Anti-Socinianism, Part 2
Secondly, Concerning Gods imputation of ſin to Christ.
WE complained in the beginning of the Dialogues want of order, but know not how to help our ſelves; for we reſolve in his own way and method, to give him that anſwer, and the Reader that ſatisfaction, which we intend. And for our more orderly proceeding herein, we ſhall propoſe and prove theſe three things; Firſt, that ſin was imputed to Chriſt; Secondly, that it was imputed to him by God himſelf; Thirdly, that it was imputed by way of ſatisfaction to Divine Juſtice.
For our entrance into the firſt, we ſhall enquire what imputation is, and what is meant thereby, that ſo it may be the better underſtood of what, and what we do affirm. The words foreign or foreign are not to be taken phyſicè, according to the native and natural ſignification thereof, as if any ſinful quality were infuſed into Chriſt; but relative, as he is conſidered in relation to us. Nor is it a naked and bare relation, that muſt make, or bear out ſuch an imputation; Chriſt therefore is termed (and that truly to) our Head, Husband, Saviour, Redeemer, Surety, Voluntarily interpoſing between God and us, undertaking our debt, and ſo becoming lyable to the ſatisfaction thereof. Imputation thenzImputatio eſt rei unius pro altero acceptatio. Bradſhaw de Juſtificat. is, the taking of one for another, nor is there any miſtake at all in ſo doing, a righteous perſon is made a ſinner, that is, juſtly eſteemed and accounted a ſinner: In this ſenſe the Apoſtle Paul offers himſelf to Philemon, Verſe the 8. of that Epiſtle, deſiring that that wrong which Oneſimus had done unto him, and his debt might foreign be imputed to him, that is, put upon his account, and eſteemed as though they vvere his ovvn, committed and contracted by him; And thus is the vvord to be taken here, one ſtanding in the room and place of others, and ſo in their ſteed accounted guilty: He vvas made ſin ſaith the Apoſtlea2 Cor. 5.21., not in reſpect of act, but tranſaction, conveyance, &c.
It is no trouble at all to us, that the Dialogue doth ſo often term it the common doctrine of Imputation, St. Paul calls faith foreign bTit. 1.4., common faith; and St. Jude, Verſe 2. our Salvation foreign, common ſalvation; Now a good thingcBonum quò communius eo melius. the more common the more commodious. I would to God it it were yet more common, and then let the Dialogue ſcoffe his belly-full.
But becauſe he knows not what kind of Doctrine it is, nor can his Maſter Socinus teach him; therefore he would fain perſwade us, there is no ſuch thing; ſhall a blind man perſwade us there is no Sun, becauſe he cannot ſee it ſhine? Yea, he tells us, becauſe he knows it not, that therefore it may well be ſuſpected, to be but a device of Satan, to darken the truth of the moſt needfull Doctrine of a ſinners juſtification; bona verba; but we intend not to be deluded by them; For we can ſee light in Goſhen, though he and the reſt of his party can ſee none in Aegypt; Doth the Dialogue profeſſe he knows not what kind of imputation it is? and yet doth he thus reproach it? We may eaſily know then what Spirit he is of, Iude 10. Speaking evill of thoſe …hings which he knoweth not; And 'tis a ſign he knows it not indeed, otherwiſe he would not ſo ſeverely cenſure it, yea condemne and blaſpheme it, as he doth; which moſt darkens the neceſſary Doctrine of a ſinners juſtification, let the indifferent Reader judge. If he deſire to know what it is, let him ſearch the Scriptures; for they do abundantly teſtify of it; To the Law and to the Teſtimony*Legimus paſſim apud Paulum nos juſtos fieri, & juſtificari, p…r Chriſtum, per Chriſti mortem, ſanguinem, redemptionem, obedientiam, & justitiam, & illam juſtitiam, imputari nobis à Deo abſ que operibus. Noſter Ameſius Bell. enerva. 10.4. pag. 137. and they which ſpeak not according to this word, it is becauſe there is no light in them.
The very term Impute, taken for judicial laying of that to the charge of a perſon, which is not properly his, but yet juſtly laid to him, and put truly upon his account, is ten times uſed by the Apoſtle Paul in the 4th. to the Romanes. In which ſenſe we affirm that ſin is imputed to Chriſt, or elſe he could not have ſuffered. This we take to be, and ſhall ſtick by, as, an infallible truth, No man dyes, as death is a privation of the life of the body, unleſſe it be for his own ſin, or the ſin of ſome others imputed to him. The Scriptures that confirm this are divers, Gen. 2.17. In the day that thou eateſt thereof, thou ſhalt dye the death. Rom. 6.23. The wages of ſin is death, 1 Cor. 15.56. The ſting of death is ſin. Rom. 5.12. As by one man ſin entred into the World, and death by ſin; and ſo death paſſed over all men, for that all have ſinned; from whence we collect, that every man that dyes, dyes for ſin, that is, either for his own, or the ſin of ſome other, made his by imputation. Death is not natural to man, as man: For that which is natural to him, as he is man, was engraffed into him, and appointed unto him of God, but death is not planted or engraffed into him by God, neither was he by him made lyable to iteforeign, &c., Man before his fall was free from death, as after the laſt judgment he ſhall be likewiſe; Beſides, death is an enemy to humane nature, threatning the ruine, and deſtruction thereof; will any man then ſay that that is natural to him, which doth deſtroy him? Is that agreeable to the nature of man, which above all other he abborreth, being accompanied with that, which brings nothing but trouble, anguiſh and vexation to him? whence we ſee that death is not natural to man, as man; but to man only as a ſinner. Now that Chriſt dyed, the Devils themſelves have not impudence enough to deny, being themſelves inſtrumentally engaged for the effecting of his death. But let the Dialogue, or any man elſe for him, anſwer me in good ſadneſs, was it for his own ſin or for the ſin of others? None can, none dare openly (though theſe black mouth'd Socinians do ſecretly mutter ſo much) affirm for his own, therefore it muſt neceſſarily be for the ſin of others.
Sin may be ſaid to be anothers properly or improperly, either truly, or after a certain manner; thoſe ſins are truly anothers, of which in no ſort thou haſt bin partaker, and for which by no Law thou art bound to ſuffer: but for thoſe, whereof thou haſt bin partaker, no reaſon can be produced to the contrary, but thou ſhouldſt ſuffer. Chriſt doth in a manner partake of our ſinsfIſa. 53.6., the Lord hath laid on him, or hath made to meet on him, the iniquities of us all; yea Peter in the 2. Chapter of his firſt Epiſtle, and the 24. verſ. ſaith plainly, that his own ſelf bare our ſins, in his own body on the Tree, &c. and ſo cannot, eſpecially offering himſelf and becoming our ſurety, undertaking for us the penalty due to us, but be every way lyable to the ſame.
Chriſt was not ſubject to any neceſſity of dying, being as God, immortal, as man, holy and immaculate without the leaſt tincture of ſin, therefore no neceſſity in him, no neceſſity for him, but in reſpect of us, and as our pledge and ſurety. This is a propoſition of an undoubted truth, that where there is no Original corruption, there is no actual tranſgreſſion; Chriſt being free from the one, muſt needs be acquit of any ſuſpition of the other; therefore not for his own ſins, but for ours, the guilt whereof being laid upon him, and imputed to him, did he ſuffer that miſery thoſe torments, and that death, that accurſed death, of which we have already ſo fully ſpoken.
Here the Dialogue, that he may the more cloſely and covertly beguile the over-credulous Reader, which I perceive is his great endeavour, doth ignorantly, if not wilfully, corrupt ſome texts of Scripture; wreſting and wringing them about, to make them ſpeak in his ſenſe, and to his purpoſe, namely, that Chriſt did not bear, as we ſay by imputation, but did bear away our ſins and our iniquities from us. Having therefore already freed thoſe places quoted out of the Propheſie of Iſaiah gIſa. 53.7. &c., expounded (as he ſaith) by that of Matt. 8.16. and from which he draweth this falſe conſequence, that Chriſt bore our ſins, as he bore our ſickneſſes, whereas indeed there is great difference in the manner of bearinghHos enim abstulit, non pertulit illa non pertulit illa pertulit & abſtulit ſimul. Sibran. Lub. lib. 2. cap. 4. theſe he did not bear, but bear away, thoſe he bore and bore away together; We ſhall now do the beſt we can by Gods aſſiſtance, to clear this of St. Peter alſo, and free it from the like corrupt handling. In this 1 Pet. 2.24. the place before cited, the Apoſtle ſaith expreſly, that Chriſt did peccata noſtra ſurſum tuliſſe, carry our ſins up with him upon the croſſe. If the Spirit of God by the Apoſtle had intended herein, a bearing away, he might have uſed, (as learned Grotius well obſervesiDe Satisfactione Chriſti. cap. 1., and more apt for that purpoſe) the word foreign, which barely ſignifies to take away: But for the greater Emphaſis, and more cleer expreſſing of his meaning, he uſeth the word foreign, that is, he took up, which is ſo far from diminiſhing, that it adds ſomething to the ſignification thereof. Now Socinus, and his Ape, the Dialogue, that they may weaken (if poſſible) the ſtrength of this place, do tell us, that this word foreign doth ſignifie abſtulit, he bare away: but quite contrary to the nature and uſe of the word: For neither the particle foreign will admit of that ſignification, nor doth any Greek Writer ſo uſe it. This Grotius proves againſt Socinus (and may ſerve as well to confute the Dialogue and his Diſciples) by many notable inſtances out of the word of God, we will take a ſurvey of ſome of them; Luke 24.51. foreign, and he was carryed up into Heaven; So Mat. 17.1. foreign, and he bringeth them up; alſo in Mar. 9.2. the ſame word is uſed; and becauſe the Sacrifices were laid, upon the Altar; they are ſaid Heb. 7.27. foreign, to be offered up. Hence Abraham is ſaid to offer up his Son Iſaac, Iam. 2.21. and Chriſt foreign, to offer up himſelf. One place only is cited by Socinus, upon which he grounds his miſ-interpretation, and by which he would lead us to the miſ-underſtanding of the word, namely, Heb. 9.28. In which he would have foreign, to ſignifie in his ſenſe, to bear away ſins; But how unfitly, the learned know: without any example, the ſenſe of the place no way bearing it, agreeing with it, or requiring of it. For the two commings of Chriſt, his firſt and ſecond comming, are there oppoſed one to another; the former, in which he ſhall come laden with our ſins; the latter, in which he ſhall come foreign, without ſins, that is, free from the burthen and weight thereof. Now there is no oppoſition at all between theſe, namely, to be without ſin, and to bear away ſin; but to be without ſin, and to be laden with ſin: So that it manifeſtly appears, even from this place to the Hebrews, which the Socinians make ſo much uſe of, that the word foreign, is either to bear up, that is, upon the croſſe, as in this place of Peter (and that appoſitly, becauſe here alſo it alludes to a ſacrifice, the croſſe being as it were the Altar) or ſimply and plainly to bear or undergo, as apud Thucydidem foreign, to ſuffer dangers. Therefore foreign is to bear, not to bear away, as the Dialogue and the reſt would have it, but are herein cleerly defeated. For the Apoſtle treateth here, not of every, or of any other grace of Chriſt, but of his great and admirable patience only, which is not ſeen, neither doth it evidence it ſelf, in bearing away, but in bearing and ſuſtaining the guilt or heavy burthen (ſaith the Pſalmiſt) of our ſins, which lay upon him, and was imputed to him.
We come to the next thing to be conſidered, namely, that God himſelf imputed our ſins to Chriſt, which is very neceſſary to be proved, becauſe the Dialogue ſeems to admit of a kind, though indeed a ſtrange kind of imputation, an imputation of men, but not of God; The Jews (ſaith he) laying many crimes to the charge of Chriſt, accounted him a moſt notorious ſinner, and therefore inſtigated Pilate the Roman Deputy to puniſh him, not only ſo, but as an hainous Malefactor. True, we confeſſe ſo much; but ſo to make him a ſinner by the unjuſt criminations, and falſe accuſations of men, as to deny any imputation of ſin by God unto him, we cannot grant, leſt we ſhould ſell our birth-right for a meſſe of pottage. For what are all the ſlanderous imputations of men to us? they are neither to us, nor to our behoof: The burthen our ſins muſt be taken from us, and layd upon him, whoſe only ſhoulders are able to undergo ſo great a weight, or elſe we are never the better for his coming in the fleſh among us. We will refer our ſelves to the Holy Scriptures herein, and ſtand or fall according to the determination thereof, which are very conſpicuous and cleer in this caſe.
A ProphetkIſa. 53.6., tells us plainly the Lord hath laid upon him, that is Chriſt, the iniquities of us all. I wot well how buſy Socinus and his brethen in evill are, leaving no ſtone unturned, to overthrow (if they could) the ſtrength, and corrupt the genuine ſenſe of theſe words, deviſing a new and uncouth interpretation of their own, to obſcure the radiant beams of the cordial and comfortable truth herein contained: But all the powers of darkneſs ſhall not be able to do it.
For the more full diſcovery whereof; I ſhall refer the judicious Reader to that tract of Grotius; his defence of the Catholick faithlDe Satisfactione Chriſti, cap. 1., the words themſelves admitting no other ſenſe then this, the Lord (for no creature whether in Heaven or Earth was able for to do it) hath made to meet on him, that is, hath faſtened upon him our ſins, and our iniquities, ſo that he beareth the whole weight and burthen thereof.
An Apoſtlem2 Cor. 5.21. alſo tells us; He, that is God, hath made him ſin for us, which knew no ſin: that we might be made the righteouſneſs of God in him; the adjunct is here to be taken for the ſubject. That the adverſaries of the truth, may ſhift off the ſtrength and authority of this place: they would perſwade us to underſtand by ſin, a man accounted a ſinner among men; Firſt, without any example to that purpoſe; for the original word is no where ſo taken; and then contrary to the mind of the Apoſtle, who aſcribes this action to God himſelf, plainly affirming that he made Chriſt ſin, who knew no ſin.
That the Jews did impute many notorions crimes to Chriſt, accounting him for one ſhamefully wicked and dangerouſly evil, is not to be eſteemed as an act of God, or that he was the Authour thereof: for by his voyce from Heaven, and his miracles on Earth, he declared the contrary, and in all doth atteſt the innocency of his Son; Beſides, the Apoſtle oppoſeth ſin and righteouſneſs, we are made the righteouſneſs of God, that is, we are juſtified being ungodly, or freed from Divine Juſtice, which we had deſerved: but Chriſt, that this might be ſo, is made ſin, that is, by reaſon of the guilt of ſin imputed to him, ſuffered Divine Juſtice for us. There is alſo another oppoſition in theſe words of the Apoſtle, He, which knew no ſin, and ſo had not deſerved any puniſhment, hath God made ſin, that is, would have to ſuffer puniſhment; even the puniſhment of ſin, which we had deſerved. Chriſt was innocent, not only in reſpect of the Law of man, but alſo of the Law of God; The force therefore and ſtrength of the oppoſition doth require, that he ſhould alſo ſuffer the puniſhment of the Divine Law. The Apoſtle doth not tell it for news (for it is no new thing) that thoſe who are innocent and harmleſſe, moſt unblameable in their converſationnHomo quantò voluerit eſſe Spiritualior, tantò praeſens vita ei ſit amarior. Iſod., are troubled, moleſted and evilly entreated of evil men; Every ſtory is a Chronicle of this truth, and the whole World the practiſe thereof; what age is not able ſufficiently to furniſh us? But here the Apoſtle noteth ſome ſingular, eminent and notable matter, and what can this be other, then that God ſhould inflict puniſhment upon a perſon, who conſidered in, and by himſelf, did no way in the leaſt meaſure ever deſerve it? It is God then that imputes the ſin, and himſelf inflicts the puniſhment thereof; Not but that men, yea and Devils to, may be inſtruments for the execution; but the puniſhment it ſelf proceeds from Cod. For the Apoſtles, when they apply the paſſion of Chriſt to us, and would bring it home to our uſe and benefit, have no reſpect at all to the actings of men in it, or about it; but only of God himſelf, as Iſa. 53.10. It pleaſed the Lord to bruiſe him, 'tis he that hath put him to grief; So that all the foul imputations of the Jews are nothing to this purpoſe. Thus have we in ſome meaſure heard, what the Scriptures ſay in this particular; Now whether we ſhould believe God or Man, Prophet and Apoſtle, or Socinus and the Dialogue, judge ye good Readers.
Here the whole Socinian band do fire at once, and to ſhew themſelves doughty champions of the black guard, do diſcharge a full volley of moſt horrid blaſphemies, even in the very face of the Almighty: If God, ſay they, ſhall impute ſin unto Chriſt, his own innocent and harmleſſe Son, he is unjuſt*Ille agit injuſtè, qui invitum pro altero punit, ſed qui illum, qui ſe ſponté pro alterò ad ſupplicium effort, & habet fui, ipſiuſ que pro quo ſe offert, liberandi poteſtatem pro altero púnit, ille non agit injuſtè. Sibrandus Lubbertus, pag. 376.; Thus, though Chriſt have taken our ſins upon him, and hath engaged for us; yet if God impute ſin to Chriſt, they will be ſo bold, as to impute ſin to God, and charge him with injuſtice: yea, the Dialogue it ſelf, though he appear one of the laſt, is none of the leaſt among them; For he confidently affirms, that God cannot impute ſin to our innocent Saviour; but if he ſhould do ſo, he ſhould be as unjuſt*Deus verè & ſummè juſtus in ſponſere noſtro Bez. in Rom. 4.25.; even as the wicked Jews; what high preſumption is it in theſe poor worms thus to reproach the living God, and to charge him fooliſhly? He that reproveth him, let him anſwer it ſaith Iob oIob 39.35.; We may diſcover the ground of this errour, though there be none for their blaſphemy; Here, here is that ignis erraticus, that cauſeth them to wonder, namely, a vain ſuppoſition, that the works of God are no leſſe ſubject to the Law of nature, and the Law of Moſes, then the works of men: and that the work of mans redemption, publiſhed to us only by the Goſpel, is to be ſquared by, and proportioned to the Law of nature engraffed in us, or the Law of Moſes ſet down as a Rule of life unto us.
This they endeavour to maintain by an argument taken from the equal obligation, as well of God, as of man to the ſame, prefixed as a rule to both, and to both a like, beyond which, as man, ſo God himſelf cannot paſſe, but they do (as it were) pull him by the ſleeve, tell him of it, and charge him with injuſtice. For, ſay they, God hath not ordained this Law for men only, namely; The Fathers ſhall not dye for their Children, nor the Children for their Fathers, but every one ſhall bear the puniſhment of his own ſin; But alſo, did after a manner impoſe it upon himſelf, ſpeaking thus by the ProphetpEzek. 18.20., the Son ſhall not bear the iniquity of the Father, neither ſhall the Father bear the iniquity of the Son, but the righteouſneſs of the righteous, &c.
This Socinian argument is patcht up with very groundleſſe, yea ſenſeleſſe and fained ſuppoſitions, the firſt of which is, that God by Moſes impoſed the ſame Law upon himſelf, which he had engraven in the hearts of the Gentiles, and delivered to the JewsqDeut. 24.16., namely, the Fathers ſhall not be put to death for the Children, nor the Children for the Fathers. That this is falſe may appear by the practiſe of Amaziah King of Judah, who having reſpect unto this Law did not underſtand it, as to extend it ſelf ſo far as to God, the moſt high and ſupream Law-giver, but to be terminated and limitted in his vicegerents, and thereforer2 King. 14.6., he ſlew not the Children of thoſe that had murthered his Father Joaſh, according to that which is written in the book of the Law of Moſes.
We affirm then, that God was not lyable, neither can he poſſibly be ſubject to any external Law whatſoever; the reaſon is plain, becauſe his own will is the prime and chiefeſt Rule of Juſtice, who receiveth Laws from none, but preſcribeth Laws to all; as being the cauſe and original of all juſt Laws engraven in the hearts of men, or by writing committed to record, and commended to poſterity. Wherefore as God will have no Law preſcribed to his will, which depends not upon the will of any other: So, ſeing his will is in it ſelf holy, and unchangeably juſt, there is no need at all, that he ſhould preſcribe a Law as a Rule of Juſtice unto himſelf.
The ſecond ſuppoſition is, that this Evangelical affirmation of God, by which he declares his willingneſs, that Chriſt by his appeaſing death ſhould ſatisfie the debt of our ſins for us, is altogether repugnant to that legal aſſeveration of his, that he would not that the innocent Son ſhould dye for the guilty Father, or the innocent Father for the guilty Son; Both which, though in ſeveral reſpects are moſt true and certain.
Firſt, God would have Chriſt our Brother according to the fleſh, being juſtified by the Spirit, and declared innocent by Pontius Pilate to be condemned and executed for us that were guilty: becauſe Chriſt by joynt conſent with God his Father appointed himſelfſAliud eſt alterum pro altero puniri invitum, aliud puniri illum qui ſe ſiſtit ipro altero vadem ſeu ſpoſorem. Chriſtus hic hominem induit, & factum eſt peccatum & execratio, undèjustè ſolvit, quod a nobis erat debitum. Prideaux de Redemptione. a propitiatory ſacrifice for us from all eternity; whence he is calledtIoh 1.29. Agnus Dei. the Lamb of God that taketh away the ſins of the World. A Lamb indeed without ſpot, without blemiſh, ordained for this very purpoſe, even before the Foundations of the World were laid; but in theſe latter times manifeſted to us, whom he hath redeemed from ſin by his moſt precious bloud as St. Peter expreſſeth it, 1 Pet. 1.17, 19, 20.
Secondly, God would not that out of mankind either the Father ſhould dye for the Son, or the Son for the Father; becauſe he knew from all eternity, that no Father or Son could poſſibly be guiltleſſe, proceeding from the corrupt maſſe of mankind, or out of the loynes of ſinfull and degenerate Adam, and ſo could not be a ſufficient ſacrifice, one for another. Add to this moreover, that among men there was never any yet found, which out of an abſolute purpoſe of mind and immutable conſtancy could be contented to offer up himſelf a ſacrifice unto death, unto ſuch a death, for the ſins of thoſe which were his Enemies, with the like reaſon and reſolution, as our Saviour Chriſt did; Though Moſes and Paul wiſhed that they might dye for the Iſraelites their Country-men, yet it was not ſo ſimply and abſolutely for them, as Chriſt did for his Elect, but conditionally that is to ſay, upon ſuch terms as ſtood not with the liking, nor were agreeable to the good will and pleaſure of God. Whereas Chriſt, not conditionally, but ſimply and abſolutely according to the decree of his Father, laid down his life, as willing to ſuffer what men or Devils could do againſt him, and was accepted of him. We might multiply reaſons for this, why God ſhould free us, who deſerved to be puniſhed unto all eternity, and ſhould lay that puniſhment, which was due to us (though in reſpect of time, not unto eternity) upon his own moſt innocent harmleſſe and beloved Son, without any, the leaſt ſuſpition of wrong or injuſtice in God*Iuſtus eſt Deus, & omni a juſtè diſponit, & eum tamen qui non debet puniri, condemnat. Mediator enim noſter quia nullum culpae cont…gium perpetravit, puniri pro ſe ipſo non debuit. Sed ſi ipſe indebitam mortem non ſuſciperet, nunquam non à debitâ morte liberaret. Gregorius Mag. lib 3. Mor., as being our Pledge, Surety and Undertaker for us, willingly and of his own accord laying down the full priſe of our redemption. But I ſuppoſe we have already done ſufficient to this purpoſe. Let God be juſt and true, and not only all Socinians, but even the whole World be falſe and liars. For though man be ſo dimſighted, that he cannot ſee, or ſo weak in his intellects that he cannot underſtand how it is, or which way it ſhould be ſouScio quod ita, ſed non cur ita, Bern. Epiſt. 190., for there is defatigatio in intellectualibus ſays one of the ſaddeſt, and the ſoundeſt of the Hebrew RabbieswRabbi Solomon in Eccl., the underſtanding may be dazled as well as the eye; even in the beſt, and they which think themſelves wiſeſt, and would make the World believe they know moſt: yet though we cannot alwayes diſcern it, God is alwayes juſt in all his wayes, and holy in all his works; Where we underſtand not, let us admire, crying out with St. Chriſoſtome in an holy extaſie foreign. Oh the hight and the depth of the love of God, &c. This, this is the Lords own doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes, and in the eyes of all that ſee it.
But leaſt the Dialogue ſhould think we had quite forgotten him, we return again unto him, finding him in the very ſame place where we left him, who tells us, that if Chriſt had ſtood a guilty perſon before God, by his imputing our ſins unto him, he could not have bin a fit perſon in Gods eſteem to perform the office of a Mediatour for our redemption. We anſwer? Qui benè diſtinguit, &c. and ſo diſtinguiſh between the guilt of commiſſion, and the guilt of obligation; If he had in the leaſt meaſure bin guilty in reſpect of commiſſion, he had not bin a fit perſon in relation to God; if he had not bin guilty*Oblatus eſt pro peccatis non immerito, peccatum factus dicitur, &c. Ambroſius in 2 Cor. 5. in reſpect of obligation, he had not bin fit in relation to us. God beſt knew what condition might render him moſt meet, and moſt fitly qualifie him for the undertaking and performing of his Mediatorial office, and therefore puts him into that capacity and condition, by imputing the guilt of our ſins unto him.
Before we paſſe any further, who can forbid us, that we may not marry theſe two together, and make one entire propoſition of them, namely this, That God did impute the guilt of our ſins unto our innocent Saviour, as unto our Pledge, and Surety, which indeed was the impulſive cauſe of all his ſufferings; being then thus joyned together by us, and that without the help of a Juſtice of Peace. We will by Gods aſſiſtance deſcend to a more particular confirmation hereof.
Firſt, from the paſſion and ſuffering of Chriſt, being conſidered in himſelf as a moſt innocent and unblamable perſon, without any, the leaſt tincture of ſin or pollution, from whence we argue thus, whoſoever is free from ſin, and yet nevertheleſſe is puniſhed as one obnoxious to ſin, muſt needs have the guilt of others ſins imputed to him*Chriſtus peccatum quidem non fecit, peccatum tamen pro nobis factus eſt, — Ipſe eti…m qui in ſimilitudinem hominum factus est, & habitu repertus eſt homo, ſine dubio pro peccato, quod ex nobis ſuſceperat quia peccata noſtra portavit, viculum immaculatum, hoc eſt, carnem in contaminatum obtulit hostiam Deo. Origen homil. 3. in Leviticum.; whereas, ſaving Divine Juſtice, no man can be moleſted, afflicted or puniſhed, unleſſe it be for his own proper ſin, or for the ſin of ſome other imputed to him.
But the firſt is true of Chriſt our Saviour, as we have plentifully proved already out of theſe ſeveral place, Iſ. 53. verſ. 4.5. alſo, 2 Cor. 5.21. Therefore the latter: The iniquities of us all did God make to meet upon him, and by the reaſon thereof, laid upon him alſo the puniſhment of thoſe iniquities; What other conſequence can proceed from hence, but that Chriſt, ſeeing he could not be lyable to puniſhment for his own ſin, being free from all ſin, and every appearance of evil, neither was there guile found in his lips; for our ſins being made ſubject to the ſame, had the ſins of others truly and indeed imputed to him? The cauſe alſo of this imputation is juſt; becauſe Chriſt having taken the Mediatorital office upon himſelf, by the joynt concurrence of his Father, being willing, freely and of his own accord to be deputed in our place and ſteed, hence our ſins were by right imputed to him, after he became a Surety for usxNaemo quâ innocens puniri poteſt, ſed innocens quatenus reorum vas factus eſt, omnino puniri poteſt docentum nomine pro quiby ſe ſiſtit. Eſſenius, lib. 2. ſect. 3. cap. 1. de Satisfactione Chriſti.. In an obligation, the debter and the bondſ-man or Surety are reckoned and conſidered but as one perſon; neither is it any injuſtice at all to require the debt of the one, as well as the other, ſeeing the one would freely and voluntarily engage for the other; Yea more eſpecially of the Surety, when it manifeſtly appears, as in our caſe it doth, that the debter himſelf is no way able to make ſatisfaction; Chriſt therefore paid that which we did we, as David himſelf ſpeaking in the perſon of our SaviouryPſal. 69.4., ſaith, I reſtored that which I took not away, or I payed that, which I did not owe.
Secondly, from the manner of Gods dealing with Chriſt: He, which knew no ſin ſaith St. Paul z2 Cor. 5.21., did God make ſin, yea a curſeaGal. 3.13., for us; So then the argument will lye thus, He which was made ſin and a curſe for others, muſt needs have the ſins and guilt of others imputed to him; But Chriſt was made ſin and a curſe for others; Therefore muſt he of neceſſity have the ſin and guilt of others imputed to him.
For the firſt, namely, that of the Apoſtle to the Corinthians, we ſhall a little more fully expreſſe our ſelves concerning it;
For the latter, we have no more at this time to ſay to it, though much more might be ſpoken of it. He was made ſin, ſaith the Apoſtle; by ſin, whether we underſtand a ſinner, as ſome, or a ſacrifice for ſin, as others do earneſtly contend to have it, it is all to one purpoſe, and come both to one paſſe; For from both the Doctrine of imputation is inferred; If a ſacrifice for ſin, it is to free us; If a ſinner, it was by reaſon of our guilt imputed to him, and by God his Father laid upon him. And therefore Chryſoſtome, Theophilact, and Oecumenius affirm, that Chriſt was made ſin, not only in reſpect of thoſe afflictions and that puniſhment, which he ſuffered for our ſins; but alſo, and eſpecially in regard of imputation, the guilt of our ſins being charged on him. Likewiſe St. Auguſtine bEnchiridion ad Laurentium. Ipſe peccatum & nos juſtitia, non noſtra ſed Dei, non in nobis, ſed in ipſo, ſicut ipſe peccatum, &c.ſaith, as we are made righteouſneſs, not ours, but of God, not in us, but in him: So he was made ſin, not his, but ours, not in him, but in us; and yet laid upon him by juſt imputation. Hence it is that Chriſt is pleaſed to charge himſelf with our ſins, even after ſuch a manner, and upon ſuch terms, as if they were his own, for ſo he calls themcPſal. 69.5., my ſins are not hid from thee; So that Chriſt is made ſin for us*Et ſi peccatum victima ex Hebraeorum idiotiſmo, &c. Tamen ratio Antitheſis poſſit ut potius Chriſtus dicatur factus eſſe peccatum pro nobis, i. e. peccator, non in ſe, ſed ex omnium peccatorum noſtrorum reatu ipſi imputato. Bez. in 2 Cor. 5. ult., not only ratione nocumenti, in regard of puniſhment, undergoing thoſe things, which we ſhould have ſuffered; but principally and eſpecially ratione culpae & reatus, in regard both of ſin and guilt, devolving them upon himſelf, bearing them for us, and in our ſteed.
Thirdly, from the deſignation of the meritorious cauſe of Chriſt our Saviours paſſion; for if our ſins were the meritorious cauſe of his ſufferings, and he dyed by the merit thereof, it muſt neceſſarily follow, that our ſins were imputed to him; But the firſt is true, becauſe he dyed for ſins and for iniquities. Therefore the latter. For the further confirmation whereof, beſides thoſe places of Scripture formerly quoted by us, the Reader may pleaſe to peruſe thoſe following, Rom. 4.25. alſo cap. 8.3. with 1 Cor. 15.3. Heb. 10.25. all which neceſſarily conclude the ſame. The Socinians do attempt to blow up this truth, by laying their mine, and making their aſſault againſt the Propoſition foreign, for; telling us our ſins may be an occaſion, but not a cauſe, not the impulſive cauſe of our Saviours ſufferings. But it is ſo apparent, that foreign joyned with an Accuſative caſe, as they who have not out-lived the memory of their rudiments know, is by all Greek Authours both ſacred and prophane, a moſt uſual note of the impulſive cauſe, that the chiefeſt of them are aſhamed to be ſeen in it, or to appear againſt it; onelyonly ſome few underlings & Novices in this Socinian hereſie, that they may ſeem to be ſome body among the ignorant, have raiſed this duſt on purpoſe: which I am the rather induced to believe, becauſe the Dialogue doth paſſe it over in ſilence, without taking the leaſt notice at all of it.
Fourthly, from the attribution of ſin; for whereas our ſins and fooliſhneſſes are aſcribed to Chriſt, that is, thoſe ſins which proceed from folly and blindneſs of mind in us, it cannot otherwiſe be, but that all our other iniquities ſhould be imputed to him alſo; For theſedforeign. really foreign, Chriſt by himſelf conſidered, are no way ſuitable unto, nor agreeable with him, he being exempted from all ſin; Therefore our ſins, all our ſins muſt needs be imputative aſcribed to him*Deſpectus erat & ignobilis quando pendebat in cruce, & factus pronobis maledictum, peccata noſtra portabat. Chryſoſt. in Iſa. cap. 53., and foreign as our Pledge and Surety take them upon himſelf; For ſo in the Pſalm before cited, Chriſt thus expreſſeth himſelf to his Father, Lord thou knowſt my fooliſhneſs, and my ſins are not hid from thee. That the Meſſias, our Mediatour doth ſpeak in this Pſalm, the boldeſt and moſt daring Socinian hath not the front to deny, if any of them ſhould, the greatneſs of the puniſhments, verſ. 2. &c. as alſo the cauſe and deſcription of his reproach, verſ. 8. &c. would eaſily convince them; which can truly be ſpoken of, or ſafely applyed to none other but him; together with drinking of Gall and Vinegar, not a doſe of Oximel ſweet and ſour, but things ſharp and bitter, verſ. 22. the enſuing judgments upon the hard and obdurate Jews, verſ. 23. Laſtly, the explication hereof in diſtinct parts in the New Teſtament, do all ſtand forth and give a cleer evidence of the ſame; and is with one conſent allowed by Hilarius, Athanaſius, Auguſtinus, Coſſiodorus, Euthymius, and all the Orthodox Fathers of the Church; Hence therefore we conclude, whoſoever paying for, or reſtoring that, which another violently took away doth ſubject himſelf to moſt grievous pains, complaining of his ſins and fooliſhneſs, being himſelf free from all manner of iniquity and tranſgreſſion, muſt needs have the ſins, fooliſhneſs, and violence of others imputed to him, which as his own, he aſcribeth and appropriateth to himſelf. But Chriſt paying for that, which others had violently taken away, that is, the honour due to the Majeſty of God, in diſobeying his holy and juſt commands, ſubjected himſelf to moſt grievous pains, and doth miſerably complain of his ſins and offences, being himſelf free from all ſin and iniquity; Therefore the ſins of others, that is, of the Elect, and their violence is imputed to him, &c.
Laſtly, from the prefiguration of types cleerly manifeſted in the Levitical ſervices; For as the ſins of the Iſraelites were imputed unto their legal ſacrifices, for which they were offeredeLevit. 4. and 5. cap.: So by the force and ſtrength of the Analogie of type and Anti-type, the ſins of all Gods people muſt in the new Teſtament, and ſervice of the Goſpel, be imputed to Chriſt, as our only Evangelical and propitiatory ſacrifice. Not to trye the Reader with one inſtance upon the neck of another*Fruſtrà fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora., when as one only may be as good as a thouſand; which ſhall be of that Goatfforeign or foreign., of which we read in the 16. cap. of Leviticus, and will ſufficiently confirm the truth hereof: for upon his head did Aaron impoſe all the ſins of the Children of Iſrael, verſ. 21. and he did bear all their iniquities into a place not inhabited, verſ. 22. This type doth ſhew, that all our ſins were laid upon Jeſus Chriſt, who was by this goat plainly prefiguredgSola mors Chriſti ſangui nolenta, ignomini oſa atque maledicta olim hircorum quibus peccata totius populi Iſraelitici imponebantur morte cruenta typice praefigurabatur. Polyander. diſput. 10., that he ſhould bear them, that is, the puniſhment of them, which we had deſerved. Nor was this a vain ceremony, or an idle and unprofitable cuſtome among them; but both for matter & manner commanded and preſcribed by God himſelf. Beſides, whoever happened to touch this Goat was unclean, till he had cleanſed himſelf by waſhing, Levit. 16.26. Whereby was ſignifyed that Chriſt the Antitype hereof, was an imputed ſinner, and ſo made a curſe for us. He then that would perſwade us, that Chriſt did not bear our ſins by imputation, did never truly conſider, or well underſtand the Anagoly between this type and the Anti-type; for if he had, he could not but be convinced hereby. Yet let me tell you, there is ſome, and that no ſmall difference in the manner of bearing, though the Dialogue, with other Socinians, will admit of none. Chriſt, I ſay, did bear our ſins after another manner, then this goat did bear the ſins of the Iſraelites; For this goat did bear them typically or Sacramentally, but Chriſt did bear them really and ſubſtantiall, he was wounded for our tranſgreſſions, he was bruiſed for our iniquities, and ſo was not this goat for theirs. He that will undertake to prove the contrary, had need take even ad Graecas Calendas, to do the ſame.
All this while we have but chaffed the wax, we come now to ſet on the ſeal; for what are all theſe ſufferings of Chriſt to us, or the imputation of our ſins to him, if Gods Juſtice be not hereby ſatisfyed, and we freed from the wrath to come? Who are yet in our ſins, and ſo lyable to ſuffer the eternal puniſhment due unto us for the ſame. We ſhall now therefore prove, that all this was done by way of ſatisfaction to Divine Juſtice, and ſo conclude this part alſo with ſome neceſſary caution, and ſound advice to the conſcientious Reader.
The ſweet Singer of Iſrael hPſ. 85.10.11.telleth it for news, and joyfull news it is indeed; and therefore compoſes a ſong, this very ſong for the ſolemnity thereof; That Mercy and Truth are met together, that righteouſneſs and peace have kiſſed each other, &c. It would be worth our while, to make ſome enquiry, how, and for what cauſe they came at firſt aſunder, ſeeing of themſelves they are no ſtrangers, all four in the boſome of God from all Eternity; Attributes all four of his undivided eſſence? Not of themſelves then, nor by reaſon of any cauſe of theirs, were they thus divided, and ſet at ſuch a diſtance, that it was news to ſee them meet, and greet thus kindly and affectionately; but the quarrel was ours, and about us did they at firſt part company.
And a ſweet Singer of our Iſrael toiBiſh. Andrew. in his Sermon. layes it forth thus; If at the coming of Chriſt in the fleſh (in conſideration where of this Pſalm was pend) theſe Attributes of God did meet; ſure, ſaith he, at Adams fall, they might be ſaid to part; It was Adams cauſe then, and ſo ours, that firſt divided Heaven, yea the very Attributes in God, and ſo in a manner God himſelf; And thus they parted firſt. Nor could it otherwiſe be ſaid by the ApoſtlekCol. 1.20., that Chriſt reconciled all things in Heaven and Earth, if there had not bin in Heaven ſome what to be taken up.
Mercy and Truth had met before, but no comfort to us at that meeting, they met indeed, but inſteed of Oſculatae ſunt, as here, kiſſing; it was altercatae ſunt, in reſpect of us killing, that that meeting did bring forth. While Mercy and Peace would have Adams, and ſo our caſe relieved, Righteouſneſs and Truth would by no means conſent unto it. The Plea between them at this meeting is excellently and eligantly drawn up by St. Bernard kBer. in Annunt. ſerm. 1.. In which Mercy thus began, for out of her propenſity & readineſs to do good, ſhee's here, ſhee's there, ſhee's every where moſt forward; therefore he brings her in as the firſt Speaker; Her inclination is, or rather ſhee her ſelf is, an inclination to pitty ſuch as are in miſery, and if ſhee can, relieve them too, though in themſelves they deſerve it not. And her plea islPſal. 89.47., nunquid in vanum? What hath God made all men for nought? What profitmPſal. 30.9. is in this bloud? Hath God forgotten to be gracious, and will he be no more entreated? His pris ſu ſurris, with theſe and the like holy whiſperings, as he terms them, did ſhee enter into the very bowels of God, making them yearn and melt into compaſſion towards the works of his own hands. And certainly, if there had bin none to ſtand up againſt us, there might have bin ſome hope, that Mercy would have prevailed for us. But Truth muſt be heard to, and ſhe layes in juſt matter of exception, pleading thus, Deus erat verbum, what is God, but his word? his word was to Adam, morte morteris, thou ſhalt dye the death; So to the Sons of Adam, anima quae peccaverit, the ſoul that ſinneth, that ſoul ſhall dye. God may not falſifie his word, that may not, muſt not be. Then ſteps up righteouſneſs and ſeconds her, and her plea is, that God, as he is true of his word, ſo is he righteous in his works, reddere ſuum cuique, to give to each his own, and ſo to the ſinner ſtipendium peccati, the wages that he hath earned, that is, death. God forbid, ſaith ſhee, the Judge of all the World ſhould do, or Judge un…uſtly; that be far from thee, O God! that were as before to make Truth, falſe: So here to do right, wrong; which muſt needs be, if Mercy ſhould have her mind, and man, ſinful man be ſpared, and relieved.
The contention ſtayes not here, but every one begins to make it their own caſe, and ſee themſelves highly concerned in it. For ſayes righteouſneſs, what ſhall become of me, or what uſe at all of Juſtice, if God ſpare ſinners, that have thus offended? And what uſe of mee, ſayes Mercy, the ſweeteſt Attribute of the Deity, if God ſpare them not? Here is hard hold indeed, inſomuch as Perij, niſi homo moriatur, ſayes Juſtice, I dye, if he dye not; and Perij, niſi miſericordiam conſequatur, ſayes Mercy, if he dye, I dye to; To this paſſe it came, and upon theſe terms brak up their meeting, and ſo they parted each from other. Terras Aſtraea reliquit, away flings Juſtice up to Heaven; Mercy ſtays behind, and keeps poor diſtreſſed man company.
For where ſhould Mercy benUbi enim miſericordia eſſet, ſi cum miſero non eſſet? Hugo?, if with miſery ſhee ſhould not be? Peace being grieved to ſee this difference, plyes her hard between both, and doubles her endeavour to get (if poſſible) a meeting upon ſome better terms, to reconcile theſe two great and glorious Attributes of God, ſet them at rights, or elſe we might be ſure it would go wrong with us. Our Salvation all this while doth, as it were, lye a bleeding.
The Plea hangs, and we ſtand, but as Priſoners at the bar, not knowing what to do, or what in the end will become of us.
Fain would Peace procure a meeting; Mercy longs to ſee that day; Juſtice ſhee is willing to; where then lyes the fault? only ſhee ſtands upon terms of ſatisfaction.
Juſtice elſe ſhould be no Juſtice, and righteouſneſs ſhould not be righteous. If ſhee remain unſatisfyed, there is no hope at all for us: but if ſhee be once ſatisfyed, all is well.
The whole matter then reſts upon her ſatisfaction, and hic labor, hoc opus, here is the work indeed; how to ſatisfie her to her mind, that ſo ſhee may be content, content to ſave us, and to ſet us free. All the World cannot do this, not render unto Juſtice ſuch, and ſo compleat a ſatisfaction, as may procure this from her. But behold, there is one that undertaketh for us, and ſpeaks thus to Juſtice in our behalfoPſal. 40.6., Sacrifice and offerings thou wouldſt not have, therefore lo I come, of whom it is, written in the volumne of thy Book, that I ſhould do this thing; He then, the only Son of God, by taking our nature upon him, and laying down both ſoul and body an offering for ſin, muſt needs give Juſtice full and condigne ſatisfaction. For what Juſtice either in Heaven or Earth could require more? men or Angels could not expect ſo much; If we ſpeak of an expiation, a ranſome, an foreign (Chriſts own wordpMatt. 16.26.) here it is, and no where elſe, and this will do it to the full.
But here the Socinians are ſo ſottiſh, as to object and Object 1 ſay, to what purpoſe is all this? What need any ſatisfaction at all? Hath God leſſe power then every common creditor: Can he remit ſuch debts as are dwing to him freely, and at his own pleaſure, and cannot God forgive offences againſt him committed of his own free mercy and goodneſs, without ſatisf…ction, and putting his well beloved Son to all this pain? Surely, ſay they, this muſt needs be an high derogation of the power and mercy of God. *Aut Deus non voluit, aut non potuit nobis nostra peccata niſi ſatisfactione interveniente condenare; ſi non voluit non eſt miſericors, &c.We will anſwer theſe; Anſw. Leaſt (as Solomon tells us) they ſhould ſeem wiſe in their own eyes, though otherwiſe we eſteem it not worth the while. If God (who can do all things, that make for his own glory, and the good and benefit of his people) would quit his Juſtice and wave his Truth, he could indeed; But his Juſtice and Truth are in him as eſſential, as intrinſically eſſential as his Mercy, of equal regard, and every way as dear unto him; and ſo he cannot. Juſtice otherwiſe remains unſatisfied, and ſatisfied it muſt be, either on our Surety, or us; not on us, alas poor wretches we are never able in the leaſt meaſure to give her that ſatisfaction, which ſhee requireth; Therefore the Son of the moſt high God, the Lord Paramont of Heaven and Earth took our nature on him; Our nature, that in our nature, for our nature, he might make to God his Father even (as the ſchools expreſſe itqStando interminis Juſtitia., ſtanding on the terms of his moſt exact and ſtrict Juſtice) a compleat, full, and every way ſufficient ſatisfaction.
Object 2 Here again it is objected, that the word ſatisfaction is no where to be found throughout the Scriptures, and therefore is juſtly to be ſuſpected; For God, ſay they, would not have left us, without ſome mention, yea plain and evident expreſſion of that, had it bin of him, which we take to be an Article of our faith, and ſuch an one, as is even the very all in all of our Religion. Anſw. For anſwer whereunto, we urge not the words ſatisfaction, merit, &c. as if our Religon conſiſted in words, which being taken from us, it could not ſubſiſt; we bid open defiance to ſuch as ſay ſo of us, and would lay ſo foul an imputation on us; we would have them know, that we build not the hope of our Salvation, upon ſo ſlight and ſandy a foundation; Not words, but things are the matter upon which we reſt, and ſuch things, as neither Socinus, Gitichius, Oſtorodius, &c. with all their complices abroad; Nor Biddle rSome of whoſe black blaſphemous lines I have ſeen more fit to be burnt by the hands of the Common Hangman, then to go abroad ſo uncontrouled, to the prejudice of others., Dialogue or Devil at home, ſhall be able to move us, much leſſe remove us from our holy profeſſion, with all their ſly and ſubtil whiſperings, by which they cloſely endeavour to ſeduce ſome, or thoſe fearfull and horrible blaſphemies which they thunder out, and by which they endeavour to bear down all before them.
We grant, the word Satisfaction is not to be found in Scripture; yet that there is not any ſuch thing couched in, and intended by the Scripture, none but Sicinians dare deny; For, though the word be not there, the thing it ſelf ſignified by the word, is not only extant in it, but is the very ſubject matter of it; as he that hath any ſpiritual inſight into the Scriptures, may eaſily diſcern by terms and expreſſions equivalent and correſpondent to the ſame.
Hugo Grotius ſDe ſatisfactione Chriſti., a man well skilled in this kind of Militia, muſters up many teſtimonies to evidence and confirm the truth hereof, ranking them into theſe ſeveral files;
Firſt, ſuch as ſpeak of Gods averſion, and turning away of his anger from us, being in Jeſus Chriſt his Son, our Saviour freely and fully reconciled to us. Now anger in God (to ſpeak after the manner of men) is nothing elſe but a will or diſpoſition to puniſh, which the Apoſtle ſaithtRom. 1.18., is revealed from Heaven againſt all ungodlineſs and unrighteouſneſs of men, who hold the truth in unrighteouſneſs; from which, none out of the State of Grace, and communion with Chriſt, are exempted, being all by nature the Children of wrath, and ſo lyable to Divine indignation. This anger abideth upon ſomeuJoh. 3.36., and upon whom it abideth not, from them it is turned away, Chriſt having obtained this favour by his ſufferings, from the hand of his Father. Here we would not be miſtaken, as if we made God lyable to paſſions and affections, ſo that he ſhould be one while angry & provoked againſt us, and by and by that anger ſhould be mitigated, and he himſelf pacified towards us. God is not, neither indeed can be ſubject in the leaſt to ſuch mutations; But this we believe and affirm, that Divine wrath or punitive Juſtice, being irritated and incenſed by us, hath cauſe enough (as well as power) to take vengance on us, but Chriſt by his ſufferings, hath purchaſed our impunity, and quenched thoſe flames, by taking away the cauſe thereof, which otherwiſe would utterly have conſumed us, and therefore is moſt fitly ſtiled, and that twice by the ApoſtlewJoh. 2.1, 2. and Joh. 4.10., a Propitiation. Add to theſe, that of St. Paul xRom. 3.24, 25., whom, namely Chriſt, God hath ſet forth to be a Propitiation, through faith in his bloud: Chriſt then is made foreign or foreign, a reconciliation by his bloud, dying for us, that ſo we might be freed from the wrath to come.
Secondly, ſuch as declare our redemption by a priſe or valuable conſideration paid to the Juſtice of God for our deliverance, which words, with the like, which we meet with in holy Scriptures, are, as it were fitted to that freedome, that we enjoy, from the puniſhment that we deſerved. That this is ſo, appears plainly by the Apoſtle Paul in two ſeveral places, uſing one and the ſame expreſſion y and z, in vvhom we have redemption through his bloud; In which words we conſider theſe particulars. 1. The matter what. 2. The manner how. 3. The means whereby. The matter what, that is, Redemptionaforeign eſt liberatio ali cujus ab incommodo, foreign intercedente., which is a delivering of one from m…ſery or ſlavery, by paying a price or ranſome for him; It is that deliverance, which we enjoy from the bondage and ſlavery of ſin and death, to which we were ſubject, ſo long as we remained in the Kingdome of darkneſs, in which none are free, but all under the ſame vaſſalage.
The manner how fully expreſſed in the word foreign, which ſignifieth ſuch a deliverance as a man enjoyeth, the price of his redemption being paid; For, as before, the Juſtice of God will not ſign our diſcharge, nor give us our manumiſſion, till ſhee be fully ſatisfied and contented. Nor is this any diſparagement to, or diminution of the mercy of God*Quàm multae eſt Deus ergo nos clementiae. Filio non pepercit, ut parceret ſervo. Unigenitum tra…dit, ut r… dim ret ſerv… planae ingratos, &c. Chryſoſt. in Iſa., as the Socinians do cunningly inſinuate and pretend, that his Juſtice muſt be ſatisfied, before we can be delivered, ſeeing he himſelf doth afford the means, the whole means, (which is our next conſideration) whereby it is accompliſhed, the foreign, the very priſe of our redemption, not gold, not ſilver, not any corruptible thing; but the moſt precious bloud of Jeſus Chriſt, hath redeemed us from that miſery, into which, by reaſon of our rebellion we had plunged our ſelves.
Thirdly, ſuch as denote a ſurrogation, or the ſetting and appointing one in the place, or room of another; as when Chriſt is ſaid to have taſted of death for all, Heb. 2.9. that he ſhould dye for the peoplebJoh 11.50., when we were ſinners Chriſt dyed for uscRom. 5.8.; This is a common expreſſion in every Speech and Language, when one doth or ſuffereth any thing in the ſteed and place of another, he is ſaid to do or ſuffer that for him. Neither is this phraſe, or manner of ſpeaking appropriated to perſons only, but alſo to things; For in the like propriety of ſpeech, this is ſaid to be given, put or accounted for that, which is given, put or accounted in the place or ſteed of that; The Socinians would willingly decline this interpretation, by ſuppoſing ſome ambiguity in the Prepoſition pro, for; which oftentimes, ſay they, is found to ſignifie a thing done for the profit and commodity of another; and therefore do keep no ſmall a do to have it ſo here; But they had as good be quiet; for it will not be; and indeed it ſeems they are very ill provided, that are beholding to ſuch poor ſhifts. I wonder none of their great Admirers and Abetters will take the pains to help the lame Dog over the ſtile. I have often found my obſervation true, Ignorance and Impudence are the firſt begetters of errour and hereſy, and after, the chief maintainers and propagators of the ſame begotten. Indeed among the Latines they may ſeem to find ſome ſhelter, and among the Greeks too, if we had to deal with the Prepoſition foreign, for; But never with the Prepoſition foreign, for; which is here uſed, and with which we have here to do.
This may appear by the Evangeliſt St. Matthew dMatt. 20.28., he came to give his life foreign, a ranſome for many, that is, to give his life in the place of many, and to dye in their ſteed; Utterly rejecting the Socinian interpretation; Alſo the ſame EvangeliſteMatt. 5.38., foreign, &c. an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; one in the ſteed and room of another; And the Apoſtle Peter fPet. 1.3, 9., not rendring foreign foreign, evil for evil, or railing for railing, as he expreſſeth it. Moreover, when …t is applyed to perſons, it denotes the ſucceſſion of one, in the room and place of another; as St. Matthew gMatt. 2.22.ſpeaking of Archelaus, ſaith, he reigned foreign, in the room of his Father Herod, not their interpretation then, being too much derogatory to the grace of Chriſt, but ours, as moſt agreeable to the mind of the Holy Ghoſt, not for our good, benefit and profit only, as they would have it, but in our room and ſteed, as we expound it; for ſo it muſt be here.
Laſtly, ſuch as ſpeak of the death of Chriſt, as an holy expiatory, or ſacrifice for ſin, which the Epiſtle to the Hebrews, eſpecially the 9th Chapter, ſetteth forth moſt cleerly. So then, though the Socinians cannot find this word Satisfaction in their Bibles, yet they may find that which is equivalent to it, and is put for it, as when the hurt or damage done to any one, either by ſin, or other treſpaſſe, is truly and fully recompenced, this is ſatisfactionhSee Grotius de Satisfact. Chriſti, cap. 7.8, 9, 10. That this was performed by Chriſt, and the Juſtice of God hereby appeaſed, which we had provoked by our tranſgreſſions, is manifeſt by thoſe Teſtimonies formerly recited, and by ſuch expreſſions as are in Scripture frequently uſed; Yet, leſt any ſhould go away unſatisfied in this point of ſatisfaction, as it is impoſſible to ſatisfie all; God in his juſt judgment having ſent abroad a Spirit of deluſion, there being multitudes, that will ſooner comply with an upſtart and erroneous opinion, upon the appearance of one ſingle, and ſingle ſole argument, then embrace and cleave to a truth, though confirmed by many ſtrong and ſinewy demonſtrations, evident and apparent probations out of the holy Scriptures; even as one ſtroke will carry a man farther with the tide, then five againſt it; And therefore I have the leſſe hope to prevail with many; yet to ſatisfy the ingenuous, and leave the reſt without excuſe, I ſhall propoſe theſe enſuing arguments to the ſerious conſideration of the unbiaſſed Reader.
The firſt, of which we take from the meritorious cauſe of Chriſt his death; Chriſt ſuffered and dyed for our ſins whence we argue thus, He, that taking upon him our nature, hath therein undergone all the ſufferings, which were due to the offenders, and ſuch as were guilty, whoſe perſons he repreſents: So that his chaſtiſements have ceaſed in the pacification of the Imponent, his Sacrifice bin the expiation of all the offences, his ſtripes have brought health and deliverance to the delinquent; He hath truly and fully made ſatisfaction for them; But Chriſt Jeſus, foreign, God-Man ha…h ſuffered and undergone all theſe things, as hath bin ſufficiently proved already by many texts of holy Scripture; Therefore he hath made full and perfect ſatisfaction.
Secondly, from the expiation of our ſins, and that reconciliation, he hath wrought between God and us, who were as the Prophet ſpeakethiIſa. 59.2., ſeparated the one from the other, ſo that from hence we thus argue. If Chriſt hath pacifyed the wrath of God towards us, which was exceedingly incenſed againſt us, by reaſon of thoſe ſins and tranſgreſſions which were committed by us, ſo that now (though before we ſtood condemned) there is no condemnation at all to us; He muſt needs ſatisfy Divine Juſtice, which otherwiſe could not be appeaſed towards us; But the former is true, as we have already proved: Therefore the latter.
Thirdly and laſtly from that redemption which we have by Chriſt; Chriſt hath redeemed us by his death; So that we thus conclude, whereſoever there is true redemptionkHeb. 9.15. foreign., in which a certain price is paidlMatt. 10.28. and Mar. 10.45. 1 Tim. 2.6., ſo that they for whom the price is paid, by reaſon and in conſideration thereof, be freed and diſcharged from deſerved bonds or puniſhment; there alſo is true ſatisfaction; But ſuch is our redemption by Chriſt, the true priſe foreign interveniente, being laid down and accepted. Therefore there is true and real ſatisfaction. Beſides, he that was made ſin for usm2 Cor. 5.21., that we might be made the righteouſneſs of God, yea was made a curſe for usnGal. 3.13., thereby freeing us from the ſame, hath truly & fully ſatisfied for us; But this was performed by Chriſt our Surety in our ſteed; Therefore he hath fully ſatisfied the Juſtice of his Father for us. Otherwiſe the Law was publiſhed to no purpoſe, & ſentence denounced in vain againſt the violatersoGen. 2.17. morte morieris. thereof, contrary to the immutability and unchangableneſs of God, yea and ſin would alſo remain unpuniſhed, contrary to his eſſential Juſtice.
Thus thou ſeeſt, good Reader, whether theſe blind guides would lead thee, and to what a miſerable eſtate they endeavour to bring thee, robbing thee of the means and hopes of thy Salvation, and leaving thee burdened with the heavy weight of thy ſins, which thou canſt not bear, and lyable to the full meaſure of Gods wrath, which thou art not able to undergo. If this be ſo, we are of all men moſt miſerable, and farewell all happineſs after this life; Men may ſing (if they have any heart to it, in this ſad and deſperate condition) that old Epicurean ditty, ede, bibe, lude, &c. Oh what madneſs doth poſſeſſe the ſouls of theſe men! were they not as good deny the very death of Chriſt, as deny the vertue, power and efficacy of his death? May they not as well ſay he dyed not, as ſay he dyed thus, thus to no purpoſe, leaving us in our ſins, and the Juſtice of God altogether unſatisfied for us? Theſe men, men ſaid I? Yea monſters rather, ſub ſpecie veritatis veritatem vulnerant, wound Truth in her own coat: under pretence of defending the Mercy of God, they deny his Juſtice. But let theſe ſtand or fall to their own Maſter, and ſeing that we have proved, that Chriſt hath done and ſuffered theſe things for us, let not the good and benefit thereof fall beſide us; Let us look at that with thankfull admiration, which theſe heretical Blaſphemers do load with ſcorn and deriſion. Chriſt ſuffered for us, not only noſtra cauſa, for our ſake, or noſtro bono, for our good, but alſo noſtra vice, in our ſteed, and noſtro loco in our place; He repreſenting our perſons in the ſimilitude of ſinfull fleſh, ſtood in our room, taking thoſe ſtripes upon him, which would have daſhed us to pieces, by the vertue whereof we have our healing; The curſe of St. Paul will ſurely light upon ſuch as preach to the people any other Doctrine, nor can they expect a bleſſing, that are reduced by it, when (as in theſe dayes) they ſhall attempt it.