Workmanship But he loveth man after his Faith and Love to him as Rector per Leges as putting on the resemblance of goodness and justice in civil Sense and as he now stands in that Relation to them in which he is by his own Law as it were obliged to do them good Note this difference of Christs love Prov. 8. 17. I love those that love me and those that seek me early shall find me So ver 21. Luke 7. 47. Many sins are forgiven for she loved much If it be meant therefore she loved much yet it would not make against this From John 3. 19. I argue thus If men are condemned for loving darkness rather than Light and Christ is this Light then they were obliged to love Christ the Light But c. Ergo c. And I have shewed it is as Redeemer that he must be loved For to Love Christ as an excellent Prophet only that a Turk may do for Mahomet so confesseth him to be Mat. 10. 37. It is Christs condition propounded to all That if they love not him better than Father Mother House Land or Life they cannot be his Disciples So that those that are not yet his Disciples are obliged at once to love him above all and become his Disciples 1 Cor. 16. 22. If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema Maran-atha And then more specially for Gratitude because I have hitherto insisted on the other species Love there are many Parables in the Gospel that shew that wicked men are condemned for ingratitude to their Redeemer Mat. 21. 37 40. c. Christ convinceth his Auditors that those unthankful Husband-men that refused to pay the Fruits and killed the Son that was sent to them he was sent to be entertained as Redeemer would deservedly be destroyed with a miserable destruction and the Vineyard let out to others i. e. that the Kingdom of God should be taken from them and given to a Nation bringing forth the Fruits thereof And what is that Kingdom here meant but the Gospel The proclaiming and offer of Christ as Redeemer and of mercy in and with him Mat. 22. 8. It is unthankful refusal of the feast prepared when all things were ready and they invited which was the unworthiness that there is mentioned which shut out those Guests Mat. 18. 32. Unthankfulness is intimamated as part of the Sin of that wicked Servant who took his fellow Servant by the throat for 100. Pence when himself had been forgiven 10000 Talents I forgave thee all the debt signifieth such a mercy as Men may have that perish as is plain verse 34. 35. and yet certainly presupposeth Christs dying for them and obligeth them to thankfulness If any ask the sense of the Text I shall give it after by it self more fitly Let me therefore conclude thus That Doccrin which subverteth a very great part of Religion is not of God But so doth this which denieth Universal satisfaction Therefore it is not of God The Minor is proved from what is said It destroyeth the ground of all Mens first love to Christ for Redeeming them It justifieth all the Non-Elect in their ingratitude and not loving Christ as their Redeemer Besides what was said before of its destroying the use of repentance and all Means But we shall recollect more of these consequences in the end and shew you more fully the face of the Doctrin which I dispute against I have proved that all Men that hear the Gospel owe Christ love and thankfulness for Redeeming them by dying for them I should next shew that all Men in the World do owe God love and thankfulness for those mercies which are the effects of Christs satisfaction But especially those within the Church who have in the New Covenant made over to them a conditional remission of their Sins and adoption and everlasting life viz. If they will accept Christ with his benefits Those that are sanctified with the Blood of the Covenant and are made partakers of the Holy Ghost and were escaped from the pollutions of the World through the knowledg of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and and have tasted the good word of God and the Powers of the World to come c. Certainly these have received the fruits of Christs satisfaction for which they were bound to be thankful But of those more particularly in their place Arg. 14th Acertitudine fidei possibilitate rectè credendi If Christ hath not satisfied for the Sins of all then no Man hath a sufficient ground for his first justifying Faith All Men are left at an utter uncomfortable uncertainty whether they may believe to Justification or not But the consequent is false Therefore so is the Antecedent That which is said before doth shew so much of the grounds of this Argument that I shall be the shorter in it now All the doubt is of the consequence of the Major and to clear that I suppose it is granted that all firm sufficient Faith for justification must not only have a command to warrant it but also a fit object about which it must be exercised God commandeth no Man to believe a falshood to make it become true by believing it nor to trust to a person or promise that is not to be trusted as being not only fallible but certainly will deceive As for the Act of affiance or recumbency commonly called the justifying Act no Man can groundedly or comfortably rest on Christ for justification by his Blood who doth not first know that his Blood was shed for him and hath satisfied for him Else he must rest on that which he knows not to be sufficient for him to rest upon For it hath been proved that Christs death is not sufficient to justifie any for whom it was not suffered though they should believe He suffered not superfluously as I have shewed Take the confession of a Divine that for fear of Arminianism joyned Hands with the Antimonians Maccovius colleg disp de justif disp 5. § 22. Quoad substantiam poenae nihil olus perpessus est Christus quam per legem debebatur Neque enim vel Amor Patris vel etiam justitia permittere potuit plura ut filio imponerentur quam quae illi necessariò tanquam sponsori ferenda erant Quoad circumstantias autem patientis personam patiendi causam passionis efficaciam plusquam sufficiens satisfactio Christi Neque enim lex requirebat ut Deus moreretur neque ut sine peccato proprio quis moreretur neque morstalis quae suffecisset pro peccatis totius mundi sive pro omnibus singulis hominibus Here he confesseth that Christ suffered no more than was due by Law and than was necessary for him to suffer as Sponsor And yet that his Death was sufficient for the Sins of all the World even for all Men and every Man And if so then either he suffered as Sponsor for all Or else circumstances did make that Death sufficient for
these are given according to the Law of Works If not then it must be according to the Law of Grace and the New Covenant or according to no Law If the former then none will question I think but it must come from Christs Blood For the New Law and Testament is founded in his Blood and Sealed by it If the later then at least the Law of Works must be first relaxed and they so far pardoned seeing according to that Law they should have lived not among these mercies but in misery And Scripture assures us that it was the Blood of Christ that delivered us from the Curse of the Law and that on the Cross he took down the hand writing that was against us c. And without his suffering there is no Relaxation of the Laws obligation They that set open so wide a door of mercy to all the World beside Jesus Christ do not lightly wrong him and do dangerously deceive themselves and others I am sure Christ will expect repentance thanks and obedience for these mercies and condemn Men for not improving these Talents which he committed to them however Men may now tell Sinners that all comes but from common providence and not by the Blood of Christ 3. Yea that which they call common providence is the disposal of things by the Redeemer For all things are delivered to him of the Father and all power given him and to that end he died rose and revived that he might be Lord of the Dead and Living And therefore if Men have any mercy now it must come through the Redeemers Hands and consequently is a fruit of his Blood But this will yet further be proved in the next which is 3. That it is Christs dying for those same persons to whom he gives these mercies that is the ground of them And this further is proved thus 1. Some of the mercies given are such as could no other way be procured and given as is ordinarily granted Such as are the Universal Remission Justification Adoption and gift of Christ himself on condition that Men will accept them Christ given as Redeemer supposeth his Redemption as to paying of the price to be past Without Blood there is no Remission neither conditional not absolute as is proved in the first Argument But a conditional Remission to all is given in the New Testament Ergo c. The Remission also of their punishment for the time of this Life or at least of so much of it is actual though not plenary Remission and wicked Men partake of that Of one of these two Christs speaks in the parable of the ungrateful unmerciful Servant Mat. 18. 27. 32. 35. The Lord of that Servant was moved with compassion and loosed him and forgave him the debt c. His Lord said O thou wicked Servant I forgave thee all that debt c. So likewise shall my Heavenly Father do also by you if ye from your Hearts forgive not every one his Brother their Trespasses But of this Text more hereafter So that God doth remit to the Non-Elect most of the temporal punishment of their Sin actually and all the Eternal punishment conditionally That he remitteth the temporal punishment is further proved Psal 78. 38. But he being full of compassion for gave their iniquity and destroyed them not Yea many a time turned he his anger away and did not stir up all his wrath He that reads out the rest of the Psalm will not believe that all these dissembling Israelites were Elect. So for the legal forgiveness of Sin upon the use of Ceremonies See Lev. 4. 26 31 35. and 5. 10 13 16 18. and 6. 7 and 19 22. Numb 15. 25 26 28. It shall be forgiven all the Congregation of the Children of Israel and the Stranger that sojourneth among them seeing all the People were in ignorance but all Israel were not Elect Numb 14. 19. Pardon I beseech thee the iniquity of this People according to the greatness of thy mercy and as thou hast forgiven this People from Egypt even until now 20. And the Lord said I have pardoned according to thy Word Dev. 21. 8. Psal 85. 2. Isa 40. 2. So the Example of Ahab the Ninevites c. Shew clearly For that which God did in mercy in respect to their humiliation was some kind of Remission 2. And further I prove it as by these express Texts of Scripture so by this Scripture reason Either God remitteth much of the temporal punishment or else he shews them no mercy And consequently they are not beholden to him nor owe him any thanks but God doth shew them mercy Ergo c. He that remitteth none of the punishment due sheweth no mercy in this case And he that sheweth mercy remitteth part of the punishment for it was part of the punishment to be deprived of the mercies which wicked Men enjoy Who dare once imagine that Health Strength Friends Liberty Peace Riches Honour Food Raiment Houses Accommodations Cattel all Creatnres to serve us Publick Peace Sun Rain Fruits of the Earth prospering of our Labours c. Knowledg Parts Motions of the Spirit excellent means and offers of Grace Godly society and Examples Admonitions Tast of the good word of God and the powers of the World co come Illumination Partaking of the Holy Ghost working Miracles casting out Devils hearing the word with joy believing for a time clean escaping the pollutions of the World by the knowledg of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to be sanctified with the blood of the Covenant to be loved of Christ as the man was Mar. 10. 21. to have the easiest place in Hell c. who dare say that none of all these are Mercies Or that the enjoyment of these may stand with the full execution of the sentence of the Law If the Curse lay in the deprivation of these then the enjoyment of them is a remission of that curse or Penalty But c. Ergo c. read Deut. 28. Now that this Remission is granted to none but by virtue of Christs dying for him I will now but refer you to the whole multitude of Reformed Divines in their Writings against the Papists about Purgatory Indulgences and Humane Satisfactions where they argue with greatest Zeal and many Arguments that temporal punishments are remitted only for Christ's Satisfaction even the same men that deny Universal Satisfaction not remembring how this overthroweth their own cause The reason I conceive is that here the evidence of truth constraineth them but in the denial of Universal Redemption they constrain themselves to it meerly because they have not found out the way of reconciling Universal Satisfaction with Special Predestination and therefore think they are necessitated to deny the former though against the clear light of many express Texts of Scripture for fear of contradicting the later 1. Amesius saith Bellarm. Enervat To. 2. li. 5. c. 2. p. mihi 158. Christus per spiritum suum nihil in nobis operatur
that he might be Lord of the Dead and Living Matth. 28. 19. John 5. 22. Rom 14. 9. 2. It is sufficient if here it be evident that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applied to Christ seeing there is no disswading reason can be brought from the word It is undoubtedly true of the reign of the Mediator in the largest sense now all power is given to him that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is said of God Psal 103. 19. by the Sept. Erasmus saith siquid interest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privati juris nomen est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 honoris authoritatis And then we may see that both both belong to Christ and yet no wonder if he be more often called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. If it were God the Father that is here called Lord yet all is one to the main point for he â— Deus Redemptor and he bought them by the blood of his Son but that 's the next Question 2. They say it is uncertain that by buying is meant purchasing with the ransom of his blood Answ 1. What other price than Christs blood doth God buy men with 2. I have proved it before that it was purchasing with Christ's blood both in that Jude mentioneth the Lord Jesus Christ and some think that the former Title the only Lord God is given of Christ too and the place invincible to prove Christs Godhead and in that the benefits received by them could come no other way But let us see their Reasons 1. They say the Apostle insisteth on a Comparison with the times of the Old Testament and the False Prophets that were then among the People Answ What of that 1. Is not the Comparison clear as those false Prophets were part of the Typical Redeemed People so are these of the truly Redeemed 2. That Typical Redemption out of Egypt was not only a Type but also a Fruit of Christs Redemption in its moral being considered 1. They say the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth primarily the buying of things translatitiously the Redemption of Persons Answ 1. It signifies any buying in the Market for a price whether thing or person And what other buying with a price can you here devise 2. It 's well known the Holy Ghost useth it to signifie Christ's purchasing of us by his blood what means it Rev. 5. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Rev. 14. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 1 Cor. 6. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rev. 14. 4. with many the like 2. They say Here is no mention of blood death price or offering of Jesus Christ as in other places where proper Redemption is treated on Answ 1. As if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not alone signifie to buy with a price 2. Hath every place that treats of proper Redemption such an addition View those before cited and be convinced of the contrary what 's added Rev. 14. 3. The third Reason is that the Apostle affirms their deliverance to consist in the escaping of the pollution of the World as Idolatry false Worship and the like by the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ plainly declaring that their buying was only in respect of the enjoyment of the knowledge of the truth but of the washing in the blood of the Lamb he is wholly silent Answ The question is of the satisfaction by Sacrifice whether Christ bought them thereby This Reason is from the effects and application if they had not so much as escaped this pollution of the World it would not follow that Christ did not buye them by his satisfaction but only that they received not this benefit of it 2. It is easier beg'd than prov'd that Christ satisfied for none but those that are washed by his blood 3. If it had been said that they were washed in the blood of the Lamb had it not been easie for the same wit to have found another interpretation and to have said it was spoken but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they professed it to be so 4. He that will well prove that God can and doth so far relax his Law as to give all these mercies without Christ's satisfying for them to whom they are given viz. washing escaping the Worlds pollutions by the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour yea clean escaping from them who live in errour ver 18. c. will do the Socinians a greater pleasure and say more against the necessity of Christ's satisfaction than ever I saw yet done by any And here I would have one strange passage observed in very many Divines that it may appear how prejudice studium partium prevails in Mens Studies and how much the Will can command the Understanding When we plead that God doth in pardoning Sin for Christ's Sacrifice relax his Law or dispence with it and not properly execute it according to its sense they stifly deny it and say that it is but an interpreting it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to its reserved exception and that Christ's suffering was the proper fulfilling of the Law and the Reason they give is because they think it of flat necessity that the Law be executed according to its sense or else it should not be true or at least God should not be just even Essenius himself forsakes Grotius in this point and yet these same Men will maintain either that God doth without any satisfaction at all so far relax the same Law to wicked men as to give them all the mercies which they enjoy viz. illumination a tast of the good word of God and the powers of the World to come to be made partakers of the Holy Ghost and believe for a time and be sanctified by the blood of the Covenant and loved of Christ and clean escape from them that live in errour and to escape the World's pollutions and be washed c. or else that God doth this without relaxing his Law and so that by the rigorous Law of Works Sinners are not deprived of these Mercies To the Non-Elect God relaxeth that Law without satisfaction which to the Elect he doth not yea cannot relax upon satisfaction These things are harder to me than to be well digested Before I come to their last Reason I will give you the Judgment of some Orthodox Interpreters on this Text that you may see whether it be the Mediator Christ or the Father only whom they are here said to deny and whether it be meant of proper Redeeming or some mercy which they had without Christ's dying for them 1. And the first shall be Calvin whom I hope in this Controversie none will except against his words are these in loc Etiam Dominum qui illos redemit Tameâ—si variis modis abnegatur Christus eum tamen hic meo judicio attingit Petrus qui extrimitur apud Judam nempe dum Gratia Dâ—i in lâ—sciviam convertitur Redemit enim nos Christus ut populum haberet segregatum ab omnibus mundi inquinamentis addictum
to desert And of those that hear the Gospel this is undenyable and I think it is certainly true of all others So that it is perishing in reference to a Gospel Judgment at the Mediators Bar that we mean and specicially in a comparative sence And by cause I mean the Reason of their perishing to be alledged So that if you ask seeing all are equally condemned by the Law of works and mercy hath found out a Remedy what is the reason that this man is condemned at the Redeemers Bar when that is acquit Or that this Man Judas is not delivered and saved as well as that Peter Is it because Christ Dyed only for one or that one only believed and the other refused Christ Here according to the Doctrine which denyeth Universal Satisfaction it must be said that either the only or the principal reason that men perish when others are saved is for want of an expiatory sacrifice or satisfaction for their Sin i. e. because they had no Redeemer when others had or no Christ to Die for them But this is contrary to the Scripture The consequence is evident that it is more principally the want of a Saviour or satisfaction then the want of Faith that is the reason of their perishing if Christ satisfied not for them 1. Because satisfaction is prerequisite to the efficacy or usefulness of Faith Sed non è contra 2. Satisfaction hath the greatest work to do and is the greatest cause And faith hath a far and a lower work and is a lesser cause or indeed no cause at all but a meer condition 3. God could not fitly save Sinners without satisfaction But he could if he had pleased have saved them for that satisfaction without a personal Faith as he doth Infants and as he saved the Church before Christs Incarnation without that Faith which now justifieth viz. Believing that this Jesus is the Christ and without believing in any Articles of our Creed If two Men be mortally sick and one be healed and the other not because one had a costly Cordial and the other had none prepared for him but only a nonimal offer without the thing though this Man refuse that nominal or feigned offer yet the chief cause why he was not healed was the want of the medicament rather then his refusal And for the Minor its plain through the whole New Testament that the cause of Mens perishing is not for want of an expiatory Sacrifice but for want of Faith to receive the Redeemer and his benefits Mat. 23. 37. How oft would I have gathered thee c. ye would not Isa 5. 4. What could have been done more to my Vineyard c. Mat. 24. 4. 5. Tell them which are bidden behold I have prepared my dinner My Oxen and Fatlings are killed and all things are ready Come unto the Marriage But they made light of it c. verse 8. The Wedding is ready but they which were bidden were not worthy i. e. There is no want on Christs Part his Sacrifice and satisfaction is sufficient But they lost the benefits for want of believing Mat. 25. 1. 2. All the Virgins might have been accepted at the Marriage if their own sloath had not shut out the foolish verse 14. All the Servants had Talents mercies purchased by Christs Death but it was not well using them that condemned one Men treade under Foot the Blood of the Covenant wherewith they were sanctified And deny the Lord that bought them Mens destruction is of themselves But in God through Christ is their help All the Scripture shews this that Men perish for their rejecting a Redeemer and not for want of the Price of Redemption For quoad pretium Christ hath taken away the Sins of the World Arg. 9th A Sufficientià pretii pro omnibus If Christ died for all Men quoad sufficientiam pretii then he hath satisfied for all But he died for all Men quoad sufficientiam pretii Ergo c. The Minor is maintained by the generality of our Ancienter Protestant Divines who use ordinarily this distinction to solve the doubt whether Christ died for all viz. he died for all sufficiently and for the Elect only effectually And indeed this one distinction rightly understood and this answer thence fitted is most full and apt for the resolution of the question The Schoolmen go the same way The consequence of the Major proposition is acknowledged by our late most rigid Anti-Arminians who on that reason do deny the Minor For our new Divines have utterly forsaken the old common opinion and in stead of saying that Christ died for all Men sufficienter They will not so much as say that His Death was sufficiens pretium pro omnibus But only that It is sufficient to have been a price for all For all our former Divines and the most of these times so far as I can discern who acknowledg that Christ died for all Men quoad sufficientiam pretii and for the Elect quoad efficaciam they say the same and as much as I and therefore I need not say much more to them For Christ cannot dye for Men sufficienter and yet not die for them at all or not satisfie for them I may well take up with this one argument If Christs Death be a sufficient price for all then it is a Price for all But Christs Death is by their confession a sufficient Price for all Therefore it is a Price for all Here understand that it is first in order of nature a Sacrifice expiatory or a satisfaction before it is meritorious of further benefits or is a Price for them Had it not been to satisfie Justice God would have been so far from taking his Sons Death for meritorious that he would have been utterly displeased in it For he delighteth not in the Death of him that dieth how much less of the innocent and lest of all of his only Son Note here also in what sence we say Christs Death is sufficient and in what sence it is called effectual There is a double effect of Christs Death and so a double efficacy and so a double sufficiency to those effects The first effect is to be a satisfaction to the offended Justice of God and a demonstration of his legal Justice The sufficiency to this effect was in the dignity of the Person and greatness of the suffering supposing Gods voluntary Acceptation of it instead of the Sinners own suffering The efficacy immediately followed the suffering Yea it went long before it upon the undertaking and the acceptation as in Moral Causes it is not unusual The 2d sort of effects are more remote even the actual good of the Sinner Of these some are general and common as the freeing of all Men from that necessity of perishing which lay on them by the Curse of the first Law as it stood without remedy c. And so Christs Death is sufficient for all and effectual too Some fruits of his Death are
Father delivered into his Hand Joh. 5. 22. The Father judgeth no Man but hath given all judgment to the Son c. Phil. 2. 7. 8. 9. Rom. 14. 9. 2. That this Right is founded on Redemption is proved by all that is said in the forementioned Arguments and Texts and I think few Christians will deny it Rom. 14. 9. For this end he both died rose and revived that he might be Lord of the dead and of the living If it were the end of his death and resurrection to obtain this Dominion then surely this Dominion is grounded in that Death and Resurrection and belongs to him as a Redeemer Phil. 2. 6 7 8 9 10 11. he became obedient to Death even the Death of the Cross Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him c. 3. And that it is not Christs dying only for the Elect that is the ground of his Dominion and Empire over all I prove thus 1. The Dominion of Christ and his Jus Imperii over the Non-Elect is of the same kind with his Dominion and Jus Imperii over the Elect and therefore hath the same cause It is not such as his Dominion over Devils or Brutes as we shall further shew anon I say not that Christ exerciseth his Imperial power in the same way over all but the relation of Rex or Imperator which Christ hath rightfully over all is the same to all And the relation of Subjects to Christ which all stand in to him quod debitum veljus is the same relation all Men as well as the Elect to whom his Laws are promulgate are bound to acknowledg him their King and Lord in the same sence as the Elect are And are bound to give up themselves to him as his subjects in the same sense as the Elect are and with a subjection of the same kind For the New Law which constituteth the duty is general and distinguisheth not as to this between Elect and Non-Elect 2. It is manifest that Christs Blood cannot be purchasing of Dominion or Empire immediately but only meante virtute satisfactoria as it is a placament or propitiatory Sacrifice to the offended Majesty For were not Christs Blood first necessary to this expiatory use it would be so far from being purchasing or meritorious of any further benefit that it would not be acceptable to God at all For he is not bloodthirsty he takes not pleasure in the Blood of the innocent Nay he is averse from it So that Christs Death must needs be first satisfactory to Justice in order of nature before it purchase Dominion or Empire Now if he may have this right to a peculiar Dominion and Empire over most of the World without satisfying for them then either his right over most is immediate without flowing from satisfaction which is evidently false or else it is founded in his satisfaction for others viz. the Elect And if so then why might not he as well have right of Dominion and Empire over the Elect without satisfying for them as over all others without satisfying for them And if so then he might do all that which now he doth as Lord and Rector without satisfaction Antecedent And if so then he might make his New Law which now he hath made wherein he Repeals the bondage of Ceremonies and provideth a remedy against the curse and whereby he gives pardon and glory to all if they will receive him But this may not be granted 3. It is also proved hence that Christs rule over all Men is founded in his satisfaction of Redeeming of those same Men because when he is offered to them and they commanded to receive him it is in the Relation of Lord Redeemer All are commanded to take him for their Lord Jesus Christ no Man is commanded to take him as Lord and King only and not as Redeemer and Saviour Nay our Divines commonly make the act of justifying Faith to confist only in receiving Christ as Redeemer or satisfieror Saviour as saving us by his Blood from guilt excluding the reception of him as King and Lord from being the justifying Act of Faith wherein yet I am forced as zealouly to contradict them as in almost any one point only they confess it is of absolute necessity that Christ at the same time be received as Lord when he is received as Redeemer Now all Men are bound that hear the Gospel to believe to justification that 's generally granted And if so then all Men are bound to receive Christ as their Lord-Redeemer and not as Lord to them and Redeemer to others And if so then doubtless Christ is their Lord-Redeemer Now Redemption hath two parts the first is the paying of the Price that is satisfaction by dying for us The 2d is applying or conferring the benefits of that satisfaction by actual delivering or Redeeming from the guilt and power of Sin The first is that chief part of Redemption from whence the whole is chiefly denominated Now the first part is past and done whether Men believe or not and is not offered to be done on any condition nor to be done for our Sins Christ doth not say I will pay the price of thy Redemption if thou wilâ— take me for thy Redeemer it is paid already but it is the 2d part of Redemption that is offered on condition The first is general and absolure The second is generally given on condition and special as to the actual Collation by Christ and fruition by Man So that when Christ saith to a Man take me for thy Redeemer it is as much as to say take me for one that hath made satisfaction for thy Sins and if thou wilt receive me I will pardon and save thee thereby now if Christ did not Redeem Men by satisfying and yet require them to take him as their Redeemer then he requires them to take him to be that which he is not and to have done that which he hath not For Christ cannot be a Redeemer to any Man that he hath not paid the paid the price of Redemption for Which if it be not done Faith will not cause it to be done So that it being certain that the Lordship and Empire of Christ which he hath right to over all and which all are commanded to acknowledg and submit to is inseparably conjoyned with his Redemption he being offered to no Man as Lord to whom he is not also offerd as Redeemer it is evident that his Jus novum Dominii imperiii his new right of propriety and Rule over all Men doth presuppose his Redeeming all as to the price and satisfaction Obj. But if that be so then he Redeemed or died for Bruits Devils and good Angels For he hath a Right of Dominion and Rule over these Ans This Objection though otherwise scarce worthy to be taken notice of hath been so entertained yielded to and confidently managed by some that it is become necessary to make a discovery of its vanity 1. Christ hath not a
were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life John 11. 51 52. That Jesus should dye for that Nation and not for that Nation only but that also he should gather together in one the Children of God that were scattered abroad Mat. 1. 21. for he shall save his People from their Sins Joh. 15. 13. Greater Love hath no man than this that a man to lay down his life for his friends 1 John 3. 16. Hereby perceive we the love of God because he laid down his life for us Rom. 8. 34. who is he that condemneth It is Christ that dyed yea rather c. 1 Pet. 3. 18. Christ hath once suffered for Sin the just for the â—njust that he might bring us to God 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. knowing that you are not redeemed with corruptible things as Silver and Gold from your vain conversation received by Tradition from your Fathers but with the precious blood of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 2. 29. He bore our sins on the Tree that me being dead to sin should live to Righteousness Tit. 2. 14. That he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie to himself a peculiar People zealous of good works Eph. 5. 25 26. Even as Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle c. Isa 53. 11. By his knowledge shall my righteous Servant justifie many for he shall bear their iniquities John 17. 2. Thou hast given him power over all flesh that he should give Eternal Life to as many as thou hast given him Mat. 7. 23. Depart from me I never knew you c. Heb. 9. 28. Christ was once offered to bear the Sins of many c. Heb. 10. 14. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Psal 16 9. Their drink offerings of blood will I not offer nor take up their name into my lips Gen. 3. 15. The Seed of the Woman shall break the Serpents head and his seed bruise her heel Mat. 11. 25. I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth because thoâ— hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and hast revealed them to Babes Eph. 1. 7. In whom we have Redemption through his blood the forgiveness of sins 2 Cor. 5. 21. For he made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him These are all the Texts that at present I can remember or find used by those that write against Universal Redemption which have any considerable shew of a proof of all which there is not one that excludeth the Non-Elect nor any in the World from being the Persons for whom Christ dyed as we shall see when we come to review them more particularly Nor is there any ill consequence following the Doctrine of Universal Satisfaction but all that terrifies men from it is seeming ill Consequences for want of right understanding it most men think who go that way that Universal Redemption is inconsistent with absolute Election and with special differencing Grace and with Christs special intention of calling and saving his Chosen whereas indeed it is so far from being inconsistent that it is necessarily concomitant and supposed and they may as well think that Universal Creation is inconsistent with Election and special grace Indeed God hath in admirable wisdom laid Universal Grace as a ground work and built special grace as to the executive part thereupon and to deny the Universal Common grace is to destroy the ground-work of special grace If this were well understood there would few sober Divines be against Universal Redemption and therefore I still say that it is a clear explication that must do more here and is more needful than argumentation Yet because some do so importunately call for Arguments I have given these Thirty and might add many more and shall now proceed to those that are drawn from particular Texts of Scriptures having first laid down one or two more general considerations from the Scripture Language in this particular That Election and Redemption are not of the same extent and not all Elected that are Redeemed but Redemption is Universal and Election special may be strongly evinced by comparing together the language of the Scripture concerning one and the other how differently it speaks 1. We find God charging Men to give all diligence to make sure their Calling and Election 2 Pet. 1. 10. But not one word in all the Scripture to command or perswade Men to make sure that they are redeemed unless we meant it not of the price but the fruits Paul saith to his Converts 2 Cor. 13. 5. Examine your selves whether you be in the Faith know ye not your own selves that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates But he never bid any man examine thy self whether thou be redeemed or whether Christ dyed for thee or whether thou be one of those for whom Christ dyed we have marks given in Scripture to know by whether we are the Children of God or no whether sanctified justified pardoned or no but never a mark laid down in Scripture to know by whether we are of those that Christ dyed for no more than there is to know whether we are of those that God Created And would not the perfect holy word of God have given marks of this or bid men make sure of this and try it if it were needful and were not unquestionable because universal 2. We find the Saints as David complaining of God's hiding his face and seeming their Enemy and writing bitter things against them and groaning under that burthen of Sin and crying for Pardon and saying God had forsaken and forgotten them c. But we never find any Man good or bad that believed Gods word to be true to doubt whether Christ dyed for him or whether he were Redeemed or complaining of his danger for want of a Redeemer or Expiatory Sacrifice 3. We find God ordinarily saying of Christ Jesus that he is the Saviour of the World and came not to condemn the World but to save the World and took away the sins of the World and is a propitiation for the fins of the whole World and dyed for all tasted death for every man and was a ransom for all c. But we have no one word in Scripture that saith he predestinated all to Salvation or decreed to save the whole World Nay the very term of Election contradicteth Universality for it is no chusing if it be all and if some be not left 4. We find Wicked Men condemned and their sin aggravated for denying the Lord that bought them 2 Pet. 2. 1. But never for denying the Lord that Elected them 5. We find Christians by the Apostles warned that they destroy not their weak Brethren for whom Christ dyed and saying through thy
knowledge shall he perish c. But he nevea saith destroy not him or by thy knowledge shall he perish whom God hath Elected but contrarily Christ saith if it were possible they would deceive the very Elect. 6. We find them that fall away described to be such as were sanctified by the blood of the Covenant but never to be such as were Elected to Salvation And their Sin is aggravated as being a treading under foot the Son of God and putting him to open shame but not as treading under foot Gods Election And their misery is in this that there is no more Sacrifice for Sin but a fearful looking for of Judgment and Fire c. But not that there is no more Election 7. Men are warned to see that they refuse not Christ that speaketh and threatned that they shall not escape if they neglect so great Salvation and they shall speed worse at Judgment than Sodom and Gomorrhah But none are so threatned for sinning against Election nor are they warned to take heed of rejecting it nor is it said how shall we escape if we neglect so great a mercy as Election Also men that unworthily receive the Sacrament are said to eat and drink damnation to themselves and to be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord But no Man that is not Elect is said either to be the cause of his own Non Election or to be guilty of abusing or rejecting his Election 8. Also I find men warned on pain of Damnation to receive Christ as their Redeemer Be they never so wicked it is our office to perswade them to this and therefore to preach the Gospel to every Creature But we are not to command men to take God for their Elector I may not go to all the ignorant prophane men men in the Countrey and charge them to take God for their Elector 9. We must command all men to love Christ as their Redeemer and be thankful to him and in thankfulness to obey him and we may say to them You are not your own you are bought with a price therefore glorifie God with your Bodies and Spirits for they are his But we cannot perswade all men to love God as their Elector or to be thankful to him for Election or to obey God because he hath chosen them 10. We find Scripture telling us how hardly flesh and blood will digest the Doctrine of predestination and how they will quarrel at Gods chosing one and not another and how God stops their mouths with an answer drawn from his absolute Lordship and Propriety over them as the Potter over the clay he may make them vessels of honour or dishonour and do with his own as he list But we never find any murmurrings of Flesh and Blood that Christ should die for one man and not for another Nor do we find God ever acknowledging any such thing much less giving them a reason from his Absolute Dominion 11. Besides we find God useth to give the reason why men be not saved by Christ from their own wilfulness and rebellious rejecting him This is the cause given why his blood is not applyed to them But when it comes matter of Election or Non-Election the Answer is Oh Man Who art thou that disputest against God So that all these things laid together and considered it seems to me clear that Redemption is a Universal Cause as Creation is and not a thing proper to the Elect only as Gods Election is and that on this Universal Ground of Redemption Christ is entitled the Redeemer of the World and hath founded his jus Dominii imperii his right of Propriety and Government over all even those That will not that he should Reign over them as God was called the Creator of the World because he Created them and on that ground did found his first Title of Dominion and Empire over all the World And that Redemption hath no more an infallible connexion to the Salvation of all the Redeemed as subsequent than Creation hath with the Salvation of all the Created But both Creation and Redemption as they are the means between Election and its End have an infallible connexion with the consequent of the Salvation of the Elect. 2. It is a rule of great use and approved generally by Divines that when texts seem contradictory one to another or several interpretations and opinions are contradictory indeed that we must ever reduce uncertainties to certainties and not contrarily certainties to uncertainties and we must interpret obscure texts by reducing them to the plain ones and not the plain ones by reducing them to the obscure This rule Dr. Sanderson presseth well And Augustine said excellently Shall we deny that which is plain because we cannot comprehend that which is hid and secret Shall we say that is not so which we see to be so because we cannot find why it is so Aug. l. de bono persever c. 14 O that this rule were better observed When God telleth us as plain as can be spoken that Christ died for and tasted death for every man men will deny it and to that end subvert the plain sense of the words meerly because they cannot see how this can stand with Christs damning men and with his special Love to his chosen It is not hard to see the fair and harmonious consistency But what if you cannot see how two plain Truths of the Gospel should agree Will you therefore deny one of them when both are plain Is not that in high pride to prefer your own understandings before the wisdom of the Spirit of God who indicted the Scriptures Should not a humble man rather say doubtless both are true though I cannot reconcile them So others will deny these plain truths because they think that All that Christ died for are certainly Justified and Saved For whomsoever he died and satisfied Justice for them he procured Faith to Believe in him God cannot justly punish those whom Christ hath satisfied for c. But doth the Scripture speak all these or any of these opinions of theirs as plainly as it saith that Christ died for all and every man Doth it say as plainly any where that he died not for all Doth it any where except any one man and say Christ died not for him Doth it say any where that he died only for his Sheep or his Elect and exclude the Non-Elect There is no such word in all the Bible Should not then the certain truths and the plain texts be the Standard to the uncertain points and obscure texts Also Divines generally make it a rule for the Interpretation of Scripture that we must not leave the most obvious plain sense of the words without necessity and clear compelling evidence Now then let them be viewed by any unprejudiced man and let him tell us what is the plain and obvious sense of these foresaid words And for my part I see no necessity of going from that plain sense Some here
sanctitati innocentiae Qui igitur excusso fraeno in omnem licentiam se projiciunt non immeritò dicuntur Christum abnegare a quo Redempti sunt But because Calvin judgeth truly that these are the same that are spoken of in Jude 4. Let us see what he saith of that Text also lest you think he overshot himself here through inadvertency His words are these Christum vero abnegari intelligit Quum hi qui sanguine ipsius Redâ—mpti fuerant diabolo se rursus mancipantes incomparaliâ—e illud pretium quantum in se irritum faciunt And that you may see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for Christ both in Peter and here and that this is a full Testimony for Christ's Godhead it being Christ that is here called the only Lord God and our Lord see the foregoing words Deum qui solus Herus est Vetusti quidam Codices habent Christum qui solus est Deus ac Herus certe Others say it is an uncertainty in secundâ Petri Epistolâ solius Christi fit mentio ille herus vocatur You see Calvin speaks both for the sense of these Texts and the point of Universal Redemption as much and as plain as I. The second shall be the Divines of the Assembly in their last Edition of their Annotations Thus they say The Lord that bought them that gave a price sufficient for them even his own precious blood Acts 20. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 20. 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. This is their first exposition and as a second they add that from their profession And they refer us farther to Jude 4. where they say thus Denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ denying Christ to be God who was their Master by profession for they professed themselves to be of his Household and their Lord by publick Authority over them or by their deeds denying Christ so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Christ in their judgment in both places and this Text speaks for Christ's Godhead The Third shall be Deodate who saith that bought them viz. who by the price of his blood which they had professed to be partakers of through Baptism had gotten the Right and Title of Lord and Master over them to make them his Servants see Heb. 10. 29. 4. Beza also expounds it of Christ as their Redeemer professedly 5. Dr. Willet expoundeth Jude 4. which is confessedly the same with this of Peter in sense thus and deny God the only Lord and our Lord Jesus Christ These words thus Translated seem to speak of two Persons of God the Father and God the Son But indeed the whole Sentence is to be understood of Christ who is called God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Master and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord So that Lord here in the first place should be translated Master For Christ is God in respect of his Godhead with his Father He is our Master because he hath bought us 2 Pet. 2. 1. He is our Lord because by him all things are preserved 1 Cor. 8. 6. Heb. 1. 3. So that he is God as our Creator Lord as our Preserver Master as our Redeemer 6. Mr. Dav. Dickson on 2 Pet. 2. 1. expoundeth it of Christ as professed by them to be their Redeemer 7. Erasmus's Paraphrase is plainly they shall deny Christ by whose blood they were Redeemed and whom they professed Many more are here omitted 8. Even Piscator himself confesseth it spoken of Jesus Christ and saith thus Per quas illi abnegaturi sint Dominum id est Christum qui ipsos mercatus est Periphrasis Christi argumentosa quasi dicat Christus illos est Mercatus ergo non debebant eum negare Mercatus est viz pretioso suo sanguine Conser Acts 20 28. 1 Cor. 6. 20. Then comes he in with his last shift not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I 'll not now stand to transcribe any more these being of such Authority and so impartial and the last the most extream in these Controversies of almost any Learned Judicious Pious Divine 3. I come next to the Third and last Reason which is given to shew that Christ bought not these men The foresaid Author saith Neither is it more certain that the Apostle speaketh of the purchase of the Wolves and Hypocrites in respect of the reality of the purchase and not rather in respect of that estimation which others had of them and by reason of their outward seeming profession ought to have had and of the profession that themselves made to be purchased by him c. This is the great answer which is the last refuge It was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am ashamed unfeignedly to remember the time when I took up with this interpretation my self and had the face to maintain it Consid 1. It was no act of theirs which the Apostle mentions which profession though dissembled might have warranted him to ascribe to them as he may call those Holy that seem to be Holy by profession but it is an Act of Christ and his passion long ago performed He bought them 2. It is not an act ascribed to them during the time of that profession while that profession might have better warranted a mistaking charitable judgment but it is after by Apostacy they cast away that profession and so if before we might have indulged a charitable mistaken judgment yet after we may not 3. It is the words of the Holy Ghost who is the Spirit of truth and sent to lead the Apostles into all truth And shall we feign the Spirit of Truth to assert a falsehood meerly because men profess that falsehood and this after they reject that profession Wicked men say Christ bought them and afterward renounce or deny Christ therefore the Spirit of God shall write it to the Churches as Gods word that Christ did buy them even they who once falsely said so but now deny him O what a bold dealing it is with the Holy Ghost to interpret his words thus without any need or fair reason 4. May not a Man by this dealing say what he will as the meaning of Scripture May not almost any truth of God expresly affirmed in Scripture be said to be spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God saith as Man would have him and in giving his Laws to be a rule to the World he speaks untruly because men speak so before him making their speeches the rule of his speech which is a rule to them Blame us not too zealously if we do not swallow these things so easily even meerly because Mr. such a one or such a one saith so But let us see why they say so for sure they have some shew of reason why 1. They say It is the perpetual course of Scripture to ascribe all those things to every one that is in the fellowship of the Church which are proper to them only
non invenient ullam Marlorat adds talibus ergo contemptoribus nulla sâ—es veniae relinquitur So that they had a Sacrifice for sin till they Apostatised So Dickson also in loc Piscator and many more for I will name none but who are known to be against universal Redemption lest their exposition be rejected To all this I find no more objections of our opponents but to the first argument which we draw hence they return many words Which was both from all those benefits which here Apostates are said to partake of which only Christs Blood hath procured them and specially in that they are expresly ascribed to Christs Blood for they are said to have been sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant Now to this they say to give you the Sense briefly For if I should recite and answer the maze of words which some here use I should provoke the Reader to throw away all in weariness or loathing 1. This speaks only of some that were professors of the Faith of the Gospel separated from the World brought into the Church c. but these are not all Men. Answ Grant that it is some Non-Elect and it is as much as I desire from this Text. And if that be granted I think there is few would question but that it is for all the Non-Elect in the Church that Christ died And for those that never heard of him though I am past doubt that Christ satisfied for the sins of all Mankind yet the use of the point is so small that I will not contend much about it with any 2. They say the Apostle doth neither declare what hath been nor assert what may be but only adds a commination upon a supposition of a thing c. Ans This I answered before I 'll stand to the Judgment of almost any learned Expositor on this Text though against Universal Redemption See Calvin Beza Paraeus Piscator Perkins Dickson Bullinger c. 3. They say It is certain that these Men made profession of all these things c. and therefore the open renouncing them was a sin so hainous as deserved all this Commination though the Apostates themselves had never interest in Christs Blood Answ What 's this to the point The Text saith they were sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant and not only they professed that they were 4. They say it was the manner of the Saints and Apostles themselves to esteem of all baptised initiated persons ingrafted into the Church as sanctified persons So that speaking of Backsliders he could not make mention of them any otherwise than as they were commonly esteemed to be and at that time in the Judgment of charity were to be considered c. Answ 1. How much doth it differ from the language of Men when they are pleading for Separation Then they cannot endure to hear that all the baptised are called Saints by the Apostles and Churches 2. Indeed only those are so called that seem probably to be so 3. And therefore what is this to them that by Apostacy into a remediless misery shew themselves not to be so The Apostles will not encourage known falshood in the Speeches or Opinions of others much less be the Authors of it and lead them into it doth the Apostle here pronounce their Case hopeless and remediless and tell them there is no Sacrifice for their sin but a fearful looking for of Judgment c and doth he at the same time perswade People to believe that they were sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant c. if it were not true Even then when it openly discovereth it self false or is supposed so to do 5. They say if the Text be interpreted positively and according to the truth of the thing it self in both parts thereof viz. 1. That these of whom the Apostle speaketh were truly sanctified 2. That such may totally perish then these two things will follow 1. That faith and Sanctification is not the Fruit of Election 2. That Believers may fall finally from Christ Answ 1. These were truly sanctified though not with that Sanctification which is proper to the Elect and saved 2. No doubt such may and do fall away and perish He that denieth this must deny to believe Christ who hath expresly affirmed it in Mat. 13. That they in whom the Word is not deeply rooted do believe for a while and in the time of temptation or persecution fall away What else is our distinction between Temporary Faith and saving 3. When common Faith and Sanctification is antecedent to special Faith and Sanctification and so found in the Elect it is then a Fruit of Election But when it is found in others it is no Fruit of Election And why should they wonder at that who deny it to be a Fruit of Satisfaction or Ransom which is a more Universal cause then Election is 6. They further say there is nothing in the Text to perswade that the Persons here spoken of must needs be truly justified and regenerated Believers much less that Christ died for them c. Answ 1. That they were illuminated and partakers of the Holy Ghost and sanctified by Christs Blood the Text speaks without strained consequence with Heb. 6. 6. But that they had true special saving Faith Regeneration or Sanctification I affirm not Yet was it true 2. Is it a strained consequence to conclude 1. That he who by Apostacy is fallen into that misery which he was never in before and other sinners are not in that now there is no more Sacrifice for his sin had before a Sacrifice And so have other sinners that be not fallen so far as he is 2. Or that he who is sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant was one whose sins caused that Blood and for whom it was shed If you had proved that it sanctifieth those for whom it was never shed then you had done something so much for this Text. I had thought to have answered all the objections of the contrary-minded which the Books at hand afford but I shall do far less than I thought to do in it as finding that they are so disordered wordy and weak in many that I shall but fill Paper with needless Lines and be tedious and ungrateful to the judicious Readers The 8th Text which I will insist on is Matth. 22. 2 3 4 12 13. The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a certain King which made a Marriage for his Son and sent forth his Servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding and they would not come And he sent forth other Servants saying Tell them that were bidden saying Behold I have prepared my Dinner My Oxen and my Fatlings are killed and all things are ready Come unto the Marriage c. Then said he to his Servants the Wedding is ready but they which were bidden were not worthy So 12. 13. Here it is agreed on that God is the King The Wedding feast is Christ and the benefits of his