Defense of the Report, Part 2 · Section 7
VII. In what Confeſſions are the Terms or Phraſes, ſo much contended for to be found?
My Brother is very confident, that the Phraſe of a Change of Perſons between Chriſt and Us, and his taking on him the Perſon of Sinners is not in any one Confeſſion of Faith. For, ſaith he,
Faithful Rebuke.
Obſerve further, That the Phraſe of a Change of Perſons between Chriſt and Us, and his taking upon him the Perſon of Sinners, are Terms wholly Unknown to thoſe Confeſſions and Articles, which were made the Teſt of ſoundneſs in the Faith, by the United Miniſters, nay, if you have the leiſure, ſearch the whole Body of Confeſſions of the Reformed Churches from Helvetia to Tranſilvania, thence to America, and you ſhall not find theſe Terms, Phraſes, or Expreſſions in any one of them. p. 17.
Reply.
1. This ſtrong Aſſurance of my Brother brings to my remembrance a paſſage I have met with in Mr. Baxters Catholick Theology of a Jocular Contemptuous Defendant; who, whilſt He pretended to have a Commiſſion from all the Syſtematical Divines of Germany, was ſo Charitably Uncharitable as to ſay, That never a man in his Wits affirmed, That the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt was the Formal Cauſe of our Iuſtification. (Append. to the Praemun. par. 2.) whereas, on the other hand, Davenant, who was far from being a Madman, or from repreſenting the Proteſtants to be ſo, doth aſſure us, That it is the common ſenſe of all our Divines, that the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, imputed to us, is the Formal Cauſe of our Juſtification, and as to what pertains to the thing it ſelf, not one Proteſtant Divine has either ſpoke, or written otherwiſe. Praelect. de Juſtit. hab. c. 22.
This Over-bold, Raſh, and Untrue Aſſertion of the Jocular Defendant, ran in my Mind as ſoon as I entred on the Examination of what the Rebuker here ſays, not only becauſe He has as little reaſon for what he ſays, but upon another account. For,
2. Do we in good earneſt preſs for what hath not the countenance ſo much as of One Confeſſion of Faith? This would really be hard, and Provocation ſufficient to ſtir up his Ange… againſt the offended Brethren. To whom, in Anſwer I do declare, that if I had not found theſe phraſes in ſome Publick Confeſſions; nay, if I had not met with them in the Holy Scriptures, I would have been ſilent and never have put Pen to Paper, on this occaſion. Miſtake me not, my meaning is, that the things ſignified by theſe Terms and Phraſes, are expreſly in our Confeſſions, and in the Holy Scriptures too; and perhaps it may appear that the phraſe moſt expoſed by him, will be found to be literally in one or other Confeſſion.
3. That I may ſet what I now declare in the cleareſt light, I muſt obſerve unto you,
1. That the phraſes, of a Commutation, or Change of Perſons between Chriſt and us; of Chriſts ſuſtaining our Perſon; of his being Subſtituted into our room; and his Suffering in our Place and Stead, are ſo nearly Allied to each other, that they are as Hypocrates his Twins; they Live and Dye together. Grant one and all neceſſarily come in with it; oppoſe but any one of 'em in the genuine meaning, and you oppoſe all of'em.
The Phraſe of Chriſts Dying in our Place and Stead, as it imports ſomewhat more than for our good, implies a Subſtitution of Chriſt into our Place, which cannot be without a change of Perſons between Chriſt and Us; or without Chriſts ſuſtaining our Perſon. If then any one of theſe phraſes be found in any one Confeſſion, there is an owning all the reſt.
2. Thoſe Scriptures, which ſpeak of Chriſts Dying for us; of his being a Sacrifice; and of his being our Surety to ſatisfie the Law for us, do all import Chriſts Suffering in our ſtead, his being Subſtituted in our Place, a change of Perſons between him and us, and his ſuſtaining our Perſon in ſuffering.
What I here aſſert is ſo clear, that there is no doubt of it amongſt the Orthodox, who throughly underſtand this Controverſie. Yea further,
3. Theſe controverted phraſes do expreſs what is eſſential unto a Real, Proper and Plenary ſatisfaction to Gods Juſtice for our ſins, and upon this account, in what confeſſion ſoever ſuch a ſatisfaction is aſſerted, there theſe phraſes are owned.
If then I can direct to the Confeſſion, where either a Proper Satisfaction is aſſerted; or, where 'tis declared, that Chriſt as our Surety ſuffered for us; or, that Chriſt ſuffered in our Place and Stead; or ſtood in our Perſon, when He Died, I hope it may ſatisfie any unprejudiced perſon, that the phraſes Contended for are in our Confeſſions; and if I ſhew that all theſe laſt mentioned are in ſome publick Confeſſions or Catechiſms, why may it not be enough to remove my Brother from his Faſtneſſes; and oblige him to conclude, that they who plead for their uſe are not ſo ſingular as he has Inſinuated?
Theſe things Praemiſed, our firſt Enquiry muſt be,
1. In what Confeſſion is a proper Satisfaction owned? Go to the Aſſemblies, cap. 8. ſect. 8. and there you may read, That the Lord Jeſus by his Perfect Obedience and Sacrifice of himſelf, hath fully ſatisfied the Juſtice of his Father. And cap. 11. ſect. 3. Chriſt by his Death and Obedience did make a Proper, Real, and Full Satisfaction to his Fathers Juſtice on their behalf. The ſame is repeated in the larger Catechiſm in anſwer to the Queſtion, What is Juſtification? and to that which follows it.
If my Brother can't ſee in the aſſertion of [a Proper, Real and Full Satisfaction made for us by Chriſt to the Juſtice of God.] the Phraſe [of a Change of Perſons between Chriſt and Us,] it is not becauſe it's not there. For in a Proper Satisfaction, whatever is eſſential thereunto, as a Commutation, or Change of Perſons between Chriſt and Us is, is contained; and whoever underſtands the true nature of a proper Satisfaction, cannot but ſee it. However for the ſake of the leſs ſtudied, I will by a very plain inſtance Illuſtrate thus much; affirming, that all ſound Believers are Diſcharged from that Obligation to Puniſhment they lay under for their paſt ſins, that the Obligation unto Puniſhment, is in their caſe, diſſolv'd, that this is the Doctrine embraced by the Reformed. Now, if my Brother demands of me, in what Confeſſion of Faith is this phraſe [of Diſſolving the Obligation to Puniſhment] to be found; In anſwer, I'll refer him to the Aſſemblies Confeſſion. cap. 11. ſect. 1. Thoſe whom God Effectually calleth, he alſo Freely Juſtifieth — by Pardoning their Sins. If he ſaith, he can't in this place ſee the phraſe [of Diſſolving the Obligation to Puniſhment.] I'll tell him, it is there, tho' he can't ſee it, for in the Pardon of ſin it is, it being Eſſential unto Pardon, that the Obligation unto Puniſhment be diſſolv'd, to talk of the Pardon of a ſinner whilſt he continues to lye under the Obligation unto Puniſhment, is to Trifle, and to ſay, that the diſſolving the Obligation to Puniſhment cannot be read, where the Pardon of ſin is expreſſed, is to talk after ſuch a manner as Modeſty wont give me leave to call by its moſt proper name.
The ſame is true of Chriſts Satisfaction, and a Commutation of Perſons between Chriſt and Us; for, a Commutation of Perſons between Chriſt and Us, is as eſſential unto a proper Satisfaction, as the diſſolving the Obligation to Puniſhment is unto Pardon of ſin.
2. The phraſe [of Chriſts ſuffering in our place and ſtead, ] as it imports ſomewhat more than for our good, implies a Commutation of Perſons between Christ and Ʋs; and ſignifieth the ſame with Chriſts ſuffering in our Perſon, as our Surety.
That it is thus underſtood by the Orthodox, I have already cleared, and to what hath been ſaid, I will add the Judgment of the Palatinate Divines, which they delivered into the Synod of Dort, which was, That one Errour, amongſt the many embraced by the Remonstrants, was [the ſame which my Brother has in his Rebuke, viz.] That to Die for ſinners must not be understood, as if Christ died Loco, aut vice ipſorum, in their Place and Stead, ſed bono tantum, but only for their good.
This Errour theſe Divines, (in what they have ſaid on the ſecond of the five Articles) did confute, aſſerting, in oppoſition unto them, that Chriſt our Surety according to the Scriptures died Loco Peccatorum, in the place of ſinners, which in their Orthodox Antitheſis they thus explain, partim Loco, partim bono ipſorum. And it was Decreed by this Synod, That whereas we were unable of our ſelves to ſatisfie Gods Juſtice, and deliver our ſelves from his Wrath, God of his Immenſe Mercy, gave his only begotten Son to be a Surety for us; who, that he might make Satisfaction for us, was made Sin, and a Curſe on the Croſs for us, or vice nostra, or in our ſtead.
This Decree was about the year 1623. received by the Reformed in France in the Synod of Charenton, and ſubſcribed by the Paſtors and Elders of the ſaid Synod, with a Proteſtation in the Preſence of God, that through his grace, they would never depart from it; decreeing that it ſhould be inviolably obſerved by all the Churches, and Univerſities in that Kingdom.
And, in the Aſſemblies Confeſſion, Cap. 11. Sect. 3. it is expreſs, That Chriſts Obedience and Satisfaction was accepted in their ſtead; and why accepted in their ſtead? but becauſe Chriſt obeyed and ſatisfied in their ſtead? which, as I have ſhown, is as much as to ſay, Chriſt obeyed and ſatisfied in our Perſon. But of this more immediately under the next Head.
3. The Term [Surety] when applyed to Chriſt, as ſuffering for our ſins, denotes to us a Change of Perſons between him and us, and his ſuſtaining our Perſon, in his ſufferings.
Thus much is ſo evident, that they who have any tollerable Acquaintance with this Controverſie, and oppoſe the Phraſes of a Change of Perſons between Christ and us, and of Chriſts ſuſtaining our Perſon, do alſo deny that Chriſt ſuffered as our Surety. Mr. Ws. himſelf therefore Rejects Chriſts being under the Law of Works, as our Surety, upon the old Socinian Bottom, as ſaid to be inconſiſtent with the Free Pardon of Sin. Man made Right. p. 92, 96. And my Brothers many diſcerning Heads do not only Reject Chriſts taking on him the Perſon of Sinners, as a Phraſe that can't bear a Sound Senſe, but they alſo Reject this other Phraſe [of Chriſts being conſidered in Relation to us, as our Surety, bearing our ſins in his own Body] and leaſt thus much ſhould have been inferr'd from that other Phraſe of [Chriſts feeling and bearing the Weight of Gods Wrath] it is alſo Rejected as what is lyable to a Senſe and Sound of Malignity to the whole of the Goſpel.
Now, if I muſt believe, as my Brother ſuggeſts, that theſe alterations and the Rejecting of theſe Phraſes is upon the aſſigned Reaſons is the deliberate Act of the whole Body, compoſed of many diſcerning Heads, that ſtill profeſs a Zeal for all the Doctrines contained in the Aſſemblies Confeſſion; Larger and ſhorter Catechiſm. I muſt declare, God knows, with a ſincere deſire, it may be with brokenneſs of Heart, and the deepeſt Humiliation, that our Caſe, in this regard, is more deplorable than I am willing to ſuggeſt, tho' I can't but reflect on the Calamitous Condition, into which our Brethren in France have fallen, ſince they omitted to witneſs ſo fully as they ſhould have done againſt Armyraldian Incroachments made on the Common Faith of Proteſtants, eſpecially ſeeing they are now out done, by ſome amongſt our ſelves.
If Chriſt was not as our Surety, made under the Law; If he did not endure the moſt grievous Torments, immediately in his Soul, and moſt painful Sufferings in his Body, as feeling and bearing the Weight of Gods Wrath due to us for our ſins, how ſhall we be able to ſtand before the Bar of God in the great day? Will the Lord be pleaſed with thouſands of Rams, or with ten thouſands of Rivers of Oyl? Shall I give my Firſt-born for my Tranſgreſſion, the Fruit of my Body for the Sin of my Soul? Theſe things can't ſatisfie Gods Juſtice, nor appeaſe his Wrath, nor make an Attonement for our Sin. It muſt be Chriſts Suffering in our ſtead, his bearing our ſins in his Body, as our Surety, and feeling, and bearing the Weight of Gods Wrath for our Sins, that alone can ſave us.
But theſe Phraſes, tho' they were in the Firſt Paper, are waved, and left out of the Third, becauſe, as my Brother ſays, they can't bear a ſound Senſe, &c. whilſt a Zeal is pretended for the Aſſemblies Confeſſion and Catechiſm, in which the rejected Doctrines are literally aſſerted. In the Confeſſion, Cap. 8. Sect. 3, 'tis expreſs, That the Father called the Lord Chriſt to the Office of a Mediator, and Surety: And in Sect. 4. this Office the Lord Chriſt did moſt willingly undertake, which that he might diſcharge, he was made under the Law, and did perfectly fulfil it, endured moſt grievous Torments in his Soul, and moſt painful Sufferings in his Body.
Theſe things the Lord Chriſt endured as our Surety; which is more fully delivered in Anſwer to that Queſtion, How is Juſtification an Act of Gods Free Grace? In which you will ſee Mr. Ws. his Objection againſt Chriſts being under the Bonds of the Law, as our Surety, taken from a ſuppoſed inconſiſtency between it and the forgiveneſs of our Sins fully removed, in that it's there declared, Altho' Chriſt, by his Obedience and Death, did make a Proper, Real and Full Satisfaction to Gods Juſtice; yet in as much as God accepteth the Satisfaction from a Surety, which he might have demanded of them, did provide this Surety, his own only Son, imputing his Righteouſneſs to them, and requiring nothing of them for their Juſtification but Faith, which alſo is his gift, their Justification is to them, of Free-Grace.
But if Chriſt, as our Surety, doth ſo, will it not follow, that he paid our Debts? Yes, it will; And ſo, ſaith the Aſſembly, Confeſ. Cap. 11. § 3. Chriſt, by his Obedience and Death, did fully diſcharge the Debt of all thoſe that are thus Juſtified, and did make a proper, real, and full Satisfaction. Did he not then feel and bear the Weight of Gods Wrath? Ay, he did ſo: And thus much is affirmed by the Aſſembly in the ſame Words, it is rejected by the many diſcerning Heads; For, in Anſwer to this Queſtion▪ How did Chriſt humble himſelf in his Death? It is in the Larger Catechiſm, thus, Chriſt humbled himſelf in that, having been betrayed by Judas—and having alſo conflicted with the Terrors of Death, and the powers of Darkneſs, felt and bore the weight of Gods Wrath; he laid down his Life an Offering for ſin.
Whether a Rejecting the Phraſes of Chriſts bearing our Sins in his Body, as our Surety, and his feeling and bearing the weight of Gods Wrath, be not a Contravening a Doctrinal Article, eſtabliſhed by the Aſſembly, at Weſtminſter? and whether this Brother who doth ſo, ought not to be Cenſured by the Body of the Ʋnited Miniſters, if we may be ever ſo bleſſed, as to ſee ſuch a Meeting once more. I ſubmit to more diſcerning Heads; and ſure I am, that, however this Matter may iſſue, it's plain enough to me, that the Controverted Phraſes are owned by the Synod of Dort…, eſtabliſhed in the Reformed Churches in France, as well as by the Aſſembly of Learned, Judicious, Godly and Orthodox Divines at Westminſter.
Well, but tho' I had leiſure to look into all the Confeſſions at home; or ſearch the whole Body of Confeſſions of the Reformed Churches from Helvetia to Tranſylvania, thence to America, can I find, in any one of them, the leaſt Countenance given to theſe Terms, Phraſes, or Expreſſions? Or is it poſſible to Obſerve in any one of them, ſo much as a ſmile on that Phraſe of Chriſts ſuffering in our Perſon? I anſwer,
1. What, tho' I can't? Is it not enough that I have ſhown, that the Controverted Phraſes are included in the Acknowledgment of Chriſts making a proper Satisfaction to Gods Iuſtice for us? And that they are all virtually owned, which in ſundry Confeſſions and Synods, which have openly Received the Phraſe of Chriſts ſuffering in our Stead, as it ſignifyeth more than for our good, and is of the ſame Import with Chriſts ſuffering in our Perſon, but the owning that Chriſt as our Surety, felt and bore the weight of Gods Wrath, ſhould, methinks, be ſufficient. However,
2. That my Brother may ſee, that without going ſo far as Helvetia, Tranſylvania or America, we may find enough nearer home to convince him, that he has very little, or no Reaſon for his aſſuming way of Writing, I will only take a turn into Scotland, where we ſhall find this very Phraſe of Christs dying in our Perſon, inſerted in their Confeſſion of Faith, It became the Meſſiah, and Redeemer to be True God, and True Man, becauſe he was to ſuffer the Puniſhments due for our ſins, and to appear, [quaſi in Perſona noſtrâ, coram Judicio Patris pro noſtrâ tranſgreſſione, & in obedientiâ pati, morte, mortis authorem ſuperare] in our Perſon, before the Judgment Seat of the Father to ſuffer for our Tranſgreſſions, and by death to deſtroy him that had power over Death. Vid. Carp. Confeſ. Ed. an. 1612. pag. 142.
Here you ſee that the Church of Scotland above a hundred years ago, uſed this very Phraſe, which, my Brother aſſured us, could not be found in any one Confeſſion: and which, he ſays, doth make a Blaſphemous Repreſentation of Gods Love in the Redemption of falen Man, but I hope, when he ſhall be ſo far recovered as to be able to entertain ſome free Thoughts, on this Subject, he will do his part, to repair the Breaches he has, by his Rebuke, made on one of the Chief Articles of our Holy Religion, and do what in him lyeth, to clear the Orthodox from thoſe unjuſt Reproaches he has covered them with, by making them to hold and defend Blaſphemous Opinions in their uſe and defence of the Controverted Phraſes; And that it may be thus, it ſhall be my Prayer, and I deſire it may be alſo the Prayer of all them who love the Lord Jeſus in ſincerity.
There is one thing more needful to be ſpoken unto, before I cloſe my Reply: It is the Third and Laſt general Head, I have propoſed to be conſidered.