The Drinking of the Bitter Cup, Text (2 of 6)

The Drinking of the Bitter Cup · Text (2 of 6)

p. 53A ſtrong Conſolation, Gods heart toward his people when his hand is againſt them.which being rightly applyed may be of great uſe for the bearing up of the hearts and ſpirits of all Gods Saints and ſervants in the ſaddeſt condition. Even then when God ſeemeth to be turned their enemy, ſo as they have no ſenſe and feeling of his love and favour towards them, but all things are againſt them, his countenance is againſt them, his hand is againſt them, he writeth bitter things againſt them, (as Job ſaith of himſelf, Job 13.26.) proceeding againſt them in a way of Judgement, yet even then his heart is towards them. He is ſtill the ſame that ever he was; I am the Lord, I change not, Mal. 3.6. Though he come againſt them as a Judge, yet ſtill is he the ſame tender p. 54and compaſſionate Father that ever he was. At this time when Chriſt was to drink this bitter Cup, to indure theſe bitter ſufferings, God the Father had now put upon himſelf the perſon of a Judge, requiring and exacting from him a full ſatisfaction for all the ſins which he as a Surety had undertaken, ſo as his Fatherly affection ſeemed now to be layed aſide, yet even now doth he lay claim to this Relation, calling him his Father, ſtill looking upon him under the ſame notion. Now if he did ſo look upon him even then when he was powring out Vialls of wrath upon him, inflicting upon him thoſe ſatisfactory puniſhments, how much more may his children ſo look upon him, when he is inflicting upon them only caſtigatory puniſhments, exerciſing them with afflictions and tryals for their good. Which, be they what they will, never ſo ſharp, never ſo bitter, yet let them reſt aſſured that they cannot diſſolve that Relation, that Affection which is betwixt God and them, ſo as to ſeparate them from his love. This is the matter of Pauls triumph in that known Text, Rom. 8.35. Who (or what) ſhall ſeparate us from the love of God in Chriſt? This ſhall not whatever Tribulation or diſtreſſe doe (as it there followeth.) God being once a Father, he will be ever a Father to his Children.

Only then (in the ſecond place) labour we every of us to make ſure this Relation, Ʋſe 2 Make ſure this Relation, that God is our Father.that God is once our Father. Our Father, and that not only by Creation, which he is to all Creatures; nor yet only in reſpect of an outward viſible Covenant, as he was to Iſrael, I am a Father to Iſrael, Jer. 31.9 and is to all within the pale of the p. 55viſible Church; but by Adoption, that he hath by a ſpeciall grace adopted us into the dignity of his children. Which we may be aſſured of when once we have received that Spirit of Adoption, which the Apoſtle ſpeaketh of, Rom. 8.15. foreign, the holy Spirit of God regenerating of us, and working effectually in us, working in us a childe-like diſpoſition, filiall affections towards this our heavenly Father, a filial fear, a filial love, a filial affiance, cauſing us to fear him as a Father, to love him as a Father, to truſt in him and depend upon him as a Father. Finding ſuch a diſpoſition, ſuch affections in our hearts, now may we be aſſured that God is our Father.

And being our Father let us now call him ſo. Ʋſe 3 Call God our Father.This is that which the Lord ſaith of his ſervant David, Pſal. 89.26. He ſhall cry unto me, thou art my Father. And it is that which he requireth from his people the Jewes, Jer. 3.4. Wilt thou not from this time cry unto me, My Father? viz. from the time that he had admoniſhed them of their duty, and corrected them for their ſins. And ſo again verſ. 19. of the ſame Chapter, I ſaid, thou ſhalt call me My Father, that is, ſo own and acknowledge me. And this let all the Lords people do. This is the language which the Spirit of Adoption teacheth all Gods children, to call God their Father. Ye have received the Spirit of Adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father, (ſaith Paul to his Romans) Rom. 8.15. And the like to his Galathians, Gal. 4.6. Becauſe ye are Sons, God hath ſent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. And this do we, call God our Father, and that not only with our tongues but our hearts, ſo p. 56looking upon him, ſo owning and acknowledging of him. Which do we at all times, in all eſtates and conditions, God to be looked upon by his Children as a Father.in Adverſity as well as Proſperity, in whatever God doth to us, or we to him, ſtill look upon him under the notion of a Father.

1. 1As (firſt) in receiving of mercies and bleſſings from him, In receiving of mercies.take them as from the hand of a Father, as pledges and tokens of his love, therein acknowledging his Fatherly affection.

2. 2So alſo in confeſſing of ſins, and begging pardon for them, In confeſſing of ſins.come unto God as unto a Father. So doth the Prodigall Son in the Parable, Luk. 15.18. I will ariſe (ſaith he) and go to my Father, and will ſay unto him, Father, I have ſinned againſt heaven, and before thee.]

3. 3So again, in deploring of wants, ſpirituall or temporall, In deploring of Wants.and making ſuit for a ſupply of them, come unto God as a Father. So our Saviour teacheth us to do in that Pattern and Form of Prayer which he hath left us, When ye pray, ſay, Our Father which art in heaven, Luk. 11.6. directing Chriſtians to make all their addreſſes unto God under that notion, as a Father. When thou pray ſt pray to thy Father, Math. 6.6.

4. 4And ſo again in Deprecations of evils feared, when God ſeemeth to be coming againſt us, In deprecating of evils feared.yet call him Father. So did David his Father-in-law, King Saul; when he was coming out againſt him, hunting his ſoul to take it, (as he ſpeaks) yet even then he calls out to him. My Father, 1 Sam. 24.11. And the like do we to our heavenly Father. Though he come againſt us as an enemy, yet ſtill call him Father. So doth our bleſſed Saviour, when he p. 57ſaw this bitter Cup coming towards him, apprehended his Paſſion at hand, He fell on his face, (ſaith the Text) and prayed, ſaying, O my Father, if it be poſſible, let this Cup paſſe from me, Matth. 26.39.

5. And the like alſo in Evils felt. 5When the hand of God lyeth heavy upon us, In preſent ſufferings.preſſing us ſore, yet ſtill call him Father. So doth the Church in thoſe Texts forecited, when God hid himſelf from her, dealt moſt ſeverely with her, yet ſtill ſhe challengeth her Relation, calling him her Father, Doubtleſſe thou art our Father, Iſa. 63.16. But now, O Lord, thou art our Father, Cap. 64.7. And ſo doth our bleſſed Saviour in the Paroxiſme of his Paſſion, hanging upon the Croſſe, ſtill he retains his former language, calling God his Father. Father forgive them, Luk. 23.34. And when the pangs of death were upon him, he breatheth out his ſoul with thoſe words, Father, into thy hand I commend my Spirit, verſ. 46. of that Chap. And the like do we, ſtirring up our hearts to a holy imitation of this our heavenly Pattern. In all our afflictions and ſufferings of what knide ſoever they be, yet ſtill call God Father; ſo look we upon him, ſo apprehend, and acknowledge him.

A good ſign of a gracious ſpirit ſo to doe, To call God Father, when he frowns, a ſign of a gracious ſpirit.(I ſcarce know a better,) then to call God Father when he frowns upon us, is angry with us, hath a rod in his hand, when he is correcting us. An eaſie matter it is ſo to do whileſt he is ſmiling upon us, whileſt we receive or expect bleſſings and favours from him. Bleſſe me my Father (ſaith Eſau to Iſaac) Gen. 27.34. But when he hath (as I ſaid) a rod in his hand, and we feel the ſmart p. 58of it, when his hand lyeth heavy upon us, when he writeth bitter things againſt us, when he is turned to be our enemy, fighting againſt us by his Judgements, then to call him Father, ſo to look upon him, ſo to apprehend and acknowledge him, ſurely this is no other but a fruit of that Spirit, the Spirit of Adoption.

And this let all Gods children ſtir up their hearts to doe, To look upon God as a Father, of great uſe in Afflictions.thus to look upon God in all their afflictions. A thing which will be of great uſe to us for the quieting, and comforting, and ſupporting our ſpirits under whatever ſufferings. So long as a man looketh upon God as an Enemy to him, or as a ſevere Judge coming againſt him, he can have no comfort, being conſcious to himſelf of his own demerits, but when once he cometh to look upon him as a Father, this ſweetneth the bittereſt Cup, making a man drink it the more willingly, whileſt it giveth him a comfortable hope and aſſurance of a wiſe and mercifull moderation of his Affliction, a gracious ſupport under it, and a ſeaſonable iſſue out of it; all which it doth.

Q. How this may be attained.But how ſhall we attain to this, thus to look upon God in our ſuffering condition.

A. Learn to live by faith.For this, learn to live by Faith. So lives the Righteous perſon, as the Prophet Habakuk tells us, Hab. 2.4. The juſt ſhall live by his Faith; Live by it in all eſtates and conditions. This is the Anchor which he rideth by in whatever ſtorms and tempeſts. When ſenſe and feeling fail he lives by Faith. And thus let us learn to live. So lived our bleſſed Saviour in his Paſſion upon the Croſſe; when ſenſe and feeling failed him, ſo as p. 59he did not finde thoſe ſweet influences, and gracious communications from God his Father as formerly he had done, as to his preſent apprehenſion he had even forſaken him, (of which he complains) yet even then he lives by Faith, ſetting that awork, ſtill calling God his God, My God, my God, why haſt thou forſaken me? Matth. 27.46. Thus did he by this eye of Faith ſee one contrary in and through another, Mercy in the midſt of Judgement, a tender Father in the habit of an angry Judge. And thus learn we of him to live. This is the proper life of a Chriſtian, to live here, not by ſenſe, but by Faith. The life which I now live in the Fleſh I live by the Faith of the Son of God, (ſaith Paul of himſelf) Gal. 2.20. Whileſt he lived in the Fleſh, in the body, he lived by Faith, Faith in Chriſt, reſting and relying upon Gods grace through him. And thus let us live; and that in all eſtates. Whatever our condition be, however the Lord be pleaſed to deal with us. Suppoſe as (Hezekiah complains, Iſa. 38.13.) he breaketh all our bones as a Lyon, or that with Job, we feel the Arrowes of the Almighty ſticking in us, the Poyſon whereof drinketh up our ſpirits, and the terrors of God ſet themſelves in array againſt us, as he ſpeaks (Job 6.4) or that, with Paul, we are troubled on every ſide, having fightings without, and terrors within, (as it was with him, 2 Cor. 7.5.) being exerciſed both with Temporall and Spirituall conflicts, in the outward and inward man, (both which Gods deareſt children are ſubject to in this life) yet even in this condition ſet faith awork to look through all theſe clouds, that ſo we may behold our Fathers face, ſee the light of the countenance of p. 60a reconciled God and Father in Chriſt, making diſcovery of his yet continued love and favour to us.

Q. But how ſhall Faith make this diſcovery?

A. Why, by looking through the Glaſſe of the Promiſe, which repreſents God as he is, not as he ſeemeth to be. And this let us have recourſe unto, hearkening what the Promiſe will ſay to us. In our ſaddeſt extremities when ſenſe and feeling repreſent God unto us as an Enemy, now hear what the Promiſe ſaith. That will give us aſſurance of what we have heard, that being once our Father, he will be ever our Father. So as though he may be angry with us, yet he will not utterly reject thoſe whom he hath taken into Covenant with himſelf. If they break my Statutes, &c. I will viſit their tranſgreſſions with the Rod, and their iniquities with ſtripes; nevertheleſſe my loving kindeneſſe will I not utterly take from him, (ſo runs that Promiſe forecited.) Now the word of Promiſe is a ſure word, a word of truth, which God will not fail in the performance of. I will not ſuffer my faithfulneſse to fail; my Covenant will I not break, (ſo it there followeth.) And therefore, whatever ſenſe and feeling ſay, hear what the Promiſe ſaith, caſting our Anchor upon that ground, living by Faith in it.

It is the want of this that maketh Chriſtians ſo dejected under their afflictions and troubles as often they are. Living by Senſe, a cauſe of great dejections.They live by ſenſe and feeling, apprehending God to be as they feel him. Whereas if Faith were acted, and ſet a work as it might be, what a conſtant clear Sunſhine day might the life of a Chriſtian be? Were a man p. 61aloft above the Clouds, he ſhould ſee the Sun ſhining clearly in the darkeſt gloomieſt day of Winter; and were the ſoul mounted, (as it might be) by Faith upon the wings of the Promiſes, what a conſtant apprehenſion of Gods love and favour might it injoy? beholding God as a reconciled Father even then when there is nothing but wrath and anger in his face. Which let all his Children endeavour to doe.

To cloſe up this point, Ʋſe 3 (in the laſt place) Is God thus a Father when he ſtrikes, Chriſtians to receive correct on from God, as from a Father.then receive we correction from him as from the hand of a Father. So our bleſſed Saviour here taketh this Cup, as from the hand of his Father. And ſo take we all thoſe Cups which he ſhall reach forth unto us, all thoſe Afflictions and Croſſes wherewith he ſhall pleaſe to exerciſe us, take them as from the hand of a Father.

Q. And how is that?

A. Why, With a quiet and humble ſubmiſſion.with a reverent and humble ſubmiſſion and ſubjection; neither ſlighting of them, nor fainting under them. My Son deſpiſe not the chaſtening of the Lord, neither be weary of his correction (ſaith the Wiſe man to his Son) Prov. 3.11. But quietly and contentedly ſubmit to his Diſpenſations. Humbling our ſelves under his hand, (as St. Peter exhorts, 1 Pet. 5.6) So do children, if ingenuous, well-natured and nurtured, receive correction from the hands of their naturall Parents, and in like manner receive we chaſtiſements from the hand of our heavenly Father. That is the Exhortation which the Apoſtle preſſeth, and that upon this very ground. Heb. 12.9. Moreover (ſaith he) we have had Fathers of p. 62our bodies which corrected us, and we gave them reverence; ſhould we not much rather be in ſubjection to the Father of Spirits? For within the next Verſe he ſubjoyneth a Reaſon. For they verily for a few dayes chaſtened us after their pleaſure, but he doth it for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holyneſse, verſ. 11. Naturall Parents ſometimes prove unnaturall to their children, correcting them in paſſion, it may be out of ſome miſtake, or out of a corrupt judgement, ſo doing more hurt then good by their Corrections. But ſo doth not our heavenly Father; who being a wiſe and mercifull God, never correcteth his children but where need is, and then he doth it in ſuch a manner as may be for their ſpiritual advantage, ſo as they may be the better for it. And therefore whatever the Rod be, kiſſe it; whatever the Cup be, take it as from the hand of a Father, drinking it not only patiently, but willingly, ſubmitting our wills to his will. So doth our heavenly Pattern, our bleſſed Lord and Saviour. However, he could have wiſhed that this Cup might have paſſed from him, yet he ſubmits his will to the will of his heavenly Father. Nevertheleſſe, not as I will, but as thou wilt, Mat. 26.39. And this he doth willingly. The Cup which my Father hath given me ſhall I not drink it? But of this I ſhall have occaſion to ſpeak more hereafter. Thus I have done with the Agent, who it was that preſented this Cup to our Saviour, My Father.]

Come we now (in the next place) to the Action it ſelf, 2The Action.which is,

The Giving of this Cup, The Cup which my Father hath given me.] foreign.

p. 63So it was, Doct. it was God the Father which gave this Cup to his Son Chriſt.God the Father gave this Cup to his Sonne, gave his Son to dye.

Mark it. Here is the chief and principal Doctrine that this former part of the Text affords us. God the Father gave this Cup to his Son Chriſt. Which in effect, and for ſubſtance ſpeaketh one and the ſame thing with that of the Apoſtle, Rom. 8.32. God ſpared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all. So was it in the Type, Abraham offered up his Son. By Faith Abraham, when he was tryed, offered up Iſaac, and he that received the Promiſes offered up his only begotten Son, (ſo the Apoſtle to the Hebrewes hath it,) Heb. 11.17. And St. James the like. Was not Abraham our Father juſtified by works, when be had offered up Iſaac his Son upon the Altar? Jam. 2.21. This did he intentionally, in affection and reſolution, binding his Son, and laying him upon the Altar, ſtretching forth his hand with the ſacrificing Knife to ſlay him, as the ſtory ſets it forth, Gen. 22.9, 10. Which in Gods acceptation was all one as if he had done what he purpoſed and intended to doe. And ſo was it in the truth of that Type. God the Father offers up his Son, his only begotten Son Jeſus Chriſt, offers him up upon the Altar of the Croſſe. Where, (as the Prophet Iſai deſcribeth his Paſſion) Iſa. 53.10. It pleaſed the Lord to bruiſe him, he hath put him to grief; when thou ſhalt make his ſoul an offering for ſin, &c. Thus did God the Father give this bitter Cup to his Son; giving him to ſuffer, and die that painfull, ſhamefull, accurſed death of the Croſſe. Obj.

Obj. But was this the Fathers act, How is Chriſt ſaid to give himſelf.(here to remove a ſtone which lyeth in my way, to meet with an obvious Objection) Did God the Father p. 64give this Cup to his Son, give him to the death, how then is Chriſt ſaid to give and offer up himſelf? So we finde it frequently elſewhere expreſſed. He gave himſelf for us, that he might redeem us, Tit. 2.14. Who gave himſelf for our ſins, that he might redeem us from this preſent evil world, Gal. 1.4. Who through the eternal Spirit offered up himſelf, Heb. 7.27. He poured out his ſoul unto death. Iſa. 53.12. So runs the phraſe of Scripture ordinarily, ſpeaking of the Death and Paſſion of Chriſt as his own voluntary act. I lay down my life for my Sheep, Joh. 10.15. Therefore doth my Father love me, becauſe I lay down my life, verſ. 17. And again (as it followeth) No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my ſelf, I have power to lay it down, &c. verſ. 18. How then is this here attributed to the Father, that he ſhould give this Cup to him?

A. Anſw. 1 To this the Anſwer is obvious.

1. Chriſt as God co-working with his Father.If we look at Chriſt as God, the Son of God, here that trite, but true Maxim will be of uſe, Opera Trinitatis ad extra ſunt indiviſa. All the external works and actions of the Trinity, ſuch acts as they do out of themſelves, for or upon the Creature, they are common to all the three Perſons, ſo as they may be indifferently referred and attributed to all, or any of them. Such was the work of Creation, the joynt work of all the three Perſons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt; and ſo attributed ſometimes to one, ſometimes to another. And ſuch was this work of …ed…mption, however undertaken by one, yet it was deſigned by all the three Perſons, being done by the mutual conſent and agreement of all, Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt; all concurring in p. 65the deſign; though not in the execution of it. What Chriſt as Mediator ſuffered he did it by the joynt conſent of all the three Perſons. And therefore is it ſometimes attributed to one, ſometimes to another. Sometimes to the Father, and ſometimes to the Son; who as they are one God, ſo they have one will, and one work. The Son can do nothing of himſelf (ſaith our Saviour) but what he ſeeth the Father doe. For what things ſoever the Father doth, theſe alſo doth the Son likewiſe, Joh. 5.19. Thus did Chriſt the Son, not only imitate his Father, doing works like unto his, but Cooperate with him, doing the ſame works. And hence is it that the ſame Action is attributed ſometimes to the one, and ſometimes to the other. Thus we here finde the giving of Chriſt to the Death, which yet was his own act, attributed by him to God his Father, he being the firſt worker in reſpect of Order, and manner of working, The Gup which my Father hath given me.]

But (ſecondly) look upon Chriſt as Man, A. 2 or rather as Mediator, as God and Man, As Mediator ſubſervient to him.ſo we ſhall finde him ſubſervient to his Father, readily doing his will. Lo I come to do thy will, O God, Heb. 10.7, 9. And as doing, ſo ſuffering it. Which he did in obedience unto him. He humbled himſelf, and became obedient to the death, Phil. 2.8. And thus, as his Father gave the Cup, ſo he drank it, ſo giving himſelf to the Death. Even as it is not without ground conceived concerning the Type forementioned, Abrahams offering of his Son Iſaac. This was Abrahams act, and yet ſo as his Son concurred in it, and that more then as a meer Patient, being obedient to his Father, p. 66at his command carrying of the Wood, yielding himſelf to be bound, and layd upon the Altar, all which he did willingly. So was it with our bleſſed Saviour. Being acquainted with his Fathers will, he yields himſelf to be bound,—which he was firſt in the Garden (as we have it in the verſe after the Text.) and then by Caiaphas, (as we finde it Mar. 15.1.) bears his Croſſe, ſubmits unto the Death. Thus the Father gave his Son, and yet the Son gave himſelf. But not to inſiſt upon this.

Q. Explic. What God the Father did, in and about the paſſion of his Son.The way being thus cleared, now come we by way of Explication to make enquiry, what God the Father did in and about the Paſſion of his Son, that he is here ſaid to give the Cup to him. The reſolving of this Queſtion will clear up this great and uſetull truth.

A. This concurrence conſiſting in divers particulars.The Action and concurrence of God the Father, in and about the Death and Paſſion of his Son it conſiſteth in divers particulars. Take we notice of five or ſix of them.

1. 1He was privy to it, he foreſaw it, he foreknew it. He foreſaw it.This he did from Eternity. So he doth all his Works. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the World, Act. 15.18. Whatſoever God bringeth to paſſe in time it is known to him before time: And ſo was this work, the work of Redemption, wrought by the ſufferings of Chriſt, it was foreſeen, foreknown by God from Eternity. This none will queſtion.

2. Foreſeeing of this before it was done, he alſo permitted it to be done. Foreſeeing whatever ſhould be done to his Son Christ by Satan and his Inſtruments, he gave way to it, permit…ing Satan to enter into Judas, and Judas to betray p. 67his Maſter, and the Officers to apprehend him, and carry him away, and Pilate and the reſt to ſit in judgement and paſſe ſentence upon him, and to execute that ſentence. All which he could have hindered if he had pleaſed. Thinkeſt thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he ſhall preſently give me more then twelve Legions of Angels, (ſaith our Saviour to Peter) Math. 26.53. God the Father wanted no power to have hindered all that was done to his Son, but he permitted it. Thus far Bellarmine, and the whole Church of Rome will go along with us. But we muſt not ſtay here. The phraſe in the Text imports more. Gods giving this Cup to his Son imports more then a bare proviſion or permiſſion. And therefore here leaving them, paſſe we on.

3. In the third place, 3God as he foreſaw and permitted this, ſo he willed it. He willed it. Bradward. contrà Pelagianos. lib. 1. cap. 33.So he doth whatever he permits. So Bradwardine rightly determins it. Reſpectu cujuſcunque eſt Dei permiſſio eſt & ejus volitio actualis. Whatever God permits to be done he alſo actually willeth that it ſhould be done. And ſo he did the Death and Paſſion of his Son. So much we may learn from thoſe words of our Saviour, Math. 26.39. where praying that if it were poſſible this Cup might paſſe from him, he ſubjoyns, Nevertheleſſe not as I will, but as thou wilt. God did not only permit his Son to dye, but he willed his death. Upon which account it is that the Prophet Iſai there ſaith, It pleaſed the Lord to bruiſe him, Iſa. 53.10. Dominus volu…t. It was his will, his pleaſure that he ſhould ſuffer what he did; having in his ſecret Counſell decreed and determined it from eternity. p. 68For this expreſſe is that known Text, Idem eſt foreign, et 1 Pet. 1, 2. nam foreign in his libris Decretum ſoepe ſignificat. Grot. Anno…. in loc.1 Pet 1:2Act. 2.23. which informs us, that Chriſt was delivered by the determinate counſell, and foreknowledge of God; That is, by his decree, for ſo are we to underſtand the word (knowledge) there, not barely of a ſimple preſcience, a foreſight, but of a determinate and abſolute decree. So we finde the word elſewhere uſed, as 1 Pet. 1, 2. where Believers are ſaid to be elect according to the foreknowledge of God, that is, according to his Decree. And ſo was Christ delivered according to the foreknowledge. the determinate Counſel of God. foreign. God in his eternal Counſell and Purpoſe had decreed that his Son ſhould ſuffer and dye. Upon which account (among ſome other) he is ſaid to be the Lamb ſlayn from the foundation of the World. Rev. 13.8. He was ſo in Gods Decree, who had determined that he ſhould dye.The Circumſtances of Chriſts death all determined by his Father.

And determining the thing he determined alſo all the circumſtances concerning it. As what kinde of death he ſhould dye, even that accurſed death upon the Croſſe. So much our Saviour intimated to Nicodemus, Joh. 3.14. where he tells him, that As Moſes lift up the Serpent in the Wilderneſſe, even ſo muſt the Son of man be lifted up, foreign, oportet exaltari, muſt be lifted up, ſo. Patris decreto (as Grotius there rightly) according to the Decree of God the Father lifted upon the tree of the Croſſe. And the like to the Jewes, cap. 12. of the ſame Goſpel, verſ. 32. where ſpeaking in the ſame language, he tells them, that If he were lift up from the earth he would draw all men unto him, This he ſaid, (ſaith the next verſe) ſignifying what death he p. 69ſhould die; viz. the death of the Croſſe. And ſo alſo the Time, when he ſhould dye, which till it was come, his enemies could not lay hands on him. As yet no man layed hands on him, (ſaith that Text, Joh. 8.20.) for his hour was not yet come, the time appointed by his Father for him to ſuffer in. And as the time ſo the place. So much he declared to his Diſciples, Math. 16 21. where he tells them that he muſt goe to Jeruſalem, Neque enim hic aut de praefinito Dei conſilio, aut de utilitate rei agitur, ſed res futura nudè praedicitur. Grot. Annot. in loc.and ſuffer many things of the Elders, and be killed. foreign, (where I know not any juſt ground why Grotius ſhould refuſe to expound the word (foreign) as he did in that former Text,) Oportet eum ire, He muſt go thither: It was not a thing left to his own liberty, or choice, but being determined by his Father, it was now neceſſary; neceſſitate decreti divini, in regard of Gods Decree which was immutable, (as Pareus expounds it.) Haecerat aetrrni Patris voluntas immutabilis. Pareus, Com. in loc.And the like we may ſay for the Perſons, who ſhould be Actors in this Tragedy, and what part every of them ſhould act, what they ſhould do. Never a circumſtance but was predetermined by God. So that one Text ſets it forth moſt fully, Act. 4.27, 28. Of a truth (ſaith Peter) againſt thine holy Childe Jeſus, whom thou haſt anoynted, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Iſrael were gathered together to doe whatſoever thy hand and thy Counſell had determined before to be done. Thus did God the Father (as I ſaid) appoint and order all the ſeverall Ingredients; every grain that was to be put into this Cup, decreeing and determining whatever his Son was to ſuffer.

4. He revealed his will concerning it.And (fourthly) having thus in his ſecret Counſell decreed this his ſuffering, he alſo revealed p. 70it, making known his will concerning his Son, that he ſhould ſuffer and die. This he had done by Types and Figures. As that of Abrahams offering his Son, his only Son, in whom all the Nations of the earth ſhould be bleſſed, (of which I ſpake before.) So alſo in and by all thoſe bloody Sacrifices under the Law, all which were ſhadowes of what was to come, repreſenting the death of Jeſus Chriſt, who was to be offered up a true Propitiatory Sacrifice for the ſins of the World. But more clearly by Propheſies, divers of which we meet with in the Old Teſtament. Among which that of the Prophet Iſai is moſt clear, Iſa. 53. where he deſcribeth the Death and Paſſion of Chriſt, rather like an Evangeliſt then a Prophet, as if he had been a Spectator of it. And ſo other of the Prophets, they foretold what things Jeſus was to ſuffer. As St. Peter ſets it forth, Act. 3.18. Theſe things (ſaith he) which God before had ſhewed by the mouth of all his Prophets, that Chriſt ſhould ſuffer, he hath alſo fulfilled. Thus God reveal…d what before he had decreed. Which our Saviour taking notice of, he here ſpeaks of his Paſſion after this manner, Non loquitur dubitativè, fortaſſe Pater …c vult, ſed aſſertativè, Calicem quem dedit. Ferus Com. in Text.calling it the Cup which his Father had given him. Being fully acquainted with his Fathers will, he ſpeaks of what he was to ſuffer non dubitativè, ſed aſſertivè, (as Ferus notes upon it) not as a thing doubtfull, but certain. The Cup which my Father hath given me.]

5. 5Yet further, God having thus decreed, and made known his purpoſe concerning his Son, He delivereth him up.he alſo delivereth him into the hands of thoſe who were to execute that his decree. Who was delivered for our offences, (ſaith the Apoſtle p. 71ſpeaking of Chriſt) Rom. 4. verſ. laſt; foreign, delivered unto death by God his Father, as that other forecited Text explains it, Rom. 8.32. He ſpared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all. This he did when by his all-diſpoſing providence he brought him into the Garden, where the Officers ſhould come to apprehend him, and ſo delivered him into their hands, and into the hands of other his enemies.

6. And laſtly, 6having delivered him into their hands, he alſo impowred them for the doing of what they did to him. So our Saviour upon his Arraignment tells Pilate, Joh. 19.11. Thou couldeſt have no power againſt me at all except it were given thee from above. That Authority which Pilate had to ſit in Judgement and paſſe ſentence upon him, and ſo that power which others had to execute that ſentence, they had it from above, from God. In all theſe they were but Inſtruments made uſe of by him, in the mean time it was he that had the main ſtroke in the work, he being the chief and principal agent.

Thus you ſee how God did concur in the death and Paſſion of this his Son. He not only was privy to it, and permitted it, but he decreed and determined it, and every circumſtance in it, making known his will concerning it, delivering him into the hands of his enemies, and giving them power to execute what he had decreed. So as putting all theſe together, well may we conclude, what our Saviour there aſſerts concerning this Cup, that it was given him by his Father.

But was it ſo? Queſt. From hence now ariſe two Queries, two ſcruples, Two queſtions of great importance.calling for ſatisfaction before we proceed any further. If God the Father, p. 72did thus give this Cup to his Son Chriſt, why then,

1. How did the Jewes ſin in putting him to death?

And (ſecondly) if they did ſin, How then is Ged free from being the Author of that ſin, or from partaking in it?

Two Queſtions of great importance. I ſhall endeavour to give a full ſolution to both.

To begin with the firſt. Q. 1 If God thus gave this Cup to his Son, How the Jewes finned in executing of what God had thus decreed.ſo concurred in this his Paſſion as we have heard, how did the Jewes ſin in putting him to death? Quaeritur, ſi Pater dedit Chriſto hunc calicem, quid pe…caverunt Judaei, qui cum Chriſto dederunt, intulerunt, & propinaverunt. Carthus. Enar. in Text.When as they were but Inſtruments, onelyonly reaching this Cup to him, God himſelf being the principal Agent, how were they culpable?

To this let me return a threefold Anſwer. Anſw. 1They were voluntary Inſtruments.

1. Diſtinguiſhing of Inſtruments; which are of two ſorts,

Meerly Inſtrumentall, or

Ministerial.

Meer Inſtruments are ſuch as have no activity, nor efficacy in themſelves for the doing of any thing further than as they are acted by another. Such is the Axe in the hand of the Carpenter, and the Sword in the hand of the Souldier.

But ſuch were not the Jewes, they were not meer, but Miniſterial Inſtruments, voluntary Agents, doing what herein they did, not by any p. 73coaction or conſtraint, but freely, willingly. Impii dum peccant non ſunt propr…è Inſtrumenta Dei, mota ſc… ſine interno principio motus, ſed metaphoricè, ita ſc. mota ut liberè moveant ſemetipſa. D. Ames Bellarm. Enerv. t. 4. c. 2. Hominis voluntas eſt quodammodo Dei Inſtrumentum, non purum & merum, ſed liberum, Alvartz. Diſput. 68.5.Such an Inſtrument is man in the hands of God. Being a reaſonable creature, indued with underſtanding and will, what he doth, he doth it freely, there being no violence in any thing offered to his will. True it is, the will of man alſo is Gods Instrument, but ſuch an Inſtrument, not a meer, but a Ministerial, a free and voluntary Inſtrument. Being moved it moveth of it ſelf, not being ſubject to coaction or compulſion. Voluntas ſi cogeretur deſinit eſſe voluntas. If the will could be compelled it ſhould ceaſe to be a will; it ever acteth freely. And ſo did the Jewes in putting the Lord of life to death, they were not meer Inſtruments, but voluntary Agents, and ſo cannot be excuſable in what they did.

2. The Jewes were culpable in acting of that which God had decreed and determined, Anſw. 2 inafmuch as they had no warrant, They had no warrant for what they did.no rule for what they did. Nay, they went againſt the rule. What is the Rule by which all the actions of men ought to be ſquared? Why, Gods ſecret will no warrant for man.it is the Revealed will of God. As for his ſecret will, that is his own rule, not Mans. Secret things belong unto the Lord, but revealed things to us and to our children, Deut. 29.29.

Obj. Why, Obj. but was not this will of God revealed to them? Whether this will of God was revealed to the Jewes, that Chriſt, ſhould die.Caiaphas the High-prieſt by a Prophetical Spirit tells it them, that it was expedient for them, that one man ſhould die for the people, Joh. 11.50. ſo propheſying, that Jeſus ſhould die for that Nation; and not for that Nation only, but that he might gather together in one the children of God that were ſcattered abroad, (as it there followeth) verſ. 51, 52.

p. 74A. Yet had they no word of command to put him to death.But ſuppoſe they had underſtood this, (which yet Caiaphas himſelf did not; This ſpake he not of himſelf, (ſaith that 51. verſ.) God only made uſe of his Tongue, to utter an Oracle which he knew not the true ſenſe and myſtery of) yet could not this have been an excuſe for them, inaſmuch as they had no direction, no word of command from God to put their hands to this work. This it is which is mans warrant for all his actions, without which, actions which in themſelves ſeem to be good and commendable, become evil and ſinfull. Sauls ſacrificing, take it with all the circumſtances of it, and it ſeemeth at leaſt not to be ſo great an evil, yet haing no rule, no ſuch warrant for it, it was diſpleaſing to God, and proved fatal to him, and his. And ſo Ʋzzahs putting his hand to ſtay the Ark when it was in danger of falling, it was to the outward ſhew a pious action, yet being irregular, without warrant, it became to him a mortall ſin, he was ſtruck dead for it. So on the other hand, Actions which ſeem to be, nay in ſome reſpects, are unlawfull and ſinfull, yet if Gods word of command come upon them, it is like the Kings Stamp upon a baſe piece of Metall, which maketh it currant, it maketh them not only excuſable, not ſinfull, but an acceptable ſervice. If Judas and the High-prieſts, and the reſt who imbrued their hands in the blood of this ſacrifice, who had a hand in putting Chriſt to death, had had but a word of command from God for the doing of what they did, and in obedience to that command had done it, this had been no more ſin in them then it had been in Abraham to have actually offered up his Son, which he intended p. 75to have done; or then it was in the Iſraelites to ſpoyl the Egyptians, as they did, by borrowing what they never intended to pay, Exod. 3. verſ. laſt; or then it is in an Executioner, to execute that ſentence upon a Malefactor which is paſs'd upon him, which another might not doe. It was their ſwerving from the Rule, acting without a Warrant, which made this act of theirs ſo horrid and ſinfull. It matters not what God had purpoſed and determined in his ſecret Counſell, that was no rule to them, nor can it be any plea for them.

3 And again, (in the third place) however, A. 3 herein they did nothing but what God had decreed and determined, This Act of the Jewes done by them,yet was this evill and ſinfull in them, inaſmuch as they did what they did out of an evill principle, and to an evill end.

1. Out of an evil and ſinfull principle. 1Out of an evil Principle.What was it that put them upon the doing of what herein they did? Why in ſome of them it was baſe covetouſneſſe, as in Judas. What will you give me, and I will deliver him unto you? (ſaith he) Matth. 26.15. In others it was malice; ſo it was in the High-prieſts, Scribes and Phariſees, and ſome other, His Citizens hated him, (ſaith the Parable) Luk. 19.14. They have hated both me and my Father, Joh. 15.24. In ſome it was fear, as in Pilate, who being willing to content the people, releaſed Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jeſus, when he had ſcourged him, to be crucified, (as St. Mark ſets it forth) Mar. 15.15. Out of a baſe ſervile fear he would complie with a giddy, inraged multitude, doing what they would have him, though againſt his own conſcience. And others out of a p. 76blinde and furious zeal. So was it in many of the vulgar, for whom our Saviour in his Paſſion puts up that charitable Prayer, Father forgive them, for they know not what they doe, Luk. 23.34. Now this Evil principle rendred the Action ſinfull in them, though it had been warrantable in it ſelf.

Secondly, 2it was alſo evil in the End. What was it that herein they aimed at? To an evil End.it Not the Glory of God, not the fulfilling of his will, not the ſalvation of his Elect people, but the executing of their own covetous, ambitious, malicious purpoſes, in taking that great Prophet out of the way, and ſo extirpating of that Doctrine which he had preached amongſt them. As for Gods ends they never came into their thoughts. Unde nec excuſantur, quia nec ea intentione Chriſtum occiderunt quâ pater voluit eum mori. Carthuſ. Enar. in loc.As it was with Sennacherib the King of Aſſyria, (of whom I ſpake before.) God ſendeth him againſt the people of the Jewes, that he might be a ſcourge unto them, to puniſh them for their ſins. This was Gods end, but this was not his end. Howbeit (ſaith the Text) he meaneth not ſo, neither doth his heart think ſo, but it is in his heart to deſtroy, and to cut off Nations not a few. Iſa. 10.6. His intent and purpoſe was, not to obey God in executing of his will, but to ſatisfie his own cruel and ambitious deſires. Even ſo was it here. God delivereth his Son into the hands of the Jewes to be crucified, which he did for juſt and righteous ends. But this came not in their thoughts. The ends which they propounded were ſiniſter and wicked. As it was with Joſephs Brethren in ſelling him into Egypt, However God meant it unto good, to ſave much people alive, yet they thought evill againſt him, (as he tells them) Gen. 50.20. they thought to make p. 77him away, that they might never ſee, or hear of him more. So here, however God had a gracious purpoſe in this delivering up of his Son, even the ſaving of many people, of all his Elect, yet the Jewes thought evill againſt him, thinking by this means to take him out of the way, that they might never hear of him, nor of his Doctrine any more. Now where the end is evill, the Action cannot be good. Thus were they guilty of ſin in executing of what God had decreed and determined. Being voluntary Inſtruments, acting without warrant, againſt the revealed will of God, out of an evill Principle, to an evil End. Thus you have the former of theſe Queſtions reſolved. Paſſe we to the latter.

How cometh God to be free from this ſin of theirs, ſo as not to be the Author of it, Q. 2 How God was free from this ſin.or a Partaker in it?

A ſcruple of great intricacy. Anſw. Give me leave a little to wade into the depth of it, ſo far as I ſhall conceive you able to follow me. The Proteſtant Doctrine vindicated, that God is not the Author of ſin.Which I ſhall the rather doe, for the vindicating of the true Proteſtant Doctrine from that odious Charge which Papiſts and Arminians would faſten upon it, viz.

That it ſhould at leaſt by neceſſary conſequence, make God to be the Author of ſin.

A Doctrine which all our Divines have with one conſent diſclaimed, as a Doctrine to be abhorred. And ſo it is, being directly contrary to Scripture, which every where aſſerts God to be a juſt, a holy God, free from all iniquity. The Lord is a God of truth, and without iniquity, juſt and righteous is he, (ſaith Moſes, in that his Swanlike Song) Deut. 32.4. And we finde the Apoſtle p. 78ſeconding him, What ſhall we ſay them? Is there unrighteouſneſſe with God? God forbid. Rom. 9.14. And ſo St. John, 1 Ep. 2.16. All that is in the world, the luſt of the fleſh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not in the Father.] He is not the Author of any ſin. Let not any think to charge their ſins, in whole, or in part upon him. Let not any man ſay, (ſaith St. James) when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted with evill, neither tempteth he any man, Jam. 1.13. Sin is no wayes Gods work. At the firſt his works were all good, very good. And God ſaw every thing which he had made, and behold it was very go…d, Gen. 1. laſt. He did not then create Evil; neither hath he done it ſince. The evil of ſin I mean. As for the evill of Puniſhment, that he challengeth to be his Creature. I create evil, Iſa. 45.7. the evil of Puniſhment. Not ſo the evil of ſin. That was the Devils Creature, having him for the Author of it. Thence it is that our Saviour tells the malicious Jews; Ye are of your Father the Devil, and the lusts of your Father you will doe, Joh. 8.44. And St. John layeth it down as an univerſall truth, He that committeth ſin is of the Devil, 1 Joh. 3.8. So much of ſin as there is in a man, ſo much of Satan; he being the proper Author of it. When he ſpeaketh a lye he ſpeaketh of his own, for he is a lyar, and the Father of it, (ſaith our Saviour in the former of thoſe Texts) Joh. 8.44. And the like may be ſaid of all other ſins; they have Satan for their Father, their proper Author. Whence it is that he is called by the name of foreign, The, (or that) evil one, the wicked one, 1 Joh. 2.13. and elſewhere. As for God, he being abſolutely good, evil p. 79is inconſiſtent with him, it cannot dwell with him, (as the Pſalmiſt hath it) Pſal. 5.4. Being holyneſſe it ſelf, he hateth ſin, cannot behold it without abhorrence. Thou art of purer eyes then to behold evil, and canſt not look on iniquity, (ſaith the Prophet) Hab. 1.13. Such an utter Antipathy there is betwixt the pure and holy nature of God, and Sin, that he cannot look upon it without deteſtation. It is the only thing which he perfectly hates; ſo hating it, as that he hateth the Workers of it, for its ſake. So it there followeth, Pſal. 5.5. Thou hatest all workers of iniquity. So hateth them as that he will not let their ſins goe unpuniſhed. Fulgent. l. …. ad Monym.Now (as Fulgentius rightly) Deus non eſt ejus rei Auctor cujus est ultor. God cannot be the Author of that whereof he is the Avenger. This is the true Proteſtant Doctrine, which as it hath been, ſo let it ever be held and maintained, that God neither is, nor can be the Author of ſin, any ſin, or yet a partaker in it.

Q. But what ſay we then to the caſe in hand? The caſe in hand cleared.Was not he the Author of this ſin, the horrideſt ſin that ever was committed, the putting of the Lord of life to death, which if he ſo concurred in as hath been declared, how can he be free from it?

A. For anſwer hereunto, The Evaſion of ſome Romiſh Doctors. Actum Judaeorum non voluit Deus, paſſionem vero Chriſti voluit. Et p…ſteà] Voluit itaque tota Trinitas ut Chriſtus pateretur, nec ta…en voluit ut Judaei occiderent; quià voluit poenam Chriſti, ſed non voluit culpam Judaeorum. P. Lumb. Sent. l. 1. Diſt. ult. Cap. 2. … Non volebat Deus actionem Judaeorum quae mala erat, ſed volebat paſſionem …n…m, Idem. cap. 3. ibid.if we will conſult with ſome of the Romiſh Doctors, they will here help us with an Evaſion. God the Father (ſaith P. Lumbard) did indeed will the death and ſuffering p. 80of his Son Chriſt, but not the Act of the Jewes in putting him to death; the one whereof was good, the other evi…. That Chriſt ſhould ſuffer, it was good, but that they ſhould lay hands upon him, was evill. In malis operibus ſaepe accidit ut actio ſit mala, & paſſio bona. Bellarm. lib. 2. De Amiſſ. Grat. c. 11.And to the ſame purpoſe Bellarmine, treading in his ſteps, determines the caſe after the ſame manner. God (ſaith he) did indeed will and determine that Joſeph ſhould be ſold into Egypt, and that Chriſt ſhould be ſlayn, but the wicked Acts of thoſe who ſold the one, and crucified the other, he neither decreed nor willed, but only foreſaw and permitted. Thus would they here have it, that God gave this Cup to his Son to drink, Deus igitur voluit ac praedefinivit opera iſta virtutum quae in paſſione conſiſtunt, cum voluit ac praedefinivit ut Jeſeph venderetur, & Chriſtus occideretur. Opera autem mala vendentium Joſeph, & occidentium Chriſtum, non voluit, nec praedefinitiv, ſed praeſcivit & permiſit. Idem. ibid.but not to Judas, and Pilate, and the reſt, that they ſhould hand, and reach it unto him. He willed that he ſhould bear this puniſhment, not that they ſhould inflict it: His paſſion being good, their Action evil.

But as for this, Retracted and rejected.we finde it ingenuouſly retracted by ſome of their own. Suarez, a late learned Jeſuite, ſtates and concludes the point generally and confidently; Dicimus tàm eſſe certum Deum influere immediatè, ac per ſe in omnem actionem creaturae, …t id negare erroneum ſit in fide. Suarez Metaph. tom. 1. diſp. 22. Sec. 1. num. 7.and that not as his own private opinion, but as agreed upon by the moſt approved Schoolmen, that God hath an immediate influence upon every action of the Creature, and that to deny this, is E…roneum in fide, an Error in the Faith. Yea it is poſitively layd down by another of them, as the common Tenent of the p. 81Schools (though the Pope could never be brought to determine it one way or other) that the very Act of ſin, as it is an act, Thom Cajer. Ferrar. Capreol. Albert. Alexand. Greg. Scotus, ibid. citati. Actus peccati in quantum …ctus eſt, à Deo eſt tanquam à Cauſâ. Alvarez. Diſp. 24.is from God as the Cauſe of it. And it muſt needs be ſo, inaſmuch as the Creature, as it hath its being from God, ſo alſo its motion, Man living in him alſo moveth in him, and from him, according to that of the Apoſtle, In him we live, and move, and have our being, Act. 17.28. And therefore to leave them.

For the returning of a full ſatisfactory Anſwer, Two things here cleared upI ſhall clear up unto you theſe two things, (which I ſhall do with as much plainneſſe as I can.)

1. How God willed the death of his Son: And

2. How he concurred with Judas and the reſt in putting him to death, and yet both without ſin.

For the Firſt. God gave this Cup to his Son, 1he willed that he ſhould ſuffer, and dye. Gods willing that his Son ſhould die, which he might doeAnd this he might doe, in as much as

1. He hath jus Supremi Dominii, a right of Supreme and abſolute Dominion and Soveraignty over his Creatures; 1ſo as he may diſpoſe of them as it pleaſeth him. This may not Man doe, In reſpect … his ſupreme & abſolute deminion.in as much as he is not ſuch an abſolute Lord over what he injoyes. It is not properly his own. He is but uſu fructuarius, having only the uſe of what he poſſeſſeth, not properly a Proprietary of any thing. Neither his life, nor eſtate are his own. He is but Gods Steward, and ſo muſt be accountable. But God is an abſolute Lord, and ſo may diſpoſe of all his Creatures according to his own pleaſure; and who ſhall challenge him of injuſtice? This is that which warranteth all thoſe p. 82actions which we read of in Scripture to have been done by his command, being in themſelves againſt the Rule. As that act of the Iſraelites in ſpoyling the Egyptians of their goods. This they did by an Order from God, with his allowance, which made it warrantable, inaſmuch as he hath a Supreme and abſolute right to the goods and eſtates of men, and ſo may diſpoſe of them at pleaſure, giving them from one to another. Is it not lawfull for me to doe what I will with mine own? (ſaith the Lord of the Vineyard to his Labourers) Matth. 20.15. And ſo again for Abrahams ſlaying of his Son, this was no more then what God might require him to doe: Inaſmuch as he is the abſolute Lord, as over the eſtates, ſo over the lives of men, which he only lends them to uſe and improve for him, and ſo may without any injuſtice call for them at what time, and in what way he pleaſeth. And ſo for the Caſe in the Text, Gods delivering his Son to the death, it was no more then he might doe, being his Soveraign and abſolute Lord. This maketh the act in him not to be unjuſt.

2. 2Gods giving his So… to dye an act of juſtice.Nay Secondly, this was in him not only not unjuſt, but it was an act of Signall justice. Chriſt having taken upon him the ſins of the World, become a Surety for his Elect, ingaged himſelf to make ſatisfaction to the Juſtice of God his Father, it was no other but Juſtice to exact this Debt. Chriſt being now become a Malefactor, a ſinner by Imputation, made ſin for us, (as the Apoſtle hath it, 2 Cor. 5. laſt) yea, the greateſt ſinner that ever was, having a world of ſin charged upon him, for God not to ſpare him, but thus to deliver him up, was (as I ſay) ſignall justice.

p. 833. And thirdly, as this was an act of Juſtice, 3An act of grace & favor.ſo of grace and favour. As of Juſtice towards his Son, ſo of Grace and Favour towards his Elect people, for whoſe ſake he did what he did, in giving up his Son, that ſo by the giving up of one, many might be ſaved; which the High-prieſt judged to be a thing moſt expedient; It is expedient for us that one man ſhould die for the people, and that the whole Nation periſh not, Joh. 11.50. Theſe were the motives and ends which God had an eye at in thus giving up his Son: Which being far different from thoſe which the Jewes propounded to themſelves, maketh that to be ſinfull in them, which was not ſo in him. But not to inſiſt upon this, which will be yielded at all hands. For God thus to diſpoſe of his Son, thus to give this Cup to him, to will his ſuffering and death, it was no more then he might doe.

But what was it for him to concur with Judas and the reſt, Q. 2 How God concurred in this Act, yet without ſin.in ſuch a manner as hath been declared, not only to foreſee what they would doe, and to permit them to doe it, but to will, decree, determine whatever they ſhould doe, and to give them power for the executing of it, how ſhall we here free him from concurring and partaking with them in the ſin? yea from being the Author of that their ſin? here lyeth the main difficulty.

For the clearing hereof, A. The former particulars reflected upon.let me briefly reflect upon every of theſe now mentioned particulars, ſhewing you, how that there is not that in any of theſe which can faſten any ſuch charges upon God.

1. For the firſt, his foreſeeing of this; 1His foreſeeing of the ſin, no cauſe of it.this he might doe, and yet be no cauſe of it. The Sun p. 84ſhineth upon noyſome Dunghills and Kennels, yet is it neither the cauſe of thoſe offenſive Vapours which are exhaled from them, nor yet infected with them.

2. 2Nor his permitting of it, which he might doe. being not bound to hinder evil.He permitted that wicked act to be done, which he could have bindered; ſo he doth all other; and it is no more then he may doe, inaſmuch as

1. He is not bound to hinder what evil he can, which man is; and that maketh this to be ſinfull in man. For him to permit ſin, when he can hinder it, is all one as to act it. Malum qui non impedit, quando poteſt, facit. Inaſmuch as the Law requires it from him. But ſo is it not with God. He is not bound to hinder ſin, to afford his reſtraining grace unto his Creature, to hold it up from falling into this or that ſin, though he could doe it.

2. And knowing how to bring good out of it.And again, he certainly knoweth how to order it, how to diſpoſe both of the ſinner and ſin, ſo as to bring good out of evill. And therefore he may permit it. A man that rideth upon a mettalled Horſe, ſo long as he holdeth the Bridle in his hand, he may let looſe the reins, and ſo ſuffer him to flie out, becauſe he knoweth how to check, and take him up, or turn him at his pleaſure. Such a Bridle hath God upon all the Sons of men, (I will put my book in thy noſe, and my bridle in thy lips, (ſaith the Lord to Sennaeherib, Iſa. 37.29.) He can reſtrain or turn them at pleaſure, knowing how to diſpoſe of them and all their ſinfull actions, how to turn them to good. This cannot Man do. And therefore as he may not upon this account act ſin, for any to ſay, Let us doe evill that good may come, this Paul p. 85chargeth as a moſt deſperate and damnable Doctrine, Rom. 3.8. ſo neither may he willingly permit it. But this God can doe, and that certainly, infallibly. He who at the firſt brought light out of darkneſſe, can bring good out of evill: This was his deſign in permitting Joſephs Brethren to ſell him, he meant it to good (as I have ſhewen you.) And ſo it was in permitting the Jewes to crucifie his Son, he knew how to bring the greateſt good out of this worſt of evils, which alſo he did, and therefore he gave way to it; which upon this account he might doe.

3. And (thirdly) he not only permitted, 3but alſo willed this action of theirs. But how? God willed this not with a will of Approbation, but Permiſſion, & Ordination. Alſted. Poſ…m. p. 465.Here we muſt diſtinguiſh. There is a twofold will in God, Voluntas approbationis & complacentiae, and Voluntas Decreti, Permiſſionis, & Ordinationis. A will of approbation, whereby he willeth that a thing ſhould be done, as well-pleaſing to himſelf. And a will of Permiſſion and Ordination, whereby he willeth to permit a thing to be done, and to order it in the doing, and when it is done. Now in this latter way did God will this wicked act of the Jewes; not by way of approbation, giving them any allowance for what they did, but only by way of permiſſion and and Ordination, he willed to permit them to doe it, and then to order what they did, making uſe of it for thoſe righteous and gracious ends which he had propounded to himſelf.

Fourthly and laſtly. 4He did conour in the very act it ſelf, as in delivering his Son into their hands, Gods concurring in this Act not ſinful.ſo in powering them for the executing of what he had d…creed.

p. 86Queſt. But how could this be without ſin?Bellarmine left to his ſhifts.

To this Bellarmin and ſome of the later Jeſuites return Anſwere. Deus non efficit actionem illam quae homini eſt peccatum, ut cauſa particularis, ſed ut cauſa univerſalis, praebens vim, & influxum quendam indifferentem & communem ad illam actionem, & ad contrariam, qui à concurſu ſecundae cauſae Innita…ur. Bellarm. …ubi ſuprà.That God doth concurre with the Creature in finfull actions, not as a particular, but as a generall, an univerſal cauſe, affording to it only a kinde of generall influence and aſſiſtance, which in it ſelf is indifferent to carry it this way, or that way, to the doing of this action, or the contrary to it, good or evill, the determining whereof is left to the Creature it ſelf, to the liberty of mans own will.

But as for this new device of theirs, Gods concurrence in humane Actions more then generall. Vid. Alvarez. Diſp. 21.we finde it juſtly rejected by others of their own, who look upon it, (as well they may) as not a little derogating from the wiſe Providence of God, making it to be confuſed and imperfect, and altogether uncertain, which it muſt needs be, whileſt it dependeth wholly upon the Creature for the determining of the event of it. Abſit quod Deus quicquam velit in univerſali & conſuſe, & illud nolit in particulari & diſtincte. Bradward. l. 1. c. 34.For a man to ſpur and put on his Horſe, leaving him to chooſe his own way, all would conclude it to be no wiſdome in the Rider. And for God thus to leave the Creature to it ſelf for the determining of its own actions, whileſt he only affords ſuch a generall concurrence, A. it derogates not a little from his Wiſdome. In every ſinful Action two things, the Act it ſelf, and the Deficiency in it.And therefore to leave them.

More ſoundly, for the reſolving hereoſ, take we notice, that in every ſinfull Action there are two things, the Materiale and the Formale (as p. 87ſome call them) there is the Act it ſelf, and the Inordination or Deficiency in that Act. A known Diſtinction, uſually explained and cleared up to vulgar capacities by thoſe plainer and obvious ſimilitudes. In a horſe that halteth there is his going, and his halting, the one is the act it ſelf, the other is the deficiency in that act. So in a crackt Bell, when it is ſtruck, there is the ſound and the jarring. Even ſo in every ſinfull actien, in ſins of Commiſſion, (for in ſins of Omiſſion there is nothing but deficiency) there is the Act it ſelf, and the inordination in that act. Inſtance in the caſe in hand, the Jewes putting Chriſt to death, there was the Act, their crucifying of him, and the inordination in that act, the evilneſſe of the action, which was their doing it without a warrant, and with ſuch evil intents and purpoſes as they did. Now to apply the diſtinction.

As for the Act it ſelf, God the Author of the one, not of the other.that action in the doing whereof the Creature ſinneth, God hath a hand in it, and that not only in the ordering and diſpoſing of it, but concurring in it, he being the principal Agent, and the Creature only his Inſtrument in acting of it. But for the deficiency, the inordination, wherein properly lyeth the evil of the Action, and ſo the ſin, that is the Creatures own, God is not the Author of that, nor any cauſe of it at all. This is a mans own work, the fruit of his own Corruption, which is properly the Mother of all ſin, as Satan is the Father of it. How this may be, thoſe forenamed ſimilitudes do very fitly illuſtrate. A man that ſpurreth a lame horſe, or ſtrikes a cracked Bell, he is the cauſe of the motion of the one, and of the ſounding of the other, but not of the halting or jarring; that is from p. 88themſelves. So here, the motion or action is from God, without whom (as I told you) the Creature cannot move, but the deficiency therein is from man himſelf. Siene aer ſole Iucente per vitrum coloratum, lumen habet a ſole, colorem a vitro, ſic hominum actiones malae habent a Deo ut ſint, ab hominibus ut malae ſint. Alſted Theol. Polem. p. 402.And ſo that other made uſe of by ſome later Divines expreſſeth it well. The Sun ſhining through a coloured glaſſe, it is the cauſe of the light, but not of the colour, that is from the glaſſe it ſelf. Thus doth God make uſe of man as his Instrument in doing of this or that action, in acting whereof the man ſinneth, the action here is Gods, the ſin is the mans own. So is it with all ſinfull Actions, they have their exiſtence, their being from God, their evilneſſe from man.

Now apply this generall to the particular caſe in hand, Applyed to the preſent c…ſe.God did concur with Judas, and the Highprieſts, and the reſt in all thoſe acts which they did in putting Chriſt to death. They were herein but his Inſtruments, it was God that acted in them, and by them. Thus the Act was his, but the ſin was theirs. So it is, No action in it ſelf is ſimply evill, as it is an action. To put a man to death is not evill in it ſelf. The Judge pronounceth ſentence againſt a Malefactor, and the Executioner exeutes it, and it is evil in neither. But to put a man to death without Authority, or without cauſe; to do it wrongfully or cruelly, there is the evill. That Chriſt was put to death by the Jewes it was Gods action, and in him (as I have ſhown you) not unjuſt, but that they did it without warrant, without cauſe, maliciouſly and cruelly, that was their ſin, How Gods Providence reacheth to the evill of ſinfull actions.which God had no hand in.

Q. But what then, doth the Providence of God reach only to the Actions, doth it not extend alſo to the evil of the action, to the ſin it ſelf?

p. 89A. To this I have in part returned Anſwer already. Take it again briefly. It doth. However God be not the Author of the ſin that is acted, yet his Providence is exerciſed about it. And that (as I ſaid)

1. In permitting it to be done. 1Which he doth not ſimply for it ſelf, In permitting it.but in order to thoſe juſt and righteous ends which he propoundeth to himſelf.

2. And ſecondly in Ordering it. 2Gods permiſſion is not a bare Negative permiſſion, In ordering it.a not hindering of the evill which is done, but an Operative, an Effectual permiſſion, (ſo Melancton, Dicitur autem permiſſio efficax, non quod Deus peccatum efficiat, ſed Ordinem illius. Alſted. ubi ſuprà.and Beza, and ſome other of our Divines call it,) Efficax permiſſio, not that God effecteth the evil of ſin, but ordereth it. Thus did his Providence extend to this ſin of the Jewes in crucifying of Chriſt; which he ſo permitted, as that he ordered it, making it ſubſervient to his own deſigns in effecting that great and good work by him intended, the redemption and ſalvation of his Elect people.

And thus have I endeavoured to clear up unto you this important truth. Which if I have not done ſo clearly as you could have wiſhed, let it be imputed to the depth of the matter, and not to any affectation of obſcurity in my handling of it.

To cloſe it up with a word of Application. Applic. Three Attributes of God ſhining in this Glaſſe.Did God the Father thus give this Cup to his Son, here behold and admire

Wonderfull wiſdome,

Exemplary Juſtice,

Ʋnparallel'd Love;

all clearly ſhining in this Glaſſe, manifeſted and declared in this one Act.

p. 901. 1Wonderfull wiſdome. Such is the wiſdome of God which he hath manifeſted, Won derfull wiſdcome.as in the work of Creation, ſo of Redemption, in finding out a way and means of reſtauration and ſalvation for loſt Mankinde. Which is effected in a wonderfull way, ſuch a way as all the wiſdome of Men and Angels could never have thought of, viz. by giving this bitter, this deadly Cup unto his Son, which being drunk by him might be a Cup of ſalvation to all that believe on him. Were it ſo that a Phyſician could finde out ſuch a medicinable Cup as would cure all Diſeaſes, who but would therein admire his skill? Of ſuch vertue is this Cup which God the Father gave unto his Son, a true Catholicon, ſufficient for the cure of all ſouldiſeaſes in them who ſhall apply it to themſelves through faith. Herein admire we the wiſdome of God in finding it out; in finding out ſuch a means whereby, ſatisfaction being made to his Juſtice, there might be way made for the full exerciſe of his grace and mercy towards forlorn ſinners. Never was the wiſdome of God more wonderfully manifeſted in any act then in this. Thence is it that the Apoſtle ſpeaking of Chriſt, and Chriſt cruciſyed, he calleth him the wiſdome of God. 1 Cor, 1.24. We preach Chriſt crucified, unto the Jewes a ſtumbling-block, and unto the Greeks fooliſhneſſe, but unto them which are called Chriſt the Power of God, and the wiſdome of God. A crucifyed Chriſt was, and is to the Jewes a ſcandall, a ſtumbling-block. They having dreamed of a Temporall Meſſiah, that ſhould be outwardly pompous and glorious, armed with power for their deliverance, they could not indure to think of a crucified Saviour. He who could not ſave himſelf was no Saviour for p. 91them. He ſaved others, himſelf he cannot ſave, (ſay ſome of them in a ſcoffing and deriding way, when they ſaw him hanging upon the Croſſe,) Math. 27.42. And in like manner he was to the Greeks fooliſhneſſe, who could not by all their ſuppoſed wiſdome ſee any Reaſon, why ſalvation ſhould be expected in ſuch a way, from ſuch a Saviour. But to them that are called] called out of darkneſs into light, indued with a right underſtanding of this ſacred myſtery, to them is Chriſt the Power of God, and Wiſdome of God,] ſo called, in as much as the Power and Wiſdome of God were wonderfully manifeſted in him and by him; and that as in his Life, ſo in his Death, His Power in conquering his and his Churches Enemies, Sin and Satan, His wiſdome in this way and by this means executing his moſt wiſe Counſell and Decree, touching the Redemption and Salvation of his Elect people. Here was wiſdome. We ſpeak the wiſdome of God in a myſtery, (ſaith the ſame Apoſtle ſpeaking of the Doctrine of the Goſpell) 1 Cor. 2.7. And hereof give we unto God the glory, admiring and adoring it; ſaying with that Apoſtle what he doth upon another account, Rom. 11.33. foreign! O the depth of the riches both of the wiſdome and knowledge of God.

2. Aud thus beholding his Wiſdome, 2do we the like by his Juſtice, Exemplary Juſtice.which was alſo in this act wonderfully declared and manifeſted, in God the Fathers thus giving this Cup to his Son. His Son having undertaken for his Elect, to make ſatisfaction for their ſins, he being thus become their Surety, God his Father ſpareth not him, but delivereth him unto the death. So juſt, ſo impartial is God in the puniſhing of ſin, not ſparing p. 92it wherever he meeteth with it, but requiring ſatisfaction to his Juſtice; which becauſe men of themſelves are not able to make, therefore he required it of this their Suretie.

3. 3(in the third place) behold we here unparallelled Love, Unparallelled Love.Herein is love (ſaith St. John) that God ſent his Son to be a Propitiation for our ſins, 1 Joh. 4.10. Herein is love,] foreign, that love. God hath in many other paſſages manifeſted his love to his Elect people, but in none like unto this, his ſending his Son into the world for their ſakes, and that not only to teach and instruct them by his Doctrine and Example, but to be a Propitiation for their ſins, to redeem them by his blood, to die for them. Here was unparallelled Love, as in God the Son in thus giving himſelf, ſo in God the Father in thus giving his Son. Herein did Abraham expreſſe his love to God, in offering up his Son to him. And herein did God the Father expreſſe his love to us, in offering up his Son for us. Give we unto him the glory of this grace. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghoſt, ſaith the Church in that ancient Hymne, giving us to take notice that there is a peculiar glory which is due unto each of the Perſons in the bleſſed Trinity. And ſo there is from this work of Redemption. Beſides the glory which is due unto the whole Trinity, whoſe joynt deſign this was, there is (as I may call it) a Perſonal glory due unto each Perſon. Glory to the Father for giving his Son, Glory to the Son for giving himſelf, and Glory to the Holy Ghoſt for revealing this myſtery to us, and in us. Now give we to each what is their p. 93due. As to Chriſt the glory of his ſuffering, his drinking of this Cup, (of which I ſhall (God willing) ſpeak hereafter,) ſo unto God his Father the glory of this act of grace in him, his thus giving his Son, giving him this Cup to drink for us. And thus have I done with this Second Particular in the former part of the Text. By whom it was that this Cup was thus preſented, viz. by God the Father. The Cup which my Father hath given.] The third is yet behinde, to which I now come.

To whom this Cup is here ſaid to be given. Partic. 3 To Whom.To Me.]

God the Father gave this bitter Cup to his Sonne Chriſt;This Bitter Cup given to Chriſt.

He was the Subject of this Paſſion. Jeſus Chriſt the Son of God. So Scripture every where aſſerts it. God ſo loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son, Joh. 3.16. He ſpared not his own Son, but delivered him up, Rom. 8.32. To him was this bitter Cup given.

But how to him? Explic.

And wherefore to him?

The reſolving of theſe two Queſtions will be ſufficient for Explication and Illuſtration.

For the former, Q. 1

How is this Cup ſaid to be given to Chriſt? Whether to Chriſt as God, or as Man, or both.How was he the ſubject of this Paſſion, whether as God, or as Man, or both?

To this take the Anſwer briefly.

This Cup was given to the Perſon of Chriſt. A. Whole Chriſt was the ſubject of this Paſſion. Whole Chriſt the ſubject of this Paſſion.It was that Perſon who was both God and Man which p. 94ſuffered, dyed. It was not the humane nature alone, as abſtracted and ſeparated from the Divine, which thus ſuffered, but whole Chriſt; Chriſtus foreign, Chriſt God and Man. It is a true Rule, that all the Actions and Paſſions of Chriſt, whatever he did or ſuffered as Mediator betwixt God and Man, they are all to be attributed unto his whole Perſon, as God and Man. And ſuch was this work which he did upon the Croſſe, the ſatisfaction which he there made it was Opus Perſonale, a Perſonal work, wherein both the Natures were intereſted. Not the Manhood alone, or the Godhead alone, but both together in one Perſon, The Cup which my Father hath given me,] foreign. The word is Perſonall. It was not given to him as God, or as Man, but as both God and Man in one Perſon.

Q. Yet ſuffering only in his Humane nature. Auguſt de Haereſ. c. 70. foreign, Deipaſſiarii, Superiore etiam ſaeculo in Germania noſtra quidam auſi ſunt aſſerere Chriſtum ſecundum utramque naturam paſſum eſſe, Polan. Syntag. l. 6. c. 18. The Divine nature impaſſible.But what then, did both Natures drink of this Cup? Did Chriſt ſuffer in, and according to both natures?

A. So indeed ſome Hereticks of old aſſerted it, that Chriſt ſuffered not only in his humane nature, as Man, but alſo in his Divine nature as God. From whence they were called by the name of Theopaſſians; who have not wanted ſome to follow them in after-ages, and ſome of late times. But this is juſtly condemned as an Error, a groſs one, aſſerting a plain impoſſibility. True it is, all things are poſſible with God, viz. to doe them, but himſelf not paſſible in any thing, ſo as to ſuffer from his Creature. Chriſt as God he could not ſuffer, he could not dye; the divine nature being impaſſible, as well as immortall. A Truth fitly illuſtrated by a familiar ſimilitude. Whileſt the Axe heweth a piece of Timber upon which the p. 95Sun ſhineth, the Wood is cut, but the Sun-beams not touched, they ſtill remain impaſſible. Even ſo was it in the Paſſion of Chriſt; the humane nature ſuffered, but not ſo the Divine. Though united unto the humane whileſt it ſuffered, yet it remained impaſſible. As it is with the ſoul and body in man, though both be united together whileſt the man ſuffereth ſome corporal puniſhment, yet the Body properly feeleth the ſmart of it, the ſoul not ſuffering, ſave only by way of ſympathie. So was it here in the ſufferings of Chriſt, the Godhead and Manhood were both united in the Perſon ſuffering, but the Godhead ſuffered not. So as we muſt then conclude it, that the whole Perſon of Chriſt ſuffered, but properly in, or according to his humane nature. So Scripture explains it ſelf. Chriſt ſuffered for ſins, &c. being put to death in the Fleſh, (ſaith St. Peter) 1 Pet. 3.18. And again, in the Chapter following, verſ. 1. Chriſt ſuffered for us in the Fleſh.] It was Chriſt that ſuffered. The Perſon of Chriſt, he who was both God and Man, but how? What, in his divine nature? Not ſo, but in his humane, in the fleſh, foreign, that is, according to his humane nature. This is that which St. Paul meaneth, 2 Cor. 13.4. where he ſaith, that Chriſt was crucifyed through weakneſse. foreign, that is, through the weakneſſe of his Fleſh, his humane nature, which was ſubject to all humane infirmities, ſin only excepted. In this nature it was that Chriſt ſuffered, in his humane nature, and only in that. As for his Godhead, it ſuffered not.

Q. No, How God is ſaid to have ſuffered and dyed.(you may ſay) what then means that of the ſame Apoſtle, Act. 20.28. where he tells the Elders at Miletum, that God purchaſed the Church p. 96with his own blood, foreign. And that other Text, 1 Cor. 2.8. where he ſaith of the Jewes, that they crucified the Lord of Glory. And ſo St. Peter, Ye have killed the Prince of life, foreign, the Author of it, Act. 3.15. Texts made uſe of by thoſe Hereticks of old for the maintaining of the ſuffering of the divine nature in Chriſt.

A. To this the anſwer is obvious and eaſie. In Chriſt there are two natures, which are ſo united as that they make but one Perſon. And from this union floweth a communication of properties, Paſſio Chriſti Divinae naturae tribuitur Dialecticâ tantum & verbali, (ut aiunt) praedicatione, non autem Phyſicâ & reali, per foreign, Danaeus de Haereſib. c. 73. Vid. Engl. N. Annot. in Act. 20.28.Acts 20:28(as they call it) whereby that which is proper to one nature is ſometimes attributed to the other, or rather (as ſome of our Divines doe more warily and ſoundly explain it,) that which is proper to one nature is attributed to the Perſon denominated from the other nature. In hoc utroque loco quod proprium eſt humanae naturae tribuitur Perſonae à divina natura denominata per communicationem Idiomatum. Polan. Syntag. ubi ſuprà.And ſo look we upon it in thoſe Texts. To ſhed his blood, to be crucifyed, killed, it was proper to the humane nature of Chriſt, but it is there attributed to the whole Perſon being denominated from his Divine nature. God ſhed his blood, that is, that Perſon who was ruely God, as well as Man, ſhed his blood, not as God, but as Man. Deus ſed non qua Deus, God, but not as God. Deus ſed non Deitas, God in the Concrete, not the Godhead in the Abſtract. The Lord of glory was crucifyed, the Author of life was killed, that Perſon who was ſo in reſpect of his divine nature, was crucified, killed in his humane nature. That which is proper to one nature is attributed to the perſon. So is it p. 97with man, in whom ſoul and body are united, that which is proper to one of theſe is attributed to the Perſon. As when the Body is ſick, wounded, buryed, we ſay the man is ſo. So in the ſufferings of Chriſt, it was his Manhood which ſuffered, not the Godhead, yet it is attributed to the perſon. Which is (as I ſay) ſometimes denominated from the one nature, ſometimes from the other. It was the humane nature of Chriſt, or the Perſon of Chriſt in and according to his humane nature, which properly ſuffered.

And this he did in his whole man, Chriſt ſuffering in his whole man. In his Body.both in his Body and Soul.

1. In his Body. This it was which was bound, ſcourged, ſpit upon, Crowned with thorns, which firſt bare the Croſſe, and then was born of it, which was pierced by the Nayls, and the Spear, which ſhed its blood. Thus did he bear our ſins in his own body on the Tree, (as St. Peter hath it) 1 Pet. 2.4. And we are ſaid to be ſanctified, (that is, freed from the guilt of ſin, and conſecrated to the ſervice of God) through the offering of the body of Jeſus Chriſt, Heb. 10.10.

2. But not his Body only, but his Soul alſo. In his Soul.That alſo did bear a part in this ſuffering; which it did not only by way of ſympathy with the Body, but immediately in and by it ſelf. So it did in that Agony of his in the Garden, where he made that ſad complaint to his Diſciples, My ſoul is exceeding ſorrowfull even unto death, Matth. 26.38. And afterwards upon the Croſſe, where being under a ſad Eclipſe, the light of his Fathers countenance being hid from him by that black Cloud, the ſins of the World, in that conflict he cryeth out, My God, my God, why haſt thou forſaken me? Matth. p. 9827.46. Thus did he then ſuffer in ſoul. His ſoul being made an offering for ſin, (as well as his Body, (as the Prophet Iſai hath it) Iſa. 53.10. Thus did he ſuffer in his humane nature, in his whole man, both Body and ſoul.

Q. But (it may be ſaid) what then, did not the Godhead alſo act a part in this Tragedy? Was that only a Spectator, a Looker on, whileſt the Manhood ſuffered.

A. The Godhead acting in the ſuffering of the Manhood.Not ſo, the Godhead at this time was not idle, though it did not bear, yet it acted a part in this Paſſion. Though it did not ſuffer with the humane nature, yet it concurred with it in ſufſuffering. Which it did in divers particulars. Take we notice of Four or Five of them.

1. 1Voluit. It willed that ſuffering. Chriſt as God willed that his ſuffering as Man. Willing that it ſhould ſuffer.So much he intimates unto his Diſciples, Joh. 10.17, 18. where he tells them, I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my ſelf. He layed down his life, how? why by the ſame power by which he took it up again, by the power of his divine nature, according to which he is properly called the Prince (or Author) of life, Act. 3.15. By this power it was that he raiſed up his body from the death, and by this power it was that he gave it up to death. It was not the power of his humane nature that could doe this, to lay down his life, and take it up again at pleaſure. This was an act of his divine nature, as well as his humane.

2. 2Quievit. As the Godhead willed that the Manhood ſhould ſuffer, Reſting that it … ſuffer.ſo it reſted that it might ſuffer. The divine nature was not withdrawn and p. 99ſevered from the humane in the time of its paſſion, the union betwixt them being indiſſoluble, but it reſted, not putting forth its power in any way of reſiſtance, which if it had done, it was not all the Powers of Hell, all the Men and Devils in the World that could have brought him to the Croſſe. The Godhead reſted, ſlept (as it were,) even as Sampſon did whileſt his locks were cut off) which it did for thoſe three dayes, during which time Chriſt ſeemed to be wholly left in the hands, under the power of thoſe his bloudy enemies, for them to execute their rage and malice upon him. Thus the Godhead though (as I ſaid) not ſeparated from the Manhood, (which it never was, even then when Soul and Body were ſeparated the one from the other, the Godhead was ſevered from neither) yet it reſted. Even as when a man is aſleep, his ſoul is not departed from his body, yet it ſeemeth to have left it, inaſmuch as it doth not exerciſe thoſe operations which before it did, not looking out by the Eye, not ſpeaking by the Tongue, not working by the Hand, &c. So was it here. The Godhead being ſtill with the Manhood, dwelling in it, and that (as the ſoul doth in the body) Bodily, In ipſo in…hitat plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter, quià in Templo habitaverat umb…alite…. Grot. Ann…t. ex Auguſt. in loc.(that is Pauls word, Col. 2.9.) foreign, Non umbraliter, (as Auguſtine explains it) not in the ſhadow, as it dwelt in the Temple, but Corporaliter, Bodily, that is, Perſonally, ſubſtantially, yet it reſted for a time, not ſhewing it ſelf, not exerciſing its wonted operations. The Godhead reſted that the humane nature might ſuffer.

3. Suſtentavit. 3Though the Godhead thus reſted that it might ſuffer, Supporting it in ſuffering.yet it ſecretly ſupported and bare it up in ſuffering, inabling it to drink p. 100this Cup, to ſuffer that which otherwiſe of it ſelf it could never have been able to have done, viz. the wrath of God due unto the ſins of the World. An inſupportable burden. Such is the leaſt drop of it; Who knoweth the power of thine anger? Pſal. 90.11. What is then ſuch a full Viall of it as was poured out upon Chriſt in his ſufferings? This could his humane nature of it ſelf never have borne. But it was ſecretly ſupported by the divine nature. As it is in Man, where (as the Wiſe man hath it, Prov. 18.14.) his ſpirit ſuſtaineth his infirmities, the ſoul being of a cheerfull temper beareth him up under his bodily ailments. So here that Eternall ſpirit, which dwelt in the humane nature of Chriſt, ſuſtained and bore it up under thoſe otherwiſe unſufferable ſufferings.

4. 4And not only bare it up under thoſe ſufferings, And making it a Conqueror.but made it a Conqueror in them, and over them. Such was Chriſt, and that even upon the Croſſe. Having ſpoyled Principalities and Powers, he made a ſhew of them openly, triumphing over them in it, (ſaith the Apoſtle) Col. 2.15. foreign, In and upon his Croſſe, that being to him as a Chariot of Triumph, where he conquered and triumphed over all the powers of Hell. This did he by the power of his Godhead. Which was to his Manhood (as one maketh the compariſon) even as the hook is to the Bait, R…ous in Synibol. … Cyp…anum.which not only keepeth it from being devoured by the Fiſh, but taketh the Fiſh which ſwalloweth it. Such a bait was the Fleſh, the humane nature of Chriſt, a Worm, (as David ſaith of himſelf, Pſal. 22.6. I am a Worm) frail weak fleſh; and this bait was expoſed to thoſe Levi…thans, Satan, Hell, Death, all which p. 101bite at it, ready to devour it, Hell opened her mouth upon him, the Grave ſwallowed him up, ſo as he ſeemed now for ever loſt; I but there was a hook within this bait, the divine nature, which was (as it were cloathed and covered over with this Fleſh, and by the power hereof this Infirmity of Chriſt (as the Apoſtle there calleth it in that Text forenamed) his humane nature, though in it ſelf weak and frail, was made not only able to ſuffer, but to overcome in ſuffering. So as to lead Captivitie captive, even as the Fiſh is taken by the Hook which it had ſwallowed down.

5. Efficaciam dedit. 5The Divine nature gave efficacy to the ſufferings of the Humane, Giving efficacy to thoſe ſufferings.making them effectuall for the ends intended, for the ſatisfying of divine Juſtice, and the meriting ſalvation for his Elect people, which without the concurrence of the divine nature they could never have been. So Damaſcene rightly, Patienti carni conjuncta eſt divinitas. Patienti carni conjuncta erat Divin… menens imp…ſſiblis, & … u… … eſſent ſal…. Dama…c O… thod. Fid. 3. c. 15.To the Humanity of Chriſt ſuffering was joyned the Divinity, which in it ſelf remained Impaſſible, yet gave vertue and efficacy to thoſe ſufferings, making them meritorious and ſaving▪ As for the humane nature alone, that could have merited nothing, at leaſt not for others. Though it had ſulfilled the Law, (as it did) yet could there not have been any ſuper-erogation in that due obedience, ſo as the merit thereof ſhould extend beyond it ſelf. And whatever it had ſuffered, yet being in it ſelf but finite, it could not have made an infinite ſatisfaction, ſuch as the Juſtice of God required for the ſins of the world. It was the divine nature concurring, which made this Obedience of his, both p. 102Active and Paſſive, ſo meritorious; which gave ſuch vertue to theſe his ſufferings, cauſing the merit thereof thus to overflow the banks, to extend to the whole world of his Elect. This it was which made this ſatisfaction in the value of it infinite, inaſmuch as though it was made in a finite nature, yet by an infinite perſon, God ſhedding his blood, that Perſon who was ſo. The divine nature being perſonally united to the humane whileſt it ſuffered, it gave efficacy to thoſe ſufferings.

Thus did this our High-prieſt, the Lord Jeſus (as the Apoſtle telleth us, Heb. 9.14.) through the eternall ſpirit offer up himſelf unto God. His divinity offering up his humanity, (as Aaron did the ſacrifices, who was therein a figure of Chriſt as God,) and giving efficacy to that ſacrifice, making it to be of an infinite value and vertue for ſatisfying and ſanctifying. Here have you an enumeration of five particulars; wherein the Godhead of Chriſt concurred with his Manhood in ſuffering.

But I ſhall no longer inſiſt upon this. Thus you have the firſt of theſe Queries reſolved, How this Cup was given to Chriſt, how he was the ſubject of this Paſſion. The Second is yet behinde, of which briefly.

Why did God the Father thus give this Cup to his Son Christ? Q. 2Why God …ave this Cup to his Son.

Why to him? And

Why only to him? So we may divide the Queſtion into two.

Q. Q. 1 1. Why did God the Father give this Cup unto him?Why to him.

p. 103A. This he did, not for his own ſake, A. not that he deſerved any ſuch thing, Not for his own ſake.not that there was any fault in him. As to this we have his Judge for his Compurgator. Pilate having throughly examined him, though (queſtionleſſe) he ſought matter againſt him, before he paſſeth ſentence upon him, acquits him, declaring to his Accuſers, that he found no fault in him, I finde in him no fault at all, verſ. 33. of this Chapter, whereof the Text is part; which he inculcates once and again in the Chapter following, Cap. 19. v. 4. & 6. foreign, no cauſe at all why they ſhould proceed againſt him in ſuch a manner as they deſired, nothing worthy of death. Man could finde no fault in him, nor yet did God his father finde any; who by a voyce from heaven gave this teſtimony to him at his Baptiſme, This is my Beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleaſed, Mat. 3.17. He was then well-pleaſed with him. Neither had he any cauſe to be afterwards diſpleaſed with him, he being obedient to his Father in all things. So he was throughout his whole courſe; not being guilty of any ſin, whether in his nature or life. He was that immaculate lamb of God, as St. Peter calls him, 1 Pet. 1.19. foreign, The Lamb without blemiſh, and without ſpot.] Without blemiſh, free from Originall corruption. That holy thing which ſhall be born of thee, (ſaith the Angel to Mary, ſpeaking of her Son, Luk. 1.35. And without ſpot] Free from all actual ſins and tranſgreſſions. He did no ſin, neither was there guile found in his mouth, 1 Pet. 2.22. Thus was he, (as the Apoſtle deſcribeth him, Heb. 7.26.) Holy, Harmleſſe, undefiled, ſeparate from ſinners. So as there was no deſert in him why his Father ſhould p. 104give this Cup to him, why he ſhould afflict and put him to grief in this manner that he did. This was not for his own ſake.

But it was for our lake. But ours.He ſpared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, Rom. 8 32. Even as Joſeph was ſold into Egypt, that he might ſave much people alive; and Jonas was caſt overboard, that the reſt which were in the Ship might not periſh. Thus was this bitter, deadly Cup given unto Chriſt, that it mgiht be a wholeſome Cup, a Cup of ſalvation unto others: He ſuffered for us. So the Prophet ſets it forth moſt fully in that known Text, Iſa. 53. Surely he hath born our griefs, and carryed ou… ſorrowes, verſ. 4. He was wounded for our tranſgreſſions, he was bruiſed for our iniquities, the chaſtiſement of our peace was upon him, verſ. 5 all we like ſheep have gone aſtray, we have turned every one to his own way, and the Lord hath layed upon him the iniquity of us all, verſ. 6. For the tranſgreſſion of my people was he stricken, verſ. 8. Thus did he ſuffer, not for his own ſake, but ours. Chriſt hath once ſuffered for ſins, the juſt for the unjuſt, 1 Pet. 3.18. Having taken upon him the ſins of the World, he was now made ſin, who knew no ſin, a ſinner by Imputation. And being ſo, God giveth this Cup unto him, as ſtanding in the room of his Elect, requiring ſatisfaction to his Juſtice from him.

Q. Q. 2 2. But why was this Cup given only to him, why not to any other but him?Why only to him.

A. A. For this take a threefold Reaſon.

1. 1No other was able to drink it but he. It is our Saviours ſpeech to the Sons of Zebedee, Matth. 20.2…. No other able to drink it.Are ye able to drink of the Cup that I ſhall drink of? So it is, others may taſte of this Cup, p. 105ſip of it, but none to drink it. Not this Cup. Mihi hic calix datus eſt, noa alteri, nemo enim ad hoc ſufficit, praeter unum me, Ferus in Text.As for the Cup of caſtigatory afflictions, Gods own people may, and often doe drink deep of it. So did thoſe two ſons of Zebedee, to whom he there ſpeaketh, James and John, whom he tells in the next verſe, Ye ſhall indeed drink of my Cup, verſ. 23. this accordingly they did, the one of them (James) being Martyred, Act. 12.1. the other (John) after many ſufferings, baniſhed, Rev. 1.9. But for the Cup of ſatisfactory puniſhment, which properly was Chriſts Cup, none could drink that without periſhing by it, but himſelf, none but he who was more then Man, God as well as Man.