A Treatise of Justifying Righteousness, Book 1 · Chapter 2

A Treatise of Justifying Righteousness · Book 1 · Chapter 2

p. 48CHAP. II.

Of the true stating of the Controversie, and the explication of the several points contained or meerly implyed in it.

I take explication to be here more useful than argumentation: And therefore I shall yet fullier open to you the state of our differences, and my own judgment in the point, with the reasons of it, in such necessary Distinctions, and brief Propositions, as shall carry their own convincing light with them. If any think I distinguish too much, let him prove any to be needless or unjust, and then reject it and spare not. If any think I distinguish not accurately enough, let him add what is wanting, and but suppose that I have elsewhere done it, and am not now handling the whole doctrine of Justification, but only that of Imputation, and what it necessarily includeth.

THough a man that readeth our most Learned Protestants, prosessing that they agree even with Bellarmine himself in the stating of the case of Imputation, would think that there should need no further stating of it. I cited you Bellarmine's p. 49words before with Vasseurs consent: I here add Johan. Crocius de Justif. Disp. 10. pag. 500. 501. Vide hominis sive vertiginem sive improbitatem, clamat fieri non posse ut Justitia Christi nobis imputetur eo sensu qui haereticis probetur—Et tamen rectam vocat sententiam, quam suam faciunt Evangelici. Quod enim cum rectâ ratione pugnare dicit, nos per Justitiam Christi formaliter justos nominari & esse, nos non tangit: Non dicimus; Non sentimus: Sed hoc totum proficiscitur e Sophistarum officinâ, qui phrasin istam nobis offingunt, ut postea eam exagitent tanquam nostram: (yet some of our own give them this pretence.) Nos sententiam quam ille rectam judicat, tenemus, tuemur; sic tamen ut addamus, quod Genti adversariae est intolerabile, non alia ratione nos justos censeri coram Deo.] But by Justification the Papists mean Sanctification: And they count it not intolerable to say that the penalty of our sins is remitted to us, by that Satisfaction to the Justice of God according to the Law of Innocency, which Christ only hath made. But though many thrust in more indeed, and most of them much more in words; yet you see they are forced to say as we say whether they will or not: For they seem unwilling to be thought to agree with us, where they agree indeed.] And the following words of Job. Crocius pag. 506, 507. &c. shew the common sence of most Protestants, [When Bellarmine observeth that Imputation maketh us as righteous as Christ, he saith, [If we said that we are Justified by Christs essential righteousness.—But we say it not. Yea above all we renounce that which the Sophister puts in of his own, even that which he saith of Formal Righteousness: For it is not our opinion, that we are constituted formally Righteous by p. 50Christ's Righteousness, which we rather call the Material cause.—§ 32. Christs satisfaction is made for all: But it is imputed to us, not as it is made for all, but as for us. I illustrate it by the like. The Kings Son payeth the debt of a Community deeply indebted to the King, and thence bound to perpetual slavery. This payment gets liberty for this, and that, and the other member of the Community: For it is imputed to them by the King as if they had paid it. But this Imputation transferreth not the honour to them, but brings them to partake of the Benefit. So when the price paid by Christ for all, is imputed to this or that man, he is taken into the society of the Benefit,—Pag. 503. Distinguish between the Benefit, and the Office of Christ. The former is made ours, but not the latter,—Pag. 542. The Remission of sin is nothing but the Imputation of Christs Righteousness. Rom. 4. Where Imputation of Righteousness, Remission of Iniquities, and non-imputation of sin, are all one,—Pag. 547. God imputeth it as far as he pleaseth,—Pag. 548. Princes oft impute the merits of Parents so unworthy Children,—Pag. 551. He denyeth that we have Infinite Righteousness in Christ, because it is imputed to us in a finite manner, even so far as was requisite to our absolution.

But I will a little more distinctly open and resolve the Case.

1. We must distinguish of Righteousness as it relateth to the Preceptive part of the Law▪ and as it relateth to the Retributive part: The first Righteousness, is Innocency contrary to Reatus Culpae: The second is Jus ad impunitatem & ad praemium (sen d…num,) Right to Impunity and to the Reward.

2. We must distinguish of Christs Righteousness, p. 51which is either so called, formally and properly, which is the Relation of Christs person to his Law of Mediation imposed on him, 1. As Innocent and a perfect obeyer; 2. As one that deserved not punishment, but deserved Reward. Or it is so called materially and improperly; which is, Those same Habits, Acts and Sufferings of Christ, from which his Relation of Righteous did result.

3. We must distinguish of Imputation, which signifyeth (here) 1. To repute us personally to have been the Agents of Christs Acts, the subjects▪ of his Habits and Passion in a Physical sence. 2. Or to repute the same formal Relation of Righteousness which was in Christs person, to be in ours as the subject. 3. Or to repute us to have been the very subjects of Christ's Habits and Passion, and the Agents of his Acts in a Political or Moral sense, (and not a physical); as a man payeth a debt by his Servant, or Attorney, or Delegate. 4. And consequently to repute a double formal Righteousness to result from the said Habits, Acts, and Passions; one to Christ as the natural Subject and Agent, and another to us as the Moral, Political, or reputed Subject and Agent (And so his Formal Righteousness not to be imputed to us in it self as ours, but another to result from the same Matter.) 5. Or else that we are reputed both the Agents and Subjects of the Matter of his Righteousness, morally and also of the Formal Righteousness of Christ himself. 6. Or else by Imputation is meant here, that Christ being truly reputed to have taken the Nature of sinful than, and become a Head for all true Believers, in that undertaken Nature and Office in the Person of a Mediator, to have fulfilled all the Law imposed on him, by perfect Holiness p. 52and Obedience, and Offering himself on the Cross a Sacrifice for our sins, voluntarily suffering in our stead, as if he had been a sinner, (guilty of all our sins) As soon as we believe we are pardoned, justified, adopted for the sake and merit of this Holiness, Obedience and penal Satisfaction of Christ, with as full demonstration of divine Justice, at least, and more full demonstration of his Wisdom and Mercy, than if we had suffered our selves what our sins deserved (that is, been damned) or had never sinned: And so Righteousness is imputed to us, that is, we are accounted or reputed righteous, (not in relation to the Precept, that is, innocent, or sinless, but in relation to the Retribution, that is, such as have Right to Impunity and Life,) because Christ's foresaid perfect Holiness, Obedience and Satisfaction, merited our Pardon, and Adoption, and the Spirit; or merited the New-Covenant, by which, as an Instrument, Pardon, Justification and Adoption are given to Believers, and the Spirit to be given to sanctifie them: And when we believe, we are justly reputed such as have Right to all these purchased Gifts.

4. And that it may be understood how far Christ did Obey or Suffer in our stead, or person, we must distinguish, 1. Between his taking the Nature of sinful man, and taking the Person of sinners. 2. Between his taking the Person of a sinner, and taking the Person of you and me, and each particular sinner. 3. Between his taking our sinful persons simply, & ad omnia, and taking them only, secundum quid, in tantum, & ad hoc. 4. Between his suffering in the Person of sinners, and his obeying and sanctity in the Person of sinners or of us in particular.

5. Between his Obeying and Suffering in our Person, p. 53and our Obeying and Suffering in his Person (Natural or Political.) And now I shall make use of these distinctions, by the Propositions following.

Prop. 1. The phrase of [Christ's Righteousness imputed to us] is not in the Scripture.

2. Therefore when it cometh to Disputation, to them that deny it, some Scripture-phrase should be put in stead of it; because, 1. The Scripture hath as good, if not much better, phrases, to signifie all in this that is necessary. 2. And it is supposed that the Disputants are agreed of all that is express in the Scripture.

3. Yet so much is said in Scripture, as may make this phrase [of Imputing Christ's Righteousness to us] justifiable, in the sound sence here explained: For the thing meant by it is true, and the phrase intelligible.

4. Christ's Righteousness is imputed to Believers, in the sixth sence here before explained; As the Meritorious cause of our Pardon, Justification, Righteousness, Adoption, Sanctification and Salvation, &c. as is opened.

5. Christ did not suffer all in kind (much less in duration) which sinful man deserved to suffer: As e. g. 1. He was not hated of God; 2. Nor deprived or deserted of the sanctifying Spirit, and so of its Graces and Gods Image; Nor had 3. any of that permitted penalty by which sin it self is a misery and punishment to the sinner. 4. He fell not under the Power of the Devil as a deceiver and ruler, as the ungodly do. 5. His Conscience did not accuse him of sin, and torment him for it. 6. He did not totally despair of ever being saved. 7. The p. 54fire of Hell did not torment his body. More such instances may be given for proof.

6. Christ did not perform all the same obedience in kind, which many men, yea all men, are or were bound to perform. As 1. He did not dress and keep that Garden which Adam was commanded to dress and keep. 2. He did not the conjugal offices which Adam, and millions more, were bound to. 3. Nor the Paternal Office to Children. 4. Nor all the offices of a King on Earth, or Magistrate: nor of a Servant, &c. Nor the duty of the Sick. 5. He did not repent of sin, nor turn from it to God, nor mortifie or resist in himself any sinful lust; nor receive a Saviour by Faith, nor was circumcised or baptized for the Remission of his sins; nor loved God or thanked him for redeeming or pardoning him; nor obeyed God in the use of any Ordinance or Means, for the subduing of sin, and healing or saving of his Soul from any sin or deserved wrath of God; with much more such.

7. Christ did perform much which no man else was bound to do: As to redeem Souls, to work his Miracles and the rest of the works, peculiar to the Mediator.

8. That Law which bound us to Suffering, (or made it our due) bound not Christ to it, (as being innocent); But he was bound to it by the Fathers Law of Mediator, and by his own voluntary sponsion.

9. The Law obliging every sinner himself to suffer, was not fulfilled by the Suffering of Christ our Sponsor: But only the Lawgiver satisfied by attaining its Ends. For neither the letter nor sence of it said, [If thou sin, thou or thy surety shall suffer.]

p. 5510. Christ satisfied Justice and obeyed in Humane Nature, which also was Holy in him.

11. He did not this as a Natural Root, or Head to man, as Adam was; to convey Holiness or Righteousness by natural propagation, as Adam should have done; and did by sin: For Christ had no Wife or natural Children; But as a Head, by Contract as a Husband to a Wife, and a King to a Kingdom, and a Head of Spiritual Influx.

12. No as being Actually such a Head to the Redeemed when he Obeyed and Suffered; but as a Head by Aptitude and Office, Power and Virtue, who was to become a Head actually to every one when they Believed and Consented; Being before a Head for them, and over those that did exist, but not a Head to them, in act.

13. Therefore they were not Christs members Political, (much less Natural) when he obeyed and died.

14. A Natural Head being but a part of a person, what it doth the Person doth. But seeing a Contracted Head, and all the members of his Body Contracted or Politick, are every one a distinct Person, it followeth not that each person did really or reputatively what the Head did. Nay it is a good consequence that [If he did it as Head, they did it not (numerically) as Head or Members.]

15. Christ Suffered and Obeyed in the Person of the Mediator between God and man; and as a subject to the Law of Mediation.

16. Christ may be said to suffer in the person of a sinner, as it meaneth his own person reputed and used as a sinner by his persecutors, and as he was one who stood before God as an Undertaker to suffer for Man's sin.

p. 5617. Christ suffered in the place and stead of sinners, that they might be delivered, though in the person of a Sponsor.

18. When we are agreed that the Person of the Sponsor, and of every particular sinner are divers; and that Christ had not suffered, if we had not sinned, and that he as a Sponsor suffered in our stead, and so bore the punishment, which not he, but we deserved; If any will here instead of a Mediator or Sponsor call him our Representative, and say that he suffered even in all our Persons reputatively, not simpliciter, but secundùm quid, & in tantum only; that is, not representing our Persons simply and in all respects, and to all ends, but only so far as to be a sacrifice for our sins, and suffer in our place and stead what he suffered; we take this to be but lis de nomine, a question about the name and words: And we will not oppose any man that thinketh those words fittest, as long as we agree in the matter signified. And so many Protestant Divines say that Christ suffered in the person of every sinner, (at least Elect,) that is, so far only and to such effects.

19. Christ did not suffer strictly, simply, absolutely, in the person of any one elect sinner, much less in the millions of persons of them all, in Lawsence, or in Gods esteem. God did not esteem Christ to be naturally, or as an absolute Representer, David, Manasseh, Paul, and every such other sinner, but only a Mediator that suffered in their stead.

20. God did make Christ to be sin for us; that is, A Sacrifice for our sin, and one that by Man was reputed, and by God and Man was used, as sinners are, and deserve to be.

21. Christ was not our Delegate in Obeying or p. 57Suffering: We did not commission him, or depute him to do what he did in our stead: But he did it by God's Appointment and his own Will.

22. Therefore he did it on God's terms, and to what effects it pleased God, and not on our terms, nor to what effects we please.

23. God did not suppose or repute Christ, to have committed all or any of the sins which we all committed, nor to have had all the wickedness in his nature which was in ours, nor to have deserved what we deserved: Nor did he in this proper sence impute our sins to Christ.

24. The false notion of God's strict imputing all our sins to Christ, and esteeming him the greatest sinner in the World, being so great a Blasphemy both against the Father and the Son, it is safest in such Controversies to hold to the plain and ordinary words of Scripture. And it is not the Wisdom nor Impartiality of some men, who greatly cry up the Scripture-perfection, and decry the addition of a Ceremony or Form in the Worship of God; that yet think Religion is endangered, if our Confession use not the phrases of [God's Imputing our sin to Christ, and his Imputing Christ's Righteousness to us] when neither of them is in the Scripture; As if all God's Word were not big or perfect enough to make us a Creed or Confession in such phrases as it is fit for Christians to take up with: Countenancing the Papists, whose Faith is swelled to the many Volumes of the Councils, and no man can know how much more is to be added, and when we have all.

25. God doth not repute or account us to have suffered in our Natural persons what Christ suffered for us, nor Christ to have suffered in our Natural persons.

p. 5826. Though Christ suffered in our stead, and in a large sence, to certain uses and in some respects, as the Representer, or in the Persons of sinners; yet did he not so far represent their persons in his Habitual Holiness and Actual Obedience (no not in the Obedience of his Suffering,) as he did in the suffering it self. He obeyed not in the Person of a sinner, much less of millions of sinners; which were to say, In the person of sinners he never sinned. He suffered, to save us from suffering; but he obeyed not to save us from obeying, but to bring us to Obedience. Yet his Perfection of Obedience had this end, that perfect Obedience might not be necessary in us to our Justification and Salvation.

27. It was not we our selves who did perfectly obey, or were perfectly holy, or suffered for sin in the Person of Christ, or by Him: Nor did we (Naturally or Morally) merit our own Salvation by obeying in Christ; nor did we satisfie Gods Justice for our sins, nor purchase pardon of Salvation to our selves, by our Suffering in and by Christ; All such phrase and sence is contrary to Scripture. But Christ did this for us.

28. Therefore God doth not repute us to have done it, seeing it is not true.

29. It is impossible for the individual formal Righteousness of Christ, to be our Formal personal Righteousness. Because it is a Relation and Accident, which cannot be translated from subject to subject, and cannot be in divers subjects the same.

30. Where the question is, Whether Christs Material Righteousness, that is, his Habits, Acts and Sufferings themselves, be Ours, we must consider how a man can have Propriety in Habits, Acts and p. 59Passions who is the subject of them: and in Actions, who is the Agent of them. To Give the same Individual Habit or Passion to another, is an Impossibility; that is, to make him by Gift the subject of it. For it is not the same, if it be in another subject. To make one man really or physically to have been the Agent of anothers Act, even that Individual Act, if he was not so, is a contradiction and impossibility; that is, to make it true, that I did that which I did not. To be ours by Divine Imputation, cannot be, to be ours by a false Reputation, or supposition that we did what we did not: For God cannot err or lie. There is therefore but one of these two ways left, Either that we our selves in person, truly had the habits which Christ had, and did all that Christ did, and suffered all that he suffered, and so satisfied and merited Life in and by him, as by an Instrument, or Legal Representer of our persons in all this; Which I am anon to Confute: or else, That Christs Satisfaction, Righteousness, and the Habits, Acts and Sufferings in which it lay, are imputed to us, and made ours; not rigidly in the very thing it self, but in the Effects and Benefits; In as much as we are as really Pardoned, Justified, Adopted by them, as the Meritorious cause, by the instrumentality of the Covenants Donation, as if we our selves had done and suffered all that Christ did, as a Mediator and Sponsor, do and suffer for us: I say, As really and certainly, and with a fuller demonstration of Gods Mercy and Wisdom, and with a sufficient demonstration of his Justice. But not that our propriety in the benefits is in all respects the same, as it should have been if we had been, done, and suffered our selves what Christ did. Thus Christs Righteousness is ours.

p. 6031. Christ is truly The Lord our Righteousness; in more respects than one or two: 1. In that he is the meritorious Cause of the Pardon of all our sins, and our full Justification, Adoption, and right to Glory: and by his Satisfaction and Merits only, our Justification by the Covenant of Grace against the Curse of the Law of Works is purchased. 2. In that he is the Legislator, Testator and Donor of our Pardon, and Justification▪ by this new-Testament or Covenant. 3. In that he is the Head of Influx, and King and Intercessor, by and from whom the Spirit is given, to sanctifie us to God, and cause us sincerely to perform the Conditions of the Justifying and saving Covenant, in Accepting and Improving the mercy then given. 4. In that he is the Righteous Judge and Justifyer of Believers by sentence of Judgment. In all these Respects he is The Lord our Righteousness.

32. We are said to be made the Righteousness of God in him: 1. In that, as he was used like a sinner for us, (but not esteemed one by God) so we are used like Innocent persons so far as to be saved by him. 2. In that through his Merits, and upon our union with him, when we believe and consent to his Covenant, we are pardoned and justified, and so made Righteous really, that is, such as are not to be condemned but to be glorified. 3. In that the Divine Nature and Inherent Righteousness, to them that are in him by Faith, are for his Merits, given by the Holy Ghost. 4. In that God's Justice and Holiness Truth, Wisdom, and Mercy, are all wonderfully demonstrated in this way of pardoning and justifying sinners by Christ. Thus are we made the Righteousness of God in him.

p. 6133. For Righteousness to be imputed to us, is all one as to be accounted Righteous, Rom. 4. 6, 11. notwithstanding that we be not Righteous as fulfillers of the Law of Innocency.

34. For Faith to be imputed to us for Righteousness, Rom. 4. 22, 23, 24. is plainly meant, that God who under the Law of Innocency required perfect Obedience, of us to our Justification and Glorification, upon the satisfaction and merits of Christ, hath freely given a full Pardon and Right to Life, to all true Believers; so that now by the Covenant of Grace nothing is required of us, to our Justification, but Faith: all the rest being done by Christ: And so Faith in God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, is reputed truly to be the condition on our part, on which Christ and Life, by that Baptismal Covenant, are made ours.

35. Justification, Adoption, and Life eternal are considered; 1. Quoad ipsam rem, as to the thing it self in value. 2. Quoad, Ordinem Conferendi & Recipiendi, as to the order and manner of Conveyance and Participation. In the first respect, It is a meer free-gift to us, purchased by Christ: In the second respect, It is a Reward to Believers, who thankfully accept the free-Gift according to its nature and uses.

36. It is an error contrary to the scope of the Gospel to say, that the Law of Works, or of Innocency, doth justifie us, as performed either by our selves, or by Christ. For that Law condemneth and curseth us; And we are not efficiently justified by it, but from or against it.

37. Therefore we have no Righteousness in Reality or Reputation formally ours, which consisteth p. 62in the first species; that is, in a Conformity to the Preceptive part of the Law of Innocency; we are not reputed Innocent: But only a Righteousness which consisteth in Pardon of all sin, and right to life, (with sincere performance of the Condition of the Covenant of Grace, that is, True Faith.)

38. Our pardon puts not away our Guilt of Fact or Fault, but our Guilt of, or, obligation to Punishment. God doth not repute us such as never sinned, or such as by our Innocency merited Heaven, but such as are not to be damned, but to be glorified, because pardoned and adopted through the Satisfaction and Merits of Christ.

39. Yet the Reatus Culpae is remitted to us Relatively as to the punishment, though not in it self; that is, It shall not procure our Damnation: Even as Christ's Righteousness is, though not in it self, yet respectively as to the Benefits said to be made ours, in as much as we shall have those benefits by it.

40. Thus both the Material and the Formal Righteousness of Christ are made ours; that is, Both the Holy Habits and Acts, and his Sufferings, with the Relative formal Righteousness of his own Person, because these are altogether one Meritorious cause of our Justification, commonly called the Material Cause.

Obj. But though Forma Denominat; yet if Christs Righteousness in Matter and Form, be the Meritorious Cause of ours, and that be the same with the Material Cause, it is a very tolerable speech to say, that His Righteousness is Ours in it self, while it is the very matter of ours.

Ans. 1. When any man is Righteous Immediately by p. 63any action, that action is called the Matter of his Righteousness, in such an Analogical sense as Action, an Accident may be called Matter, because the Relation of Righteous is founded or subjected first or partly in that Action. And so when Christ perfectly obeyed, it was the Matter of his Righteousness. But to be Righteous and to Merit are not all one notion: Merit is adventitious to meer Righteousness. Now it is not Christs Actions in themselves that our Righteousness resulteth from immediately as his own did; But there is first his Action, then his formal Righteousness thereby; and thirdly, his Merit by that Righteousness which goes to procure the Covenant-Donation of Righteousnass to us, by which Covenant we are efficiently made Righteous. So that the name of a Material Cause is much more properly given to Christs Actions, as to his own formal Righteousness, than as to ours. But yet this is but de nomine. 2. Above all, consider what that Righteousness is which Christ merited for us, (which is the heart of the Controversie.) It is not of the same species or sort with his own. His Righteousness was a perfect sinless Innocency, and Conformity to the preceptive part of the Law of Innocency in Holiness. Ours is not such. The dissenters think it is such by Imputation, and here is the difference. Ours is but in respect to the second or retributive part of the Law; a Right to Impunity and Life, and a Justification not at all by that Law, but from its curse or condemnation. The Law that saith, Obey perfectly and live, sin and die, doth not justifie us as persons that have perfectly obeyed it, really or imputatively; But its obligation to punishment is dissolved, not by it self, but by the Law of Grace. It is then by the Law p. 64of Grace that we are judged and justified. According to it, 1. We are not really or reputatively such as have perfectly fulfilled all its Precepts: 2. But we are such as by Grace do sincerely perform the Condition of its promise. 3. By which promise of Gift, we are such as have right to Christs own person, in the Relation and Union of a Head and Saviour, and with him the pardon of all our sins, and the right of Adoption to the Spirit, and the Heavenly Inheritance as purchased by Christ. So that besides our Inherent or Adherent Righteousness of sincere Faith, Repentance and Obedience, as the performed condition of the Law of Grace, we have no other Righteousness our selves, but Right to Impunity and to Life: and not any imputed sinless Innocency at all. God pardoneth our sins and adopteth us, for the sake of Christs sufferings and perfect Holiness: But he doth not account us perfectly Holy for it, nor perfectly Obedient. So that how-ever you will call it, whether a Material Cause or a Meritorious, the thing is plain.

Obj. He is made of God Righteousness to us.

Ans. True: But that's none of the question. But how is he so made? 1. As he is made Wisdom, Sanctification and Redemption as aforesaid. 2. By Merit, Satisfaction, Direction, Prescription and Donation. He is the Meritorious Cause of our Pardon, of our Adoption, of our Right to Heaven, of that new Covenant which is the Instrumental Deed of Gift, confirming all these: And he is also our Righteousness in the sense that Austin so much standeth on, as all our Holiness and Righteousness of Heart and Life, is not of our natural endeavour, but his gift, and operation by his Spirit; causing us p. 65to obey his Holy precepts and Example. All these ways he is made of God our Righteousness: Besides the Objective way of sense; as he is Objectively made our Wisdom, because it is the truest wisdom to know him; So he is objectively made our Righteousness, in that it is that Gospel-Righteousness which is required of our selves, by his grace, to believe in him and obey him.

41. Though Christ fulfilled not the Law by Habitual Holiness and Actual Obedience, strictly in the Individual person of each particular sinner; yet he did it in the nature of Man: And so humane nature, (considered in specie, and in Christ personally, though not considered as a totum, or as personally in each man,) did satisfie and fullfil the Law and Merit. As Humane Nature sinned in Adam actually in specie, and in his individual person, and all our Persons were seminally and virtually in him, and accordingly sinned, or are reputed sinners, as having no nature but what he conveyed who could convey no better than he had (either as to Relation or Real quality): But not that God reputed us to have been actually existent, as really distinct persons in Adam (which is not true.) Even so Christ obeyed and suffered in our Nature, and in our nature as it was in him; and humane sinful nature in specie was Universally pardoned by him, and Eternal life freely given to all men for his merits, thus far imputed to them, their sins being not imputed to hinder this Gift; which is made in and by the Covenant of Grace: Only the Gift hath the Condition of mans Acceptance of it according to its nature, 2 Cor. 5. 19, 20. And all the individuals that shall in time by Faith accept the Gift, are there and thereby made p. 66such as the Covenant for his merits doth justifie, by that General Gift.

42. As Adam was a Head by Nature, and therefore conveyed Guilt by natural Generation; so Christ is a Head (not by nature but) by Sacred Contract; and therefore conveyeth Right to Pardon, Adoption and Salvation, not by Generation, but by Contract, or Donation. So that what it was to be naturally in Adam, seminally and virtually, though not personlly in existence; even that it is, in order to our benefit by him to be in Christ by Contract or the new Covenant, virtually, though not in personal existence when the Covenant was made.

43. They therefore that look upon Justification or Righteousness, as coming to us immediately by Imputation of Christs Righteousness to us, without the Instrumental Intervention and Conveyance or Collation by this Deed of Gift or Covenant, do confound themselves by confounding and overlooking the Causes of our Justification. That which Christ did by his merits was to procure the new Covenant. The new Covenant is a free Gift of pardon and life with Christ himself, for his merits and satisfaction sake.

44. Though the Person of the Mediator be not really or reputatively the very person of each sinner, (nor so many persons as there are sinners or believers,) yet it doth belong to the Person of the Mediator, so far (limitedly) to bear the person of a sinner, and to stand in the place of the Persons of all Sinners, as to bear the punishment they deserved, and to suffer for their sins.

45. Scripture speaking of moral matters, usually speaketh rather in Moral than meer Physical p. 67phrase: And in strict Physical sence, Christs very personal Righteousness (Material or Formal) is not so given to us, as that we are proprietors of the very thing it self, but only of the effects (Pardon, Righteousness and Life,) yet in a larger Moral phrase that very thing is oft said to be given to us, which is given to another, or done or suffered for our benefit. He that ransometh a Captive from a Conquerer, Physically giveth the Money to the Conquerer & not to the Captive, & giveth the Captive only the Liberty purchased: But morally and reputatively he is said to give the Money to the Captive, because he gave it for him. And it redeemeth him as well as if he had given it himself. He that giveth ten thousand pounds to purchase Lands, & freely giveth that land to another; physically giveth the Money to the Seller only, and the Land only to the other. But morally and reputatively we content our selves with the metonymical phrase, and say, he gave the other ten thousand pound. So morally it may be said, that Christs Righteousness, Merits and Satisfaction, was given to us, in that the thing purchased by it was given to us; when the Satisfaction was given or made to God. Yea when we said it was made to God, we mean only that he was passively the Terminus of active Satisfaction, being the party satisfyed; but not that he himself was made the Subject and Agent of Habits and Acts, and Righteousness of Christ as in his humane nature, except as the Divine Nature acted it, or by Communication of Attributes.

46. Because the words [Person] and [Personating] and [Representing] are ambiguous (as all humane language is,) while some use them in a stricter p. 68sense than others do, we must try by other explicatory terms whether we agree in the matter, and not lay the stress of our Controversy upon the bare words. So some Divines say that Christ suffered in the Person of a sinner, when they mean not that he represented the Natural person of any one particular sinner; but that his own Person was reputed the Sponsor of sinners by God, and that he was judged a real sinner by his persecuters; and so suffered as if he had been a sinner.

47. As Christ is less improperly said to have Represented our Persons in his satisfactory Sufferings, than in his personal perfect Holiness and Obedience; so he is less improperly said to have Represented all mankind as newly fallen in Adam, in a General sense, for the purchasing of the universal Gift of Pardon and Life, called The new Covenant; than to have Represented in his perfect Holiness and his Sufferings, every Believer considered as from his first being to his Death. Though it is certain that he dyed for all their sins from first to last. For it is most true, 1. That Christ is as a second Adam, the Root of the Redeemed; And as we derive sin from Adam, so we derive life from Christ, (allowing the difference between a Natural and a Voluntary way of derivation.) And though no mans Person as a Person was actually existent and offended in Adam, (nor was by God reputed to have been and done) yet all mens Persons were Virtually and Seminally in Adam as is aforesaid; and when they are existent persons, they are no better either by Relative Innocency, or by Physical Disposition, than he could propagate: and are truly and justly reputed by God to be Persons Guilty of Adams fact, so far as they were by nature p. 69seminally and virtually in him: And Christ the second Adam is in a sort the root of Man as Man, (though not by propagation of us, yet) as he is the Redeemer of Nature it self from destruction, but more notably the Root of Saints as Saints, who are to have no real sanctity but what shall be derived from him by Regeneration, as Nature and Sin is from Adam by Generation. But Adam did not represent all his posterity as to all the Actions which they should do themselves from their Birth to their Death; so that they should all have been taken for perfectly obedient to the death, if Adam had not sinned at that time, yea or during his Life. For if any of them under that Covenant had ever sinned afterward in their own person, they should have died for it. But for the time past, they were Guiltless or Guilty in Adam, as he was Guiltless or Guilty himself, so far as they were in Adam: And though that was but in Causâ, & non extra causam; Yet a Generating Cause which propagateth essence from essence, by self-multiplication of form, much differeth from an Arbitrary facient Cause in this. If Adam had obeyed, yet all his posterity had been nevertheless bound to perfect personal persevering Obedience on pain of Death. And Christ the second Adam so far bore the person of fallen Adam, and suffered in the nature and room of Mankind in General, as without any condition on their part at all; to give man by an act of Oblivion or new Covenant a pardon of Adams sin, yea and of all sin past, at the time of their consent, though not disobliging them from all future Obedience. And by his perfect Holiness and Obedience and Sufferings, he hath merited that new Covenant, which Accepteth of p. 70sincere, though imperfect, Obedience, and maketh no more in us necessary to Salvation. When I say he did this without any Condition on mans part, I mean, He absolutely without Condition, merited and gave us the Justifying Testament or Covenant. Though that Covenant give us not Justification absolutely, but on Condition of believing, fiducial Consent. 2. And so as this Ʋniversal Gift of Justification upon Acceptance, is actually given to all fallen mankind as such; so Christ might be said to suffer instead of all, yea and merit too, so far as to procure them this Covenant-gift.

48. The sum of all lyeth in applying the distinction of giving Christs Righteousness as such in it self, and as a cause of our Righteousness, or in the Causality of it. As our sin is not reputed Christs sin in it self, and in the culpability of it (for then it must needs make Christ odious to God) but in its Causality of punishment: so Christ's Material or Formal Righteousness, is not by God reputed to be properly and absolutely our own in it self as such, but the Causality of it as it produceth such and such effects.

49. The Objections which are made against Imputation of Christs Righteousness in the sound sense, may all be answered as they are by our Divines; among whom the chiefest on this subject are Davenant de Justit. Habit Habit & Actual. Johan. Crocius de Justif. Nigrinus de Impletione Legis, Bp. G. Dowman of Justif. Chamier, Paraeus, Amesius and Junius against Bellarm. But the same reasons against the unsound sence of Imputation are unanswerable. Therefore if any shall say concerning my following Arguments, that most of them are used, by Gregor. p. 71de Valent. by Bellarm. Becanus, or other Papists, or by Socinians, and are answered by Nigrinus, Crocius, Davenant, &c. Such words may serve to deceive the simple that are led by Names and Prejudice; but to the Intelligent they are contemptible, unless they prove that these objections are made by the Papists against the same sence of Imputation against which I use them, and that it is that sense which all those Protestants defend in answering them: For who-ever so answereth them, will appear to answer them in vain.

50. How far those Divines who do use the phrase of Christs suffering in our person, do yet limit the sense in their exposition, and deny that we are reputed to have fulfilled the Law in Christ: because it is redious to cite many, I shall take up now with one, even Mr. Lawson in his Theopolitica, which (though about the office of Faith he some-what differ from me) I must needs call an excellent Treatise, as I take the Author to be one of the most Knowing men yet living that I know.) Pardon me if I be large in transcribing his words.

Pag. 100, 101. [If we enquire of the manner how Righteousness and Life is derived from Christ, being one unto so many, it cannot be, except Christ be a general Head of mankind, and one Person with them, as Adam was, We do not read of any but two who were general Heads, and in some respect virtually, All mankind; the first and second Adam.—The Mark, Virtually.principal cause of this Representation whereby he is one person with us, is the will of God, who as Lord made him such, and as Lawgiver and Judge did so account him. p. 72But, 2. How far is he One person with us? Ans. 1. In general so far as it pleased God to make him so, and no further. 2. In Not absolutely.particular, He and we are one so far 1. As to make him liable to the penalty of the Law for us. 2. So far as to free us from that obligation, and derive the benefit of his death to us. Though Christ be so far one with us as to be lyable unto the penalty of the Law, and to suffer it, and upon this suffering we are freed; yet Christ is not the sinner, nor the sinner Christ. Christ is the Word made flesh, innocent without sin, an universal Priest and King: but we are none of these. Though we be accounted as one person in Law with him, by a Mark by a Trope.Trope; yet in proper sence it cannot be said that in Christ's Satisfying we satisfied for our own sins. For then we should have been the Word made flesh, able to plead Innocency, &c. All which are false, impossible, blasphemous if affirmed by any. Mark how far.It's true, we are so one with him, that he satisfied for us, and the benefit of this Satisfaction redounds to us, and is communicable to all, upon certain termes; though not actually communicated to all: From this Unity and Identity of person in Law (if I may so speak) it followeth clearly that Christ's sufferings were not only Afflictions, but Punishments in proper sense.—Pag. 102, 103. That Christ died for all in some sence must needs be granted, because the Scripture expresly affirms it (vid. reliqua.)—

There is another question unprofitably handled, p. 73Whether the Propitiation which includeth both Satisfaction and Merit, be to be ascribed to the Active or Passive Obedience of Christ? Ans. 1. Both his Active, Personal, Perfect and Perpetual Obedience, which by reason of his humane nature assumed, and subjection unto God was due, and also that Obedience to the great and transcendent Command of suffering the death of the Cross, both concur as Causes of Remission and Justification. 2. The Scriptures usually ascribe it to the Blood, Death, & Sacrifice of Christ, and never to the Personal Active Obedience of Christ's to the Moral Law. 3. Yet this Active Obedience is necessary, because without it he could not have offered that great Sacrifice of himself without spot to God. And if it had not been without spot, it could not have been propitiatory and effectual for Expiation. 4. If Christ as our Surety had performed for us perfect and perpetual Obedience, so that we might have been judged to have perfectly and fully kept the Law by him, then no sin could have been chargeable upon us, and the Death of Christ had been needless and superfluous. 5. Christs Propitiation freeth the Believer not only from the obligation unto punishment of sense, but of loss; and procured for him not only deliverance from evil deserved, but the enjoyment of all good necessary to our full happiness. Therefore, there is no ground of Scripture for that opinion, that the Death of Christ and his Sufferings free us from punishments, and by his Active Obedience imputed to us we are made righteous, and the heirs of life. 6. If Christ was bound to perform perfect and perpetual Obedience for us, and he also performed p. 74it for us, then we are freed not only from sin, but Obedience too: And this Obedience as distinct and separate from Obedience unto death, may be pleaded for Justification of Life, and will be sufficient to carry the Cause. For the tenor of the Law was this, Do this and live: And if man do this by himself or Surety, so as that the Lawgiver and supreme Judg accept it, the Law can require no more. It could not bind to perfect Obedience and to punishment too. There was never any such Law made by God or just men. Before I conclude this particular of the extent of Christs Merit and Propitiation, I thought good to inform the Reader, that as the Propitiation of Christ maketh no man absolutely, but upon certain terms pardonable and savable; so it was never made, either to prevent all sin, or all punishments: For it presupposeth man both sinful and miserable: And we know that the Guilt and Punishment of Adams sin, lyeth heavy on all his posterity to this day. And not only that, but the guilt of actual and personal sins lyeth wholly upon us, whilest impenitent and unbelieving and so out of Christ. And the Regenerate themselves are not fully freed from all punishments till the final Resurrection and Judgment. So that his Propitiation doth not altogether prevent but remove sin and punishment by degrees. Many sins may be said to be Remissible by vertue of this Sacrifice, which never shall be remitted.] So far Mr. Lawson.

Here I would add only these Animadversions. 1. That whereas he explaineth Christs personating us in suffering by the similitude of a Debtor and his Surety who are the same person in Law: I note 1. p. 75That the case of Debt much differeth from the case of Punishment. 2. That a Surety of Debt is either antecedently such, or consequently: Antecedently, either first one that is bound equally with the Debtor; 2. or one that promiseth to pay if he do not. I think the Law accounteth neither of these to be the Person of the principal Debtor (as it doth a Servant by whom he sends the Debt.) But Christ was neither of these: For the Law did not beforehand oblige him with us, nor did he in Law-sence undertake to pay the Debt, if we failed. Though God decreed that he should do so; yet that was no part of the sence of the Law. But consequently, if a friend of the Debtor when he is in Jayl will, without his request or knowledg, say to the Creditor, I will pay you all the Debt; but so that he shall be in my power, and not have present liberty (lest he abuse it) but on the terms that I shall please; yea not at all if he ungratefully reject it] This Consequent Satisfyer, or Sponsor, or Paymaster, is not in Law-sence the same Person with the Debtor: But if any will call him so, I will not contend about a word, while we agree of the thing (the terms of deliverance.) And this is as near the Case between Christ and us, as the similitude of a Debtor will allow.

2. I do differ from Mr. Lawson and Paraeus, and Ʋrsine, and Olevian, and Scultetus and all that sort of worthy Divines in this; that whereas they make Christs Holiness and perfect Obedience to be but Justitia personae, necessary to make his Sacrifice spotless and so effectual: I think that of it self it is as directly the cause of our Pardon, Justification and Life, as Christs Passion is; The Passion being satisfactory p. 76and so meritorious, and the personal Holiness Meritorious and so Satisfactory. For the truth is, The Law that condemned us was not fulfilled by Christs suffering for us, but the Lawgiver satisfied instead of the fulfilling of it: And that Satisfaction lyeth, in the substitution of that which as fully (or more) attaineth the ends of the Law as our own suffering would have done. Now the ends of the Law may be attained by immediate Merit of Perfection as well as by Suffering; but best by both. For 1. By the perfect Holiness and Obedience of Christ, the Holy and perfect will of God is pleased: whence [This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.] 2. In order to the ends of Government, Holiness and perfect Obedience, is honoured and freed from the contempt which sin would cast upon it; and the holiness of the Law in its Precepts is publickly honoured in this grand Exemplar; In whom only the will of God was done on Earth, as it is done in Heaven. And such a Specimen to the World is greatly conducible to the ends of Government: So that Christ voluntarily taking humane nature, which as such is obliged to this Perfection, He first highly merited of God the Father hereby, and this with his Suffering, went to attain the ends that our suffering should have attained, much better. So that at least as Meritorious, if not secondarily as satisfactory, I see not but Christs Holiness procureth the Justifying Covenant for us, equally with his Death. A Prince may pardon a Traitor for some noble service of his Friend, as well as for his suffering: much more for both. This way go Grotius de satisf. Mr. Bradshaw and others.

3. When Mr. Lawson saith that the Law binds p. 77not to Obedience and Punishment both, he meaneth as to the same Act: which contradicts not what Nigrinus and others say, that it binds a sinner to punishment for sin past, and yet to Obedience for the time to come: (which cannot be entire and perfect.)

So pag. 311. Cap. 22. Qu 2. Whether there be two parts of Justification, Remission and Imputation of Christs Righteousness. 1. He referreth us to what is aforecited against Imputation of Christs Active Righteousness, separated or abstracted for Reward from the Passive. 2. He sheweth that Paul taketh Remission of sin and Imputation of Righteousness for the same thing.] So say many of ours.

In conclusion I will mind the Reader, that by reading some Authors for Imputation, I am brought to doubt whether some deny not all true Remission of sin, that is, Remission of the deserved punishment. Because I find that by Remission they mean A non-Imputation of sin under the formal notion of sin; that God taketh it not to be our sin, but Christs; and Christs Righteousness and perfection to be so ours, as that God accounteth us not as truly sinners. And so they think that the Reatus Culpae as well as Poenae simply in it self is done away. Which if it be so, then the Reatus Poenae, the obligation to punishment, or the dueness of punishment, cannot be said to be dissolved or remitted, because it was never contracted. Where I hold, that it is the Reatus ad Poenam the Dueness of punishment only that is remitted, and the guilt of sin not as in it self, but in its Causality of punishment. And so in all common language, we say we forgive a man his fault, when we forgive him all the penalty positive and privative. Not esteeming him, 1. Never to have done the fact. 2. Or that p. 78fact not to have been a fault, and his fault; 3. but that punishment for that fault, is forgiven him, and the fault so far as it is a cause of punishment. We must not feign God to judg falsly.

This maketh me think of a saying of Bp. Ʋshers to me, when I mentioned the Papists placing Justification and Remission of sin conjunct, he told me that the Papists ordinarily acknowledg no Remission. And on search I find that Aquinas and the most of them place no true Remission of sin, in Justification: For by Remission (which they make part of Justification,) they mean Mortification, or destroying sin it self in the act or habit. But that the pardon of the punishment is a thing that we all need, is not denyable; nor do they deny it, though they deny it to be part of our Justification. For it's strange if they deny Christ the pardoning power which they give the Pope. And as Joh. Crocius de Justif. oft tells them, They should for shame grant that Christs Righteousness may be as far imputed to us, as they say a Saints or Martyrs redundant merits and supererogations are.

But if the Guilt of Fact and Guilt of Fault in it self considered, be not both imputed first to us, that is, If we be not judged sinners, I cannot see how we can be judged Pardoned sinners; For he that is judged to have no sin, is judged to deserve no punishment. Unless they will say that to prevent the form and desert of sin, is eminenter, though not formaliter, to forgive. But it is another (even Actual) forgiveness which we hear of in the Gospel, and pray for daily in the Lords prayer. Of all which see the full Scripture-proof in Mr. Hotchkis of Forgiveness of sin.