſe, and ſome others do, to the great hardning of Socinians, and Infidels) at preſent I refer them to the Writings of Divines that have proved it: As Voetius in Theſibus, Camero Paſſim; ſpecially excellent well by Moſ. Amyraldus in Theſib. Salm…rienſ. Vol. 1. de ſatisfactione: and Eſſenius, Joh. Junius, and moſt againſt the Socinians on that point, ſay ſomewhat to it, and ſomething I have elſewhere ſaid my ſelf, and therefore will not now ſo far digreſs.
But on the other ſide, that God might have given Faith (ſeparated from theſe benefits) without ſatisfaction, is evident.
1. In that there is no injuſtice or other prohibiting inconvenience in it.
2. God doth give the Devils a belief that God is, and that he is a Rewarder of them that ſeek him diligently, and that Chriſt is the Son of God, and the Saviour of the World, and that he was Incarnate, dyed for Sin, Roſe and Aſcended, and ſitteth at the right hand of God, and ſhall come again to judge the World, ſome to life, and ſome to death, and that all the Scripture is Gods word, and all true, and that whoſoever of Mankind believeth ſhall be ſaved, (for the Devil believeth the connection between Faith and Salvation,) all this Faith God giveth to thoſe that look to the nature of things more than to bare words, and can ſee through the vail of metaphorical expreſſions, will not make any queſtion of this; eſpecially if they have ſo far ſtudied the Civil Law and Politicks as is requiſite for the right underſtanding of the nature and extent of theſe two relations. Indeed Chriſt is called a Father, but that ſignifieth but
1. His ſpecial propriety in us, as Fathers have in their Children (which is a branch of propriety in general.)
2. And his Authority over us, as a Father hath over his Children, which is part of his Rectorſhip. And withal it ſignifieth that ſpecial love of Chriſt to thoſe to whom he is thus related.
So he is called a Husband, which expreſſed the ſame ſpecial Propriety and Rectorſhip with the ſingular love accompanying them. He is called a Prophet, but that term expreſſeth but the manner of his applying himſelf to men in the exerciſe of his Dominion and Rule; for he that teacheth them, doth not teach them as a private man, but with Authority, and as their rightful King, whether they acknowledge him or no;) even as a King doth offer mercy to Rebels, and perſwade them earneſtly to accept it, ſhewing them the danger of ſtanding out againſt him: Or as he teacheth his Subjects their duty; you may call this Man a Teacher, but the meaning only is this, he is a Teaching King, and ſo his Teaching is part of his Ruling, or ſubordinate to it: It ſignifieth but the manner of his applying himſelf to them, ſo Chriſt's Prophetical Office in its ſelf belongeth to his Rectorſhip: Not that all Teaching is Ruling, but in all his Teaching he doth it as their Ruler, in right at leaſt, if not in exerciſe. For that Teaching by which he converteth Sinners, is not properly an act of moral ruling thoſe Sinners; but yet it is the Act of a King perſwading Rebels to come in that they may be Ruled; and as their King doth he perſwade them.
And then the diverſity of the degrees of Goſpel Light and Motions, (ſome having more, ſome leſs, ſome none,) is from Chriſt as abſolute owner of all, that may do with his own as his liſt.
It were eaſie to manifeſt how all his other Office-Titles and Relations are reducible to theſe two, at leaſt as he is ſignified in relation to the Creature; For in his interceſſion he ſtands in a double relation.
The one is to God, with whom he intercedeth, and ſo he intercedeth as the Son of his Love, who having ſatisfied his Juſtice, hath all delivered up to him, and therefore is Owner and Ruler of all.
The other Relation is to the Creature for whom he intercedeth; and that is as their Owner and Ruler, and for his own choſen as their Owner and Ruler in a ſtricter ſenſe than the reſt, even as they are his Jewels, and ſpecially beloved.
More is ſaid of this in another place: peruſe the Table of the effects of Chriſt's death.
Now let us ſee how it is that Chriſt hath purchaſed Faith, and how he giveth it, having ſatisfied God's Juſtice by dying for all Mankind, God giveth up all men to him as their Owner and Ruler by Redemption-Title (and giveth up alſo into his hands the former obligation, as is ſaid,) hereupon Chriſt hath full power,
1. To alter the Law, or to make new Laws for them, and by theſe Laws to confer Salvation, and other Benefits, by ordaining on what terms they ſhall be obtained, and ſo giving right to them.
2. To give further mercies, over and above what he giveth right to by that Law, being abſolute Lord, he may do with his own as he liſt; (ſtill ſuppoſing that his Fathers Will is his Will.)
Now Chriſt having received this Plenipotency, as Rector per Leges, he makes a free Univerſal Conveyance or Grant of Pardon, Juſtification, Reconciliation, Adoption, Sanctification, in the common Scripture ſenſe) and Glorification to all Men on Condition they Repent, and Believe.
But he hath no where made any Conveyance of the firſt effectual Grace, or of Faith to any Man. He hath indeed propheſied or foretold us that he will infallibly give it to his Choſen, but he hath not named or deſcribed them by any antecedent diſtinguiſhing Character; ſo that no man can beforehand ſay this belongs to me, nor hath he by this Prediction made over to them any right to the thing, but only foretold that he will give them right hereafter.
Only he hath preſcribed certain means to all men, either for the immediate obtaining of Grace to believe, or at leaſt for the obtaining of Grace conducing thereto, which may bring them into a nearer capacity, who before were further off than the reſt of the World. And he hath given them ſufficient encouragement to uſe thoſe means without deſpairing of ſucceſs, even ſo much, as that no man that hath the uſe of Reaſon, can be named by the tongue of Man that did his beſt in the uſe of means to get Faith, or to get nearer to Chriſt, and yet loſt his labour.
Yet hath not Chriſt thought meet to engage or oblige himſelf to any Unbeliever to give him Faith; but when he doth it, he will do it as Dominus Abſolutus, and as not obliged; and indeed doth it only to thoſe whom he had an abſolute purpoſe to ſave, and were given him to be infallibly brought home to God.
So that Chriſt gives not Faith (the firſt Faith) as Rector per Leges, but as Dominus Abſolutus. Thoſe Mercies (if ſpecial) that are thus given, are ſaid by ſome Divines to flow from Predeſtination alone, as did the gift of a Saviour to fallen Mankind; but no doubt, it is mediante Sanguine Chriſti, and in a remote ſenſe are fruits of Chriſt's death.
By what hath been ſaid it may appear that Faith is not the proper effect of ſatisfaction as ſatisfaction, nor is it any neer or inſeparable effect of ſatisfaction as it is meritorious. God did not give Chriſt Faith for his bloodſhed in exchange; the thing that God was to give the Son for his ſatisfaction, was Dominion and Rule of the Redeemed Creature, and power therein to uſe what means he ſaw fit for the bringing in of Souls to himſelf, even to ſend forth ſo much of his word and Spirit as he pleaſed; both the Father and Son reſolving from Eternity to prevail infallibly with all the Elect. But never did Chriſt deſire at his Fathers hands, that all whom he ſatisfied for, ſhould be infallibly and irriſiſtibly brought to believe; nor did God ever grant or promiſe any ſuch thing. Jeſus Chriſt as a Ranſom dyed for all, and as Rector per Leges, or Legiſlator he hath conveyed the Fruits of his death to all; that is, thoſe Fruits which it appertained to him as Legiſlator to convey, which is right to what his New Law or Covenant doth promiſe. But thoſe Mercies which he gives as Dominus Abſolutus, arbitrarily beſides or above his engagement, he neither gives nor ever intended to give to all that he dyed for; no nor to all his Elect doth he give all thoſe fruits of his death, nor for ought I know to any in the ſame degree; for theſe are but remotely the Fruits of Chriſt's death, and not conſtant nor inſeparable Fruits. Peruſe the foreſaid Table of the Fruits of Chriſts death, and it will ſhew you which the mercies be that Chriſt gives by Law, and which arbitrarily, as beſides his engagement.
Is it not manifeſt then that it is a deſperate charge againſt the Lord Chriſt to ſay, that he is an imperfect Saviour, if he do not perfectly ſave all that he Died for; or convey to them all the fruits of his Death?
The Preaching of the Goſpel expreſly, is a fruit of Chriſts Death: Some have this in great power, clearneſs and conſtancy; ſome but weakly, darkly, or ſeldom; and ſome not at all. Shall they that have been at one or two dark Sermons of Chriſt in all their Lives ſay, That either Chriſt Died not for them, or elſe was an imperfect Saviour? Some are endowed with the gift of Prophecy, Tongues, Miracles, as fruits of Chriſts Death; ſhall all that receive not theſe ſay, that Chriſt is an imperfect Saviour, becauſe he gave them none of theſe fruits of his Death? Some are made Kings and Rulers, and ſome Apoſtles, Evangeliſts, Paſtors, Teachers, &c. and all are fruits of Chriſts Death: Yet all are not Apoſtles, Paſtors, Teachers, &c: Some have Learning and ſome none: Some have good Parents, and good Education, and ſome bad: Some of the Elect have Health of Body, and Helps, Opportunities and Advantages to to ſerve God, which others want: Some are permitted to live long in ſin, as Manaſſes: And others converted in the morning of their Days: Some are preſerved in a more even and comfortable walking with God: And ſome are permitted to fall into moſt hainous ſcandalous ſins, to the great diſhonour of God and their Profeſſion, and to walk ſadly for it all their Days, Nay, ſome to ſuffer Death by the hands of publick juſtice; Shall all theſe ſay, Chriſt is an imperfect Saviour to them? Some are kept in vigor and growth in grace, and ſome remain Infants; and ſome loſe their firſt degree of Love, and grow more luke-warm, and Die in a very low ebb of Grace, Comfort and Aſſurance. Some enjoy much fellowſhip with the Father and Son in the Spirit: And others are almoſt wholly ſtrangers to it. Some are made inſtruments of doing God abundance of ſervice and the Church much good, and bringing home or building up many Souls, and that to the end of their Lives: Others are kept without parts and gifts, next to uſeleſs, if not burdenſome. Some Diſtracted, and after a Godly Life fall into ſtark madneſs, and ſo ſpend their days as being uncapable of making uſe of their Affliction or of any Mercy: And ſome are cut off in Infancy or in the Womb, before they did ever believe or love God, or do him any ſervice. And is Chriſt an imperfect Saviour to all theſe? Nay, and he hath revealed to us, that according to this diverſity here in degrees of Grace, Holineſs and Obedience; ſo will be the diverſity in the degrees of glory: One ſhall be Ruler of ten Cities, and another but of two: For he will reward every Man according to his works. How vaſt a difference then is there like to be between the Glory of an Infant, that being born of a weak believer, Died from the Womb, and the Glory of Peter, John, Paul, or thoſe to whom it ſhall be given to ſit on Chriſts Right Hand and Left Hand in his Kingdom. And yet all theſe are Elect. Where is it then that the force of the Argument lyeth that would prove that all muſt needs have Faith for whom Chriſt Died? If he be an imperfect Saviour except he ſave all alike, or give to all that he Died for, all the fruits of his Death, then ſuch a charge might as truly be grounded on his dealings with the Elect themſelves as with others.
Object. But he ſaveth all the Elect, though not all alike: He bringeth them all ſafe to Heaven at laſt; but ſo he doth not others.
Anſw. That's true: But then,
1. It's yielded that it belongs not to the perfection of Chriſts Office or Work to give all the fruits of his Death (quoad ſpeciem) to all that he Died for.
2. It belongs as truly to his office of ſaving, to ſave men from ſin, and to give them a full degree of Grace and Glory, as to give men Faith: And yet it belongs not to his office neceſſarily to give theſe to all that he Died for. No doubt a greater meaſure of Glory is a greater good than that ſmall meaſure which ſome enjoy. (Specially if the joy of ſome ſaved Infants were no greater than Nazianzene (Orat. 40.) and other antients did think the pain of ſome condemned Infants would be.)
3. Some of theſe parts of Salvation which the Elect themſelves do come ſhort of, are penally denied them, (and ſo are given by Chriſt as Legiſlator) being propounded on a condition, and they not performing the condition; (to the performance whereof Grace was neceſſary to aſſiſt them.) If then Chriſt may give good things by a conditional grant (as Legiſlator) to his Elect, and yet not give them that Grace which may cauſe them infallibly to perform the condition, and ſo deny them the benefit conditionally given, for want of that performance, what reaſon can be given, why he may not do ſo by the Non-Elect, in reſpect of Salvation and Faith, and Repentance, the Conditions thereof?
So that all the weight of their Argument lyeth on this ſuppoſition, that Chriſt bore not Puniſhment for any mans ſins but thoſe whom he intended infallibly to bring to Heaven: which they have never yet proved, nor ever will do, there being no Word of God that promiſeth to ſave all that Chriſt died for.
Lay all this together and you will ſee the truth of theſe Concluſions.
1. That it was not the abſence of Faith in Chriſt the Remedy, but the Old Laws Obligation of us to Puniſhment, or the guilt of ſin, which required Chriſt's ſatisfaction to God's Juſtice.
2. That Chriſt by this ſatisfaction did not immediately merit Faith it ſelf, but only thoſe intermediate cauſes, from whence the Faith of his Elect is produced, that is, He purchaſed all men from the Legal neceſſity of periſhing that they were in, into his own Power, as their Owner and Ruler, that ſo he might make over Reconciliation. Remiſſion and Salvation to all, if they will believe; and might ſend forth ſufficient means and help of Grace to draw all men towards him: reſolving to draw his Elect Infallibly to him.
3. That it is therefore an improper and unfit phraſe to ſay, that [Chriſt Died to purchaſe us Faith] though rightly explained it hath truth in it: But rather, that [Faith is an effect or fruit of Chriſt's Death,] viz. where Faith is given. For the former phraſe would intimate as if Faith were the thing that God was to give in requital of Chriſt for his Bloodſhed, and that directly: and ſo Faith ſhould be given by God as Legiſlator of the Old Law: For the ſtipulation ſuppoſed to be between the Father and Son, was made by the Father on his part, not as Redeemer, or Legiſlator of the New Law; but as the offended Rector according to the Law of Creation, now treating with the Mediator about mans Recovery. Though theſe things ſpoken after our manner, do but ſignifie Gods Decrees, yet they ſhew us in what Relation God ſtood towards Man and towards the Redeemer, when he required and accepted of Satisfaction. Whereas the thing given to Chriſt was Power of Dominion and Rectorſhip, and ſo the Redeemed delivered to him (not all to one final end, nor with a like intent.) And ſo Faith is procured by Chriſt only in this remote ſenſe, in that he procured full power to uſe the fitteſt means to draw men to him, in the ſeaſon and degrees he pleaſe; with a full reſolution in his own mind to make all this effectual upon his choſen, that he might attain the full end of his Blood-ſhed. So that Faith is the effect of that degree of Grace which from his Plenipotency he gives, leſt his choſen ſhould miſs of the intended Salvation; and therefore is improperly ſaid to be purchaſed by Chriſts Blood, though yet it be a remote effect of his Blood to thoſe that have it, and none could have had it without the Intervention of his Blood, becauſe there would have been no ſaving uſe of Faith without that Blood: otherwiſe they might, if we look to Faith, but as ſuch an act conſidered without its object given.
4. And therefore the Scripture no where uſeth any ſuch phraſe, as to ſay, that Chriſt Died to purchaſe us Faith: But ordinarily that he died to purge or put away ſin, &c. And in controverted caſes it is ſafeſt to ſpeak in Scripture Language: Suppoſe a man pay 1000 l. to Ranſom certain Priſoners that owed that ſum, and upon the Ranſom it is agreed that they ſhall now be delivered up to him, as his Ranſomed ones, to diſpoſe of at his pleaſure; yet both parties agree that only thoſe ſhall be actually delivered into freedom who thankfully accept the favour, and the Ranſomer as their Lord: The Redeemer knows that theſe are men of ſuch ſtubborn hearts that they will refuſe his offer: yet he reſolves to ſend them under his hand a conditional diſcharge, that all ſhall come forth that will accept him and his offer; and to tell them, that all the reſt ſhall by him be ſtill detained, and as his Priſoners ſuffer greater miſery: Yet out of a ſpecial love to ſome of them, he reſolves to ſend a friend who is ſo effectual an Orator, as will certainly prevail with them to lay by their obſtinacy and yield to his motion. Doth it ſeem a proper phraſe in this caſe, to ſay, that this man paid 1000 l. to purchaſe for theſe men a yielding Heart, or to purchaſe their conſent to accept him and his kindneſs? Rather he did it to purchaſe their Freedom from Priſon; which he gives to all, as far as belongs to him as Ranſomer. But he ſends this Orator with a reſolution to prevail, in another ſuperadded relation, viz. as one that beareth a ſpecial love to thoſe particular men above the reſt; or as one at leaſt that is reſolved to attain infallibly that fruit of his Ranſom, even the actual deliverance of thoſe men. Nor can it therefore be concluded, that he paid not the debt of any of the reſt, becauſe he will not as importunately ſolicite them to accept of his offer.
5. We muſt therefore diſtinguiſh of meer Ranſoming or Redemption by Sacrifice; and the ſame Sacrifice or Redemption as it is conjoyned with Election, and is ſubordinate to it: Effectual Grace to work Faith infallibly, proceeds from Redemption as it is accompanied with Election, or with a ſpecial abſolute reſolution, of ſaving thoſe particular perſons: but it comes not from mere Redemption by Sacrifice, as divided from Election; and therefore is common to all the Elect, but not common to all the Redeemed. For God hath means of two different ſorts for the accompliſhing his Decree of Election, as to execution: Firſt general means, and ſecondly ſpecial means: and the general is the Foundation on which he means to build the ſpecial.
Let us again remember Ameſius's words, that Redemption is to the whole work of Grace (viz. both common and ſpecial) what Creation is to the work of Nature. Nay, better we may ſay, what Creation was to Gods Governing Adminiſtrations under the firſt Law, that is, Redemption to Gods Governing Adminiſtrations under the Second or New Law. For in Creation God did two things.
1. He gave man his Being, that he might be a Subject fit for Government.
2. He gave him his Right Being Real and Relative; making him after his Image, in his favour, and in a ſtate of happineſs: and in this ſtate he made a Law with him, (even with all mankind in Adam and Eve,) promiſing him further everlaſting life on condition of obedience. Now here Gods Creation of man in his favour and in rectitude, was a common work; and ſo was his giving him that Law: But ſo was not the fulfilling of its Promiſe, which implieth the Intervention of mans performance of the condition. Suppoſe now that man had been multiplied by propagation before the fall of any, and then one half of mankind had kept this Law of Works, and the other had broke it: Had it been fit for any man to ſay, that God did not Create any of thoſe that fell, in his favour, or placed them not in happineſs, or ſet them not in the way to a further happineſs, becauſe he did not infallibly cauſe them to keep his Law, which was the condition of further happineſs? No more can it be truly ſaid that Chriſt did not Redeem them becauſe he did not cauſe them infallibly to believe. Indeed it may be ſaid of both, that God in Creating or in Redeeming had not the ſame Decree or Abſolute Reſolution to ſave them, as he had to ſave the Elect whom he cauſeth to perform the condition. And yet our Divines uſe commonly to ſay, that God created all Mankind in Adam in a ſtate of happineſs, and to a further happineſs: that is, as Legiſlator, ſet them in a way to a further happineſs, and conditionally promiſed it to them (whether it were any greater happineſs, or only the perpetuation of the ſame, I will not now diſpute.) And ſo hath Chriſt done all for men that pertains to a ſatisfier of Juſtice, and ſetteth them in a way to full deliverance from the miſery that they were fallen into, and conditionally promiſeth it to them, with an additional happineſs.
6. And Laſtly, Beſides all this let it be well conſidered, that if there be any man on Earth (that hath the uſe of Reaſon, of whom only actual Faith is required) that doth not actually Believe in Chriſt, it is their own fault, and is not long of Chriſt: He will not condemn them meerly for their ſin againſt that Law of works which ſaith [obey perfectly, or dye] but for rejecting recovering Grace, and that ſufficient in its kind, and to its own work. I ſay it again confidently, all men that periſh (who have the uſe of reaſon) do periſh directly for rejecting ſufficient Recovering Grace. By Grace I mean, mercy contrary to merit: by recovering, I mean, ſuch as tendeth in its own nature toward their Recovery, and leadeth or helpeth them thereto. By ſufficient I mean, not ſufficient directly to ſave them; (for ſuch none of the Elect have till they are ſaved) nor yet ſufficient to give them Faith, or cauſe them ſavingly to Believe: But it is ſufficient to bring them nearer Chriſt than they are, though not to put them into immediate poſſeſſion of Chriſt by Union with him, as Faith would do. It is an eaſie truth, that all men naturally are far from Chriſt, and 2. That ſome by cuſtom in ſinning, for want of informing, and reſtraining means, are much further from him than others (as the Heathens are.) 3. And that it is not Gods uſual way, (nor to be expected) to bring theſe men to Chriſt at once by one act, or without any preparation, or firſt bringing them nearer to him. It is a ſimilitude uſed by ſome that oppoſe what I now ſay: ſuppoſe a man in a lower room, and another in a room below him, and you ſtand at the Stair head, and call them both up to you and offer them ſomewhat if they will come: It is not your intent that they ſhould leap up at one leap, but come up ſtep by ſtep: nor do you mean that he in the lower room ſhould go no more ſteps than he in the middle room: He muſt go many ſteps before he come to be as near you as the other is. Now ſuppoſe you offer to take them by the hand when they come to the upper Stairs, and give them ſome other ſufficient help to come up the lower ſteps: If theſe men will not uſe the help given them to aſcend the firſt ſteps (though intreated) who can be blamed but themſelves if they come not to the top? It is not your fault but theirs that they have not your hand to lift them up at the laſt ſtep. So is our preſent caſe. Worldlings, and ſenſual ignorant ſinners, have many ſteps to aſcend before they come to Juſtifying Faith: and Heathens have many ſteps before they come as far as ungodly Chriſtians (as might eaſily be manifeſted by enumeration of ſeveral neceſſary particulars.) Now if theſe will not uſe that ſufficient help that Chriſt gives them to come the firſt or ſecond or third ſtep, who is it long of that they have not Faith?
Obj. But here you vent two points of Arminianiſm, one, that there is ſufficient Grace which is not effectual: The other, that God will give men Spiritual Bleſſings on the good uſe of natural.
Anſw. No Arminianiſm at all.
I. I ſay not that God giveth all men ſufficient Grace to Salvation, or to Believe.
II. That there is ſuch a thing in rerum naturâ, as ſufficient Grace, not effectual, as it is confeſſed by Dr. Twiſs, ſo it is undeniably proved.
1. In the caſe of Adam, who had ſufficient Grace to have ſtood (or elſe all the ſin and miſery in the World muſt come principally from Gods denial of ſufficient Grace, before ever man did treſpaſs.) Yet the event ſhewed that hat Grace was not effectual.
2. From the Caſe of the Godly, who have ſufficient Grace to think, ſpeak, and do more good, and leſs evil than they do.
3. From the Caſe of the Wicked, who have ſufficient Grace to enable them to do leſs evil than they do, and uſe more means for the geting of Grace to Salvation. They might paſs by an Ale-houſe Door, and might go to a Sermon when they go to a Whore: and might go among good company when they go to bad.
To the ſecond point I anſwer.
I. I ſay not that God gives Spirituals, on our right uſe of Naturals: but that God gives Special Grace, on our right uſe of Common Grace; Or rather that he may moſt juſtly deny men ſpecial Grace, that will not make that uſe of Common Grace as they might.
II. And I do not ſay, that God hath any where promiſed to give men Special Grace, if they will uſe well their Common Grace. For God hath not thought meet to make any ſuch Covenant with Unbelievers; nor to engage himſelf to them, but when he giveth the firſt Special Grace for Repenting and Believing he doth it as not pre-engaged to do it; and therefore as Dominus Abſolutus, and not per legem premiantem. (And therefore the Papiſts in their Language ſay, the firſt Grace is not of merit, at leaſt of Condignity.)
Obj. Then they that come not the firſt ſtep are excuſable; for if they had come to the ſtep next Believing, they had no aſſurance that Chriſt would have given them Faith.
Anſ. No ſuch matter: For though they had no aſſurance, they had both Gods Command to ſeek more Grace, and ſufficient encouragement thereto: They had ſuch as Mr. Cotton calls half promiſes, that is a diſcovery of a poſſibility, and high degree of probability of obtaining; as Peter to Simon [Pray if perhaps the thoughts of thy heart may be forgiven.]
They may think God will not appoint men vain means, and he hath appointed ſome means to all men to get more grace, and bring them nearer Chriſt than they are. Yea, no man can name that man ſince the World was made, that did his beſt in the uſe of theſe means, and loſt his labour.
So that if all men have not Faith, it is their own fault; not only as Originally Sinners, but as rejecting ſufficient Grace to have brought them nearer Chriſt than they were; for which it is that they juſtly periſh (as is more fully opened in the Diſpute of ſufficient Grace.
I think now I may fafely conclude, that there is no proof yet brought that Chriſt will give Faith to all that he dyed for, but the contrary I have proved.