innocent Brother to pass without Rebuke I subâ—it to their Consciences knowing how hateful Delators when amongst Persons of an inferiour Rank have been unto them in whom could be founâ— the least degree of Morality But however their Carriage may be towards mâ— in this respect I am not I bless God in the leaâ— gone off from my peaceable Principles or Tempeâ— being most desirous the Brethren who are unfeigneâ— Embracers of the Protestant Faith would enteâ— on such Methods as are most likely to Restore Peaâ— upon the Foundation of Necessary Truth There is nothing more needful that I can at prâ—sent think of to be spoken unto unless what relatâ—â— to Amyrald which will require more room thaâ— is here left me S. L. Books sold by Nath. Hiller at the Princes Armâ— in Leaden-Hall-Street THE Divine Institution of Congregations Churches Ministry and Ordinances as haâ— been Professed by those of that Perswasion Asseâ—â—ted and Proved from the Word of God By Isaaâ— Chauncy M. A. A Discussion of the Lawfulness of a Pastors Acting as an Officer in other Churches besides thaâ— which he is especially called to take the Oversighâ— of By the late Reverend Mr. Nath. Mather A further DEFENCE OF THE REPORT Was once as I suggested in the Preface to my Appeal Resolv'd against Answering some Objections not only as I then said because it was so difficult for their Authors either to 〈◊〉 Contradiction or forbear Personal Reflectiâ—â— but because what was objected appeared to â—â—to be very Weak Impertinent and Frivolous But â—â—â—g assured by some Learned and Judicious Diâ—â—â—s who have Read Mr. Alsop's late Rhapsodie 〈◊〉 passing by his Rude and Uncomely Invectives False and Injurious Accusations the whole of strength lieth in Noise and Clamour which he â—â—es upon the account of my saying nothing to â—e of his Trifling Objections and as he pretends â—â—use of my Quarrelling with my Brethren about â—â—â—ers of no moment c. I will without giving my 〈◊〉 the trouble of Reading that Book which hath â—â—â—d the Hearts of his most Godly Learned and â—â—icious Friends with unconceivable Grief Exaâ—â—e those Objections which when I wrote my â—ince I did not answer and give some Reasons 〈◊〉 I think the Differences amongst us are more than Verbal and that they are about some of tâ—â— most substantial Articles of our Holy Religion Section 1. I will begin with what he objects against the â—â—â—porter and my self His first Objection That the Reporter has left out of his substance the Gospel Regeneration Conversion Repentanâ—â— Holiness Sanctification a New Heart and New Oâ—dience Good Works c. A blessed Report for tâ—â— Countrey You are eased at least of one Moity 〈◊〉 your Work Reply In my Return I will give you the Passage 〈◊〉 which he refers as it is in the Report and then conâ—â—der what Reason Mr. A. had for this Objection In the Report it 's thus That all Who belief might escape the Wrath to come and have Everlastiâ—â— Life the Lord Jesus Undertakes for us by makiâ—â— satisfaction to Punitive and Remunerative Justicâ—â— and that he might do so he did put himself in our Place State and Condition so that whereas vâ—â—â— were Sin and under a Curse by this Blessed Chanâ—â— Christ is made Sin and a Curse and we deliverâ—â— from Sin and the Curse 2 Cor. 5.21 Gal. 3.13 This is the substance of the Gospel of Chriâ—â— this the Ground and Foundation of our Faith Out of this Passage it is that Mr. Alsop fetcheâ— the Reason why he chargeth the Reporter for lâ—â—ving out his Substance of the Gospel Regeneratioâ— Repentance c. To which I answer 1. That 't will be very hard for them who knoâ—â— the Person that is thought to be the Reporter 〈◊〉 think it possible for Mr. A. to believe one word of hâ—â— own Charge against him it being in his own Conscience so contrary to Truth and can therefore 〈◊〉 no less than a Calumny as Calumnia est cùm quis 〈◊〉 â—â—â—ta Scientia dolo injustè agit excipit But it â—â—st be further observ'd 2. That this Passage of the Reporter was only â—â—out Christ's Satisfaction as it is an Article of â—â—â—ple Belief and of distinct Consideration either â—â—â—m Matters of Practice or such Works as are â—ought in us by the Holy Spirit 3. That Matters of Simple Belief have been ever 〈◊〉 the Churches of God placed in a Formula by â—â—â—mselves And if there be any strength in the â—â—jection it must lye in this That whenever a â—â—â—mula is given of the Credenda there must be â—â—ed with it an Exact Catalogue of the Agenda 〈◊〉 that whoever Composes a Summary of Matters Simple Belief without inserting in it the Agenda Matters of Practice doth thereby Reject out of Substance of the Gospel Repentance Good Works c. â—â—e I say lyeth the strength of his Objection â—â—ch if of any force at all against the Reporter must â—â—â—â—g all the Churches of Christ from the Beginâ—â— under the same Condemnation because they had 〈◊〉 Credenda in a Formula by themselves The Reporter had in his Summary a word more â—â—is in many of the Antient Creeds For he saith â—â—â—at all who Believe might escape the Wrath to â—â—me and have Everlasting Life c. thereby â—â—ing Faith which supposes Regeneration and inâ—â—es within it the Entire Nature of Evangelical â—â—tance and is Prolifick of Good Works necesâ—â—â— to Salvation and therefore so long as this â—â—ge viz. That all who Believe might escape Wrath to come c. continues in his Summaâ—â— there will not be the least pretence for the Horâ—â—â— Noise he has made about it But. Mr. A. as one whose Conscience had whilst 〈◊〉 as making this Objection check'd him for it 〈◊〉 add But suppose this were intended only as the Substance of the Gospel so far as we arâ—â—â— to Believe what Christ has done and suffered foâ—â— Sinners without them c. Well then let us suâ—pose it and see what will follow Really as for mâ—â—â— part I can observe in it nothing less than a Fuâ—â—â— Answer to his own Objection For if the Report 〈◊〉 intended no more than the Substance of what wâ—â—â— are to Believe concerning what Christ has done aâ—â— suffered for Sinners without them and with God 〈◊〉 really he did not he was under no Obligation 〈◊〉 mention Regeneration Conversion Repentancâ— Good Works c. which are wrought in and upâ—â— Sinners and the not mentioning 'em cannot be 〈◊〉 Reason a Rejecting'em The Reporter was writing of the Substance 〈◊〉 the Gospel so far as it concern'd the Article 〈◊〉 Christ's Satisfaction 'T was no part of his Provinâ—â— to entreat of Regeneration Conversion Repâ—â—tance c. And Mr. A. might have blamed hâ—â—â— for not opening the Nature of Faith Regeneratiâ—â— or Repentance as well as for not mentioning eithâ—â— them or the Order in which they are wrought Aâ— would it not be very wisely urged The Reporter 〈◊〉 dertook to discourse of the Substance of
lieveth on the Son hath everlasting Life That is hatâ— a Right to everlasting Life Habet i. e. certo habituruâ— est as Lucas Brugensis in Poole who refers us unto John 1.12 where 't is thus Jus ad haereditatem quod Haereditatis nomine interdum venit sicut quâ— credit nempe sicut oportet credere viva side diâ—citur habere vitam aeternam C. 3.36 Sic Juris conâ—sulti is qui actionem habet ad rem ipsam rem habere videtur Well then the import of what the Reporter has here said is That Christ suffered that they who believe may have a Right to eberlasting Life and seeing Justification carries in it a Right to Life eternal it is as if it had been said That they who believe may be justified 5. That this is the manifest intendment of the Reporter may be seen by comparing the present Paragraph with the fore going which is We are all by Nature under the Curse of the Law and destitute of a Righteousness entitling to eternal Life That Vindictive Justice which is essential unto God makes it necessary that the wrath be inflicted and that there be no Right to eternal Life without a perfect meritorious Righteousness This is our State and Condition This is the Place in which we are in which if we dye we are eternally undone The Reporter having shown into what a deploable Condition we are brought by Sin and urging the necessity of an Interest in a perfect meritorious Righteousness he proceeds to show how we may obtain such a Righteousnes as is meritorious of eternal life to the end we may obtain a right thereunto â—ying ' That all who believe might escape the Wrath to come and have everlasting Life the Lord Jesus undertakes for us thereby clearing it â—hat they who believe having an Interest in Christs Righteousness may have a Right to everlasting Life that is may be justified so that here is an asserting of faith as necessary to Justification Pardon and Peace with God 6. The Reporter in giving this brief account of the Doctrine of Christs Satisfaction hath followed the blessed Jesus and the â—oly Apostles as his Guides for our Lord when â—e sent out his Disciples to preach the Gospel bids them declare That whoever believe and are baptized â—hall be saved and they who believe not shall be damned In this Summary though not one word expresly of Regeneration Conversion Repentance c. nor a word of the Precedence of Faith to Justification or Pardon of Sin yet are all these included in it The â—reaching of the Apostles was frequently the same Believe and thou shalt be saved But 7. If there had been any Strength in this Objection Mr. A. doth make not only the Author of the Reasonableness of Christianity and the rankest Socinians but the very Mehometanes would be very much beholding to him for it For if the not mentioning every Article of the Christian Faith particularly in the Letter where our Lord gives a Summary of the Gospel must import a Rejection or at least an Indifference about the Points not mentioned then to believe that Jesus is the Messiah is sufficient and we may burn our Systems Catechisms and larger Confessions of Faith But 8. If he saith it 's mentioned by our Lord Jesus and his Apostles elsewhere I grant it and from thence I infer that as our Lord 's not mentioning these things in a summary is not a Rejecting them so the Reporter tho' he spake not a word of them in his summary cannot without the greatest Injustice and wrong done him be charged as a Rejecter of them And 9. It 's not unworthy our observation that the Lord Jesus did in Mark 16.15 16. give a summary of the whole Gospel without the mention of the particulars specified by my Adversary but the Reporter only of the substance of the Gospel so far as we are to believe what Christ has done and suffered for Sinners without them and with God in which he hath insisted on the necessity of Faith in order to our escaping the Wrath to come and our having Everlasting Life which passage importing the necessity of Faith to our actual Right unto Glory is as much as if it had been said that it 's necessary to our Justification and Pardon But Mr. A. it 's likely not thinking himself under those Bonds which oblige to a strict adherence unto Truth in what he either saith or writes I have Reason to believe that he hath charged the Reporter for Rejecting what he himself believes in his Conscience he holds and that he hath done thus much upon a Reason which he is perswaded has nothing of strength in it so dangerous a thing it is for a Man who in his own Opinion is a Great Wit to enter on a Controversie with a design to load his Opposers with False and Reproachful Charges tho' it be to the cost and expence of his own Reputation and in an Instance wherein he cannot expose the Reporter but by casting dirt on the Cathick Church and on his own Understanding too giving â—ountenance to nothing so much as unto the vain â—retences of such Debauched Hereticks as the Licentious Antinomian and Libertines of the Age are Thus we see whither somewhat has hurried his Man and how he has brought himself into such Circumstances as may move a Christian Temper â—o Pity and Compassion for which reason I 'll say â—o more to this Objection but go on to a second The second Objection Be pleased to observe He instructs you That we are all by Nature under the Curse of the Law and destitute of a Righteousness that may intitle us to Eternal Life and that this was our Place State and Condition Reply And was not this our Place State and Condition Will Mr. A. deny it No he dares not for saith â—e This we all own and lament as too true Where â—hen is his Objection It is in the following words But then he instructs you also That Christ put himself into our Place State and Condition Will you not must you not conclude from hence That Christ also was destitute of a Righteousness to entitle him and if himself us too to Eternal Life Reply 1. That I may show how Mr. A. trifles in raising his Objection I will propose the Sentiments of the Reporter about a Commutation of Persons between Christ and us which was the Occasion of what was said about our being destitute of a Righteousness And it must be observ'd that the Reporter had his Eye on the Manuscript in which its Author speaking of a proper Commutation saith That it is the same with a proper Surrogation where the Surety or Surrogate puts on the Person and stands in the Quality State and Condition of the Debtor and lies under the same Obligation he did to answer for him Not that he apprehended the Agreement there is between Christ's Suretiship and that amongst Men to be adaequate and full nor did he allude unto a
Mr. A. doth insiâ—â—nate That Jesus Christ hath wrought for himself Righteousness that he might by it be entitled to Eternal Life I will consider the Import and Tendency of such an Assertion 1. As for its Import it cannot be any thing less than that the Lord Jesus Christ was once in a state of Tryal and made under the same Law for himself that we were for our selves and that Obedience was required of him to the end that he merit Eternaâ— Life for himself Whence it follows That when the Promise of Eternal Life was proposed for the Encouragement of his Obedience he had no Right nor Title to Eternal Life no not for himself But that to get a Title thereunto he was under the Obligation of the same Law that we were and to speak most modestly of Mr. A's Notion The Lord Jesus Christ God-Man was antecedently to his rendring Obedience to the Law which said Do this and live He was as destitute of a Right to Eternal Life as Adam was on his first Creation Thus whilst he would fasten on the Reporter the groundless Charge of making Christ destitute of 〈◊〉 Righteousness he makes our Blessed Lord destitute of Eternal Life ay of a Right thereunto But leâ— us consider 2. The Tendency of this Notion and that I may do it with the greater clearness I will deliver what I design to offer on this occasion as pressed by the Learned Judicious and Holy Doctor Owen who in his Day excelled most Men in these Studies And whoever will consult his Discourse of Justification from page 366 to page 378. will see That this great Man in confuting the Socinians and their next of Kin in the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction and our Justification doth with much concern declare and strongly prove That Christ came not under the Law for himself but for us To set this Important Point in the clearer Light it must be observed That the Controversie is not whether the Humane Nature of Christ as it is a Raâ—ional Creature be subject unto the Law of Creaâ—ion and eternally obliged from the Nature of God â—â—d its Relation thereunto to Love him Obey him â—epend upon him and to make him its End Blessed-â—â—ss and Reward For as the Dr. admirably wel â—â—presseth it ' The Law of Creation thus considered doth not respect the World and this Life only but the Future State of Heaven and Eternity But the Point here controverted is Wheâ—â—er Christ be under the Law as it is imposed on â—reatures by especial Dispensation for some time â—â—d for some certain End with some Considerations â—â—les and Orders that belong not essentially to the â—â—w as before described as it is presented unto us â—â—â—t absolutely and eternally but whilst we are in this World and that with this special End that by Obeâ—â—â—nce thereunto we may obtain the Reward of â—ternal Life To this the Dr. answers That the Lord Jesus Christ was not made under the Law under this â—â—nsideration for himself to the end he might get a â—ale unto Eternal Life For saith the Doctor upon the first Instant of the Vnion of his Natures being holy harmless undefiled and separate from Sinners he might notwithstanding that Law he was made subject unto have been stated in Glory For he that was the Object of all Divine Worship ceded not any New Obedience to procure for him state of Blessedness And a little before Setting side saith the Doctor the consideration of the Grace and Love of Christ and the Compact beâ—ween the Father and the Son as to the Undertaking â—or us which undeniably proves all that he did in pursuit of them to be done for us and not for â—imself I say setting aside the consideration of these things and the Humane Nature of Christ bâ— vertue of its Vnion with the Person of the Son 〈◊〉 God had a Right unto and might have immedâ—ately been admitted into the Highest Gloâ—â— whereof it was capable without any Anteceder Obedience unto the Law And this is appareâ—â— from hence in that from the First Instant of thâ—Vnion the whole Person of Christ with our Natuâ—â— Existing therein was the Object of all Diviâ—â— Worship from Angels and Men wherein consisâ— the Highest Exaltation of that Nature So fâ—â— Dr. Owen Here then you see a difference between this Leaâ—ned Dr. and Mr. A. Mr. A. suggests as if Chriâ—â— were under the Law which saith Do this and livâ— for Himself as well as for us that he might be eâ—â— titled to Eternal Life but the Dr. denies it upâ—â— the weightiest consideration Besides the Doctâ—â— is the more positive in his Opinion as it doth moâ—â— effectually subvert the Notion of Socinus which 〈◊〉 That our Lord Jesus Christ was for himself or on 〈◊〉 own account obliged unto all that Obedience which 〈◊〉 performed and therefore could no more obey aâ—â— satisfie for others than any other person But thâ— Doctor proves That Christ's Obedience unto tâ—â— Law was for Vs and not for Himself and therâ— by doth most effectually enervate the strength 〈◊〉 Socinus his Argument which upon Mr. A's Notioâ— receives new Life and Vigour Whoever desires a suller understanding of thâ— Controversie will do well to consult the Doctâ—â— himself who in the pages referred unto hath 〈◊〉 fully and clearly stated this Doctrine as to obviaâ—â— Objections made against it by the Remonstrant Socinians and others but what I have here said 〈◊〉 sufficient to shew Mr. A's Mistake and what countenance it gives the Socinians and how much reason 〈◊〉 hath to be more in his Study consulting not â—ay-Books for the sake of foolish Jests but the â—oly Scriptures and the Learned Writings of D. O. â—â—d other Orthodox Divines that for the future â—rough inadvertency or otherwise he give not those â—dvantages to the common Enemies of our Holy â—eligion he hath too oft done But I pass on to third Objection The Third Objection We are sin saith the Reporter and under a Curse Can you with all your Penetration Divine the â—eason why it 's said we are sin but how â—â—e we sin why must it be phrased thus we are 〈◊〉 It was Poetically and Satyrically said That â—lexander the sixth was non tam vitiosus â—â—à m vitium non tam scelestus quà m scelus but â—â—e need to be taught how Man was sin sin it â—â—lf Reply 1. That Mr. Alsop is so very much at a loss to â—â—d out the genuine meaning of the word Sin â—en it 's said we are Sin as if it had been never â—used in Scripture doth not a little surprize it â—â—ng so common for the Holy-Ghost to express the â—â—erlative Degree by the Abstract not only in â—â—er Instances but even in this that doth so puzâ—â— and confound him For as the Devils whose â—â—s are exceeding great are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or spiritual wickedness so wicked Men are calâ—â— Wickedness particularly in 1 Cor. 6.9 10 11. â—ere is an enumeration of sundry sorts of Sinners 〈◊〉 render it And
one thâ—â— and therefore not speaking a word of another tâ—â—â— of a distinct Nature he must be interpreted to â—â—ject that other as if he who writes of Botannicks mâ—â—â— be look'd on as a denyer of the Existence of â—â—nerals because he confines his Discourse to 〈◊〉 matter in hand 6. This Objection must be either the most Tâ—â— fling one that ever was started or be most Ferâ—â—â—â— of Blasphemous Absurdities For if when we 〈◊〉 course of what Christ hath done and suffered for â—â—ners without them the not mentioning Regenâ—â—tion Conversion Repentance c. be a Rejecâ— them it must be because these things are Essenâ—â—â— Pâ—rts of Christ's Obedience and Sufferings what â—â—ore evident than that if Regeneration Repenâ—â—â—ce Good Works c. be not Essential Parts of â—â—at Christ has done and suffered for Sinners the â—â—orter when he gave the Substance of what we 〈◊〉 to believe of Christ's Obedience and Sufferings 〈◊〉 he did not mention Regeneration c. cannot 〈◊〉 justly esteemed a Rejecter of them whence 〈◊〉 good Man's pretences for his Charge against the â—â—â—orter tho' on it as is said by many the Subâ—â—â—ce of his late Rhapsodie depends dwindles into â—â—hing and the Objection appears to be a most â—â—â—fling one But 1. If Regeneration Conversion Repentance 〈◊〉 Obedience c. be essential Parts of what â—â—rist has done and suffered for Sinners without 〈◊〉 then 't will follow 1. That a Man may be â—â—nerated converted and sanctified as well as â—â—ified and adopted by a mere external or relative â—â—ange And Regeneration Sanctification c. â—â—port no more an internal Physical Change on the â—â—art and Life than Justification doth For if they 〈◊〉 the Essentials of what only is done without us Christs Obedience and Sufferings are acknowledgâ—â— to be in this Place by Mr. A himself they 〈◊〉 be as perfect in their own Nature without 〈◊〉 as Christs Satisfaction is which is a Notion if â—â—ad been true that would have been very useful 〈◊〉 the Libertines Ranters and Debauchees of the Age 〈◊〉 tho' they make no Conscience of what they 〈◊〉 write or do do nevertheless please themselves â—â—th the conceit of their being in a blessed State as generated converted and sanctified which acâ—â—ding to the natural and easie Consequence that â—â—es from what strength Mr. A's Objection has in 〈◊〉 may be without a work wrought in them And â—â—t be thus then Christ in doing and suffering for Sinners regenerated converted sanctified them c. anâ— all this without them they still remaining in themselveâ— as Vile and as Vicious as ever Again 't will folloâ—â— 2. That if the Substance of what Christ hath doâ—â— and suffered for Sinners without them cannot 〈◊〉 given in a Formula unless there be the mentioâ— made of Regeneration Conversion Repentanâ—â— new Obedience good Works c. then our Faitâ— Repentance new Obedience c. are included 〈◊〉 what Christ hath already done and suffered for Siâ—â—ners without them as if Christ had believed and â—â—pented for us yea as if he had done whatever wâ—â— necessary for us to have done in order to our actuâ—â—â— Justification Pardon and entrance into the eternâ—â— Glory This is the way of my Adversary who fears noâ—â— to run upon the most dangerous Precipices nor 〈◊〉 give Advantage to the most malignant Heretick 〈◊〉 how ridiculously soever when he fancies ' twâ—â—â— make against his Opposers But 7. That I may follow this witty Gentlemaâ—â— somewhat further I will go on to consider whâ—â— Use he makes of this Supposition which carries 〈◊〉 it the genuine Sense of the Reporter which he givâ— in these words Here 's something saith he in thâ—â— Draught that gives cause of Suspicion to thoâ—â— who are of no jealous Inclinations For whereâ—â— he informs us that Christ suffered and satisfied thâ—â— all who believe might eâ—cape Wrath to come and haâ—â— everlasting Life Here 's no necessity of Faith in â—â—der to Justification no believing necessary to Pardâ—â— of Sin or Peace with God no Faith needfâ—â— to Union with Christ that we may have an Iâ—terest in his Righteousness but only to escape Wratâ— to come and the having everlasting Life To this 〈◊〉 answer 1. What is here urged being upon Supposition that the Reporter intended only a summarâ—◠〈◊〉 what Christ has done and suffered for Sinners with 〈◊〉 and with God and not of the Order between â—â—th and Justification or Pardon there is no â—â—re room for suspicion in this Draught than there 〈◊〉 the antient Symboles in which not a word of â—â—â—h's precedence to Justification or Pardon And â—â—â—ld an Antinomian imitate this learned Man in â—â—way of arguing would he not be as able to vinâ—â—â—e his most licentious Principles from the Apoâ—â— Creed as Mr. A. is to fasten his Charge on the â—â—ter and after his manner professing an extraâ—â—ary Zeal for that Creed press it that there is â—ecessity of Faith in order to Justification because 〈◊〉 word of it in that Symbole though it contains 〈◊〉 the sum and substance of the Gospel For if 〈◊〉 is not mentioned in the Formula composed by Reporter must be look'd on as rejected because mentioned in it then what is not in the Formula â—he Apostles must be also look'd upon as rejectâ—â— them as if they had held that Faith doth â—antecede Justification and is not necessary to â—â—â—on or Peace with God But 2. Why doth he Here 's no believing necessary to Peace with God 〈◊〉 he think that a Man may escape the Wrath to â—â—e and have everlasting Life tho' his Peace with 〈◊〉 be not made When it 's said in Scripture that 〈◊〉 who believe escape the Wrath to come and have everâ—ng Life I thought nothing less could be meant that they had on their believing Peace with God is as Beza Piscator Tolet Estius Pareus in Poole 〈◊〉 Reconciliation or as Vatablus ubi supra are reâ—â—ed into Favour with God 3. The Godly learned â—heir general Discourses about these Points have 〈◊〉 thought it sufficient to secure themselves from 〈◊〉 slanderous Accusations as Mr. A would fasten the Reporter if they did but mention believing as â—â—ssary to our Deliverance from eternal Wrath or to our having everlasting Life I might give a large catalogue of learned men on this occasion but will only instance in the learned Grotius who in the Summary he gave of the Catholick Faith in this very Point has it thus at nos intercedente vera Fide a Poena Mortâ— aeternae liberaremur This great Man writing to Christs Satisfaction saith that Christ did it that oâ— the Intervention of true Faith we might be delivereâ— from the Punishment of eternal Death But 4. The Reporter has one Passage more than Grotius whâ— was never thought to reject the necessity of Faith in order to Justification namely and have everlasting Life Thus much the Reporter took care to inserâ— into the substance of the Gospel in this Article having a regard to that Place in John 3.36 He that be
Creditor and Debtor to insinuate that whatever may be truly affirmed of them in Humane Courts might be safely applied unto God and Sinners as to Christ acting the part of a Surety But to explain how Christ came under the same Obligations we stood and by his Satisfaction and Merit Redeems us from that miserable state and condition our sin had cast us into and procures for us a Right to Eternal Life And therefore in Obedience to the Holy Scriptures he considered Jesus Christ as a Surety that came into the State Quality or Condition of Sinners so far and no further than to come under the same Obligations and Bonds with us to answer for us and do on our behalf what was impossible to be done by our selves And that he might make this the more clear he represented unto us that State in which we all are by Nature affirming That we are all under the Curse destitute of a Righteousness that may entitle us to Eternal Life And that except Satisfaction be made both to Punitive and Remunerative Justice it 's impossible for us to be saved For seeing the Law under which we were Created is of Everlasting Obligation we stand bound thereby both to Obedience and the Punishment and until this Debt be paid we cannot be Relieved This is our State this is our Condition and that they who believe may be brought out of this Place State and Condition and have Everlasting Life Christ came into this Place into this State and Condition that is he came under those Bonds and Obâ—igations that lay on us that by answering them we â—ight be the Redeemed and Saved But saith Mr. A. if it be thus Christ must be deâ—itute of a Righteousness to which I reply By no â—eans and if we consider how it is between a Surety and a Debtor in our Courts we may soon see â—he contrary For when one becomes Surety for another he comes into the Place State and Condition â—f that other that is under the same Bonds and Obligations to pay for him what he could not do for himself But would any Man of Sense say that the Surety coming into the same State and Condition of the Debtor to pay his Debts for him must be thereupon destitute of what is necessary in order thereunto He comes into the Place of one who is Insolvent but must he therefore be himself Insolvent and yet pay what neither the Debtor nor himself can pay Thus you see what Mr. A's Objection is at last come to But 2. The Righteousness of which our Discourse is answers that Law which said Do this and live In the day thou sinnest thou shalt die and it is to make Satisfaction both to Punitive and Remunerative Justice For whatever some may impertinently object it may be very safely said that Justice distributes Rewards and Punishments and therefore is rightly denominated Remunerative and Punitive For though it 's said That Punishment is merited by or is rather the Demerit of sin and that the Sinner when he bears the Punishment due unto him for his Iniquity partakes of the Reward of Vnrighteousness yet none can with the least pretence to Reason say That Punitive and Remunerative are Terms in all respects Coincident For it 's most notorious that when Believers are for the sake of Christ's Righteousness rewarded with Eternal Life they are not then punished though Remunerative Justice is then glorified yet Punitive Justice is not so But being assured that Mr. Alsop saith these Terms of Remunerative and Punitive Justice are Coincident I will give the Sense of some learned Protestants about it Gilbertus Voet a Man of good Learning and a right Calvinist discoursing of the Justice of God saith that Justitia Dei est vel in Dictis vel in Factis Posterior duplex scilicet Regiminis Judicii Justitia Judicii est quae secundum Opera Mercedem retribuit Estque haec duplex vel Remunerativa seu Praemians secundum Promissionem erga bene agentes vel Correctiva erga male agentes Quae etiam distinguitur in Castigantem erga Filios Vindicantem seu Punitivam proprie stricte sic dictam erga Reprobos Voet. Select Disput Pas 1. Disp de Jure Justitia pag. 357 358. And the learned Doctor Owen in his Diatribe de Justitia Divina saith the same affirming it to be the general Sense of Modern Divines not one of them who writ on the Divine Attributes being of a different Opinion And in the Margine he makes particular mention of Zanchy Voet Maresius and others directing us also unto Doctor Ames his Cases of Conscience who in the second Chapter of his fifth Book resolves this Question viz. Whether Remuneration or Punition belongs to Communicative or to Distributive Justice Whether Mr. A. understood these things or not is not in my Opinion very material it being sufficient to my purpose that in the Judgment of wiser Men than himself these Terms are not so Coincident as it 's said he doth insinuate But to return The Lord Jesus undertaking to make Satisfaction both to Punitive and Remunerative Justice that is to say the obliging himself to suffer the Punishment due to us for the Satisfaction of Punitive Justice and render Obedience to the same Law to merit the Reward we had â—ost the Righteousness the Reporter spake of lieth 〈◊〉 bearing the threatned Curse and in obeying the Preâ—â—pts of that Law we violated And I demand of â—â—r Alsop Whether the Lord Jesus was always â—ossess'd of this Righteousness Had he it the â—â—rst Instant of his undertaking or when he first â—ame into our Place State and Condition That there was no Guile in the Mouth nor Deâ—â—it in the Heart of the blessed Jesus That he â—as ever even whilst he was in a State of Exaâ—nition without Spot Holy Harmless Undefiled â—â—parate from Sinners and at the greatest distance â—â—om the least Pollution or Impurity we do firmly â—elieve And though he had not actually a satisfying-â—eritorious Righteousness before he did by his Paeâ—â—l Sufferings and his perfect Obedience to the vioâ—â—ted Law satisfy and merit yet was he at no inâ—â—ant of time destitute of what in that instant it â—ecame him to have But it s like nothing will â—â—tisfie Mr. A. but the granting That either beâ—â—re or at his undertaking or at least the first â—â—â—ment of his entring on the work of our Redempâ—on he was actually possess'd of a satisfactory â—eritorious Righteousness as if he believed that Christ before he obeyed and suffered did perfectâ—â— obey and fully satisfie How else can he make â—â—hideous a Noise about the Reporters holding at Christ was destitute of a Righteousness entiâ—â—ng himself and us too to eternal Life Once more 3. Mr. A blames the Reporter for suggesting if Christ had not a Righteousness entitling himself 〈◊〉 eternal Life To which I answer 1. That the Reporter spake not about Christs haâ—â—ng or not having a Righteousness entitling himself 〈◊〉 eternal Life But 2. Seeing