The Life of Faith, Chapter 2
CHAP. II. Of our Union with Chriſt, what it is not, viz. Eſſential, Perſonal, Corporeal, a meer Union of affections: Joh. 17.21. and Gal. 2.20. vindicated: the effects of this Union ſhewed by divers ſimilitudes; how this Union is by Faith; of the legal Union betwixt Chriſt and the Elect before Faith, by ſome aſſerted; the relation betwixt Chriſt and his Elect as the neceſſary foundation of his ſatisfaction.
IT being ſo that Chriſt is the original and fountain of a Beleevers life, I muſt begin the proof of what I have taken in hand to clear, with the Union which is betwixt Chriſt and beleevers, this being the foundation of our Communion with him. Joh. 14.20. our Saviour tells his Diſciples, that after his Reſurrection, when they ſhould receive a more full meaſure of the Spirit, they ſhould know two great myſteries, his Union with the Father, and his Union with them, whereby they did, as it were, mutually poſſeſs each other; of this Union we read further, Joh. 17.21, 23. 1 Cor. 12.12.
Now, if any ask me what this Union is, I muſt tell them, I know not; Chriſtianus ad multa respondere poteſt Ignoro, ſaith Austin, If I ſhould ſay, it is a myſtical union, I do in effect ſay, it is ſuch an Union as I do not underſtand, Eph. 5.32. yet as they ſay, we may know God per viam remotionis vel negationis, & per viam cauſalitatis: So I may tell you what this Union is not, and what the effects of it are.
1. It is not an eſſential Union, as ſome have boldly affirmed; for this would infer an equality of power, holineſs, wiſdom, &c. that is, make the creature not only perfect, in holineſs, but omnipotent, omniſcient; the infiniteneſs and perfection of all excellencies being of the Eſſence of the Godhead.
And for that place, John 17.21. it is forced to ſerve two Hypotheſes. Some thence deny the Deity of Chriſt, becauſe it is but ſuch an Union that is between the Father and the Son, as is betwixt Chriſt and believers. Others would thence infer an eſſential Union betwixt Chriſt and Believers, becauſe it is ſuch an Union as is betwixt the Father and the Son. But the place will ſerve neither of their purpoſes, ſignifying, as Matt. 5.48. only ſome kinde of ſimilitude, no equality, as Glaſſius hath fully proved, Gram. ſacr. 501. &c.
2. This Union is not a perſonal Union, as ſome ſtrangely ſpeak, (ſee W. Dell. on Gal. 2.20.) The whole proceſs of the laſt Judgment (as ſet down Matth. 25.31, &c.) fully proves, that Chriſt and Believers remain diſtinct perſons, and that place, Gal. 2.20. is not to be underſtood literally, for then there were a plain contradiction in it. But Chriſt is ſaid to live in us, becauſe he makes us live, as will appear by comparing Rom. 8.15. with Galat. 4.6. in one place the ſpirit is ſaid to cry, in another place to make us cry. Nos clamamus, ſed ille clamaredictus eſt, qui facit ut nos clamemus, ſaith Auſtin de correp. & Grat. c. 15. And the Apoſtle ſpeaks in that place, as in 1 Cor. 15.10. but as one afraid of ſeeming to aſſume to himſelf, and derogate from the Grace of Jeſus Chriſt.
3. It is not a corporeal Union, as the Papiſts would prove from John 6.56. that place is interpreted literally, only to ſerve their hypotheſis of tranſubſtantiation.
4. It is not a meer Union of affections, ſuch as was in the primitive Chriſtians, Acts 4.32. or in the ten Kings, Rev. 17.13. though there is ſuch an union of affections, 1 Cor. 6.17. Phil. 2.5. yet this is but the effect of a nearer Union, which (though we fully underſtand not its nature) is ſet forth to us by ſeveral ſimilitudes, as of a vine and its branches, John 15.1. &c. Of an head and members, 1 Cor. 12.11. Of an husband and wife, Eph. 5.32. all which ſhew the effects of this union, denoting the influence of divine power and vertue, which believers have from Jeſus Chriſt: the ſympathy that he hath with them: their ſubjection to his guidance, and direction: the protection which they have, and freedome from the Law by Jeſus Chriſt: as a woman under the covert of her husband: But of theſe things in their place.
I now come to ſhew how this Union is made up by Faith; which I prove,
Firſt, from 2 Cor. 13.5. where being in the Faith, and Chriſt being in them, are made indifferently a proof of Chriſt ſpeaking in the Apoſtles, Of the ſenſe and contexture of that place, See the Animadverſions of Sr. Norton Knatchbull.
2. Chriſt dwells in the heart by faith, Epheſ. 3.17. he ſtands and knocks, and Faith is the opening to him, Rev. 3.20. when Lydia believed her heart was opened.
3. By Faith we are eſpouſed to Jeſus Chriſt, 2 Cor. 11.2. As the marriage Union is made by the conſent of both parties, ſo is this Union betwixt Chriſt and the ſoul; Chriſt hath given his conſent by the offer and promiſe of the Goſpel, and the ſoul conſents, when by faith it accepts this offer, and layes hold on this Promiſe.
4. By faith we are made the ſons of God, John 1.12. Gal. 3.26. and conſequently Partakers of the ſpirit, Gal. 4.6. Some indeed ſpeak of an Union betwixt Chriſt and the elect before Faith, by his Incarnation, which they call a legal Union, or a ſtipulatory Union, ſuch as is betwixt a Debtor and his Surety, which they make neceſſary to his ſatisfaction, ſince, as they ſay, unitas praeſtantis eſt fundamentum proprietatis ad officium praeſtitum: others again load this with dreadfull conſequences, making it the foundation of Antinomianiſme, the ruine of Chriſtian Religion, leaving no room for Remiſſion of ſinnes. I dare not peremptorily define in ſuch a caſe, yet it ſeems to me at preſent, that there muſt be ſome relation betwixt Chriſt & his elect, whereby his ſatiſfaction becomes available for them, & whereby he may obtain for them ſpiritual bleſſings wherwith they are bleſt in him, Eph. 1.3. amongſt which faith is to be certainly reckoned. But the forementioned conſequences of the former Doctrine, (as underſtood by them that maintain it) I cannot ſo clearly apprehend. If we have recourſe to the civil Law for the proof of them, which tells us, that every obligation is taken away by the payment of the debt; that tells us alſo, that vicarius paena corporalis cannot properly pay the debt: for in ſuch a caſe, that holds, dum alius ſolvit, aliud etiam ſolvitur. And if it be ſaid, it is the ſame in ſenſ… civili, though not in ſenſu phyſico; I anſwer, in ſtrictneſs noxa ſequitur caput, and aliud pro alio invito creditori, ſolvi non poteſt, Myn ſinger, in lib. 3. Inſtitut. Tit. 30. ſo that God did, in diſpenſing with the perſon, uti ſuo jure, and by an act of ſupream Dominion ſubſtitute Chriſt in our ſtead; wherefore it was free for him to appoint himſelf upon what termes the Obligation ſhould be taken away: and here was room enough left for Remiſſion. I will but refer to Grotius, de ſatisfac. c. 6. where he ſets down what the true notion of remiſſion is, and ſhews that there is properly Remiſſion, where an act of the rector or Creditor doth intervene, to make a ſolution valid: antecedently to which act, ſuch a ſolution may be admitted or refuſed: and that ſuch an act doth here intervene is evident, which ſeems to be a diſpenſation, unleſs we will underſtand interpretation in as large a ſenſe as Suarez, l. 6. de legibus, cap. 1. S. 3. And further, Grotius doth in the ſame place yield, that ſolution ejuſdem doth not ipſo facto liberare: unleſs it be with this intention, ut reus liberetur. So that whatever Chriſt paid, it might be that the ſinner might be freed, at ſuch a time, or on ſuch termes as ſhould be agreed on between the Father and the Son. Whereas ſome ſay, what Chriſt did or ſuffer'd, was as a Mediator, this will not prove, that he was not ſponſor: the ſame perſon may be Mediator and Surety, as the learned Parker hath proved by the examples of Judah, Gen. 43.8, 9. and Paul, Philem. 9.18. de deſcenſu, lib. 3. Sec. 95. We ſhould as carefully avoid Socinianiſm in this caſe, as Antinomianiſm. Aquinas, p. 3. quaeſt. 49. Art. 1. c. goeth as far as any man, for he ſaith plainly, that the Redemption of Chriſt becomes available to the Remiſſion of our ſinnes, as he is our head, and we his members, as the hand may do ſomething to ſatisfie for the fault which hath been committed by the foot: becauſe actiones ſunt ſuppoſitorum. I have ſometime wondered, how this place of Aquinas eſcaped Mr. Wottons cenſure, (de Reconciliatione, P. 1. l. 2. cap. 10. N. 3. & cap. 16. N. 9. where he cites it) conſidering how he diſputes P. 2. L. 1. C. 16. &c. But to leave this digreſſion; Whatever the Relation was betwixt Chriſt and his Elect, as the foundation of his Satisfaction, yet that which according to Scripture may moſt properly be called our Union with him, is not before we believe, when we become actual partakers of the benefits of his death, as will more fully appear in the following Chapter.