The Sum of Christian Religion, Animadversions · justice
The Epiſtle of D. David Parie to the illuſtrious and noble Count, Lord Ludovick Witgenstenius, &c.
CONCERNING Chriſts active and paſsive juſtice.
Illuſtrious and noble Count,
IN that I anſwer your demand later then is fitting, I humbly intreat, that you will not impute this to any fault or neglect in mee: For I acknowledge, that you have deſerved ſo well of the Church in generall, as of my ſelfe in particular, that your beck ſhall command both willing and deſerved ſervice from mee. A concatenation of buſineſſe hath hitherto withheld and pulled mee back, now and then, from that which I had heretofore begun to write: but, that I may ſpeak plainly and ingenuouſly, I deſire not to interpoſe my judgement in matters of controverſie; becauſe I am conſcious of mine owne weakneſſe that way: as likewiſe in regard of that affection I have to peace, which I have alwaies loved, I am averſe from medling with ſtrange controverſies, and eſpecially, with this of Juſtice; which makes me feare, I know not how,foreign. that it will prove both beneficiall and hurt full to our Churches. We know, that the reformation of doctrine in our times began from this head; I wiſh it may not end in this. The Scripture phraſe is plain and ſimple, That we are juſtified by the bloud and death of Chriſt; and, that our juſtification conſiſteth in remiſſion of ſins. Now, the diſpute is, Whether we are juſtified by the death of Chriſt? whether by it alone? whether it be temporarie? whether the matter, by imputation of which we are juſtified, be one, or multiplied; ſimple, or made up of parts; two, or three? Whether the imputation be one, or double, or triple? Whether remiſſion of ſins be whole, or halfe of our juſtification, and I know not what elſe? In which, my judgement is, that there is more dangerous ſubtletie, then ſolid veritie; and, that many worke more with their wit, then with their faith. And theſe digladiations are not onelyonly in our neighbour countries exerciſed, but are alſo every-where ſpread abroad, and diverſly agitated, according to the acuteneſſe of mens wits. In another corner, not far from you,foreign. there is riſen another ſtrife, more dangerous, concerning Gods vindicative juſtice, whether it is naturally or voluntarily in God: That, as God will raine, or not raine to morrow, his nature requiting none of theſe; ſo, whether he will puniſh, or not puniſh the ſins of Divels and wicked men, his nature requiring neither of theſe: which, ſome, ſeaſoned with Socinian ſubtleties, have begun lately to move. By which craft, Satan (doubtleſſe) goeth about to undermine the neceſſitie of ſatiſfaction; and, withall, Chriſts ſatisfaction for us; and conſequently, our whole faith, and utterly to deſtroy theſe: For it is not unknowne, that Socinian nicities aime at this. Good God! what meanes this itching humour of arguing, and this luſt of innovating and pulling up of every thing? Whatſoever yeſternight they dreamed of, to day they utter it in their Pulpits, as if they were Oracles; and with great eagerneſſe defend: to morrow they are of another opinion, and they change their opinions, as often as they doe their clothes; as though there were not already too many ſtrifes, and monſtrous opinions in the Church. I feare, leſt theſe ſparkes ſhortly burſt out into a flame, which will by degrees ſet our Churches in a combuſtion, if we be not the more watchfull: Therefore, Noble Count, your ſingular care and ſtudie deſerve high commendation, in that (out of your grave wiſdome and excellent pietie) you doe not ſlightly paſſe over theſe increaſing evils; but you perceive that you are concerned, when your neighbours houſe is on fire: and therefore you endeavour to find out fit remedies for theſe freſh wounds. As for my ſelfe, although I confeſſe that I am not willing to meddle with this controverſie, but by all meanes deſire it may be buried; both becauſe I judge it unworthy of our Churches, and Evangelicall Schooles, eſpecially in this cleere light of Scripture and Reformation; as alſo, becauſe I perceive our Adverſaries take occaſion to oppreſſe the truth by our wranglings; then laſtly, becauſe whatſoever I ſay, will preſently be thought a caſting of oile into the fire, as the Proverb is, by reaſon of the heat of ſome, who are ſo violent in maintaining this cauſe, that they can ſcarce abide their brethren, if they be of another opinion. Notwithſtanding, ſeeing what in this caſe is demanded from mee, is not diſſonant to mine office and profeſſion, I ſhall think it no burthen, freely to deliver mine opinion of this queſtion: and that I may anſwer in order to all your Lordſhips interrogatories, I will firſt of all briefly touch the chiefe opinions and reaſons of moment in this controverſie; to wit, 1. Whether Chriſts paſſive juſtice alone, or his active alſo, be imputed to us for righteouſneſſe. 2. I will in few words unfold what I think of other mens opinions, and of the beſt way to procure concord in this caſe. 3. Whether it be fit to handle this Argument poſitively, and refutatively in popular Sermons. 4. I will briefly give mine opinion, if it be needfull to leave out, or to put out any paſſages in the Palatinate Catechiſme and Directorie.
As for the firſt head, That the ſtate of the controverſie may be better underſtood, we muſt know in what theſe Diſputers agree, or diſagree. They all agree, 1. That to juſtifie, in that ſenſe it is uſed in the Courts of Juſtice, (ſignifieth to abſolve from guilt, and to repute one juſt. 2. That wee ſinners are juſtified before God, not legally, but evangelically; that is, not by workes, but by faith: not by our owne, but by anothers juſtice. 3. That this juſtice of another is not infuſed, but imputed by God to the faithfull, and that freely. 4. That the application of imputed juſtice is done by faith onelyonly; and, that to be juſtified by faith, is the ſame that is to be juſtified by the juſtice of another imputed, and by faith applied. 5. That this externall juſtice is the merit of Chriſt alone, and his ſatisfaction for us, or Chriſts righteouſneſſe imputed to us.
But they diſagree in the explication of this merit, or of Chriſts juſtice: Firſt, as the juſtice of God in Scripture equivocally ſignifieth ſometimes that, by which God himſelfe is juſt; ſometimes that, by which he juſtifieth us: So, the juſtice of Chriſt equivocally is called that, by which Chriſt, God and man, is juſt; as alſo that, which hee hath merited for us, and which by faith hee beſtoweth on us: the neglect of this equivocation is the cauſe of all the controverſie.
Againe, when in Chriſt, as God and man, there is a foure-fold juſtice affirmed by ſome: 1. His divine or eſſentiall. 2. His humane, or formall, or originall. 3. His active filling of the Law. 4. His paſſive obedience; the queſtion is, Whether all theſe juſtices, or ſome, or the laſt onelyonly, be that thing, by the imputation of which, we are juſtified? Some call this the matter, others the forme of our juſtice; I, to be better underſtood, will call it the matter.
This queſtion hath drawne with it another, concerning the forme of our juſtification, whether remiſſion of ſins be the whole, or onelyonly the halfe of our juſtification? And ſo far, as I can remember, this controverſie began firſt to be in agitation amongſt ſome Divines of Marchia, about the yeare 64. then in the yeare 70. by the mediation of the Univerſity of Witteberg, it was in ſome ſort laid aſleep, or rather ſuppreſſed: heretofore it was unknowne to the Reformed Churches; neither is there any mention or diſpute of it, for ought I know, in the writings of Luther, Melancthon, Zuinglius, Calvin, Martyr, Muſculus, Hyperius, or of the other Divines of this Age. But the ſimple doctrine of Scripture, was received by conſent of all, to wit, that we are juſtified by the death of Chriſt, whereas by it we have remiſſion of ſins. Now, there are in a manner foure opinions, which, whilſt I am writing, I thinke of Lombard, who rehearſeth alſo foure opinions of his ſide,Lib. 3. d. 19. concerning Juſtification, he himſelfe being ignorant what to thinke.
The firſt ſort are they, who will have all theſe foure juſtices of Chriſt at once to be imputed to us; to them the matter of juſtification is the foure-fold righteouſneſſe of Chriſt; the forme, the quadripartite imputation: yet, this they reduce ſometimes to two parts; to wit, the remiſſion of ſins by the death of Chriſt, and the imputation of Chriſts righteouſneſſe, divine, humane, active, &c. and the proper reaſon of theſe is, that whole of Chriſt, God and man, is our Saviour, King, and Prieſt, &c. and that the dignity of Chriſts merit, eſpecially from the dignity of the perſon, that is, of the divinity, hath its dependence.
Others will have the three latter juſtices of Chriſt to be the matter, and the three-fold imputation of them, to be the forme of juſtification: And they teach, that firſt is imputed to us the paſſive obedience, to this end, that we may not be unjuſt; that is, for remiſſion of ſins. Secondly, the active obedience, for this end, that we may be juſt; that is, to righteouſneſſe. Thirdly, the formall, or, as they call it, the habituall ſanctity, for this end, that we may be accounted holy; that is, to perfect holineſſe.
The third ſort make the two latter juſtices onelyonly of Chriſt the matter of juſtification, and the two-fold imputation of them, the forme of juſtification. All theſe three agree in this, that they diſtinguiſh remiſſion of ſins and juſtification, as the part and the whole, ſometime alſo as the integrall parts of the whole; and the former they attribute to the death of Chriſt, the latter to his active obedience: they all likewiſe uſe the ſame arguments, and words of Scripture, of which I will briefly ſet downe the chiefeſt.
1. As by the diſobedience of one man, many were made ſinners; ſo by the obedience of one, many are made righteous, Rom. 5. But Adams diſobedience was active; therefore we are juſtified by Chriſts active obedience. 2. He was made obedient, even to the death of the Croſſe, Phil. 2. Here is a two-fold obedience of Chriſt, the one before death, the other in death; therefore both are imputed. 3. God ſent forth his Son, made of a woman, and made under the Law, that he might redeeme thoſe that were under the Law, Gal. 4. Therefore, the active fulfilling of the Law by Chriſt is imputed to us. 4. He was made of God to us, wiſdome, righteouſneſſe, ſanctification, &c. 1 Cor. 1. Therefore his juſtice and ſanctity are imputed to us. 5. The Law of the Spirit of life in Chriſt Jeſus, freed me from the law of ſin, and of death, Rom. 8.2. Therefore, the life of Chriſt, or his active obedience, is imputed to us. 6. Whole Chriſt is our juſtice, with which he juſtifieth us; therefore, whole Chriſt is imputed. 7. Active juſtice cannot be excluded from Chriſts merit, and from juſtification, ergo, it is imputed. 8. The Law obligeth both to obedience, and to puniſhment; therefore, it behooved Chriſt both to fulfill the obedience of the Law for us, and alſo to ſuffer puniſhment. 9. To whom the Law doth promiſe life, ſuch muſt we be by the grace of Chriſt, that we may obtaine life: the Law promiſeth life, not to them who tranſgreſſe not the Law, but to them who fulfill it all: but by the imputation of his paſſive obedience, we are accounted indeed not unjuſt, not ſinners, or, not tranſgreſſors of the Law; but we are not as yet accounted juſt, or fulfillers of the Law; for, what is more vaine, then to call him juſt, who hath not fulfilled the Law? Therefore, not onelyonly muſt his paſſive obedience be imputed to us for this, that we may not be unjuſt, or not tranſgreſſours of the Law; but alſo his active, for this, that we may be juſt, or fulfillers of the Law: for, he that in Chriſt is accounted for no ſinner, ſhall eſcape death; but by what right ſhall he alſo ſue for life, unleſſe he fulfill the whole righteouſneſſe of the Law in the ſame Chriſt? 10. The ſacrifice and death of Chriſt comfort us againſt the guilt, and death eternall: but his holineſſe againſt our inherent impurity, or the remainders of ſin; therefore, the imputation of both is neceſſary for our conſolation, 11. Laſtly, the Catechiſme of the Palatinate teacheth qq. 60. and 61. that the perfect ſatisfaction, juſtice, and ſanctity of Chriſt, are imputed and given to us, to be our juſtice: and q. 36. that our Mediatour, by his innocency, and perfect ſanctity covers our ſins in which we were conceived, leſt they ſhould appeare in the ſight of God. The ſame is found every-where in the Palatinate Directory.
I have faithfully ſet downe the arguments, by which the former ſort maintaine their opinions: the fourth ſort remaine, who make Chriſts paſſive obedience onelyonly our righteouſneſſe, and define juſtification by remiſſion of ſins onelyonly; theſe make uſe chiefly of two arguments taken our of Scripture, the one from the matter, the other from the forme of juſtification: The firſt is this; The Scripture ſheweth the whole matter of our righteouſneſſe to conſiſt in the paſſion, Croſſe, bloud, and death of Chriſt; therefore, this onelyonly is it for which we are juſtified. They prove the Antecedent by teſtimonies of Scripture:aRom. 3.24. We are juſtified freely by redemption made in Chriſt Jeſus, whom God hath ſet as a propitiation by faith in his bloud. bRom. 5.9.We are juſtified by his bloud, being reconciled by the death of his Son. c2 Cor. 5.21.Him who knew no ſin, be hath made ſin, (that is, a ſacrifice for ſin), that we might become the righteouſneſſe of God in him. dGal. 3.13.He being made a curſe for us upon the tree, hath redeemed us from the curſe of the Law. eEpheſ. 1.7. Col. 1.14.We have redemption by his bloud. fCol. 1.20.Having made peace by the bloud of his Croſſe, by him he hath reconciled all things to himſelfe; hath reconciled them in the body of his fleſh by death. g1 Pet. 1.18.We are redeemed by the precious bloud of the immaculate Lamb. hIſa. 53.5.By whoſe ſtripes we are healed i1 John 1.7.The bloud of Chriſt purgeth us from all our ſins. kRev. 19. & 7.14.Thou haſt redeemed us by thy bloud. They have waſhed their robes, and made them white in the bloud of the Lambe.
The latter is this: The Scripture defines our whole juſtification, by remiſſion of ſins through the bloud of Chriſt; therefore, onelyonly the effuſion of bloud is that, by imputation of which we are juſtified; and the remiſſion of ſins is our whole righteouſneſſe. They confirme the Antecedent by teſtimonies of Scripture:lLuke 18.13. God be mercifull to me a ſinner. I tell you, that he went downe unto his houſe juſtified rather then the other. mActs 13.38.Be it knowne to you, that to you is preached remiſſion of ſins, through him; and from all things, from which by the Law you could not be abſolved, by him all that beleeve are juſtified. Here, to be abſolved, to be juſtified, to have remiſſion of ſins, are the ſame things. David pronounceth that man bleſſed, to whom God imputeth righteouſneſſe without works:nRom. 4.7. Pſal. 32.1. Bleſſed are they whoſe ſins are forgiven, and whoſe iniquities are hid. Bleſſed is the man to whom God imputeth no ſin. oRom. 8.33.Who ſhall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect? It is God that juſtifieth; who ſhall condemne? It is Chriſt who is dead, &c. p2 Cor. 5.19.God was in Chriſt, reconciling to himſelfe the world by not imputing to them their ſins. qEpheſ. 1.7.In whom we have redemption by his bloud; that is, remiſſion of ſins, &c. They have alſo other arguments, which, for brevities ſake, I omit; they alledge alſo for themſelves the Catechiſme of the Palatinate, qq. 37.45.66.55.57.72.76.80.84. &c. In which it is taught, that we obtaine remiſſion of ſins, juſtice, and life eternall, for the alone ſacrifice of Chriſt on the Croſſe; and that onelyonly the bloud of Chriſt purgeth us from all ſin: which very thing, is every-where found in the Directory of the Palatinate. Hitherto the different opinions concerning juſtice.
I now paſſe to the ſecond head, where I will briefly ſhew, without prejudice to others, what I can approve or diſapprove in thoſe who follow the firſt opinion: I cannot ſee how they can prove out of Scripture the imputation of Gods eſſential juſtice: or, why that ſhould be ſaid to be imputed, ſeeing man was never obliged, either to the poſſeſſion or performance of it: for, God never conferred upon man his eſſentiall juſtice, and man never loſt it. They make God then unjuſt, as if he did require of man divine juſtice, which he never gave him, nor ever will give him.
The reaſon is a Paralogiſme non cauſae; for, although whole Chriſt is a King, Prieſt, and Saviour, and whole Chriſt juſtifieth; yet, it is knowne, that he performes the effects of his office, among which is juſtification, by the diſtinct operations of his natures: therefore whole Chriſt juſtifieth; but one way, according to his divinity, to wit, as the efficient cauſe; another way, according to his humanity, to wit, as a meritorious cauſe: and the dignity of the merit flowes from the dignity of the perſon; that is, from the deity of the Mediatour. But from hence it doth not follow, that the deity can challenge any part of the merit, being the fountaine of merit. It behooved then the Mediatour to be God, not that the deity, or juſtice of the deity might be imputed to us; or, according to Oſianders madneſſe, eſſentially dwelling in us, might become our juſtice: but for the cauſe explained in the Catechiſme, q. 17. Therefore, the juſtice of the divinity differs from merit, as the cauſe from the effect.
Other inconveniences alſo of this opinion belong to the two enſuing; therefore, I joyne the ſecond and third opinion together; for, they differ not, ſave onelyonly that the one makes two parts, the other three parts of imputative juſtice. All which opinions are ſubject to the ſame inconveniences.
1. All confound the juſtice of the perſon, and of the merit of Chriſt, which the Scripture oftentimes conjoynes, but doth alſo manifeſtly diſtinguiſh, as the efficient cauſe, or ſine qua non; and the materiall cauſe of our juſtice: as, My righteous ſervant by his knowledge ſhall juſtifie many. For, ſuch an High-Prieſt became us, who might be holy, ſeparated from ſinners: that he might offer not for his owne, but for the ſins of the people. Him who knew not ſin, he hath made ſin for us, that we, &c. 1 Pet. 3. Chriſt ſuffered once, the juſt for the unjuſt. And ſo our Catechiſme, queſt. 15.16.
2. Theſe diſtinctions which they make betweene not unjuſt, and juſt; betweene not tranſgreſſing of the Law, and fulfilling of the Law; betweene not dead, and alive: they have more ſubtlety then verity; being indeed equivalent termes, as I will afterward ſhew: for, of neceſſity, he that before God is not unjuſt, muſt be juſt; who tranſgreſſeth not the Law, fulfils it; who is not dead, is alive. Seeing all theſe are immediate contraries, one of which being affirmed or denied, the other muſt neceſſarily be affirmed or denied.
3. If by the imputation of the paſſive obedience we are not as yet juſt, but onelyonly not unjuſt, how is this true, We are juſtified by the bloud of his Son? We are reconciled by his death, &c?
4. If remiſſion of ſins be not whole juſtification, how can that be true, Bleſſed are they whoſe iniquities are forgiven? Rom. 4. &c. how doth the Apoſtle in the ſame place take for the ſame thing, To impute righteouſneſſe, and, Not to impute ſin?
5. If the omiſſion of obedience to the Law, and the imperfection of our holineſſe, are not expiated by Chriſts paſſive obedience, but neceſſarily that muſt be covered with Chriſts actuall obedience, this with his naturall holineſſe; how againe can this be true, The bloud of Jeſus Chriſt purgeth us from all ſin? unleſſe, perhaps, omiſſion and imperfection be not ſins.
6. If we are not juſtified by the paſſive, but by the active obedience of Chriſt; how is it, that Chriſt died not in vaine? For, what need was there that Chriſt ſhould die, and by his death procure to us pardon for our ſins, if by his juſt and holy life, he had already merited righteouſneſſe for us? for, righteouſneſſe neceſſarily preſuppoſeth remiſſion of ſins.
7. It is manifeſt, that all theſe partitions of Chriſts merits into two or three members, do exceedingly derogate, either from the death of Chriſt, or from the juſtice of God. For, theſe two or three parts of our juſtice, are either three perfect juſtices of Chriſt, every one of which apart ſatisfieth the Law; or, they are ſo many imperfect juſtices, concurring to make up one perfect righteouſneſſe. If they are imperfect, do they not manifeſtly derogate from the death of Chriſt? If perfect, how is not God unjuſt, who, for one fault, demands two or three perfect ſatisfactions, whereas his juſtice requires but one?
8. If a part of our juſtice muſt be ſought for here, a part there, a part in the death, a part in the actuall Antecedent obedience, and a part in the naturall holineſſe of Chriſt; is not our faith dangerouſly diſtracted, and our comfort undermined?
9. Laſtly, that which chiefly with-holds me, is, that I reade no-where in Scripture, ſuch a tripartite, or bipartite diviſion of our juſtice: I reade no-where, that Chriſts humane holineſſe is imputed to us; that either it, or any part of it, is our righteouſneſſe. If any man hath read it, I intreat him to ſhew it, that I may alſo reade and beleeve it. Neither do I reade this any-where of actuall obedience; nor do the five teſtimonies which they bring, prove any ſuch thing; which I briefly ſhew, thus:
Out of that ſaying Rom. 5. they conclude more then followes; for, the conſequence will not hold: We are juſtified by Chriſts obedience, ergo, by his active obedience. The Apoſtle ſets in oppoſition, Chriſts obedience, and Adams diſobedience; not as action againſt action, but as ſatisfaction againſt the fault, as the remedy againſt the diſeaſe; otherwiſe, the ſinnes of omiſſion were not tranſgreſſions: but Adams ſin was not onelyonly a perpetration of evill, but the omiſſion of good alſo. Now, the obedience which he underſtands here, in another place he doth more expreſly declare, ſaying, He was made obedient to death, even the death of the Croſſe. But this was the obedience of his exinanition, and of death; and of the ſame obedience Theophylact interprets both places. Therefore, we deny that in this other place, which they object the ſecond time, any mention is made of two obediences: for, the text ſheweth, that the Apoſtle ſpeakes of his continuated obedience, Even to the death of the Croſſe; Phil. 2.which began, when he aſſumed a ſervile condition, and ended with his death.Gal. 4. Neither doth that place, Gal. 4. availe any whit to the active obedience; for, how Chriſt for us was made ſubject to the Law, the Apoſtle himſelfe explaines cleerely, chap. 3. He redeemed us from the curſe of the Law, being made a curſe for us; that the bleſſing of Abraham may be extended upon the Gentiles in Chriſt Jeſus. But this is underſtood of Chriſts voluntary humiliation, even to the death appointed by the Law for our ſins. How, notwithſtanding, this place may be underſtood of the ſervitude to the whole Law, I will ſpeake hereafter.
In that ſaying to the Corinthians,1 Cor. 1. the Apoſtle joyneth foure things, but not as parts of imputed juſtice, (for, who will reckon among theſe, wiſdome, or redemption it ſelfe?) but as the chiefe heads of Chriſts benefits; of which, ſome do helpe us onelyonly by imputation, as juſtice; others, by reall participation alſo: in this life inchoatively, in the other life perfectly, as all the reſt. Hence then no partition can be proved.
In that place to the Romans is the fallacy of Figura dictionis; Rom. 8.for there, The Law of the Spirit of life, doth not ſignifie life, or Chriſts active obedience, much leſſe his formall holineſſe; but it ſignifieth, the doctrine, or quickning grace of the Goſpell. The place is ſomewhat obſcure; but, by the ſcope, the ſimple meaning may be knowne: that the remainders of the fleſh condemne not godly men, if ſo be they make reſiſtance againſt them, by the helpe of the Spirit. What the Apoſtle ſaid in the firſt verſe, he proves in the ſecond, by ſuppoſing his owne perſon, from the effect of the Goſpell: The Law, ſaith he, of the ſpirit of life; that is, the doctrine or grace of the Goſpell, which is the miniſtery of the Spirit of life, or of that which makes us live in Chriſt Jeſus: hath made me free; that is, hath abſolved me, and all the faithfull, and pronounceth us free from the law of ſin and of death; that is, from condemnation, with which the Law threatneth ſinners; therefore, the Apoſtle oppoſeth here, the law of the Spirit, and the law of death; as he oppoſeth the miniſtery of the Spirit, and the Miniſtery of condemnation, 2 Cor. 3.8. as if he would ſay, Although that killing law endeavoureth to condemne thoſe that are juſtified in Chriſt Jeſus, becauſe of the remainders of ſin in them, with which as yet they wreſtle: yet, the Law of the Spirit of life; that is, the living doctrine and grace of the Goſpell, doth abſolve them from damnation, notwithſtanding theſe remainders of ſin, ſeeing theſe alſo are pardoned them through Chriſt; for, The bloud of Jeſus Chriſt purgeth us from all ſin, and from all remainders of ſin. This (without prejudice to other mens judgements) ſeems to me, to be the genuine meaning of the Apoſtle. But this by the way: I haſten to the other Arguments.
To the ſixth wee have already anſwered. Chriſt wholly quickneth us: but one way, as he is the efficient; another way, as he is the matter of righteouſneſſe. And nevertheleſſe he all juſtifieth, although his paſſion or death is onelyonly ſaid to be imputed: for, he all ſuffered and dyed. Neither is his active obedience excluded from merit or juſtification, though it is not ſaid to be imputed; which is that the ſeventh Reaſon would have. For, how can the efficient cauſe, or that which is called ſine qua non, be excluded from its effect? Truly, both the obediences, as well the active, as the paſſive, were required in the Mediatiour, for our juſtification, but after a divers way: that, as the cauſe, ſine qua non, or without which the effect cannot be produced, as alſo his naturall holineſſe: this, as the matter.
In the eighth Reaſon we deny the Antecedent: For, it was never heard, that the Law did oblige both to obedience and puniſhment, at the ſame time; but every law obligeth (diſ-junctively, not copulatively) either to obedience, or to puniſhment: For, ſo long as obedience is performed, the Law obligeth no man to puniſhment; that is, it pronounceth no man guilty of puniſhment, but promiſeth life: but when obedience is violated, then the Law obligeth the ſinner to puniſhment. This is generally true, both of divine and humane lawes.
Therefore their ſuppoſitions, which they here aſſume, are untrue, and repugnant to Gods juſtice: 1. That Adam, before his fall, at once was tyed to obedience and puniſhment. 2. That man, after his fall (and ſo the Mediatour for man) was obliged both to fulfill the Law, and to ſuffer puniſhment. When obedience, indeed, is violated, the ſinner is bound to make ſatisfaction by puniſhment; this being performed, he is no more a ſinner: and he is tyed to obedience, not to that, for the violation of which he hath ſatisfied by puniſhment, but to another new obedience; or, if againe he violate this, to a new puniſhment. Chriſt then, taking upon him our perſon, he is obliged to ſatisfie for us, by ſuffering puniſhment; this being paid, and imputed to us by faith, we are juſt: and are tyed furthermore to new obedience, or to new puniſhment. This new obedience Chriſt alſo by regeneration repaires in us, but imperfectly; and this imperfection is hid by Chriſts ſatisfaction, that it may not condemne us: becauſe the bloud of Jeſus Chriſt doth cleanſe us from all ſins, as well from thoſe that follow, as from thoſe that precede juſtification.
The ninth Reaſon ſeems to be the quickeſt of all, but is indeed fraughted with contradictions, and overthrowes it ſelfe; and beſides, is repugnant to Scripture. Firſt, there is a manifeſt contradiction, when it ſaith, That the Law promiſeth life to thoſe that fulfill the Law, and promiſeth not life to thoſe that tranſgreſſe it not: The reaſon is, becauſe, not to tranſgreſſe the Law, and to fulfill the Law, are the ſame in effect. This is proved by the contrarie: to tranſgreſſe the Law, is to violate the Law; either by committing what the Law forbids, or by omitting what it commands: therefore not to tranſgreſſe the Law, is not to violate the Law, by committing what it forbids, or by omitting what it commands; but this is truly to fulfill the Law: for, hee that commits nothing againſt the Law, nor omits what ſhould be done by the Law, doth truly fulfill the Law: therefore whoſoever doth not tranſgreſſe the Law, fulfils it. This is manifeſt in our firſt father Adam before his fall: for, ſo long as he ſinned not, he fulfilled the Law, by a continuall act in his originall integritie. And doe not the Angels in heaven fulfill the Law, even in that they ſin not? And ſhall not we in life eternall fulfill the Law, when we ſhall not offend againſt it? Either then theſe are the ſame, or ſo knit together, that it's impoſſible either to ſeparate them, or to deviſe a medium betwixt them. Secondly, this alſo is inconſiſtent which they ſay, That the Law doth not promiſe life to them that tranſgreſſe it not; but it promiſeth life to the fulfillers of the Law. Now, not to tranſgreſſe, is to fulfill. Thirdly, this implyeth a contradiction, when they ſay, That by paſſive obedience we are accounted not unjuſt, or not ſinners; and yet are not accounted juſt: Alſo, That they who ſin not, in Chriſt doe eſcape death, but dare not ſue for life: for the ſame thing here is both affirmed and denied of termes equivalent: for ſurely, he that is not a ſinner before God, is juſt; and, who is not dead, or who hath eſcaped death, is alive: For theſe are immediate contraries, as is ſaid. Fourthly, this is plainly repugnant to Scripture, when it is ſaid, that we are not accounted juſt by Chriſts paſſive obedience, that is not juſtified: For, on the contrarie, it is ſaid expreſly, Being juſtified by his bloud, being reconciled by his death, they have waſhed their robes in the bloud of the Lamb. They that can reconcile their ſubtleties one with another, and with theſe and ſuch like plaine ſayings, let them; I confeſſe, I cannot.
To the tenth Reaſon wee anſwer out of that ſaying, The bloud of Jeſus Chriſt purgeth us from all ſin. But ſurely, that impuritie that ſticks to the Saints, is ſin: therefore from that alſo the bloud of Chriſt purgeth us. Why then ſhould trembling conſciences be driven in their temptations from the bloud of Chriſt, to ſeek out other remedies, againſt ſo manifeſt a Scripture?
Laſtly, as for the Palatinate Catechiſme, that tells us in two places, that the ſatiſfaction, juſtice, and ſanctitie of Chriſt is imputed to us. And once, that originall ſin is covered by the holy nativitie and conception of the Mediatour. But that theſe Authors never thought of a tripartite matter in imputative juſtice, or of derogating the expiation of originall ſin, and juſtification from the bloud of Chriſt, is aſſuredly knowne by this, in that elſewhere ſo often and ſo plainly, they aſcribe the merit of juſtice and life eternall, to the paſſion, death, and ſacrifice of Chriſt, and that ſolely and onelyonly to it. And they witneſſe, that our inherent ſin is forgiven us for this merit. Either then the Catechiſme is repugnant to it ſelfe, which, God forbid; or it makes no tripartite diviſion of juſtice imputative: nor doth it derogate from Chriſts paſſive obedience the merit of righteouſneſſe.
The fourth opinion remaines, That our juſtice is the obedience even to death, or the puniſhment of the Son of God for our ſins, that whole juſtification is the remiſſion of ſins, for this ſatisfaction imputed to us. Which opinion, as being truer, ſimpler, and ſafer, I confeſſe, I doe embrace; but ſo, as it may be underſtood and explained rightly, and according to the Scriptures meaning. I ſay, it is truer; becauſe it is the conſtant voice of the whole Goſpel, That wee are juſtified by the death and bloud of the Son of God, and that our juſtification conſiſteth in the ſole remiſſion of ſin. The teſtimonies of the Goſpel were rehearſed above.
Object. But there is a Synecdoche totius in the termes of bloud death, &c. Anſw. There is, indeed, but not ſuch an one, as hath gathered into one merit two or three juſtices altogether heterogeneous; ſuch as the naturall ſanctitie, the active juſtice, and the paſſive obedience; for, there is no reaſon why the two former ſhould be called by the name of death and bloud: but it is the Synecdoche of the whole humiliation, as ſhall be ſaid. I ſay alſo, it is ſimpler: for, it doth not diſtract our faith hither and thither, by any partition of merit; nor doth it diſturb our comfort; but in our ſpirituall wreſtlings with the Scriptures, it ſends our conſciences to the only death of Chriſt; to wit, by which alone Gods juſtice and commination is ſatisfied. Thou ſhalt dye the death: By this ſatisfaction, being applyed to us by faith, we our ſelves have ſatisfied, are abſolved, juſtified, reconciled to God, by the bloud of his Son.
But, you will ſay, To make us juſt, it is not enough to ſuffer for ſin, but the fulfilling of the Law is alſo required. Anſw. The puniſhment is the fulfilling of the Law; then 'tis ſufficient: For, the Law is fulfilled two waies; either by yeelding perfect obedience, or, when this is violated, by ſuffering condigne puniſhment: by both there is …atisfaction made to Gods juſtice; each then is the fulfilling of the Law,1 John 3.7. Rom. 6.7. and each is juſtice. Of the former it is ſaid, He that doth righteouſneſſe, is righteous. Of the later, He that is dead, is justified from ſin. The firſt fulfilling was in man, before his fall; and by that he was juſt: Neither was he tyed to the other, ſo long as he ſinned not; becauſe Gods juſtice requires not both together, but either of them: ſeeing the Law, as is ſaid, doth tye the reaſonable creatures, not conjunctively to obedience and puniſhment together (for it were great iniquitie, to oblige them to puniſhment, that obey the Law:) but diſ-junctively, either to obedience, page missing of his humane juſtice with the Law, as the chiefe perfection of the perſon of the Mediatour, without which, he could not be our High-Prieſt and Saviour: ſo the juſtice of his merit, or foreign, is not onelyonly the bloud and death, but comprehends alſo all the obedience of his humiliation, from the minute of his conception, even till the death of the Croſſe. For the whole life of Chriſt, being full of miſeries and ſorrowes, what elſe was it, then a perpetuall ſuffering and puniſhment for our ſins? For, by the order of divine juſtice, whereas Chriſt was moſt juſt, his life ſhould not have been miſerable and calamitous; but altogether ſorrowleſſe, fortunate, and happy: but in that it was miſerable, it was by reaſon hee ſuffered and ſatisfied for our ſins.
4. Therefore, when the Scripture points out to us juſtice in the bloud, croſſe, and death of Chriſt; he doth not ſpeak excluſively, as if the ſufferings that went before his death did nothing belong to his merit; but ſynecdochically, comprehending under the complete finiſhing of our redemption, all the antecedent degrees alſo; that is, the beginning, encreaſe, and conſummation. The beginning was in his Incarnation; when, having aſſumed the forme of a ſervant, hee became poore, &c. for us. The encreaſe was throughout all his life, which he led in perpetuall miſeries, tentations, and dangers, being ſubject to Gods wrath for us. Laſtly, the conſummation was in his croſſe and death; when, giving up the ghoſt, he cried out, It is finiſhed. All theſe the Prophet conjoynes in the price of our redemption, which Chriſt paid for us: He did truly beare our infirmities,Iſa. 53. and took upon him our ſorrowes; he was wounded for our tranſgreſsions, and bruiſed for our iniquities: and with his ſtripes we are healed. So the Apoſtle, 2 Corinth. 5. When he was rich, be became poore for us; that we, by his poverty, might be rich. So Herb. 2. He was made ſomewhat inferiour to the Angels, by ſuffering of death. But chiefly, Phil. 2. Being in the forme of God, he emptied himſelfe, taking the forme of a ſervant; and he humbled himſelfe, being made obedient even to the death of the Croſſe. Nor will their cavill availe, in ſaying, that the Apoſtle ſpeaks not here of the matter of our juſtice: it is enough, that he here extends Chriſts obedience, which elſewhere he ſhewed was our juſtice, to his whole humiliation. Neither is that place, Hebr. 9.22. againſt us, Without ſhedding of bloud there is no remiſsion: It onelyonly followes from hence, that the ſhedding … bloud is not excluded from the cauſe of remiſſion; but that it is the cauſe ſine qua non of this. But it will not follow, that it is the onelyonly cauſe; or, that death which followed, or the antecedent ſufferings are excluded: Therefore to Chriſts death belongeth the whole obedience of his humiliation, even to the death of the Croſſe.
5. But why the Scripture aſcribes merit, which Chriſt hath purchaſed for us in all the courſe of his obedience, to his death; as if it were peculiar onelyonly, and proper to that; the reaſon is, becauſe the ſufficiencie of merit conſiſteth in the death of Chriſt alone: for, had hee not dyed, the obedience of his humiliation had not been abſolute; neither had the wrath of God, in threatning death to Adam, been ſatisfied: Therefore all the reſt of Chriſts obedience, without dying, had been an inſufficient merit, and unprofitable to us. But they, who attribute the merit of juſtice to his active obedience, or naturall holineſſe, they make void (doubtleſſe) the death of Chriſt.
This explication, true and conſonant to Scripture, being obſerved, it will appeare, 1. That there is ſomething amiſſe in both ſides of the controvertents: in the former, becauſe they confound the juſtice of the perſon, with the juſtice of merit; and, by dividing merit into many heterogeneall parts, they doe not onelyonly diſturbe our faith and comfort; but alſo, againſt Scripture, they ſeparate juſtification from Chriſts death. In the later, becauſe from the juſtice of merit, they exclude the whole life of Chriſt, with his humility and ſufferings, that went before his death. And they oppoſe the excluſive particle Alone in their phraſes (as when they ſay, The death of Christ alone juſtifieth, His bloud alone purgeth) to his life and antecedent obedience; whereas it is oppoſed in meritorious or materiall cauſes partly to perſonall juſtice, partly and chiefly to mens merits, and all other externall cauſes; except they reſtraine this particle Alone to ſufficiency, of which wee have ſaid in the fifth poſition. Againe, it will appeare, that this will be an eaſie way to reconcile the controverſie, if all of them will agree to urge againſt the Papiſts, and mens merits, all theſe common paſſages, in which (as I ſaid already) they agree, concerning free juſtification of faith, by Chriſts imputed juſtice; and that they would not uſe ſcrupulous diſputations, concerning this juſtice, or the matter of imputative juſtice before the people in their Sermons; but that they would uſe Scripture phraſes, and be content, that we are juſtified not by workes, but by faith; not by our owne righteouſneſſe, but by anothers obedience; to wit, by the bloud and death of the Son of God, imputed to us, and applyed by faith, &c. For theſe are ſufficient to beget true comfort to all, and to refute humane merits.
As for the controverſie it ſelfe, if it muſt at all be handled in the Schooles, it is needfull for a tolerable reconciliation to beware on both ſides, that the Diſputants minds may not be too much alienated. The later ſort are offended at the partition of merit into ſo many divers pieces; becauſe they ſee many abſurdities ſpring from thence, and the Scripture to be wronged. On the other ſide, the former are offended, by reſtraining merit to the death of Chriſt; becauſe they feare, leſt his life and antecedent obedience be excluded againſt the Scripture. What ſhall be done then? It is needfull, that the one forbeare to divide the matter of merit into two, three, or foure, as they uſe: and that they doe not ſeparate the merit of juſtice from Chriſts death, nor juſtification from remiſſion of ſins: That the others reſtraine not merit to the effuſion of bloud upon the Croſſe, or to the three dayes death; and, that they exclude not his life and antecedent obedience: And both muſt diſtinguiſh, with the Scripture, perſonall juſtice from merit, as the efficient cauſe, or ſine qua non, from the materiall; ſeeing many inconveniences muſt ariſe of confuſion, by which, the ſenſe of Scripture is overthrowne, the conſciences are diſturbed, and occaſion of cavilling is miniſtred to Papiſts, as we ſhewed in the firſt and ſecond Poſition. 2. Let the perſonall juſtice of the Mediatour be rightly limited, according to the third Poſition. 3. Let the juſtice of merit be rightly defined, and let the Synecdoche of the bloud, death, and paſſive obedience, &c. be underſtood of Chriſts whole humiliation, according to the fourth and fifth Poſitions. 4. For a better reconciliation, let this alſo be added, That under the humiliation, is comprehended his voluntary ſubjection to the Law; and conſequently, his active obedience, as they call it: ſo that this alſo, in ſome reſpect comes under the notion of merit; to wit, ſo far as it is conſidered to be a voluntary ſervitude, undertaken and performed for us by the Son of God. For, this obedience may be conſidered two waies: 1. As it is a conformity with the Law, and ſo it is the perſonall juſtice of the Mediatour. 2. As the ſervitude of the Law, to which, for our ſakes, Chriſt made himſelfe obnoxious; and ſo it belongs to merit: For, although Chriſt, as man, was bound to obey the Law; yet, as juſt, holy, and the Son of God; yea, even according to his humanity, hee was not obliged to many duties of the firſt and ſecond Table, to which nevertheleſſe he did ſpontaneouſly ſubject himſelfe; and ſo he was made a ſervant to the whole Law for us, that hee might redeem us from the ſervitude, coaction, and damnation of the Law. So, it was a voluntary ſervitude, that he would be circumciſed, that hee would obſerve the Sabbaths and Feaſts, that he was ſubject to his parents, and payed tribute to Ceſar, and ſerved his neighbour, &c. being Lord of the circumciſion, of the Sabbath, of patents, of Ceſar, of his neighbour, &c. Of this ſervitude of the Law, that of the Apoſtle is to be underſtood,Galat. 4. God ſent his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, &c. and ſo, the complaint of excluding active obedience from merit, will be of leſſe force. This way of reconciliation, perhaps, will not ſatisfie the ſcrupulous; yet it will not be diſpleaſing to them, who deſire theſe differences of opinions may be buried: or elſe, ſurely, they will think more of ſome meanes of peace, and will ſhew better. In the interim, I am ſatisfied with theſe.
By what we have ſaid,Chap. 3. it will now appear (which was our third Quere) how this doctrine is to be handled in popular Sermons: whether poſitively, and refutatively it will be fit to diſpute of it before the people. For my part, I think it is not fitting: for, what elſe can be expected of ſuch a diſceptation, but that the more ignorant ſort will ſtagger in their faith, and will preſently think, that the doctrine of faith, hitherto taught in our Churches, hath been very ſlippery and uncertain; which, notwithſtanding, cauſed us firſt of all to renounce Popery? And the Church can be edified in faith and conſolation, without ſuch oppoſition: by which, not our Adverſaries, but our brethren ſhould be touched, and wrung; their minds diſtracted into dangerous diviſions and contentions, and ſcandals ſhould be encreaſed by our fault. Surely, the Romaniſts willingly, with both hands, would lay hold upon this opportunity, to traduce us; to wit, that we cannot agree in that, which we make the maine point of the Goſpel. When Luther began, with others, to reforme the doctrine of Juſtification, Popery received a deadly wound. What? ſhall we goe about to heale againe this wound of the Beaſt? And doe wee not think, what an account we are to make unto God, for the delight wee take in ſtrife and altercation?
But you'l ſay, There is danger, leſt errour, in ſtead of truth, ſhould prevaile in the Church. Truly, there is none; if ſo be theſe things be retained, and diligently taught, which are in our Confeſſion: In other points, let moderation and candor be uſed. Let our brethren be heard with calmneſſe, and let their opinions be compared one with another, and with Gods word. Laſtly, ſeek not a knot in a bulruſh.
The fourth head remaines, concerning the Catechiſme,Chap. 4. and Palatinate Directorie, Whether it be ſit to omit, or put out any thing in them? Here I know not, whether I ſhould rather admire, or grieve at the precipitate temerity of ſome, who think, they may lawfully judge and cenſure ſacred and profane things as they liſt; chooſe and reject what they pleaſe: this humour is not to be endured. If their wiſdome be greater then other mens, they ſhould doe well to new-mould their own Catechiſme and Directorie: Or, if they have perceived any errour in that of the Palatinate, they ſhould, in a brotherly way, admoniſh thoſe, who have the care of this, and who will be ready to give them an account. Sure, this pretended zeale ſeems neither to have much conſcience, nor knowledge in it: For, with what conſcience can they paſſe by their owne Catechiſmes, and make changings in ours? Shall private men put out that, which publickly belongs to many Churches? If they have knowledge ſufficient, that is, if they underſtand well the meaning of the Catechiſme in every paſſage, and will be ingenuous, as they ought to be in ambiguous matters, they will find they have no reaſon to doe thus; becauſe all things agree ſufficiently, if ſo be that which is doubtfull, be explained by that which is cleerer; and what is briefly ſet downe, be enlarged as if fitting.
But you will ſay, that in the Catechiſme nothing ſhould be ambiguous or doubtfull. I confeſſe, indeed: neither had any ſuch thing crept into our Catechiſme, if it were now to be written, ſince the moving of theſe ſcruples. But the paſſages of our Catechiſme, which be more manifeſt, and at large, are theſe:
Queſt. 12. and 14. there is taught, That no other way of deliverance and of reconciliation with God could be found, then that either the ſinner himſelf, or elſe a Mediatour for the ſinner, ſhould, by condigne puniſhment, ſatisfie divine juſtice: therefore the puniſhment of the Mediatour for us, is our ſatisfaction; and that thing, by and for which we are juſtified and reconciled to God: for, in the Apoſtle, theſe two are all one, Rom. 5.9, 10.
Queſt. 15.16. there is taught, That it was needfull for the Mediatour to be true God, and true man, and perfectly juſt; that hee might be able to pay the ranſome for us, which we ſinners could not pay: therefore the juſtice of the perſon is diſtinguiſhed from the ranſome, as the cauſe from the effect; ſo that the actuall and formall juſtice of the Mediatour, belongs to the juſtice of the perſon, as the cauſe ſine qua non.
Queſt. 21. is taught, That for this ranſome of Chriſts remiſſion of ſins, eternall juſtice and life are beſtowed upon all beleevers: therefore the Catechiſme doth not ſo divide remiſſion of ſins and juſtice, as if that were given becauſe of the ranſome, and this, becauſe of Chriſt active juſtice.
Queſt. 37. it is taught, That Chriſt by his Paſſion, as by the onelyonly propitiatory Sacrifice hath obtained for us the favour of God, juſtice, and life; and that this his ſuffering extends through the whole courſe of his life that he lived here on earth; albeit the chiefe act of his ſuffering was in the end of his life: therefore againe, the merit of juſtice and of life is not aſcribed to active, but to paſſive obedience; and with all, the Paſſion Synecdochically is underſtood of the whole humiliation.
Queſt. 40. it is again taught, That by no other meanes could ſatisfaction be made to divine truth and juſtice for our ſins, then by the death of the Son of God; therefore it is confirmed again, that the death of the Son of God is our ſatisfaction; that is to ſay, that thing for, and by which we are juſtified.
Queſt. 45. the Catechiſme ſaith, That Chriſt therefore roſe, that he might make us partakers of his juſtice, which he purchaſed for us by his death. Therefore, the death of Chriſt hath obtained juſtice for us, and by imputation thereof we are accounted not onelyonly not unjuſt, but juſt alſo.
Queſt. 56. teacheth, That God, for the ſatisfaction of Chriſt (which is his puniſhment and death) hath forgot all our ſins, even originall too, and hath beſtowed freely upon us the righteouſneſſe of Chriſt. Therefore it confirmes againe, That his death is not onelyonly the merit of the remiſſion of all our ſins, even of originall too, but alſo of juſtification: and that it is not needfull that originall ſin ſhould be covered with the holineſſe of his humanity, leſt it appeare in the ſight of God.
Finally, Queſt. 66.67.70.72.74.67.80. it is often repeated, that we have remiſſion of ſins, juſtice, and life eternall, for the onelyonly ſacrifice, bloud, and death of Chriſt. Therefore, in all theſe, there is neither taught, nor can be imagined ſuch a partition of merit; as if by the imputation of Chriſts death, we did onelyonly obtaine remiſſion of ſins, and, as ſome lately phraſe it, onelyonly privative benefits; but by the imputation of actuall obedience we obtaine juſtice, and poſitive benefits. The Catechiſme aſcribes all together to Chriſts death, as the Scripture alſo doth, John 3. He gave his onelyonly begotten Son, (to wit, to death) that whoſoever beleeveth, (to wit, that the Son was given, and died for him) may not periſh, but have life eternall, &c. But you will ſay, Queſt. 60.61. That imputative juſtice is expreſly divided into three, to wit, perfect ſatisfaction, juſtice, and ſanctity, which it ſaith, are imputed to us. And, Queſt. 36. it ſaith, That the Mediatour, by his innocency, and perfect ſanctity, hath covered our ſins in which we are conceived, that they may not appeare in the ſight of God.
As for the firſt, either we muſt confeſſe, that theſe fight againſt the former, which charity, and Chriſtian candor will not allow; or the partition muſt be denied, and a convenient interpretation, and a reconciliation of them muſt be found. Without wronging other mens judgements, I will tell my minde here, and how I am wont to excuſe the Catechiſme: I ſay then, that the Catechiſme joynes theſe three together, but doth not (as we ſaid) divide them expreſly as three: it joynes, I ſay, theſe three, not as if it divided imputative juſtice into theſe three, as into divers parts, as if the imputed ſatisfaction did make us not unjuſt, the juſtice juſt, the ſanctity holy; for it taught the contrary before: but either becauſe the Compilers of the Catechiſme did retain this phraſe, out of Mr. Beza's Confeſſion, (whoſe it is properly knowne to be) not fearing there would be cavilling about it; they themſelves in the meane while neither intending, nor obſerving any partition: or, becauſe they would more emphatically note by theſe phraſes, as Synonymous, the whole courſe of his obedience, and humiliation till death: for, Chriſts humiliation and death is our ſatisfaction; becauſe by it ſatisfaction is made to divine juſtice for us: It is alſo juſtice; becauſe it is the fulfilling of the Law by ſuffering: It is laſtly holineſſe,John 17. becauſe it is a holy Sacrifice; of which it is ſaid, Father, I ſanctifie my ſelfe for them: And, By one oblation he hath conſecrated all who are juſtified. This I conjecture, becauſe, in the firſt edition of the Fundamentals of the Lords Supper, page missing