The Mystery of the Gospel Vindicated and Socinianism Examined, Commentary on text · Chapter 30
CHAP. XXX.
The Satisfaction of Christ, on the Consideration of His Death, being a Punishment, farther evinced; and vindicated from the Exceptions of Smalcius.
THE Third consideration of the Death of Christ, was of §. 1.it, as it was Penal, as therein he underwent Punishment for us, or that punishment which for sin was due to us. Thence directly is it said to be satisfactory. About the word its selfe, we do not contend; nor do our Adversaries except against it, if the thing it selfe be proved, that is intended by that Expression, this Controversy is at an end. Farther to open the nature of Satisfaction, then by what is said before, about bearing of sins, &c. I see no reason; our ayme in that word is known to all; and the sence of it obvious. This is made by some the generall head of the whole businesse. I have placed it on the peculiar consideration of Christs bearing our sinnes, and undergoing punishment for us. What our Catechists say to the whole, I shall briefly consider.
Having assigned some Causes, and Effects of the Death of §. 2.Christ, partly true in their own place, partly false. They aske Q. 12.
Is there no other cause of the Death of Christ?
Nonne est etiam aliqua alia mortis Christi causa? Nulla prorsus; etsi nunc vulgo Christiani sentiunt, Christum morte sua nobis salutem meruisse, & pro peccatis nostris planarie satisfecisse, quae sententia fallae… est & erronea, & admodum perniciosa. Cat. Racov. de Mor. Christi cap. 8. q. 12.Ans. None at all. As for that which Christians commonly think, that Christ by his Death, merited salvation for us, and satisfied fully for our sinnes, that opinion is false (or deceitfull) erroneous, and very pernitious.
That the men of this perswasion are bold men, we are not now to learne; Only this Assertion, that there is no other cause of the Death of Christ, but what they have mentioned, is a new experiment thereof.
If we must believe, that these men know all things, and the whole mind of God, so that all is false and pernitious, that lies beyond their roade and understanding, there may be some colour for this Confidence. But the Account we have already taken of them, will not allow us to grant them this plea.
2. Of the Merit of Christ, I have spoken briefly before. His §. 3.Satisfaction is the thing opposed chiefely; What they have to say against it, shall now be considered. As also how this imputation, or Charge, on the common faith of Christians, about the Satisfaction of Christ, to be false, erroneous, and pernitious, will be mannaged.
Q 13. How is it false, or deceitfull?
§. 4.That it is false (or deceitfull) and eroneous Quaratione? Quod ad id quod fallax sit & erronea, attinet, id hinc perspicuum est, quod non solum de ea nihil extet in scripturis, verum etiam Scripturis & sanae rationi repugnat?is hence evident; that not only there is nothing of it extant in the Scripture, but also that it is repugnant to the Scriptures, and sound reason.
For the truth of this suggestion, that it is not extant in Scripture, I referre the Reader to what hath been discoursed from the Scripture about it already; When they, or any for them, shall answer, or evade the Testimonies that have been produced, or may yet be so, (for I have yet mentioned none of those which immediately expresse the dying of Christ for us, nor his being our Mediator and Surety in his death) they shall have liberty (for me) to boast in this manner. In the meane time we are not concerned in their wretched confidence. But let us see how they make good their Assertion by instances.
Q. 14. Shew that in order?§. 5.
That it is not in the Scripture, this is an Argument, Demonstra id ordine? Id non haberi in Scripturis argumento est, quod istius opinionis assertores nunquam perspicuas scripturas afferunt, ad probandam is…m opinionem: verum quasdam consecutiones nectunt, quibus quod asserunt efficere conantur; quas at admittere aequum est, cum ex Scripturis necessario adstruuntur, ita ubi Scripturis repugnantur, …eas nullum vim habere certum est: Quest. 15.that the Assertors of that opinion doe never bring evident Scriptures for the proofe of it; But knit certaine consequences by which they endeavour to make good what they assert: which as it is meet to admit, when they are necessarily deduced from Scripture, so it is certaine they have no force, when they are repugnant to the Scripture.
But what is it that we do not prove by expresse Scripture, and that in abundance? That our iniquity was layd upon Christ; that he was bruised, grieved, wounded, killed for us, that he bare our iniquitys, & that in his owne body on the tree, that he was made sin for us, and a Curse; that we deserved death, and he dyed for us, that he made his soule an offering for sinne, layd down his life a price and ransome for us, or in our stead, that we are thereby redeemed and reconciled to God; that our iniquityes being layd on him, and he bearing them, (that is the punishment due to them) we have deliverance, God being attoned, and his wrath removed, we prove not by consequence, but by multitudes of expresse Testimonyes. If they meane that the word Satisfaction is not found in Scripture in the businesse treated of, we tell them that foreign is, and foreign, foreign, and foreign, foreign, foreign, (all words of a cognate significancy thereto, and of the same importance as to the Doctrine under consideration) are frequently used; It is indeed an hard taske to find, Satisfaction, the word, in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, or the Greeke of the New; But the thing it selfe is found expressly an hundred times over; and their great Master doth confesse, that it is not the Word, but the thing it selfe, that he opposeth. So that without any thanks to them at all, for granting, that Consequences from Scripture may be allowed to prove matters of Faith, we assure them, our Doctrine is made good by innumerable expresse Testimonies of the word of God, some whereof have been by us now insisted on; and moreover, that if they and their Companions did not wrest the Scriptures to strange and uncouth sences, never heard of before amongst men professing the name of Christ, we could willingly abstaine wholly from any expression, that is not foreign found in the word it selfe. But if by their Rebellion against the Truth, and attempts to pervert all the expressions of the word, the most cleare and evident, to perverse and horrid abominations, we are necessitated to them, they must beare them, unlesse they can prove them not to be true.
Let the Reader observe, that they grant, that the consequences we gather from Scripture, would evince that which we plead and contend for, were it not but that they are repugnant to other Scriptures. Let them then manifest the Truth of their pretension, by producing those other Scriptures, or confesse that they are selfecondemned.
Wherefore they aske.
§. 6.Q. How is it repugnant to the Scripture?Qui vero Scripturae repugnat? Ad eum modum, quod Scripturae passim, Deum peccata hominibus gratuito remittere, testentur, 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 3. 24, 25. potissimum vero sub N. Faedere, Ephes. 2. 8. Math 18 23. &c At remissioni gratuitae nihil adversatur magis quam satisfactio. Cui enim creditori satisfit, vel ab ipso debitore, vel ab alio debitoris nomine, de eo dici non potest vere, eum debitum gratuito ex ipsa gratia remisisse.
A. In this sort, that the Scriptures do every where testify, that God forgives sinne freely, 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 3. 24, 25. But Principally under the New Covenant, Ephes. 2. 8. Math. 18. 23. Now nothing is more opposite to free remission, then satisfaction; so that if a Creditor be satisfied, either by the Debtor himselfe, or by any other in the name of the Debtor, he cannot be said to forgive freely.
If this be all that our Consequences are repugnant unto in the Scripture, we doubt not to make a speedy Reconciliation. Indeed there was never the least difference between them. Not to dwell long upon that which is of an easy dispatch.
1. This Objection is stated solely to the consideration of §. 7.Sinne as a Debt, which is Metaphoricall-Sinne properly is an Offence, a Rebellion, a Transgression of the Law, an Injury done, not to a private Person, but a Governor in his Government.
2, The two first places mentioned, 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19, 20. Rom. §. 8.3. 24, 25. do expresly mention the payment of this Debt by Christ, as the Ground of Gods Forgivenesse, Remission, and Pardon; The payment of it, I say, not as considered Metaphorically, as a Debt, but the making an Attonement and Reconciliation for us, who had committed it, considered as a Crime, and Rebellion, or Transgression.
3. We say, that God doth most freely forgive us, as Ephes. 2. §. 9.8. Math: 18. 23. without requiring any of the debt at our hands, without requiring any Price or Ransome from us, or any satisfaction at our hands; but yet he forgives us for Christs sake, seting forth him to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, he laying downe his Life a Ransome for us, God not sparing him, but giving him up to Death for us all.
4. The Expression of another satisfying in the name of the §. 10.Debtor, intends either one procured by the debtor, and at his entreaty undertaking the work, or one gratiously given, and assigned to be in his stead, by the Creditor. In the first sence it hath an inconsistency with free remission, in the Latter, not at all.
The Truth is, men that dreame of an opposition between the satisfaction made by Christ, the surety, and Mediator of the new Covenant, and free Remission made to us, are utterly ignorant of the whole mystery of the Gospell, nature of the Covenant, and whole Mediation of Christ; advancing carnall imaginations against innumerable Testimonies of the Scripture, witnessing the blessed Conspiration between them, to the praise of the glorious grace of God. But they say,
That it is contrary to Reason also, Because it would hence §. 11.follow, That Christ underwent eternall Ce…o qui …istud rationi repugnet? Id quidem hinc perspicuum est, quod sequeretur Christum aeternam mortem subiisse, si Deo pro peccatis notris satisfecisset: Cum cons…et paenam quā homines peccatis meruerant aeternam mortem esse: deinde con…equeretur, nos Christo, quam Deo ipsi devinctiores esse, quippe qui satisfactione multum gratiae nobis ostendisset; Deus vero exacta satisfactione, nulla prorsus Gratia nos prosecutus fuisset.Death, if he satisfied God for our sinnes: seeing it is manifest, that the punishment we deserved by our sinnes, was eternall Death. Also it would follow, that we should be more bound to Christ, then to God himselfe, as to him who had shewn us greater favour in satisfaction, but God receiving satisfaction afforded us no favour.
What little reliefe this plea will afford our Adversaries, will quickly appeare. For
1. I have proved that Christ underwent that death that was due unto sinners, which was all, that Justice, Law, or Reason required. He underwent it, though it was impossible for him to be detained by it.
2. If the Racovians doe not think us obliged to God, for sending his Son out of his infinite & eternall love to die for us, causing al our iniquties to meet on him, justifying us freely, (who could do nothing for our own delivery) through the Redemption that is in the blood of Christ, we must tell them, that (we blesse his holy name) we are not of that mind; but finding a dayly fruit of his love and kindnesse, upon our soules, doe know that we are bound unto him eternally, to Love, Praise, Serve, honour, and glorify him, beyond what we shall ever be able to expresse.
2. For the enquiry made, and comparison instituted, between §. 12.our obligation to the Father and the Sonne, or which of them we are most beholding to, we professe we cannot speake unto it. Our obligation to both, and either respectively, is such, that if our Affections were extended immeasurably to what they are, yet the utmost and exactest heigth of them, would be due to both, and each of them respectively. We are so bound to one, as we cannot be more to the other; because to both in the absolutely highest degree. This we observe in the Scriptures, that in mentioning the worke of Redemption, the rise, fountaine, and spring of it is still assigned to be in the Love of the Father: The carrying of it on in the love, and Obedience of the Sonne, and so we order our thoughts of Faith towards them. The Father being not one whit the lesse free and gracious to us, by loving us upon the Satisfaction of his Sonne, then if he had forgiven us (had it been possible) without any Satisfaction at all.
And thus is this Article of the Christian Faith, contrary to §. 13.Scripture, thus to Reason. They adde.
How also is it pernitious?Cedo etiam, qui haec opinio est perniciosa? Ad eum modum, quod hominibus fenestram ad peccandi licentiam aperiat, aut certe ad socordiam in pietate colenda eos invitet. Scriptura vero testatur, eum inter alios Christi mortis finem esse, ut redimeremur ab omni iniquitate, ex hoc seculo nequam eriperemur, & redimeremur ex vana conversatione a patribus tra…ita, & mundaremur conscientia a mortuis operibus ad serviendum Deo viventi. Tit. 2. 14. Gal. 1. 4. 1 Pet. 1. 18. Heb. 9. 14.
A. In that it openeth a doore unto men to sin, or at least incites them to sloath in following after holinesse. But the Scripture witnesseth that this amongst others is an end of the death of Christ, that he might redeeme us from our iniquity and deliver us from this evill world that we might be redeemed from our vain conversation, and have our consciences purged from dead workes, that we might serve the living God, Tit. 2. 14. Gal. 1. 4. 1 Pet. 1. 18. Heb. 9. 14.
That the deliverance of us from the Power and Pollution of our sinne, the purifying of our soules and Consciences, the making of us a peculiar people of God, zealous of good workes that we might be holy and blamelesse before him in love, is one eminent end of the death of Christ, we grant. For this end by his death, did he procure the spirit to quicken us, who were dead in trespasses and sinnes, sprinkling us with the pure water thereof, and giving us dayly suplyes of Grace from him, that we might grow up in holinesse before him, untill we come to the measure in this life assigned to us in him.
But that the consideration of the Crosse of Christ, and the Satisfaction made thereby, should open a doore of licentiousnesse to sinne, or encourage men to sloath in the wayes of Godlinesse, is fit only for them to assert, to whom the Gospell is folly.
What is it I pray in the Doctrine of the Crosse, that should §. 14.thus dispose men to licentiousnesse and sloath? Is it that God is so provoked with every sinne, that it is impossible, and against his nature to forgive it, without inflicting the punishment due thereto? Or is it that God so loved us, that he gave his only Sonne to dye for us, or that Christ loved us, and washed us in his own blood? Or is it that God for Christs sake doth freely forgive us? Yea but our Adversaries say, that God freely forgives us; yea but they say it is without Satisfaction. Is it then an encouragement to sinne, to affirme that God forgives us freely for the Satisfaction of his Sonne? and not to say, that he forgives us freely without Satisfaction? doth the adding of Satisfaction whereby God to the highest manifested his indignation and wrath against sinne; doth that I say make the difference, & give the Encouragement? Who could have discovered this but our Catechists and their Companions? Were this a season for that Purpose, I could easily demonstrate that there is no Powerfull or effectuall motive to abstaine from sinne, no encouragement or incitation unto holinesse, but what riseth from or relateth unto the Satisfaction of Christ.
And this is that which they have to make good their charge §. 15.against the common Faith, that it is false, erroneous, and pernitious. Such worthy foundations have they of their great superstruction, or rather so great is their Confidence, and so little is their strength for the pulling down of the Church built upon the Rock.
They proceed to consider what Testimonies and proofes §. 16.(they say) we produce for the confirmation of the truth contended for. What (they say) we pretend from Reason (though indeed it be from innumerable places of Scripture) I have vindicated not long since to the full in my book of the vindictive De Justit. divin. DiatribJustice of God, and answered all the Exceptions given thereunto; so that I shall not translate from …hence what I have delivered to this purpose, but passe to what followes.
Question 12 they make this enquiry.
§. 17.Which are the Scriptures out of which they endeavour Quae vero sunt Scripturae e quibus illi opinionem suam adstruere conantur? Eae, quae testantur Christum vel pro peccatis nostris mortuum. deande, quod nos redemit, aut dedit semetipsum, & animam suam. Redemptionem pro multis: Tum quod noster. Mediator est. Porro quod nos reconciliarit Deo, & sit propitiatio pro peccatis nostris; Deni{que} ex illis Sacrificiis, quae mortem Christi, seu figurae adumb…averunt.to confirme their opinion?
A. Those which testify that Christ dyed for us, or for our sinnes, also that he redeemed us, or that he gave himselfe or his life a Redemption for many; Then, that he is our Mediatour: moreover, that he reconciled us to God, and is a propitiation for our sinne. Lastly, from those Sacrifices which as figures shadowed forth the death of Christ.
So do they huddle up together those very many expresse Testimonies of the Truth we plead for, which are recorded in the Scripture. Of which I may clearely say, that I know no one truth in the whole Scripture, that is so freely and fully delivered; as being indeed of the greatest importance to our soules. What they except in particular against any of the Testimonies that may be referred to the heads before recounted, (except those which have been already spoken to) shall be considered in the order wherein they proceed.
They say then§. 18.
For what belongeth unto those Testimonies Quod attinet ad illa Testimonia in quibus habetur Christum pro nobis mortuum, ex iis satisfactionem aastrui necessario non posse hinc manifestum est, quod Scriptura testetur, etiam nos pro fratribus animas ponere debere 1 Joh. 3. 16. & Paulus de se seribat Col. 1. 24. nunc gaudeo &c. Certum autem est, nec fideles pro fratribus cuiquam satisfacere, neque Paulum cuiquam. pro Ecclesia satisfecisse. At horum verborum, Christum pro nobis esse mortuum, qui sensus est? Is, quod haec verba [pro nobis] non significent loco vel vice nostri, verum propter nos, uti etiam Apostolus expresse loquitur, 1 Cor. 8. 11. Quod etiam similia verba indicant, cum Scriptura loquitur, pro peccatis nostris mortuum esse Christum; quae verba eum sensum habere nequeunt, loco seu vice nostrotum peccatorum mortuum esse; verum propter peccata nostra esse mortuum; uti Rom. 4. 25. manifeste Scriptum legimus. Ea porro verba (Christum pro nobis mortum esse… hanc habent vim, eum idcirco mortuum, ut, nos salutem aeternam, quam is nobis caelitus attulit …amplecteremur, & consequemur; quod qua ratione fiat, paulo superius accepisti.wherein it is contended that Christ dyed for us, it is manifest that Satisfaction cannot necessarily be therein asserted, because the Script…re witnesseth that we ought even to lay down our lives for the brethren, 1 Joh. 3 16. And Paul writes of himselfe, Col. 1. 14. Now I rejoyce in my affliction for you, and fill up the remainder of the affliction of Christ for his body which is the Church. But it is certaine, that neither do Believers satisfy for any of the bretheren; nor did Paul make satisfaction to any for the Church.
Qest. 23. What then is the sence of these words [Christ dyed for us.]
That these words [for us] do not signify in our place or stead, but for us, as the Apostle expressly speakes 1 Cor. 8. 11. which also alike places do shew; where the Scripture saith, that Christ dyed for our sinnes, which word cannot have this sence, that Christ dyed instead of our sinnes, but that he dyed for our sinnes, as it is expressly written Rom. 4. 25. Moreover these words [Christ dyed for us] have this sence, that he therefore dyed, that we might imbrace and obtaine that eternall Salvation which he brought to us from Heaven, which how it is done you heard before.
Resp. Briefely to state the difference between us about the §. 19.meaning of this expression [Christ dyed for us] I shall give one or two observations upon what they deliver, then confirme the common Faith, and remove their exceptions thereto.
1. Without any attempt of proofe they oppose vice nostri, and propter nos, as contrary & inconsistent; & make this their Argument, that Christ did not dy vice nostri, because he dyed propter nos. When it is one Argument whereby we prove that Christ dyed in our stead, because he dyed for us, in the sence mentioned, 1 Cor. 8. 11. where it is expressed by foreign, because we could no otherwise be brought to the end aymed at.
2. Our sence of the expression is evident from what we insist upon, in the Doctrine in hand. Christ dyed for us, that is, he underwent the death and Curse that was due to us, that we might be delivered therefrom.
3. The last words of the Catechists are those wherein they §. 20.strive to hide the abomination of their hearts in reference to this businesse. I shall a little lay it open.
1. Christ say they, brought us eternall Salvation from Heaven; that is, he preached a Doctrine in obedience whereunto, we may obtaine Salvation. So did Paul.
2. He dyed that we might receive it; that is, rather then he would deny the truth which he preached, he suffered himselfe to be put to death. So did Paul; and yet he was not Crucifyed for the Church.
3. It is not indeed the death of Christ, but his Resurrection that hath an influence into our receiving of his Doctrine, & so our obtaining Salvation. And this is the sence of these words, (Christ dyed for us.)
For the confirmation of our Faith from this expression, §. 21.(Christ dyed for us.) we have
1. The common sence, and customary usage of humane kind as to this expression. When ever one is in danger, and another is said to come and dye for him that he may be delivered, a substitution is still understood. The foreign of old, as Damon and Pythias &c. make this manifest.
2. The Common usage of this expression in Scripture confirmes §. 22.the sence insisted on. So David wished that he had dyed for his Sonne Absolon, that is, dyed in his stead, that he might have lived 2 Sam. 18. 33. And that supposall of Paul Rom. 1. 11. of one daring to dye for a good man, relating (as by all Expositours on the place is evinced) to the practice of some in former dayes, who to deliver others from death, had given themselves up to that whereunto they were obnoxious, confirmes the same.
3. The Phrase it selfe, of foreign, or foreign, §. 23.which is used Heb. 2. 9. 1 Pet. 1. 21. Rom. 5. 6, 7, 8. 2 Cor. 5. 14. sufficiently proves our intention, compared with the use of the preposition in other places; especially being farther explained by the use of the preposition foreign, which ever denotes a substitution, in the same sence and businesse, Math 20. 28. Math. 10. 45. 1 Tim. 2. That a Substitution and Commutation is alwayes denoted by this preposition (if not an opposition which here can have no place) 1 Pet. 3. 9. Rom. 12 14. Math. 5. 38. Luk. 11. 13. Heb. 12. 16. 1 Cor. 11. 15. amongst other places are sufficient evidences.
4. Christ is so said to dye foreign, so as that he is said in §. 24.his death to have our iniquityes layd upon him, to beare our sinne in his own body on the tree, to be made sinne and a curse for us, to offer himselfe a Sacrifice for us, by his death, his blood, to pay a price or ransome for us, to redeem, to reconcile us to God, to do away our sinnes in his blood, to free us from wrath, and condemnation, and sinne. Now whether thus to die for us, be not to dye in our place and stead, let Angels and men judge.
5. But, say they, this is all that we have to say in this businesse; Yet we ought to lay downe our lives for the Brethren; and Paul saith, that he filled up the measure of the affliction of Christ, for his bodies sake the Church, but neither the one, nor the other did make satisfaction to God by their death, or affliction. But,
1. If all we had to Plead for the sence of this Expression, Christ died for us, depended solely on the sence and use of that §. 25.word foreign, then the Exception would have this force in it. The word is once or twice used in another sence, in another businesse; therefore the sence of it contended for in this businesse, cannot be such as you seek to maintaine. But,
1. This Exception at best, in a cause of this importance, is most frivolous, and tends to the disturbance of all sober Interpretation of Scripture.
2. We are very farre from making the single sence of the Preposition, to be the medium, which in the Argument from the whole expression we insist on.
2. The passage in 1 Jo. 3. 16. being a part of the Apostles perswasive to Love, Charity, and the fruits of them, tending to the reliefe of the Brethren, in Poverty, and distresse, disclaimes all intendment, and possibility of a substitution or Commutation, nor hath any intimation of undergoing that which was due to another, but only of being ready to the utmost to assist and relieve them. The same is the condition of what is affirmed of Paul; Of the measure of affliction, which in the infinite wise Providence, and Fatherly care of God, is proportioned to the mysticall body of Christ his Church, Paul underwent his share for the good of the whole. But that Paul, that any Believers were Crucified for the Church, or dyed for it, in the sence that Christ died for it, that they Redeemed it to God by their own blood, it is notorious blasphemy once to imagine. The meaning of the phrase (He died for our sinnes) was before explained. Christ then dying for us, being made sinne for us, bearing our iniquity, and redeeming us by his blood, died in our place and stead, and by his Death made satisfaction to God for our sinne.
Also that Christ made satisfaction for our sinne, appears §. 26.from hence, that he was our Mediator. Concerning this, after their Attempt against proper Redemption by his blood, which we have already considered, Q. 28. They enquire.
What say you to this, that Christ is the Mediator of the Quid ad haec dicis, quod Christus sit Mediator inter Deum & homines, aut N. faederis? Cum legatur Moses fuisse Mediator Gal. 3. 19. (puta inter Deum & populum Izrael aut prisci faederis) neque eum satisfecisse deo ullo modo constet, ne hinc quidem quod mediator dei & hominum Christus sit, colligi certo poterit, eum satisfactionem aliquam, qua deo pro peccatis nostris satisfieret peregisse.New Covenant between God and Man? and Answer
Ans. Seeing it is read, that Moses was a Mediator, Gal: 3. 19. (namely of the Old Covenant between God and the people of Israel) and it is evident, that he no way made satisfaction to God; neither from hence, that Christ is the Mediator of God and man, can it be certainly gathered, that he made any satisfaction to God for our sinne.
I shall take leave before I proceed, to make a returne of this Argument to them from whom it comes, by a meer change of the instance given. Christ they say, our High Priest, offered himselfe to God in heaven: Now Aaron is expresly said to be an High Priest, and yet he did not offer himselfe in Heaven, and therefore it cannot be certainly proved, that Christ offered himselfe in Heaven, because he was an High Priest. Or thus: David was a King, and a type of Christ; but David raigned at Jerusalem, and was a temporall King: It cannot therefore be proved, that Christ is a spirituall King from hence, that he is said to be a King. This Argument I confesse Faustus Socinus could not Answer when it was urged against him by Sidelius: But for the former, I doubt not but Smalcius would quickly have Answered, that it is true; it cannot be necessarily proved, that Christ Offereth himselfe in Heaven, because he was an High Priest, which Aaron was also, but because he was such an High Priest, as entred into the Heavens to appeare personally in the presence of God for us, as he is described to be. Untill he can give us a better Answer to our Argument, I hope he will be content with this of ours to his. It is true, it doth not appeare, nor can be evinced necessarily, that Christ made satisfaction for us to God, because he was a Mediator in generall, for so Moses was who made no satisfaction; but because it is said, that he was such a Mediator between God and Man, as gave his Life a Price of Redemption for them for whom with God he mediated, 1 Tim. 2. 6. it is most evident and undeniable; and hereunto Smalcius is silent.
What remaines of this Chapter in the Catechists, hath been §. 28.already fully considered; so to them and Mr B. as to his 12th Chapter about the death of Christ, what hath been said may suffice. Many weighty Considerations of the Death of Christ in this whole discourse, I confesse are omitted; and yet more perhaps have been delivered, then by our Adversaries occasion hath been administred unto. But this businesse is the very Center of the New Covenant, and cannot sufficiently be weighed. God assisting, a farther attempt will ere long be made, for the briefe stating all the severall concernements of it.