The Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Christs Righteousness Part 2, Tract · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI. This Doctrine overthroweth Chriſt's Merit and Satisfaction.
THE Apoſtle Rom. 4.25. ſaith, That Chriſt was delivered, i. e. to death, for our Offences, and raiſed again for our Juſtification: Whence our Proteſtants have taught that the proper and immediate Effect of the Death of Chriſt was the procuring or grant of Pardon, Juſtification, Life Eternal, to all the Elect, in the Purpoſes of God, and that accordingly God in due time publiſheth to them the Promiſes of the Goſpel, by which through the effectual operation of the Holy Ghoſt they are perſwaded and drawn to Chriſt to believe and truſt in him for Life, and ſo they are made actual partakers of his Death, and juſtified. But theſe Authors denying us to be juſtified immediately and properly by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, muſt and do deny Juſtification to be the immediate and proper Effect of it, and aſſign ſome other immediate End of Chriſt's Death. What this is we ſhall ſhew, and how it doth make void the Merit and Satisfaction of Chriſt. I meet with two Opinions in this matter: The Firſt, ſaith, That the immediate and proper End of the Death of Chriſt was not to procure Reconciliation, Juſtification, &c. for all or any man, but to render God placable or reconcileable to man, i. e. not that God upon the Death of Chriſt doth grant, purpoſe, or covenant the Juſtification and ſalvation of any man, but that he may now juſtifie, forgive, and ſave men in what way and upon what terms he pleaſeth. Thus Mr. Trueman as before:Gr. Prop. p. 86. The immediate Effect of Chriſt's Satisfaction is, that God might be Juſt, though he ſhould pardon Sinners, that he might pardon ſalvâ juſtitiâ, not that he muſt pardon them, come what will of it, or be unjuſt— And again; The Juſtice of God as a flaming Sword obſtructeth all treating with us upon any terms of Reconciliation whatſoever, and this would have been an eternal Bar to all Influences and Effluxes of Favour; and now this Juſtice being ſatisfied, and this Bar and Obſtacle removed, Divine Grace and Benignity is left at liberty freely to act how it pleaſes, and in what way and upon what terms and conditions it thinketh meet. This he had from Arminius, who having ſaid, That Juſtification, Pardon, or Reconciliation of any man, is not immediately purchaſed by the Death of Chriſt: He tells us, The proper Effect of it is, Reconciliatio Dei, remiſſionis, juſtificationis & redemptionis apud Peum impetratio, contra Perkins, fol. 76. apud Twiſs.qua factum eſt ut Deus jam poſſit, utpote justitiâ cui ſatisfactum eſt non obſtante, hominibus peccatoribus peccata remittere & ſpiritum gratiae largiri, i. e. the Reconciliation of God, the obtaining of remiſſion and redemption, viz. That God may forgive and ſanctifie men if he pleaſe without breach of Juſtice, which is now ſatisfied. Hereupon they go ſo far as to tell us, That when Chriſt had done and ſuffered all which was appointed him, God was free to ſave or not to ſave men, or to ſave upon what terms or whom he pleaſed. Thus Grevinch contra Ames. fol. 8.Peltius. p. 126. Poſtquam impetratio praeſtita ac peracta eſſet Deo, jus ſuum integrum manſit, pro arbitratu ſuo eam applicare vel non applicare, nec applicatio finis impetrationis propria fuit, ſed jus & poteſtas applicandi pro liberrimo ſuo placito quibus & qualibus vellet, i. e. After Chriſt's Purchaſe was made and finiſhed, God was perfectly free to apply …t or not to apply it as he ſhould pleaſe, nor was the Application of it the proper End of Chriſt's Purchaſe, but that God might have power to apply it to whom and how he ſhould think fit. Epiſcopius goes a ſtep further, and ſaith, There could not be a deliberate purpoſe in God of ſaving men, and opening a way of …iſe to them, till Chriſt was ſacrificed:Diſp. 5. Ibid. Deli…eratum mortale ſalvandi ſalutiſque ostium apetiendi propoſitum in Deo eſſe requirit, priuſquam ſacrificium oblatum eſſet. Now if this be the only proper Effect of the Obedience and Death of Chriſt, that God who was before bound to condemn Sinners by the Law of Works violated by them, might now think of a way to ſave them if he pleaſed, and withal might chuſe whether he would ſave them, or propound terms of Life to them or not. It followeth …ence:
1. That the Obedience of Chriſt was not meritorious, nor did merit any thing of the father: It is true there was an intrinſecal, infinite value in Chriſt's Obedience, by reaſon of the Divine Excellency of his Perſon, and ſo there was an equality or proportion betwixt his Obedience and the Happineſs which was to be procured for men: But this is the Foundation of Merit, not Actual Merit. To merit, is to deſerve a Reward, to do ſomething whereupon a Reward is due; ſo that Merit in its proper notion doth imply an actual Right or Obligation to a reward, which Obligation ariſeth from ſome Law, Promiſe, or Compact betwixt the Parties; and he which doth not give that Reward according to Merit offendeth againſt ſome Law, either of ſtrict Juſtice, or at leaſt of Gratitude, Generoſity, Kindneſs, &c. If then God was not bound by Covenant, Promiſe, or ſo much as deliberate Purpoſe to ſave men, or to give them any terms of Life for all that Chriſt did or ſuffered, then his Obedience merited nothing, there was nothing due, no reward propoſed to him, which he would challenge; for God was ſtill free to do what he pleaſed with men: God (they ſay) would not have been unjuſt, if he had not ſaved men (though Chriſt died) he was not then bound by the Law of Juſtice (and he could not be bound by any other Law) to remunerate the Death and Sufferings of his Son with ſuch an happy Effect, as man's Salvation. Chriſt's Death (ſay they) was a refuſeable payment for ſin, even when it was preſented to the Father; God might then have refuſed it, and yet have been Juſt: But it would not have been juſt to have denyed Jeſus Chriſt that which he merited, that would be due debt to him. They ſay indeed Chriſt was the meritorious cauſe of our Juſtification? But what did he merit? Juſtification: Then God was not free to deny it; he muſt juſtifie thoſe for whom Chriſt merited Juſtification, or be unjuſt, unleſs there can be a cauſe without an effect or cauſality: The effect of merit is ſome reward deſerved, given for the ſake of the merit; the cauſality of merit is ſome compact Law or Promiſe, whereby one is bound to reward that merit: If then God was bound to nothing upon the Obedience of Chriſt, but ſtill had jus integrum, intire freedom to do what he pleaſed, then Chriſt did as freely offer his Obedience to the Father to do what he pleaſed with it, or upon it; and certainly this is not to merit. Thus Slatius declar. apert. Jeſus Chriſtus per paſſionem & mortem ſuam nihil meritus est, nec ſolvit pro noſtris peccatis, veluti vas pro debitore, qui non eſt ſolvendo. If they ſay that he took away the Covenant of Works and the neceſſity which God was under to condemn men, and this might be the Effect of his Merit; this is not true: By this Opinion Chriſt did not take away the Covenant of Works nor the Sentence of it: For then man muſt have been diſcharged without any further Covenant or Terms, which is the thing they oppoſe. They muſt ſay Chriſt offered himſelf to his Father in ſuch manner, that he might take occaſion from it, if he thought it, juſtly to lay aſide his Obligation to Puniſh by the Law of Works, and proceed to terms of Grace, but not that he muſt do either; and ſo Chriſt merited nothing at all of his Father.
2ly. It followeth from this Doctrine, That Chriſt's Obedience and Death were not properly ſatisfactory to Divine Juſtice. The ſay, That by Chriſt's Death God's Juſtice w… ſatisfied, the obſtacle of Juſtice was removed, But how? God's Juſtice in this caſe is nothing elſe but his Will or voluntary Obligation of himſelf to deal with men according to his Law: To ſatisfie God's Juſtice is to ſatisfied his Law, and to ſatisfie the Law is to fulfill … by obedience to it, or ſuffering the penalty … it, or both: But they will not allow, That Chriſt properly ſatisfied the Law of God Mr. Trueman ſaith,Ibid. p. 89. His death was not proper Payment at all: And if Chriſt did properly ſatisfie the Law, then thoſe for whom be did it muſt be hereupon diſcharged without any further conditions to be required, or … be performed of them. But if Chriſt ſatisfied not the Law, how could he ſatisfie Divine Juſtice, which hath the Law for its Rule … is tied to it? It was of Divine prerogative or infinite Soveraignty, that God did accept of Chriſt to fulfill the Law for man, to wh… it was given, and who only was obliged by … But when the Law-makers Prerogative … accepted of the Surety, and of his under… king for the Sinner; then he himſelf was m… under the Law, and ſatisfied Juſtice by ſatisfying the Law; but if he ſatisfied not the Law then his Obedience was not performed as Obedience to the preceptive part of the Law, or his ſufferings indured as ſubjection to the unitive part of it; and ſo neither of them …ere exacted in a way of Juſtice, or performed as ſubmiſſion to Juſtice, either preceptive, or punitive; and ſo Juſtice could no …ay be ſatisfied by his Obedience: Moreover … after all the Obedience of Chriſt, God was …ree to ſave or not to ſave men, then he was …ree either to give them new conditions of Life, …r to proceed to deſtroy them, according to …he ſentence and curſe of the Law of Works; and is it poſſible that Gods Juſtice ſhould have received real ſatisfaction from an infinite Price and Perſon, and yet the Perſons for whom ſatisfaction was made not be diſcharged, but Juſtice ſtill be left in full force to take vengeance, if the Judge pleaſed? Surely among men, if Juſtice be ſatisfied either by the guilty perſon or by his Surety, by the Judge's conſent, even Juſtice it ſelf muſt acquit and diſcharge the party concerned. The truth is, By this Doctrine there was no ſatisfaction made to Divine Juſtice by Chriſt's Obedience, and therefore the Sinner hath no diſcharge procured, but the whole tranſaction of the buſineſs of Man's Redemption, betwixt the Father and the Son, was but a point of honour or a kind of generoſity (if we may ſo ſpeak) As if a young generous Prince ſhould perform ſome noble and difficult exploits for the honour of his Father, and the Father again ſhould pardon ſome condemned Rebels, and reſtore them to his Favour hereupon, not as being any way obliged to it, but as an act of a Noble and generous mind, and to expreſs ſome honour and requital to his Son. Thus Slati… Epiſt. ad N. Martin. An Chriſtus pro nob… ſatisfecit? Reſpondeo, Nos negare, i. e. Did Chriſt ſatisfie for ſin? We deny it; And he gives five reaſons, the laſt whereof is, The God could neither puniſh for ſin, nor require Faith as a condition in order to Salvation.
3ly. It followeth alſo that Chriſt's Death was no Ranſom, Redemption or Price for Sinners: For if God after the death of Chriſt was ſtill free to ſave or not to ſave Sinners, then this death had properly bought or purchaſed nothing of him. A ranſom or price is not a valuable conſideration only for a thing worth it, or equal in value to it, but it muſt alſo be paid with the Compact or Agreement, that the thing bought or ranſomed ſhall for that price become the Buyers, and the property be transferred to him, and no longer remain in the Seller: If then Chriſt propetly bought us, ranſomed us, &c. then our Salvation became his de jure, he had a right to it upon his death, and it could no longer remain in the free power of God to grant, or not to grant it: But if there were no compact that life ſhould be granted to Sinners if Chriſt would die for them; if to give Life was ſtill in God's abſolute diſpoſal, then his obedience is no ranſom, nor was he a Redeemer, he did not purchaſe his Church with his own Bloud, nor was that Bloud a Price of their Redemption.
4ly. It followeth that Chriſt did not at all die for ſin: The Prophet ſaith, He was wounded and bruiſed for our iniquities, yea his Soul …us made an Offering for Sin, Iſa. 53.5, 10. But if Chriſt did not take away ſin and procure pardon, but left God ſtill free to pardon or …ot, then he did not die for ſin, ſin was not …he meritorious cauſe of his Death, nor was …he pardon of ſin the immediate end of his Death, but only to free the Father from the neceſſity of condemning Sinners: Sin could be …t the moſt but a remote occaſion, or cauſa …ne qua non of the death of Chriſt: if that had not been, God would not have been bound up from the exerciſe of his natural goodneſs, and …o there would have been no occaſion of Chriſt …o die, to remove that obſtacle out of the way. And yet it is not eaſie to imagine what theſe …en mean by the obſtacle of God's Juſtice, which hindred his Mercy to Sinners, which was removed by Chriſt's Obedience. For …oth they, and their Friends the Arminians …eem generally to grant, That God of his infinite Sovereignty might have pardoned ſin without ſatisfaction, ſo that his abſolute Juſtice … as not an obſtacle to his Mercy; and for his Law, and that Juſtice which reſpecteth it, Chriſt (ſay they) did in no proper ſence ſatisfie …, and therefore his Obedience could have …o proper reſpect to Divine Juſtice, much leſs …o ſin that had offended Juſtice.
5ly. Nor was Chriſt's Death a Propitiation …r Atonement for our ſins. The Apoſtle, 1 Joh. 2.1. ſaith, That Chriſt was a Propitiation for our Sins; that he loved us and waſhed us from our ſins with his own Bloud, Ap… 1.5. But this is true only accidentally and eventually, if the immediate effect of Chriſt's death was only that God might pardon, not that he muſt; and it was not the prime and principal intention of his death: Since God hath pleaſed to grant terms of Salvation upon the death of Chriſt; his death may improperly be ſaid to have made atonement or reconciliation for them, becauſe it occaſioned it, … made ſome way for it; but that which left God ſtill intirely free to pardon, or not, that did not appeaſe his Anger, remove his diſpleaſure, reconcile him, or obtain his good Will (as is the nature of a Propitiation or propitiatory Sacrifice) nor was it immediately … directly intended for that end.
6ly. Nor can it properly be aſcribed to God's Love to the World, that he gave his Son to die, or to the Son's Love to Mankind, that he gave himſelf. For if love to men were the Motive of Chriſt s Obedience and Death, both to the Father and the Son, men's Salvation would have been immediately deſigned and intended in it; it would have been medium ordinatum, a proper means, deſign'd to bring about their Salvation. But they tell us it was deſigned only to ſave God's Honour, in caſe he ſhould forgive Sinners, but not that he had obliged himſelf any way to do it, no, nor that he had reſolved with himſelf or deliberately purpoſed to grant terms of Salvation when he ſent his Son into the World, or when he laid his wrath a curſe upon him; it ſeems God did not yet know what uſe he would make of the Death of his Son, neither could the Son know, when the Father was not reſolved. Thus we ſee this Opinion overthroweth the whole Nature and Intendment of Redemption; and Chriſt's Merit, Satisfaction, Ranſom, Sacrifice, and all that belong to it are but improper Metaphors, and the greateſt Myſtery of Godlineſs muſt fly for refuge to a poor Trope to ſave it from being an untruth; and Chriſt himſelf muſt be at moſt, but an honorary Mediator and Redeemer.
The Second Opinion concerning the End of Chriſt's death is, That he died to purchaſe the Covenant of Grace, or Conditions and Terms of Salvation, by the fulfilling whereof men might be ſaved. Thus the Arminians uſed to ſpeak, That Chriſt died viam ſalutis pandere, to open a way for Mens Salvation, to purchaſe conditions whereupon they might be ſaved, whereas before their Salvation was impoſſible, by reaſon of the Curſe or Sentence of the Law of Works. Act. Syn. Dort. Art. 2. Remon. Chriſtus merito mortis ſuae Deum Patrem univerſo generi humano hactenus reconciliavit, ut Pater propter ipſius meritum, ſalva juſtitia & veritate ſua, novum gratiae foedus cum peccatoribus & damnationi obnoxiis hominibus inire & ſancire potuerit & voluerit. Thus Mr. Baxter faith, That Chriſt purchaſed Juſtification and life to be given by his New Covenant; not that he purchaſed theſe abſolutely, to be certainly given to any perſons, but that he purchaſed a Covenant or Law of Grace, whereby theſe are promiſed upon condition of Faith and Obedience. And this muſt be the ſence (if any) of thoſe that aſſert Chriſt dying for all men to make them ſalvabiles, ſalvable; and to render their Salvation poſſible, being impoſſible before, while the Law of Works ſtood in ſuch ſorce. For before Chriſt's death, Mens Salvation was poſſible to God, no new power was acquired to him; and poſſible in its ſelf, Men being ſubjects naturally capable of Salvation; this poſſibility then, muſt be a poſſibility in Law, as we ſay, id poſſumus, quod jure poſſumus, that Chriſt purchaſed a Law and grant of Salvation upon certain Terms, whereby it now became poſſible for all Men to be ſaved if they ſhould have ſufficient notice of it. This Opinion is a little more plauſible, but no more true than the former; which I thus prove,
1. It cannot be conceived how Chriſt did purchaſe this Covenant, according to the reſt of their Notions. The occaſion or ground of this Purchaſe was, That God was bound by his own Law of Works violated by Men, to condemn them without Mercy: Now then, could this Obligation be diſſolved without ſatisfaction to, and fulfilling that Law, which yet they will not allow Chriſt to have done, unleſs per accidens, as part of it is compriſed in that ſpecial Law of Mediator, which was given to him: If it was the Law which hindered God from ſhewing mercy, and made mans Salvation impoſſible, then that Law doth oblige God to ſee it fulfilled, or elſe to grant no life to Sinners; and if Chriſt did not fulfil it, nor was made properly ſubject to it, (as they teach) then he could not properly purchaſe a Covenant of life; if he did fulfil it for ſinners, then they muſt be diſcharged by his ſatisfaction, without further conditions impoſed on them, (as hath been often ſaid.) They ſay the Law of Works was neither aboliſhed nor fulfille by Chriſt, but relaxed; I ſuppoſe they mean, That God did not inſiſt upon the abſolute performance of the Law, but was pleaſed to admit of an aequivalent reparation of his Honour, by the Obedience of Chriſt to that Law which he ſhould impoſe on him, wherein ſhould be comprehended a great part of the Moral Law. I reply, If God did relax the Law, ſo as not to require the proper fulfilling of it; then he did loſe the obligation which was laid upon him to ſee it fulfilled: The ordinate or relative Juſtice of God obliged him to proceed according to that Law; and if he admitted of another way of reparation to his Honour, he did not proceed in a way of Juſtice in all that he laid upon Jeſus Chriſt; and he might as well have ſaved Man without the Obedience of Chriſt as with it; his Juſtice or Law allowing that relaxation no more than a total ſuperſeding or laying aſide the Law: by this purchaſe therefore they can mean no more, but that Jeſus Chriſt did ſo honour the Father by his Obedience and Sufferings, that he might with Decorum to his Majeſty give to Sinners terms of Salvation, and would do it: but this is no purchaſe, which transferreth a legal right to the Purchaſer, if the Purchaſe be accepted; but dependeth meerly upon Promiſe or Terms of Honour. It is alſo great preſumption for Men to judge what is becomming Divine Majeſty, and what will ſalve his Honour, other then what is according to his Law or Promiſe: wherers here they make him to wave his own declared Law founded in the higheſt reaſon and equity.
2ly. Nor in this ſence is the death of Chriſt a ranſome, ſatisfaction or propitiation. A ranſome reſpecteth perſons to be redeemed; it is a price given for them, not for Laws and Covenants: Whoever paid a ranſome without agreeing to whom it ſhould extend, and that it ſhould take certain effect? whereas here is nothing purchaſed but a Covenant or Promiſe, that all thoſe that believe and obey the Goſpel ſhould be ſaved, which perhaps might be none nor was it agreed how long the World ſhould ſtand, and ſo what number of Men ſhould be made, or ſhould need, or be capable of this Redemption. A ſatisfaction to God in this caſe, is a ſatisfaction to his Law, whereby the Sinner muſt immediately be diſcharged. A Propitiation is a Sacrifice appeaſing and reconciling God to Man; neither of which it done, if only a Promiſe be procured to ſave Men upon their fulfilling the conditions of a New Law.
3ly. If Chriſt only purchaſed a Covenant of life, then his Redemption is much more in-effectual to fave, than Adam's Fall was to deſtroy Man. The Apoſtle, Rom. 5.17, 18, 20. comparing the Death of Chriſt with Adam's Fall, ſaith, As Sin reigned to death, ſo Grace much more reigneth to life; as Sin abounded to condemnation, Grace much more aboundeth to juſtification and life: but where is this much more? the Obedience of Chriſt falls far ſhort of Adam's Diſobedience in its effects, if he only purchaſed conditions of life. Adam in a few moments by one tranſgreſſion procured a ſentence of certain death upon every individual perſon that ſhould naturally deſcend from him, as ſoon as they ſhould have a Being; but Jeſus Chriſt by his tranſcendent Obedience of thirty four years, by induring the Wrath of God, the rage of Men and Devils, and a moſt ignominious death, purchaſed life for no one certain Man, but only conditions whereupon they that ſhould hear of them (not half Mankind) ſhould be ſaved, if they did fulfil them; which, for any thing he purchaſed, or was contained in the Covenant of life, was a meer contingency, viz. whether any ſhould ever believe and be ſaved or not.
4ly. If Chriſt only purchaſed a Covenant of life, then he purchaſed no more for the Elect, than for others; no more for the Sheep, than the goats, and they that go to Heaven may hereafter ſay, Chriſt redeemed them no more than he did thoſe in Hell; the difference betwixt them proceeded from their applying and performing the Covenant and its conditions, which others neglected: For the Covenant is equal to all that hear it, promiſing life upon conditions only, which every one is equally concerned in, alike capable of Salvation, and one no more likely to perform the conditions than another. The Arminians grant this, that Chriſt died for all alike,Syn. Dordr. Ibid. Th. 2. Heterodox. Chriſti mortem impetraſſe omnibus hominibus reſtitutionem in ſtatum gratiae & ſalutis.
5ly. It follows alſo, That for any efficacy there was in the death of Chriſt, there muſt have been no man ſaved. For the Covenant of Grace which only he purchaſed, would have been as true and as firm a Covenant, viz. That they ſhould be ſaved who would believe and obey the Goſpel, though no man had fulfilled it; and ſo been ſaved by it, as the Covenant of Works was, which (according to them) was never fulfilled, nor ever gave life to any. The Covenant required no more, then that God ſhould be ready faithfully to give eternal life ro all that fulfilled it; and all that Chriſt purchaſed, was a Promiſe that he would ſo be, which would have been true, though all men had periſhed by their unbelief, and ſo Chriſt might have had the empty Title of a Redeemer, without any perſon being redeemed by him: And this Arminius, Gravirch, and others are not aſhamed to confeſs. Arnoldus contra Molin. Omnino credo futurum fuiſſe ut finis mortis Chriſti conſtaret, etiamſi nemo credidiſſet. Some of ours fay, That God had his Elect whom he purpoſed to bring to Chriſt and ſave by him: But the Scriptures are as expreſs that Chriſt died for the Elect, as that God elected them; And if Chriſt purchaſed no more for them, then for others, they might have periſhed as well as others, for any thing his Redemption or Purchaſe could do for them or had done.
6ly. If Chriſt intended his death for certain particular perſons, then he purchaſed more than a meer covenant or conditions of Life. The conſequence is evident, If he purchaſed life to be given to certain men certainly & infallibly, then he purchaſed more than offer of life to them upon conditions, which they might, or might not perform. The Minor, That Chriſt in his death intended the redemption of certain, particular perſons, the Scriptures aſſirm, He laid down his Life for the Sheep, Joh. 10.15, 16. even for thoſe of the Gentiles, that were not of the Jewiſh Fold, and ſo yet knew him not; And the effects of this laying down his life for them was on purpoſe to call them in due time, v. 16. to teach and make them follow him, v. 27. and to keep them ſafe to life eternal by his own and the Fathers power, v. 28, 29. and from theſe Sheep are diſtinguiſhed thoſe who are not of his Sheep, and therefore all means are ineffectual to make them believe, v. 25, 26. He died to gather together in one all the Children of God, Joh. 11.52. that were ſcattered abroad, i. e. all the Elect of God, diſperſed throughout all Nations: And the Apoſtle Paul ſaith of himſelf, He loved me, and gave himſelf for me, Gal. 2.30. Therefore Chriſt redeemed particular perſons, and did not only purchaſe Grants and Covenants.
7ly. Chriſt purchaſed the Spirit and Grace to make his Death effectual to thoſe he died for; therefore he purchaſed more than a Covenant of Grace. A meer Covenant of Grace only promiſeth Life upon conditions of Faith and Obedience, leaving it to men whether they will perform them or not; as the Covenant of Works promiſed life to perfect obedience, and then left it to Adam whether he would obey or not: A meer Covenant makes no proviſion of grace and ſtrength to enable men to perform it; If then Chriſt purchaſed grace, to believe and to obey for the Elect, he purchaſed more than a Covenant of Grace; and that he did ſo hath been partly proved, and may be further evidenced by this, That when Chriſt ſaith, he laid down his life for the Sheep, Joh. 10.16, &c. he preſently adds he muſt bring home all the Sheep, and make one Fold, under one Shepheard himſelf, and that he will make them follow him, and will preſerve and lead them to Eternal Life, and no Wolves ſhall pluck them out of his hand, v. 27, 28, 29. Alſo that he died to gather into one all the Children of God: This muſt be done by his Spirit and Grace purchaſed by his Redemption, and that power which is given to him not only to purchaſe, but alſo to apply the bleſſed Fruits of Redemption to them.
Thus our Divines at Dort. Rationes omnes, Act. Syn. Art. 2. Ibid.à ſcripturis, fidei que analogia petitae, quibus Chriſti incarnatio, humiliatio, vel exaltatio, probatur, vel confirmatur, eò ſpectant, ut demonſtretur divina expreſſa intentio de fructuoſo hujus tanti myſterii effectu, non conditionaliter producendo (nempe, ſi homines cùm aeque nolle poſſint, velint, ut hic fructus in de enaſcatur) ſed infruſtrabiliter efficiendo, potentiâ divinâ id operante, i. e. All thoſe Arguments that prove the Incarnation, Humiliation, and Exaltation of Chriſt, tend to this, to ſhew, that it was God's expreſs intention to produce the certain effects of that great Myſtery infallibly, by his own power, and not to leave them to be conditional, depending upon Man's Will, who might as well neglect and refuſe as accept of them.
I conclude, the Sum of this Doctrine comes to this, That God took occaſion by the Incarnation, Obedience and Death of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt to grant men terms of Salvation, viz. if they ſhould believe and obey the Goſpel, not as any ſatisfaction to his Juſtice or Law, which man had broke, but as ſome kind of ſalvo to his Honour, at leaſt as he was pleaſed to interpret it: And what need Chriſt have been God to do no more than this? How eaſie is the ſlip from hence into the dead Sea of Socinianiſm? To lay that Chriſt came by his Life and Death to declare and confirm only this Covenant of Life, on condition of Faith and Repentance, and to intercede for the Penitents Indeed the whole platform of this Doctrine was borrowed from Socinus by the Arminians, from whom moſt of our modern Writers have it, and ſome immediately from the Socinian; from whom alſo came that common (but illogical) Evaſion of works, being not the meritorious, but the cauſa ſine qua non of our Juſtification. Opera ea ſunt ex quibus justificamur, ſunt autem opera ista noſtra, Soc. de Juſtif. apud Pelt.i. e. ut dictum fuit, obedientia quam Chriſto praeſtamus, licet nec eſſiciens nec meritoria, tamen cauſa, ut vocant ſine qua non, juſtificationis coram Deo, at que aeterne ſalut is noſtrae. I do not deſire this ſhould be believed on my credit, much leſs do I write to reproach any, who do in heart abhor that blaſphemous hereſie, however their words and notions may agree too much with it. I only beg that Scholars and Divines would take the pains to examin and compare them before they imbibe this new Doctrine.