CHAP. I.

AND as we have grounded what we have said in the Introduction upon the Revelations of God, which have acquainted us how Sin, and the Punishment of it, Death, entred into the World: So, in what is to fol­low concerning the Redemption of Mankind both from Sin and Punishment, we shall take our Rise from Revelation likewise: Not only because we had known nothing of the Mat­ter, but by Revelation; but also because, in the present Case, Revelation is undoubtedly the best Guide of our Reason. For, Reason must of necessity be guided best by that, without the Guidance of which, Reason it self is confessedly blind. And we are very sure, that it becomes all those, who acknow­ledge the Scriptures to be the Revelations of God; I say, it becomes them, in modesty [Page 14]and deference to the Author, and in prudence for their own more certain Conduct, rather to endeavour to bring their Reason to com­ply with the Revelation, than to bring the Revelation to comply with their Reason. And therefore that we our selves may pra­ctise what we cannot but judge to be best in the Practice of others, we shall lay the Ground-work of all that is to follow, upon the Words of St. Peter, in the Fourth of the Acts and the Twelfth Verse; Neither is there Salvation in any other: For there is no other Name under Heaven given among Men, where­by we must be saved. In which Words the Apostle, and he too at that time filled with the Holy-Ghost (as appears by the Eighth Verse) does expresly tell us (for the Words do import so much) That Men must be sa­ved by JESUS CHRIST of Nazareth, (consult the Tenth Verse) and by no other.

For it is evident, that by Name in the Text is meant Jesus Christ himself; because what he calls [Name] in one Part of the Verse, is opposed to [any other] in the other Part of the Verse: As in the Tenth Verse he tells us, that the impotent Man was made whole by the [Name] of Jesus Christ, in the begin­ning; and that he was made whole by [Him], that is, by Jesus Christ, in the latter end of the Verse.

Those who professedly and avowedly make it their Business to evacuate the Purchase of [Page 15]Our Saviour's Merits and Blood, do to that purpose start, if not an impertinent, yet a very sawcie Question; which is, Whether or no God could not have saved sinful Man by some other Means, than by the Death of his Son? And by that means would alter that very Question, (which they alone have made a Question) viz. Whether Jesus Christ died for the Sins of Men? I say, they would al­ter it into another Question, neither fit to be disputed, nor possible to be determined by short-sighted Men; viz. What God can do, and what God cannot do? Whereas it is suf­ficient for us to take Things as we find them; and if we find, that Things in the present Case are so ordered by God, and that he tells us, that they are so, as that sinful Man shall not obtain Redemption but only by the Merits and Death of Jesus Christ their Saviour: I say, if God tells us, and that too by repeated Declarations, that Things in the present Case are so ordered; we ought to acquiesce in such his Declarations, and not employ our Vanity or Curiosity (for it can in no sober Sense be call'd our Reason) in enquiring Whether, much less in determining that they might or might not have been bet­ter ordered. But of this more hereafter.

At present therefore, and in the first place, we shall take the Matter of Fact to be just as the Scriptures have in most plain and express Words told us it is; That Jesus Christ died [Page 16]for our Sins; that he died to save Sinners, &c. And then, by comparing this Matter of Fact with other the Methods of the Divine Pro­ceedings in the like Cases, see if it will not afford us a very plausible Argument of the Truth laid down, That there is not Salvation in any other.

Now if we carry our Observation through any other the Transactions of the Divine Love and Mercy, that do design to entitle Men to the same Salvation, we shall find, that God does never make use of extraordinary Means, where the ordinary are sufficient. And therefore, when the Lord himself appeared to Saul in his Journey to Damascus, we find, that the Design and Effect of that Vision was to refer him to Ananias for Instructions in his Duty. And so when the Angel ap­peared to Cornelius, the Business of his Mes­sage was only to direct him to Peter, that so Peter might by the ordinary Means of Grace direct him into the Way of Salvation. And when Men have Moses and the Prophets, it will therefore concern them in Duty and In­terest to hear them, because in such Case God will not convince them by raising one from the Dead. In short, as it is not the Method of the Divine Proceedings, so neither is it of Wisdom it self, to let the Measure of the Means exceed in their Proportion to the de­signed End. And in any Case whatsoever, where less Cost or Labour is sufficient, there [Page 17]common Prudence will by no means allow, and much less approve our Drudgery or Pro­fuseness. Now to bring what we have said to our present purpose:

Since our Saviour, for the Establishment of the Gospel-Covenant, did actually take upon him Our Flesh, and in that Flesh suf­fer; it will afford us no slight Argument, that That Covenant could not have been established upon more easie Conditions; be­cause our common Reason does assure us, that all Excess of Performance in the Case would have been Superfluity: And our Re­ligion and Modesty does forbid us to fasten any such Imputation upon the Divine Coun­sels and Actions. And here we may well put Abraham's Question, Shall not the Judge of all the Earth do right? And when by the pur­pose of his Mercy he determined to rescue faln Man from Sin and Misery, shall he re­ject the Son of his Bosom, and expose him to all sorts of Misery in this World, and to Violence and Barbarity in his Departure out of it; when the Ransom might have been made at a cheaper Rate? Certainly the Love of God is not so narrow and stinted, but that he both could and would have extended it to his lost Creatures, and yet at the same time not have removed it from his only and belo­ved Son, if Justice and Wisdom had allowed him so to do. But then, because he himself tells us, that he did otherwise; and because [Page 18]we know, that what he tells us, must be true; as well as, that what he does, is just and holy; therefore the Conclusion, that fairly offers it self, is, That nothing less than the Incarnation, and Death of the Son of God could in Wisdom and Justice have brought about the designed Redemption. To which we shall in short add, That it is one of the certain Characters of the True God, that he brings his Purposes to pass by the best, wisest, and most proper Means.

And now having thus opened our Way to our main Design, by these few Reflexions on the Matter of Fact, as it is laid down most expresly in the Scriptures: We shall in what follows go on to consider the Merits of the Cause; and that we shall do, by examining, Whether or no Mankind had not brought themselves into so forlorn a Condition by their Sin, that there does not appear in Ju­stice any probable, or indeed any possible Way for their Salvation, but only by the In­carnation and Death of the Son of God.

And that there did not, will (I presume) appear, when we have considered and con­firmed the following Propositions; whereof the

First is, That Misery and Death, or, in one word, that Vengeance is, as the Just, so also the Necessary Wages of Sin.

And here, before we begin, to prevent, as much as possible, all Objections that may be [Page 19]started against what we shall deliver, we must desire the Reader to take notice, that we do at present only make it our Business to mea­sure the Equity of the Punishment of Sin by the exact and rigorous Laws of Justice: That is, we do (as we must, if we will do right) conceive Things in that State, in which they had stood, had the Son of God never been designed for the Saviour of the World. For, because our Business at present is to en­quire, what would have become of sinful Man, if the Son of God had not interposed for his Rescue; therefore we stand obliged at present to take other Measures in accounting for the Proceedings of the Divine Justice, than what our Experience acquaints us with in this World. For while we live here, we come within the Compass, and so enjoy the Benefit of that Relaxation of the Law, which was the Purchase of our Saviour's Merits; and therefore we cannot truly pass a Judgment upon the exact Proceedings of the Divine Ju­stice, from the Contemplations of those Pro­ceedings of Justice which we see in this World, and which, upon that account, come within the compass of that Relaxation. To know therefore, whether the Incarnation, Life, and Death of our Saviour were neces­sary for Man's Redemption, we must enquire, what had become of sinful Man, if the Son of God had not become his Saviour. And if upon that Enquiry it shall appear, that Ven­geance [Page 20]without any Remedy had been his Portion; then it will also appear (at least) a probable Conclusion (for we shall adventure no farther, because we are utter Strangers to the unsearchable Depths of the Divine Wis­dom) That Mankind had brought themselves into so forlorn a Condition by their Sin, that there does not appear to us any possible or just Way for their Redemption, but only by the Incarnation, Life, and Death of their Re­vealed Saviour, the Son of God.

This Caution then being laid down, and well observed, the First Proposition, viz. That Punishment or Vengeance is the Just and Neces­sary Wages of Sin, will appear more easie and rational.

And for asserting the Truth of it, we lay it down in the

1. First place, That God is in his own Nature Holy. This does necessarily fall in with our very Notion of a God; because it is a Con­tradiction to our very Conceptions of a Dei­ty, to suppose any Wickedness or Turpitude in him.

2. We lay it down, secondly, That God loves himself. This will easily be allowed, for more Reasons than one; both because the Notion is Natural and Universal, that all Li­ving Things do so; as also because God can­not but be supposed to be the most Noble and Adequate, as well as Natural Object (if I may so speak) of his own Love. Nay, some [Page 21]Men have streined this Point so far, as to tell us, that the great and infinite Complacency that God takes in himself, and in his own Per­fections, would never have allowed him to condescend to his Work of Creation, and by that Means to have allowed any of his Love and Good-will to low, mean, and inferiour Creatures (as the best of Creatures are, if compared to him) if the Son, who is the Word of God, had not interposed upon that Occasion; and so they make him a Mediator of Creation, as well as of Redemption. But laying that aside at present, as being nothing to our purpose; it may suffice for our Design, that whatever Love God bears to his Crea­tures, it cannot be supposed, but that he not only loves, but that he does also chiefly, and in the first place, love himself.

These Two Things then being laid down, That God loves himself; and, That he is in his Nature Holy; the Inference that we shall make, before we proceed any farther, must be, That he cannot otherwise chuse but hate and abhor whatsoever is contrary to such his Nature: And, because all Sin and Wickedness is so; that therefore he cannot chuse but hate and abhor all Sin and Wickedness. And hence it is, that the Scripture acquaints us, that the carnal mind is enmity with God; that is, all Sin and Wickedness is so. For we may as rationally conceive, that a Man, who en­tertains and makes much of Sin, does love [Page 22]God; as we may, that God, who in his Na­ture is Holy, can love Sin, which is directly contrary to such his Holiness. This Inference then, from the Two former Propositions, be­ing thus in short laid down, and made good; we go on, and add in the

3. Third place, That the Life and Happi­ness of all God's Creatures is only the Effect of the Divine Good-will and Pleasure. For un­doubtedly, it was he that made us, and not we our-selves. And taking it for granted at pre­sent, that he did so; I would in the next place enquire, Whether we did deserve such our Beings, or not? If it be answered, That we did not; then we have what we desire, and that is, that the great and first Blessing, that ever God bestowed upon us, was by him freely bestowed, without any possible Merit in us; and therefore, that it was the free Ef­fect of his Good-will and Pleasure. But if any Man shall be so silly, as to think, that he could deserve his Being of God; then to make good such his Conceit, it will be ex­pected (and that too, for ever; for the Ex­pectation will never be answered) that he should make it out, that Nothing may have Something of Merit in it; and, that what as yet is not, may have wherewithal to lay an Obligation upon Omnipotence.

And as our Being was the free Effect of the Divine Good-will and Pleasure; so also are all those Blessings which do attend it. For [Page 23]with our Beings he did also bestow upon us all those Faculties, which should entertain any other Thing whatsoever. And as he made our Faculties, so did he all Things else, which can possibly gratifie those Faculties. And that there is any Harmony or Agree­ment between those Faculties, and their Ob­jects, is undoubtedly owing to him, who was the original Contriver and Author of both. And therefore in the

4. Fourth place, I would offer it to Con­sideration, That it is only the Exercise of God's Good-will towards us, that does indeed and truth make way for the Exercise of his Justice upon us; Because we could never have un­dergone the Severity of the last, if we had never been made Partakers of the Bounty of the first: And therefore, when God does punish us for our Sins by his Justice, that Pu­nishment does nothing else, but only strip us of something, which we had before received from his Mercy. And this, upon a serious Consideration, will appear to be true, whe­ther the Punishment inflicted do deprive us of our Ease, Peace, Safety, or even of Life it­self. For, what have we, that we did not re­ceive; since in him we live, and move, and have our Being?

5. Fifthly, I would offer it to Consideration, Whether when God takes any Thing from us, which, upon the account of his Good-will and Pleasure, he had bestowed upon us; I say, [Page 24]Whether in such a Case the true and just Rea­son, why he does so, is not, because we by our Sins have turned such his Good-will towards us, into his Displeasure against us? For, if what he bestowed was the Effect of his Good­will; and if (as God made us holy and upright at first) he cannot but continue the same Good-will towards us, so long as we conti­nue as he made us: Then we may be assu­red, that so long as he continues such his Good-will towards us, so long he will con­tinue the Effects of such his Good-will too. And if we were not assured of this, then it might be all one as to us, whether God were well-pleased with us, and loved us, or not. For, if the Loss of such good Things, which are the Essects of God's Good-will to us, may (while we continue holy and innocent) be once made consistent with such his Good-will; then farewel to all Distinction as to the Justice of Rewards and Punishments: For, in such a Case it may be the same thing, whe­ther we please God, or displease him; because we may lose the Effects of his Favour, that is (according to the Tenor of the last Head) we may be punished as well for our Inno­cence, as for our Wickedness; or, at the very best, we may be punished for Nothing. No! no! As God's Displeasure is contrary to his Good-will and Favour; so the Essects and Consequences of that Displeasure must be con­trary to the Effects and Consequences of such [Page 25]his Good-will and Favour too. This is the Voice of Nature, and this the Voice of Ju­stice; and therefore also this is the Voice of Truth. And then, as we shewed before, that all the good Things, that we do or can enjoy, did proceed purely and meerly from God's Good-will; so I do now add, that our Sins do naturally turn that Good-will into Displeasure; and then the Good-will ceasing, all those Emanations, that flowed from it, must in course cease also. And then, because where they cease, there the Sinner's Punish­ment does begin; therefore we may now from the Whole begin to perceive, that the Punishment of Sin is not so arbitrarious a thing, as it is usually taken to be; but that it does, when traced to the beginning, depend upon the same Necessity, by which God loves himself. For, if we sum up all our Discourse upon this Head from the beginning, we shall understand, That God loves himself; That he is in his own Nature Holy; That there­fore he hates whatsoever is contrary to such his Nature; That all Sin therefore is so, be­cause it is contrary to his Holiness; That the Effects of his Hatred must be contrary to those of his Love; or, at the very best, That the Emanations of his Love must then be stopped, when that Love is turned into Ha­tred and Displeasure; That when his Crea­tures lose those Emanations, then their Mi­sery begins; That all those Creatures must [Page 26]needs lose them, that lose that Love, from whence alone they do proceed; and, That they lose that Love by their Sins; because (as we said before) Sin, and Sin alone, does turn it into Hatred and Displeasure. So that (if we may be allowd so to speak in Morality) there is an essential Relation between Sin and Punishment; and the Necessity of Punishment (when narrowly scann'd) is founded upon the eternal and immutable Laws of Truth, Holiness, and Justice.

But before we leave this Head, I would (if that be possible) make all a little plainer by an Instance: And that Instance shall be in that Punishment, which the first Sin brought upon the whole Race of Mankind. And I do the rather take my Instance there, be­cause the Law was given and broken, and so the Penalty both threatned and incurred, when there was no Saviour to remit the ri­gorous but just Execution of such Penalty.

Now we are assured by the Reason of the Thing it-self; (as we have already discoursed) But if that will not do, we are assured by God's Word, by his Promise, by his Oath, that he neither wills, nor delights in the death of a Sinner. And when he swears so to us, it would be both proper and modest in us to believe, that there is something in Sin, which does oblige God in Justice (and that is the same thing with God, as to be obliged by Necessity) to punish it with Death. And to [Page 27]this purpose we may take notice, that it is derogatory to God's Honour, for us to re­solve any Punishment, which we suffer, into God's Will only, and not into his Justice. Be­cause (as we shall presently perceive) when God wills the Death of a Sinner, he there­fore only wills it, because Justice does re­quire it, and that (in the Nature of the Thing) antecedently to such his Will. For, if the Death of a Man should be therefore just, only because God wills it, tho' the Man do not deserve it; then it may be all one as to the Event, and that justly too, whether a Man were perfectly innocent, or the most profligate Miscreant upon the Face of the Earth. For, according to that Doctrine, which we now oppose, God might in such a Case justly will the Death of the Innocent, and save the Criminal alive. For, if the ul­timate Resolution of the Justice of our Death be only into the Will of God, then nothing can hinder, but that God may justly slay a perfect Innocent. And so when God told Adam, that in the day of his Transgression he should surely die; the Meaning of his Threat must have been, that he might have died, whether he had transgressed or not. But be­cause we cannot without Blasphemy tax God's Law of such notorious Prevarication; therefore we must determine, that the ulti­mate Resolution of Adam's Punishment in such Case, must be into the Desert of such [Page 28]Punishment by the Breach of the Law, and that God's willing his Death was a just Con­sequent of such his Desert. In short; God wills such things only, which he can will justly; and he, who will rationally, and truly account for the Proceedings of God, in that and such like Cases, must have a care to do it so, as to maintain the Harmony of all his Attributes. He must not magnifie his Power, no nor his Mercy so, as to impeach his Truth, Wisdom, and Justice: For he, who confounds the Events of Innocence and Guilt, will be found (when his Opinion comes nar­rowly to be scanned) to make God either a Favourer of Sin, or an Enemy of Righteous­ness. The Sum of all is, That when God tells us, that Death is the Wages of Sin, he does not therefore pass it into a Law, because it pleases him so to do; but because it is just in it-self, that he should do so: And that if it had not been just in it-self, he had not upon that single Account willed it at all. So that upon the whole, it does remain a fixed and setled Truth, That Death is the Wages of Sin by the eternal and immutable Laws of Iustice and that it cannot be otherwise, so long as God loves himself, and so hates whatsoever is contrary to himself and to his Nature, as all Sin most undoubtedly is. And therefore when any Man sins against God, as by so do­ing, he does of necessity forfeit God's Favour; so also by consequence, he does by necessity [Page 29]forfeit his own Life, which has nothing else to depend upon, but that Favour alone.

And as a Temporal Death upon Sin is ne­cessary, because both threatned and incurred before the Promise of a Saviour; so after the Saviour has laid down his Mediatorial Office, an Eternal Death will be found to be so too. I word it so, lest my Caution before this Head should by this time be forgot. Now, if it be not an Eternal Law of Justice, that Punishment is the necessary Reward of Sin; then it may be all one, as to the Event, (and that justly and finally too) whether a Man de­part this Life the best or the worst Man in the whole World. For, if there be not some Law of Justice, that shall at the last Day distinguish the Event of their contrary Courses, then nothing can: And if that Justice be not ne­cessary (let the Means, by which it is not so, be what they will) the Difference between their Condition can be but casual, (or at the very best, but arbitrary) and so we must leave them both to a grand Perhaps; which will be in effect to destroy all Religion and Justice.

There is one thing against this Discourse, of weight and moment; which tho' I shall professedly answer in another Place, yet shall not go unmentioned here: And that is, That if the Punishment of Sin be absolutely just and necessary, then how came it to pass, that God did in his Counsel design, and in his Wis­dom [Page 30]appoint a Saviour, in order to the Pa [...] ­don of Sin? For, in Order of Nature the De­sign of Pardon must be antecedent to th [...] Design of sending a Saviour: And therefore if the Punishment of Sin be, as it is la [...] down, both just and necessary, God's Design of Pardon going counter to this Law, should seem to be unjust. For how could he just [...] design to pardon That, which in Justice an [...] Necessity he stood obliged to punish?

Now to this several Things may be answered. As,

1. First, That God did never design [...] pardon Sin, but only in and through a Sav [...] ­our. And how far such his Design, unde [...] such a Restriction and Limitation, is ju [...] is very much the Business of that part of th [...] Discourse, which in its Place is to follow, an [...] therefore must not be forestalled here.

2. That notwithstanding a Saviour, ye [...] God did never pardon any sinful Creature All the Sinners, that we know, are the fal [...] Angels and Men. What the Scriptures ac­quaint us with concerning the first, we know well enough: And among such Things, [...] know also, that it gives us an Account [...] the Punishment of their Sin. And as fo [...] Men; those of them that shall be saved a [...] last, in consideration of their Saviour's Me­rits, do yet in this World suffer Losses an [...] Crosses, and Pains, and Diseases, and Death. All which are undoubted Punishments of Sin [...] [Page 31]And for the rest, who shall by a final Impeni­tence reject the Benefit of the Saviour's Pur­chase (besides the Calamities which they suf­fer in common with the Good in this World) the Scriptures do acquaint us sufficiently with their Doom in the next. So that if it may be an Argument, that Punishment is the ne­cessary Reward of Sin, because all Sinners have, do, and shall suffer Punishment; then God's designing of a Saviour for Mankind, in order to their Pardon, does not take off the Force of such Argument; because, notwith­standing such his Design, and such Saviour, no Sinner whatsoever did, or ever will go un­punished.

3. But then, thirdly, It is a Mistake, that the Salvation of Man from Punishment was the immediate and direct Design in God's Counsel of sending a Saviour. For, as we shall see hereafter, [See Chap. 12.] the Busi­ness of our Saviour's Coming was to bring back Mankind to his Father's Kingdom, who had been drawn into a Revolt from his Do­minion and Jurisdiction, by the Sollicitations of the Devil, and had thereby put a Slight upon the Authority of the King of all the World, and so, in some sense, lesned the Ex­tent of his Kingdom. Now those whom our Saviour shall so bring back to their Allegi­ance, by restoring them to their lost Holi­ness, shall indeed be saved: But then their Salvation is a Consequence of their Return [Page 32]to Holiness; and so was not properly the Design of God's sending a Saviour, but the Consequence of the Success of such Design.

CHAP. II.

THe next and Second Proposition offered to be made good, in order to our main Design, is this; That the Gospel holds out no such thing to us, as an absolute Forgiveness of Sin. Which Proposition I therefore lay down here, not only because it is introdu­ctive to some Things, which are to follow; but also to obviate the Conceit of those Men, who think they do sufficiently wipe away the Merits of our Saviour in reference to the Par­don of our Sins, by telling us, that God may without any more ado pardon such our Sins by his Free Grace.

1. But, in the first place, we cannot but take notice, that what God may do, and what he has declared he will do, are Two very dif­ferent and distinct Things. Though therefore it be supposed, that God may grant us an ab­solute Pardon; yet if in those very Revelati­ons, in which he has discovered to us his In­tention of pardoning us, he does expresly tell [Page 33]us, that he will not do so; it will be proper and modest in us, to acquiesce in what he so tells us, rather than to raise in our Imagina­tions conceited Possibilities, which do direct­ly contradict such his Declarations.

2. But, secondly, He who brought us the Gospel-Dispensation, in order to the Pardon of our Sins, does in that Dispensation require our Repentance in order to such our Pardon. Now if Repentance be a Condition of the Pardon, then for that Reason alone the Par­don cannot be Absolute; because an Absolute Pardon is an Inconditional Pardon, and it is impossible, that the same Pardon should be a Conditional, and an Inconditional Pardon too.

3. An Absolute Pardon of Sin fights di­rectly against all that we have said under our last Head, concerning the Necessary Justice of Punishment: And therefore, till all that be wiped away, we may upon those Grounds deny, that there is any such sort of Pardon. For, it looks a little too harsh, and that too to Natural Reason, to tell us, that God will be reconciled to the Enemy of his Nature, and that upon the account of mere Mercy and Compassion; and that, in order to his being so, he will throw away all Considera­tions of his Justice, which in this Case we may adventure to call his Natural Displea­sure.

4. If we should suppose or allow such a thing as an Absolute Forgiveness; then we must also allow, that it may be the same thing, whether a man has been the best, or the worst Man in the whole World. For an Absolute Forgive­ness, in the Reason and Nature of it, may as well be extended to the one, as to the other. For, let what Reason soever be assigned, why it may not; and that very Reason (be it what it will) will prove the Forgiveness not to be ab­solute. For, that Forgiveness cannot be so, that is limited or restrained by any Reason what­soever.

5. An Absolute Pardon does throw a Slur upon God's Wisdom, no less than it does so upon his Justice. For, the Law being his, against which we have transgressed, and he having in that very Law threatned Venge­ance upon such as shall transgress it; if after the Transgression he should grant an absolute Pardon to such Transgression, he would by such a Pardon as much void and annul the Law, as he had by his Threatning established and confirmed it: And so it might come to the same pass, as to the final Event, whether he had made any Law or no. For, what is the Difference, not to make a Law, and not to execute it? And therefore St. Paul, point­blank to our purpose tells us, in the Third to the Romans, the Fifth and Sixth Verses, That if God should not execute Vengeance, he would not only be unrighteous, but that also [Page 35]he could not judge the World. And we may add, that he would not only be unrighteous, but (considering the Contrariety that would be between his Practice and his Law) he would be unwise also. And therefore,

6. Lastly, The last Judgment, and that De­scription that we meet with of it in Gods Word, do fully assure us, that he has no such Designs in his Counsels, as to throw away his Laws to gratifie his Enemies with Impunity.

From all which Reasons, and (as we do be­lieve) from each of them in particular, it seems satisfactorily evident, that a Gospel-Par­don of Sin is no absolute Pardon: And that therefore, when God does in the Gospel pro­mise Pardon of Sin, there must be some previ­ous Conditions, that must be observed in order to such a Pardon. And what Share our Saviour has in the Performance and Accomplishment of such Conditions, we shall learn hereafter.

In the mean time, before we dismiss this Chapter, we must not dissemble, that it may be surmised, and therefore also, that it may be objected, That tho' there should be no al­solute Gospel-Pardon, that yet there may be an arbitrary Gospel-Pardon; and that there are some Expressions in the New Testament, that lean that way, and may at least incline us to believe, that there is such a Thing. But be­cause we are sure, that no Pardon can come from God, but what is just; and because we know that Arbitrary Justice is only one Branch [Page 36]of Arbitrary Power, and therefore is in rea­lity no Justice at all (for it is only a resolute Determination of the Will, without any Rea­son for such Determination) therefore we are sure, that it cannot belong to God. For all his Actions are limited and bounded by his Holiness, that is, by the Eternal Rules of Reason and Justice: And he only therefore wills what he pleases, because he neither does not can please to will any thing, but what is Just.

CHAP. III.

HAving in the First Chapter made it good, that Misery and Death, that is, in one Word, that Vengeance is, as the just, so also the necessary Wages of Sin: And, in the Second, That the Gospel it self holds out no such thing to us as either an Absolute or Arbitrary Forgiveness of Sin: Our next Proposition must be, That because the Gospel [Page 37]in this very Case is the Revelation of God's Will, and because the Will and Counsel of God in that Gospel revealed is the Pardon and Salvation of Man; that therefore Man's Sin is to be pardoned, tho' not by an absolute or arbitrary Forgiveness.

And then, because it must for that Reason be pardoned some way or other; it will be our next Business to enquire, what that Way is. For, by such Enquiry it may perhaps ap­pear to be a Gospel-Truth, and that too agreeable to Reason, That there is not Sal­vation in any other, but in Jesus Christ alone; and, that there is no other Name under Heaven given among Men, whereby we must be saved.

And here, because the Gospel promises no absolute Pardon of Sin; as we do from thence in the first place conclude, that the Pardon must be conditional; so we must in the next place enquire, what that Condition, or what those Conditions are, upon which this Par­don is to be obtained.

Now, if in order to our more rational and satisfactory Resolution of this Enquiry, we do first look into the Gospel, there to inform our selves, what a Gospel-Salvation means; we may from thence learn, that it does con­tain in it Two Things: Whereof the first is, Pardon of Sin; and the second is, the Gift of Eternal Happiness. And in order to the obtaining of these Two Things (as we shall [Page 38]see more fully in the farther Prosecution of this Matter) Two other Things are in the Gospel required: 1. An Expiation of Sin; and, 2. A Restitution to our lost Holiness. For, as we may conclude from our second Propo­sition, That (tho' the Gospel does allow a Pardon, yet because it does not allow an ab­solute Pardon of Sin, that) therefore something will be required in order to such a Pardon: So we may conclude from our first Proposi­tion, That (because Punishment for Sin is ne­cessary) therefore some Punishment (be that what it will at present) must be suffered for our Sin.

And then, if in the Progress of our Dis­course it shall appear, that in Consideration of any such Punishment so suffered, the Go­spel-Pardon of our Sins does afterwards en­sue; then such Pardon may be so far ascribed to such Punishment, as that our Guilt, and the Vengeance due to such our Guilt, may be truly esteemed to be expiated by it.

Now, in order to find out what Punishment it is, that can make such an Expiation, we shall first enquire, what Punishment cannot do it. And because Repentance does not so wholly consist in Action, but that it must have something of Suffering mixed with it; there­fore in pursuit of our Design, let our first Negative Proposition be this:

1. That our Repentance for our Sins can never make out an Expiation of our Sins. [Page 39]For, tho' Repentance for our Sins be a Gospel-Condition required of us, without which we shall never be made Partakers of the Benefit of the Gospel-Expiation; yet, notwithstand­ing that, we neither do, nor can by our Re­pentance make out that Expiation for Sin, which is by the Gospel necessary for our Sal­vation. For, besides that there is no Man's Repentance so exact and compleat, as to free him from all Sin, while he lives; and so after all he must remain a Sinner as long as he lives: I say, besides that, His very manner of going out of the World, and that is by Death, is a demonstrative Proof, that his Repen­tance has not made an Expiation for his Sins; because we may most certainly conclude, that his Sins are not then expiated, and so neither pardoned, when God himself lays on the Pe­nalty threatned in his Law with his own Hand. For when God gave his Law to Man­kind in their universal Father and Represen­tative Adam, we know, that he ratified such Law by the Penalty of Death; and we know also, that every Man (let him be as pemtent as can be supposed) does still suffer that Pe­nalty. And we may from thence also know, that for that Reason no Man's Repentance can so far expiate his Sin, as to free him from the Punishment threatned to it by the Law. And then from the whole we may conclude, That if any Man be saved because he is a true Penitent, he must be saved by some [Page 40] other Expiation, than by such his Repentance; forasmuch as his Repentance can at the most but qualifie him to be made a Partaker of such Expiation.

2. As Man's Repentance for his Sin (which we may call his voluntary Punishment for Sin) cannot; so neither can his professed Punish­ment (which we may call his legal Punish­ment for Sin) expiate his Sin, and so obtain for him a Gospel-forgiveness; and that for this Reason, because there is such a Thing in the Gospel, as an eternal Punishment, allotted to Sin. And as under the last Head we found, that Reason did fall in with the Gospel, and that they both spake the same thing; so also we shall find it here. For, it is certain, that the Punishment of sinful Man can therefore never expiate his Sin, because it can never purchase a just Release from Punishment; and it is certain, that it cannot do that, if it may be justly continued to Eternity. And that it may be so, we may learn from hence, be­cause the Law of Grace being God's Law, as well as the Law of Works, must for that Rea­son be just: And we are assured by this Law, as much as Words can assure us, that the Pu­nishment which it denounces against those, who do not ful [...]l the Conditions of it, is Eternal. And that it shall so prove, besides the express Words of the Law, we have this farther Reason; which is, that the suffering the Punishment threatned by the Law to [Page 41]those, who neglect to perform the Conditions of the Law, can neither in Sense or Reason pass for the Performance of such Conditions so neglected; and that the Neglect of this Law shall (and that in Reason and Justice) be repaid with an additional Vengeance for the refusal of the Mercy offered in it, (which designs to free us from the Punishment of all our other Sins) as well as with that Punish­ment, which is due to such Sins. For, it is Reason and Justice, that a more heinous Sin should be punished with a more grievous Judgment; and it is Truth and Reason, that a Sinner does then become a more heinous Criminal, when to his Desert of Punishment, he adds a Neglect or Contempt of the easie Conditions of Pardon. And since by the Te­nor of the Covenant of Grace, such Sinner is to suffer his Punishment after his Resurre­ction from the Dead, that is, not only after the Time limited for the Possibility of his Pardon is expired, but also after Death it self shall be destroyed; as we may from thence conclude the certainty, so may we also the eternal Duration of his Punishment. For, as a Punishment due after the Day of Grace is past, will not be remitted; so such Punish­ment, when Death is no more, cannot be de­termined. By which we may understand, that as Death is, without a Saviour, the just and necessary Wages of Sin, (as we made it good in our first Chapter) so also, that when [Page 42]such Death is sure (by a Resurrection pur­chased by a Saviour) to be taken away, in order to an happy and everlasting Life, (and that too upon the easie, or, at worst, the very feasible Conditions of the Gospel;) yet if Men will neglect such Salvation, so placed within their reach, and so leave the eternal Life (purchased for them in order to their Happi­ness) exposed to the Vengeance, which is the just and necessary Reward of all their other Sins, and of such their Neglect; they must impute it to their own Folly, if such Vengeance, in stead of Happiness, be the con­tinued Companion of their eternal Life. For, in the Case so put, the Restoration from Death to Life comes from the Mercy of God; the making that Life eternal, comes from the Mercy of God; the Designing to make that eternal Life happy, comes from the Mercy of God; The granting Means to Men (and those no very hard ones neither) of obtaining that Happiness, comes from the Mercy of God. But foolish Man defeats the Counsel of God, by an obstinate and unrelenting Perse­verance in Sin; and does in this Case, as he does in most others, turn the Blessing of God into a Curse upon himself; that is, he makes that Life, which was designed for his eternal Happiness, an Occasion of the eternity of his Misery.

One thing more may be added to what has been said upon this Head, and then we shall [Page 43]apply it to our present Design; and that is, That at that time, when the Punishment we now speak of shall come to be inflicted, our Saviour (as the Scriptures tell us) will have laid down his Mediatorial Office, and so Men must stand the Award of their own Deserts; and then, if such their Deserts be Evil, we may be instructed from what was said in the First Chapter, that the Justice, which will overtake them, will be Justice without Mer­cy; and that pure and unmix'd Vengeance will be their Portion, even such Vengeance which will only revenge upon them the Breach of the Covenants of their God, but will never so much as pretend to make up such Breach.

To our present purpose then: If the Pu­nishment of Men for their own Sins shall, without the Interposition of a Saviour, be eternal; and if this appear to be so by the Testimony of that very Gospel, (in which, however, there is a Possibility of Salvation held forth) and if Reason do vouch for the Truth of what the Gospel in this Case teach­es; and lastly, if an Eternity of Punishment be absolutely inconsistent with an Expiation of Sin by such Punishment (for the last sup­poses the Sin to be cancelled, and the first supposes it to be continued): Then we may conclude, that the Punishment of Man for his Sin can no more exp [...]ate his Sin under this Head, than his Repentance (as we there made [Page 44]it good) could do so under the last. An [...] then, because there is no other possible Way for Mankind to expiate their Sin, but by their Repentance, or by their Punishment, w [...] do conclude, that there is no possible Way for them to make any Expiation of it at all.

3. As Man cannot expiate his Sin by any Punishment of his own; neither by his Re­pentance, nor by his Death, whether Tempor [...] or Eternal: So neither can he expiate his Si [...] by the Death of any other Creature. This [...] therefore add, because we may be apt to sur­mise, that what has been done already, may be done again. And we can hardly be igno­rant, that the Lives of other Creatures have been offered to God, and that too by his own Appointment, for the Expiation of the Sin [...] of Men. And (which is yet something more) they have not only been offered by Man, but they have been also accepted by God, as a [...] effectual Expiation. And that they have bee [...] so, the History of the Jewish Religion, re­corded in the Bible it self, may easily con­vince us.

But, notwithstanding all this; yet he who shall look nearer into the Matter, and exa­mine it more nicely, will be satisfied, 1. That all those Sacrifices (tho' instituted by God him­self) were only Types and Shadows of that great Propitiatory Sacrifice, that was to ex­piate the Sins of the whole World. And therefore, tho' they may serve to inform us, [Page 45]that such a Sacrifice ought to be in order to the Expiation of Sins, and (because they did prefigure such a Sacrifice) they might over and above foretell, that such a Sacrifice should be; yet because they themselves were but Types and Shadows, it is notorious, for that very Reason, that they were not the Reality and Substance; and that therefore the Expia­tion did not belong to them. Take what we say in the Apostle's Words, and so it may be more satisfactory, in the Tenth to the He­brews, and the beginning: For the Law having a Shadow of good Things to come, and not the very Image of the Things, can never with these Sacrifices, which they offered Year by Tear con­tinually, make the Comers thereunto perfect: And after some other things to the same pur­pose, he concludes in the Fourth Verse, that it is impossible that the Blood of Bulls and Goats should take away Sins. And therefore, tho' it be freely granted, that a Remission of Sin did usually follow upon the offering of those Legal and Ritual Sacrifices; yet from what has been said, it must be granted also, that such Remission did not proceed from the Consideration of any real Expiation, that was made by those Sacrifices; but only from that Expiation, of which they were the Types, viz. from the Expiation made by the Lamb of God, which was slain from the Foun­dation of the World; that is, the Merit of whose Death does extend it self from the [Page 46]Fall of Adam to the Consummation of a Things.

2. But, secondly, The Lives of the Crea­tures offered to God, as an expiatory Sacr [...] ­fice for Sin, can never make the Expiati [...] designed, because all those Lives are his as tecedent to such Offering. To attempt ther [...] fore to expiate our Sins by them, is no bette [...] than to offer to God what is his own already or (for our Sins are in the Gospel calle [...] Debts) it is to pay our Debts to God wi [...] his own Money; which, rightly considere [...] is so far from bringing us out of debt, that really increases our Debt, by the folly, if no also by the mockery of the Attempt. This [...] God's own Argument to his People the Jew [...] in the Fiftieth Psalm: I will take no Bullock o [...] of thine House, nor He-goat out of thy Folds for every Beast of the Forest is mine, and [...] are the Cattel upon a thousand Hills; wit [...] more to the same purpose, relating to th [...] Insufficiency of their Legal Sacrifices for th [...] Expiation of Sins.

3. The Lives of the Creatures offered t [...] God for the Expiation of the Sins of Men can never make such Expiation; because the are of far less Value, and that too not only in the Nature of the Thing, but also in th [...] Estimation of those that offer them, than th [...] Lives of those for whom they are offered Now it can never answer to the Rules of Ju­stice, to pay our Creditor only an hundre [...] [Page 47] Pence, when we owe him an hundred Pounds. And he who shall think, that he can so dis­charge his Debt, may by the same Measures come in time to reckon, that he may dis­charge it for nothing.

I have spoken something the larger to these Things (tho' perhaps it may seem need­less) partly because they have been a Part of God's own Instituted Worship; partly because they are a Part of the Religious Worship of many Nations at this Day; but chiefly, be­cause they have a Relation to that great Sa­crifice, which is the main Design of all our Discourse. And this our Design will still be farthered, if we consider in the

4. Fourth place, That as neither Man for himself, nor the Creatures, that are inferior to him, can make any Expiation for his Sins; so neither can the Creatures above him. Now the most exalted Creatures that Revelation has acquainted us with (and we know no­thing in this Case, but what we have from Revelation) are the Angels and Archangels: And we may be therefore satisfied, that those glorious Beings can never make an Expiation for the Sin of Man; because it appears by the Revelations of God, that they can never make an Expiation for their own Sins. And therefore, as we are told in such Revelations, that some of them have sinned; so we are in the same told, that those that have so done, are reserved in everlasting Chains, to the Judg­ment [Page 48]of the great Day. Now, our Natural Reason tells us, that no Creature can be so in love with Misery (and surely everlasting Chains, and a fearful expectation of Judgment, do imply Misery; for, the Devils believe and tremble:) But, I say, our Natural Reason tells us, that no Creature can be so in love with Misery, as not to free it self from it, were it in its power so to do. And therefore the same Natural Reason does tell us, that the true Reason why the faln Angels do not do so, is because they cannot do so. And if they cannot expiate their own Sins, we may be pretty well satisfied, that they cannot ex­piate Sin at all: And we may be the rather so satisfied, because we are as sure, that they would in the Case employ their best Endea­vours for themselves, as we are sure, that they love themselves best.

Besides, we know, that in the Case of Mankind, Death is threatned, as the Penalty for the Breach of the Law: And we may be pretty well satisfied, that without Death no Expiation can be made: For, without Blood there is no Remission. But, on the other side, we have some Reason to believe, that Angels are not liable to Death, at least, not to such a Death, to which Man is obnoxious; and therefore, for this Reason, as well as the for­mer, we may pretty rationally conclude, That the Angels are in no Capacity to expiate the Sins of Mankind, and that therefore they can­not do it.

One thing more I would add to this Head, before I leave it; and that is this: That tho' the Angels are very glorious and exalted Creatures, and, by the Account we have of them in the Scriptures, are placed in a much higher Scale in the Creation than Man, and so are far above him; yet still, because they are Creatures, they are therefore at as great a distance from God, as Man himself is: For, their Distance from him is infinite; and there are, we know, no Degrees in Infinity. Now, because the Expiation of Sin is to be made to God, and to God alone; and because there is an infinite Distance between God and An­gels, as well as there is between God and Man: I say, for these Reasons, we can no more think the Interposition of an Angel effe­ctual for making an Atonement and Expiation for Sin, than we can think the Interposition of a Man to be so. And if we should suppose a sort of Creatures a thousand, nay, ten thou­sand or more times as much above Angels, as Angels are above Men; yet because, after such a Supposition, even this sort of Crea­tures are as much below God, as Man is; and because the Expiation of Sin, if attempted by such Creatures, is to be made to God; therefore we cannot think, that the Dignity of their Station can contribute any thing at all towards the making their attempted Expi­ation effectual. And we know, and that too by unquestionable Proof, that the Dignity of [Page 50]the faln Angels (and among them, one of them Son of the Morning, whatever that sig­nifies; but we may be satisfied, that it signi­fies something excellent) but, I say, we know, that the Dignity of the faln Angels did not so far avail them, but that God provided and accepted an Expiation for faln Man; where­as he left them in the Hands of Justice, to attend the Events of their own Deserts. So that, for ought we can discover, either by Re­velation or Reason, the Dignity of no Crea­ture whatsoever does qualifie him to make an Expiation for those Sins which he shall com­mit against the Creator. For, in this Case, the Distance between the Party offended, and the Party offending, being infinite, there can­not possibly be any Mediation or Expiation, that can extend it self to both the Extremes. And therefore, we shall at last, from what has been said upon this Head, conclude, That no Creature, tho' never so much above Man, can ever make an Expiation to God for the Sins of Man.

5. Fifthly, and lastly: As no sinful Crea­ture can ever by its Punishment expiate its own Sins, or the Sins of any other Creature; so no innocent Creature can do the last, that is, no innocent Creature can ever expiate the Sins of any sinful Creature. For, in such a Case, it must, in order to its undergoing the Punishment justly, first take upon it the Sin willingly; and so, by putting it self into the [Page 51]Place of the Sinner, must first be supposed to be such a Sinner it self, before it can under­go the Punishment due to its Sin. But then, when any Creature is supposed to lie under the Burden of such Sin, it is at the same time supposed to be in the same Condition with the Original Sinner himself: For, when the Punishment comes to be transferr'd from the last to the first, it is therefore so transferr'd, because the Law allows the Act of the Surety, by which he has owned and accepted the Sin to be his own: And then the Law in such a Case makes no difference between the Surety and the Principal. And if the Law makes no difference, then, as to the Business of Punish­ment, we may be therefore sure, that there is none, because both are Creatures, and both are Sinners. If therefore (as we shewed be­fore) the Principal could not by his Punish­ment (had he undergone it himself) have expiated his Guilt; then, for the self-same Reasons, the Surety will also be unable to expiate the self-same Guilt. So that the Con­clusion of this Head will be, that as no sinful Creature is able to unload its self of its Sin by its Punishment; so no Creature (be it ne­ver so innocent) will be able to do it, by be­ing punished for its Fellow-Creature. And therefore, as we do not know, that any of the Blessed Angels, who retained their Inno­cence, did ever interpose for the Redemption of those that fell, so we do most assuredly [Page 52]know, that tho' they did interpose, the Event did not answer; because we know, that the Condition of those that fell, does continue desperate: Nay, there do not want probable Reasons to persuade, that the faln Angels themselves do not interpose for their own Re­demption in any kind, no not so much as by Prayer: Which, if it be true; as it is a good Argument of their Despair, so it is a proba­ble Argument, that they have no Mediator, in whose Name they may put up such their Prayers, and for whose sake they may with any probability hope, that they will be ac­cepted. And yet all this while we have no Reason to doubt, but that That noble Chari­ty, which must needs accompany a perfect and unspotted Innocence (such as that of the Holy Angels is) would be inclined to engage it self one way or other for the Redemption of their faln Brethren, did not their Prudence check and controul such a possible Inclinati­on. And then, if such their Prudence do not consist in One of these Two Things, that is, that they either think or know, that such their Interposition would be either sawcie or vain; we can hardly upon any other ground excuse their Neglect of such their Interpo­sition.

In One Word; The Scriptures have ac­quainted us, that some of the Angels have sinned, and that their Condition thereupon is become desperate: But the Scriptures have [Page 53]not acquainted us, that they have any Medi­ator to intercede with God in their behalf, or to make Expiation for their Sin. And, as we may be satisfied, that were an Expiation made, their Sin must in Justice be remitted; so may we, that if any of the good Angels had taken upon himself to make such Expia­tion, he must, in order to his so doing, have taken upon himself the Sin; and so he must have brought himself into the very same Condition with those that fell; and that therefore he would have been just as unable as they, to free himself from such Condition. No! no! We do, or may know well enough, that Sin has Weight enough in it to crush both Men and Angels. Experience has ac­quainted us with the first; and Revelation has assured us of both. And then the Conclusion is easie; That he who in such a Case could relieve either, must for that Reason be more powerful than both. And when we come to make it out, that he who did so, was so, we shall then begin more plainly to perceive, that there is not Salvation in any other; tho' most of what we have hitherto offered, has directly tended to the same Design.

But before we proceed any farther, we shall make some few Remarks upon what has been already laid down, that may have an Induence upon our Practice.

1. And first, From what has been offered, we may take notice of the great Malignity [Page 54]of Sin. For People would hardly sin so freely, if they thought Sin so deadly. And yet a little Reflection will tell us, that Sin has slain all Mankind from the time of Adam to the time of the Expiration of the last Man that died. We may think the Plague, the Sword, the Famine, great Destroyers: They are in­deed the Beesoms of Destruction, and, where they come, make great Devastations among Mankind; but when we have taken a View of the Desolations caused by them, and by all other Miseries and Mischiefs besides, we must know, that as Sin has been the Parent of them all, so has it been also of all those Calamities and Destructions, that all of them have produced: And because it has so, there­fore we take notice in the

2. Second place, That God's Justice is no such trifling Thing, as is but too generally thought. For, there is no Sinner, who ever escaped being a Sufferer. For, if all the Mi­series which we suffer in this World (and those are neither few, nor light) do come from our Sins, as most certainly they do; then we may be easily satisfied, that even those Sinners, whom yet God does treat with the greatest Kindness of all others, do yet never go with­out the Marks of his Displeasure. And if he does correct his Children with Rods (and we may be sure, that he never does that, but he does it with Justice too) then, for the same Reason, we may believe, that he will chastise [Page 55]his Enemies with Scorpions. And upon this Account we should take care to hear the Rod, and who has appointed it; and should make such good use of the Miseries which we suf­fer in this World, as to let them put us in mind to flee from the Wrath to come. For, if we will not hearken to God's Voice, when he chides us, we shall at last, when he comes to smite us, sink under the weight of his Hand; and if we neglect his Displeasure, we shall fall under his Fury and Indignation.

3. If God in the greatest and highest In­stance of his Mercy, with which he has ac­quainted us in his Gospel, has not allowed us an Absolute Pardon; but has even in that his Covenant of Grace required Conditions of us, in order to our being made Partakers of that Pardon, which is the Purchase of our Saviour; then it does highly concern us, that we take care to perform the Conditions on our Part, that so we be not excluded from the Benefits of such Purchase. For, tho' it be most certain, that we shall not be saved by our Repentance alone; yet it is as cer­tain, that we shall not be saved without it. No! He who has purchased our Ransom, has in such his Purchase provided for God's Ho­nour, as well as for our Safety; and, notwith­standing his Purchase, has taught us, that we shall forfeit the last, if we take no care of the first. Let us therefore look upon our selves, as we are in our selves, that is, as forlorn, [Page 56]miserable Wretches: Let us acknowledge our selves such to God: Let us quit our Sins, which have made us such: And (as we have by such our Sins hitherto rebelled against him) let us for the future resolve to comply with his Will, that is, to the uttermost of our Power, to obey his Laws: Let us be heartily sorry, that we have been so foolish, as ever to have done otherwise. And when we have done all this, then let us joyfully ac­cept, and thankfully acknowledge the Designs of his Pity towards us, and the Provisions that he has made for our Safety in a Saviour. For, this is the Way to bring that Salvation, which he has pr [...]ded for Mankind, I say, to bring it home to our selves, and to make it our own. And I may add, that this is the only way for us to do so: For, as there is not Salvation in any other, but in Jesus Christ alone; so there is not any possible Way for us to make our selves Partakers of this Salva­tion, but by Repentance.

4. Lastly, Because we have seen, that the Condition of the faln Angels is forlorn and desperate, for want of a Saviour to expiate their Sins; therefore this Consideration should enhance and magnifie our Praise to God, that whereas he has in his Severity passed by those glorious and exalted Creatures, and so has left them to the Stroke of pure and unrelent­ing Justice; yet he has not dealt so with us Men, weak and sinful Dust and Ashes. Lord, [Page 57]what is Man, that thou art thus mindful of him? or the Son of Man, that thou so regardest him? Therefore, Blessing, and Praise, and Ho­nour, and Glory, be to him that sitteth on the Throne, and to the Lamb for evermore.

CHAP. IV.

HAving seen in the foregoing Chapter, that an Expiation for our Sin could neither be made by our selves, nor by any other Creature; and that therefore he, who could make good such an Expiation, must be more than a mere Creature: It will be our next Business to search the Scriptures, in which (as we shall see more fully hereafter) the Expiation of Sin is set forth; and there to see, what Character they give of him, who made such Expiation: For, by that Means only, we are likely to come to any [Page 58]true Knowledge and Information in this great Affair.

1. Now in such Scriptures we find, first, that That Person to whom this Expiation is there ascribed, is called God, the Son of God, the Word, the Only Begotten of the Father; That he is there said to be with his Father be­fore the World began; That he laid the Foun­dations of the Earth, and that the Heaven are the Work of his Hand; That he create [...] all Things that are in Heaven, and that are i [...] Earth, visible and invisible, whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, o [...] Powers; That all Things were created [...] him, and for him; That he is before al [...] Things, and that by him all Things consist That to him is given all Power in Heave [...] and Earth; with much more to the same Im­port and Purpose; which we need not repe [...] at present, because if we believe so much (and we all, at least, pretend to believe it fo [...] the Word of God) we may from thence sa­tisfie our selves, that he who has such a Cha­racter from God, must be the True an [...] Everlasting God: For so is the Maker o [...] Heaven and Earth; and so is he, who ha [...] all Power in Heaven and Earth: For, such [...] Description does imply in it Omniscience, an [...] Omnipotence, and such other Attributes, b [...] which we do (tho' in other Words) describ [...] the True God, both to our selves, and to al [...] others. But we shall pursue this no farther [Page 59]here, because it is not our professed Business at present: For we have only mentioned it, and confirmed it with some few Texts of Scripture, without quoting the Places, in or­der to our full and clear Explication of that Expiation which was made by our Saviour. And when we come to do that, we shall then more plainly perceive, that the Deity of our Saviour, and the Expiation made by him, do mutually prove and establish each other.

2. The Scriptures do acquaint us, That that very Person to whom they do ascribe the Expiation of Sin, was a true and real Man. For they give us an Account of his Concepti­on, Nativity, Life, and Death: They acquaint us with his Conversation, and Manner of Life; with his Natural Actions and Passions; and each of them such, which are undoubted Arguments of an Humane Nature and Condi­tion: Such are his Discourses, his Eating, Drinking, Sleeping, Grieving, and the like: By which Account of his Person, we may be as well satisfied of his Humanity under this Head, as we may be of his Deity under the last. And I may add, that (if we do with Simplicity and Sincerity receive the Account of his Person and Character, that the Scrip­tures give us both in the one Case and in the other) that we may be as well satisfied of his Deity under the last Head, as of his Humanity under this. But neither shall I at present pursue this Thing any further, because I must [Page 60]go on towards That, which is the present De­sign of it, and that is, the Expiation of Sin Therefore,

3. Thirdly, The Scriptures do acquaint u [...] that That very Person, to whom they d [...] ascribe the Expiation of Sin, was God an [...] Man in Conjunction, or, in other Words, the he was God Incarnate. To this purpose the tell us in one place, That the Word was ma [...] Flesh, and that he dwelt amongst us, or (as [...] is in the Original) he tabernacled among us which was typified by the Feast of Tabern [...] ­cles under the Jewish Law, and by God's abode and residence in the Tabernacle of th [...] Sanctuary in the Jewish Commonwealth (as h [...] been fully made out by Learned Men). We are told in another Place, that God was mani­fested in the Flesh; and in a third, that in him that is, in Jesus Christ, dwells all the Fulness [...] the Godhead bodily; with several other Place [...] of the same import, and to the same purpose and design. Now because this Propositio [...] does comprehend the two former, (for i [...] our Saviour be God Incarnate, there can be no doubt, but that he is God and Man) and because our true understanding of the Do­ctrine of the Expiation, does mightily depend upon the Doctrine of the Incarnation; and because, lastly, this Doctrine of the Incarna­tion is not only vigorously opposed by many among us, but also slighted, and even ridicul'd by not a few; therefore we must a while [Page 61]make a Stand here, and examine, whether the Incarnation (which we affirm to be re­vealed by the Scriptures) will not stand the Test, and admit the Approbation of Reason; or whether (as is pretended) it be so absurd, as to be easily confuted by Reason, or to be treated with Contempt and Derision.

And, in the first place, we cannot but take notice, that as Contempt and Derision is very seldom a Sign of Wisdom; so it is so far from being so, when it is imployed about any thing which does appear to be the Revelation of God, that, in such a Case, we may certainly pronounce it to be Folly. For, let it (for once) be supposed, that some Men (and yet those some have been very far the greater Number of Christians through all Ages, since the New Testament was recorded for the Word of God.) But, I say, let it for once be sup­posed, that some Men have been mistaken in the Meaning of God's Revelations in the pre­sent Case: Yet because the obvious and lite­ral Sense of such his Revelations does speak the same thing that they do; that is, because that Book, which is on all Sides agreed to be the Word of God, does in plain and express Words tell us, that God was manifested in the Flesh, that the Word was made Flesh, and the like; it must needs be insolent and soolish, to treat the literal and plain Meaning of such Propositions with Scorn and Derision: Be­cause, in such a Case, should the Meaning be, [Page 62]what at first view it appears to be, it will [...] but an ill Excuse for such a Treatment, to a [...] ledge, that Men thought otherwise; and pe [...] haps it may be nothing better, but rath [...] worse, to alledge, that they knew otherwi [...] No! where Things revealed, by what we o [...] selves confess to be the Word of God, [...] plain, and categorical; but more especiall where such Things have from the same Wo [...] of God a great deal of collateral Confir [...] ­tion (as the Incarnation has) in such Cas [...] if we doubt of the plain and literal Meanin [...] our best and most prudent way will be, to [...] our Doubting be attended with Modesty a [...] Sobriety, and to let our Inquiry after anoth [...] Sense be sincere and diligent: And not upo [...] the Confidence of our own Presumption, [...] upon the presumed Strength of our Natur [...] Reason, to reject That, which upon such [...] Inquiry may prove a Truth. For, if we w [...] admit nothing for Truth, that is proposed [...] us, as such, by Revelation, but what we ca [...] without such Revelation, discover to be so [...] our Natural Reason; all Revelation may, [...] to us, be superseded: and so the Old Tes [...] ­ment, indited by the Spirit of God for th [...] Institution of the Jewish Religion, and t [...] New Testament, indited by the same Spirit f [...] the Institution of the Christian, might hav [...] very well been spared, and Natural Religic [...] which was in the World before either, mig [...] well enough have supplied the Place of Bo [...] [Page 63]Now this Consideration we have therefore offered in the first place, to check the Confi­dence of those, who lean so much to their own Understandings, that they will never allow Revelation to guide their Reason; but, on the contrary, do so manage it by their uncouth Expositions, as to permit it to speak no Truth, but what their Natural Reason might have acquainted them with, without it.

But to proceed: To such Men, who there­fore reject the Belief, because they deny the Possibility of the Incarnation, I would put this short Question, which is, Whether or no they are acquainted with the Nature of all possible Unions? For, it is most certain, that the Reach of no Man's Understanding is so large, as to enable him where to fix the ut­most Bounds of all such Unions, nor yet to account for the Manner how several of those Unions, with which yet it is acquainted, are made. And Instances might be given (and those too not a few) to make out what we have said. But tho' Humane Understanding is not acquainted with all possible Unions; nor can account for many, with which yet it is acquainted; yet that will be no good Ar­gument, that therefore there are no such Uni­ons. Alas! our most refined and improved Reason falls short in its Knowledge of the greatest part of those Things, which yet are as surely known, as it is sure, that there is such a Thing as Omniscience, and such a [Page 64]Being as a God. And when we are once sa­tisfied, that any Union, be it what it will, is revealed to us by Omniscience; as we may by the same Means be satisfied in Rea­son, that there really is such an Union; so we may be satisfied in Modesty, that the Know­ledge and Discovery of such Union did exceed the Grasp of our Natural Understanding. Tho' therefore, in what follows, I do neither pretend to prove or to explain the Incarna­tion by Reason; yet if any Thing shall be offered, by which the Expressions which the New Testament gives us of it, shall appear to be plain and literal, and that their Meaning is, what it seems to be; it will be a sufficient Ground for our Belief of the Thing; be­cause those with whom we have to do in the present Argument, do not pretend to doubt the Truth, but only the Meaning of such Ex­pressions.

1. In order then to the helping forward our Faith in the Union of God and Man in the Incarnation of our Saviour; I would offer it to Consideration, That the Scriptures do in­struct us, that there is a very intimate Union between Christ and his Church. And tho' Humane and unassisted Reason, taking its Measures from other Instances of the like Appearances, may be apt to conclude, that the Union of our Saviour with his Church is but a Political Union, such as is between a King and his Subjects, or the Head and Mem­bers [Page 65]of an ordinary Corporation; yet a Chri­stian's Reason, once truly enlightned, and so guided by Divine Revelation, will thereupon conclude it to be something nobler and bet­ter: And because it is informed, that he took part of the same Flesh and Blood with his Members, and because he their Head does influence such his Members by his Spirit, in order to their Spiritual Life; that therefore there is between them, in some sense, a vital Union.

From whence we may, to our present pur­pose, conclude, That one Person may be vi­tally united to another, and that too at the greatest apparent Distances; and that they may by that means become one, tho' our Senses, and our Natural, but unassisted Rea­son, do give us in quite contrary Informati­ons. When the King of Syria sent a great Host, and enclosed Elisha in Dothan, in order to his Destruction, the Man of God, to en­courage his desponding Servant, desired of the Lord to open his Eyes: and when that was done, he saw the Mountain full of Hor­ses, and Chariots of Fire round about his Ma­ster. Now tho' one might well think (and Natural Reason would be apt to incline one more than barely to think so) that Fire is a Thing very discoverable to our Sight; (for perhaps nothing discovers it self to our Sight but Fire) yet we see, that sometimes Revela­tion is required even for such a Discovery. [Page 66]But then, such a Revelation, when once made, does easily work a Conviction. And truly I cannot persuade my self, but that the Re­velation of our Saviour's Union with his Church would do so too, would Christians but consider it with an honest and sincere Mind, and with a free and impartial Reason. For, tho' I am satisfied, that bare Reason could not have discovered it; yet I cannot so well satisfie my self, that a diligent Use of our Reason will then let us dissent from it, when once Revelation has acquainted us with it.

2. But, secondly, I would have it consi­dered, in order to the Assisting our Belief of the Union of God with Man in the Incarna­tion of our Saviour, whether or no the Ap­prehension of the possible Union of God with Man be not (at least in some degree) natural. For, that the Heathen in many Countries, and in several Ages, had such a Notion, (and that too very ordinary and common) might be made out from innumerable Instances out of their several Histories. But it will be the less needful to produce any from thence, be­cause we are furnished with one out of the Acts of the Apostles: For there, in the Four­teenth Chapter, where we have an Account, that Paul and Barnabas cured the impotent Man who had been a Creeple from his Mo­thers Womb, we are likewise told, that the People lift up their Voices, and said, that the [Page 67]Gods are come down to us in the likeness of Men. And that we may not think, that such Ap­prehensions proceeded only from an Idola­trous Notion of the Deity, we may furnish our selves with Instances in abundance from the Old Testament, that the Worshippers of the true God had constantly the same Appre­hensions: For, tho' God sometimes appeared to the Jews in Fire, as to Moses in the Bush; and sometimes in a Cloud, as in the Taber­nacle; and sometimes in both together, as in the Wilderness, and in Mount Sinai: Yet his more constant and repeated Appearances to particular Persons, were in the Likeness of Man. So he appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, to Jacob, to Joshua, to Manoah, and to seve­ral others. And tho' it be freely confessed, that some of those Appearances were in rea­lity but the Appearances of Angels; yet it must be granted also, that such Angels were so united to those Bodies, in which they ap­peared, that they did in them exercise several Actions both of an Humane and Animal Life. By which we may be instructed, that an An­gel may be so united to Man, that our Know­ledge of that may help to lead us one Step farther towards our Belief, that Man may be united to God. It must be granted also, that tho' in several of the Instances laid down, the Union was only between a Man and an Angel; yet (which is close to our present purpose) they who saw the Appearance, did [Page 68]almost constantly take it for the Appearance of God. So it seems to be in the Case of Joshua, in the Fifth Chapter of that Book: So it was in the Case of Manoah and his Wife, in the Thirteenth Chapter of Judges, where the Man tells his Wife, We shall certainly die, because we have seen God: And so undoubt­edly it was in the Case of Abraham, when he entertained the Three Men, in the Eighteenth Chapter of Genesis; for Abraham in his Be­haviour and Discourse treats one of them as the Lord God himself; and more particular­ly, in the Twenty fifth Verse, calls him, the Judge of all the Earth.

To our purpose then; If it be certain, that Angels have appeared to Men in Humane Shape; If it be certain, that under such Ap­pearances they have done several Actions of the Humane Life, such as Talking, Walking, Eating, Drinking, and the like; if it be pro­bable, that God himself has so appeared, and under such Appearances has also done the same Things; And, lastly, if it be certain, that most of those People, to whom such Appearances have been made, have constant­ly taken such Appearances for the Appearan­ces of God in the Likeness of Man: I say, if these Things be so, as it is probable, by what has been said in short, that so they are; then, as we may rationally look upon such Things as Presigurations of the Incarnation; so may we also be so far from thinking the [Page 69]Incarnation an Absurdity, or an Impossibility, that we may be satisfied, that great, good, and wise Men have believed and thought otherwise, and that too upon such their own Experience; to which they, who deny an Incarnation, nei­ther do nor must pretend, unless they will by such their Pretences contradict themselves. Now, if Abraham, who had such an intimate Converse with God, and so was a much bet­ter Judge in the Case, than we can pretend to be, did not only acknowledge the Possibility, but the Reality of an Incarnation too, it may so much the less become us to deny it; and that too the rather, because we may easily satisfie our selves, that he did so believe. And therefore I do not question, but that there is more in that Saying of our Saviour, than is usually taken to be, [Your Father Abraham rejoiced to see my Day, and he saw it, and was glad.]

3. I would take notice, in the third Place, That where the Scriptures do professedly give us the Account of Man's Creation, they do frequently inculcate it upon us, that God made Man after his own Image and Likeness; I say, frequently, because I find it so deliver­ed Six times in the Beginning of Genesis, and in Two Places, that is, both in the Twenty sixth and Twenty seventh Verses of the First Chapter, with an Ingemination: And an In­gemination does by the very way of Expres­sion summon us to a more deliberate atten­tion [Page 70]to, and observation of what is spoken. Now tho' we do not, with the Anthropomor­phites, from such repeated Expressions con­clude, that God has the Shape and Figure, or the Image and Likeness of a Man; yet for all that, it will be impossible to conceive any Sense in the Words, if God may not be so like to Man, as Man is like to God: For the Likeness with reference to both must be the same (be that Likeness at present what it will) or else there can be no Likeness at all. And to say, that the Likeness consists in Holiness, is too frigid an Interpretation of such an inculca­ted and reiterated Expression, and does not very well agree with several Texts, where such Likeness is mentioned; nor indeed does it seem to come up to the Import of the Ex­pression. And I am therefore persuaded, that the Patriarchs apprehended, that there was something more in it, for the Reasons offered under the last Head. For, tho' Moses, who wrote the History of the Creation, lived af­ter them; yet it is not only possible, but also highly probable, that their Notion of the Thing might be derived down by Tradition from them to him: And we may be the rather satisfied, that so it was, because after the Flood, God does give it as a Reason to Noah, why that Man's blood shall be shed by Man, who sheds Mans Blood, because God made Man in his own Image. Now, (considering the Longevity of Men in those Days) as a [Page 71]Tradition from Adam to Noah, so a Traditi­on from Noah to Moses, is a very conceivable Thing, especially in such a Case, in which several of the intermediate Descendants might reasonably conceive, that they had had, at least, something like Experience in the Case, by conversing with God in the Likeness of Man.

To come up a little closer to that Point, at which we all this while do aim: As the Derivation of all Mankind from one sole Head and Fountain, which was the first Adam, was a Type, that all the Elect should by Re­generation derive from one sole Fountain, which was the second Adam; and as the Pro­mise, that the Seed of the Woman should break the Serpent's Head, contained in it a Prophe­tick Account of the Manner of the Saviour's Nativity: So the Expression of Man's being made after God's Image and Likeness, does to me seem to be a Proleptick Declaration of the Incarnation, and, when compared with several Places in the New Testament, may very fairly, at this time of day, be thought to be no very dark Prophecy, that God should be made in the Likeness of Man. For, if it were in the Counsel and Foreknowledge of God, that God should become Man, and be really united to an Humane Body; then the Expression, that Man was made in the Image and Likeness of God, will, upon that account, not only be warrantable, but proper. For, [Page 72]when God made Adam, he made him (if I may so speak) by the Samplar in his own Mind: And I may the rather be allowed so to speak, because in the very Making of him God does seem to set himself a Pattern, when he says, Let us make Man in our Image, after our Likeness. And therefore before Man was made at all, and before our Saviour was made Man, the Expression of Making Man after our Likeness, and in our Image, may be thought only to give an honorary Precedence to our Saviour's Incarnation, though the Creation of Man was to have a temporary Precedence to the same Incarnation. And then the Import of the Expression, [Let us make Man in our Image, after our Likeness] will amount to thus much; Let us make Man in that Image, and according to that Likeness, in which we our self in the Fulness of Time will converse among Men. And therefore, as Man in his Creation is said to be made in the Likeness of God; so God in his Incarnation is said to be made in the Likeness of Man: So we read of God's sending his Son in the Likeness of sinful Flesh, in the Third Verse of the Eighth Chap­ter to the Romans; and so again, in the Se­cond to the Philippians, the Fifth, Sixth, Se­venth, and Eighth Verses, the Apostle tells us, that Christ Jesus being in the Form of God, thought it no Robbery to be Equal with God, and was made in the Likeness of Man; that is, in the same Apostle's Words, 1 Tim. 3. and the [Page 73]last Verse, God was manifested in the Flesh. And he who shall consider what Interpreta­tion the Apostle, in the Second to the He­brews and the Sixth Verse, puts upon the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Verses of the Eighth Psalm, and what Relation those Ver­ses have to the Twenty sixth and Twenty eighth Verses of the First Chapter of Genesis, may be easily satisfied, that the Creation of Adam did prefigure our Saviour's Incarnation. And therefore it is remarkable to our pur­pose, what we meet with in the Twenty se­venth Verse of the First Chapter of Genesis, that it is there twice said, that God created Man in his own Image; but when the Text goes on to speak both of the Man and the Woman, it is barely said, that God created them. Agreeable to which, we may add what St. Paul says, in the First to the Corin­thians, the Eleventh Chapter and Seventh Verse, where he tells us, That the Man is both the Image and Glory of God; but then speaking of the Woman, he only says, that she is the Glory of the Man.

Now from the whole we argue, That God, in whose Image and Likeness Man was crea­ted, was made in the Likeness and Fashion of such created Man; that is, that God, who at first created Man, was afterwards made in the same Likeness himself; which, in other Words, is the same as, He became Man him­self. Now there neither is, nor can be any [Page 74]doubt, but that That God, who became Man, was the Word of God also. Now then, if God made Man, and if the Word of God made Man; and if God was made Man, and if the Word was made Flesh, that is, Man: Then we must first controul, not only the Ac­count of the Creation given in the Scrip­tures, but the Account of the Incarnation too; that is, we must in effect contradict the Old Testament and the New, before we can deny the Union of God with Man, that is before we can deny the Incarnation.

We might to all this add those several Pas­sages in the Old Testament which ascribe to God the Parts of an Humane Body, such as Eyes, Ears, Nostrils, &c. or Humane Po­stures, Actions, Passions, and the like: Which (tho' they are usually taken to be nothing more but condescending Expressions, suited to our feeble Capacities) yet, from what has been said, may be conceived to carry in them a farther, and more mysterious Meaning, that is, to have a Regard to the Incarnation [...] And that too so much the rather, because (as Learned Men have observed) it is probable, that since the Fall God has had no other In­tercourse with Mankind, but by the Interpo­sition of the Mediator. And then, if such Expressions are to be applied to the Media­tor, (tho' they do not expresly foretell in­deed) yet they may be thought to insinuate a future Incarnation.

To sum up all then in a few Words: As it is a Presumption to measure all Possibilities by the Standard of our own Reason; so is it, to measure all possible Unions by the same Line: For there are actually several real Unions, which must be confessed to be so, which yet we should never have known, if we had not been made acquainted with them by Revelation. And where Divine Revelation (and that too acknowledged by us for such) does in as plain Words as can possibly be made use of, disco­ver to us the Personal Union of God and Man; and when it does moreover, by seve­ral Gradations, gently lead us (if our Wil­fulness or Conceitedness do not make us hang back) I say, when the Revelations of God do gently lead us into such a Belief, how dare our short-sighted Reason contradict the Truth of the Discovery, or limit the Efficacy of Om­nipotence? Do not we know, that in him we live, and move, and have our being? and that if he were not present with us, we could nei­ther think, nor reason, nor perform any the ordinary Actions or Offices of Life? And do we think his Power so restrained, that he cannot, when the Purposes of his insinite Mercy and Goodness invite him to it, I say, do we think, that he cannot more intimately unite himself to any of us, than he has done in the more familiar and ordinary Ways? We believe, that he will do so in another World; and it must be something very far [Page 76]out of our reach, which neither Eye hath seen, nor Ear heard, nor can enter into the Heart of Man to conceive. And yet we need not at all question, but that God can make a more intimate Union between himself and Man, than what will be requir'd to our design­ed Happiness: And therefore, when he tells us, that he has done so, it would be very pro­per for us to resign our shallow Reason, and to take his Word.

One Remark I would leave here, before [...] leave off this Head; and that is, That tho in the Instances produced it has appeared, that Angels often, and that (at least probably) God sometimes has appeared to Men in Hu­mane Bodies; and that they have in such Bo­dies exercised several Functions of an Humane Life and Nature; and that therefore they were so united to such Bodies, that, to the Apprehensions of the Beholders, they were judged to be an Union of God and Man; yet we do not all this while either assert, or pre­tend to maintain, that those Unions were such, or so intimate, as that which was ex­hibited to us in the Incarnation of our Sa­viour. For, we have not offered the several Instances of Divine Appearances to explain the Manner how the Union is made, but only to facilitate the Credibility of it. For, if we are once satisfied of the last, it is no great matter, tho' we are ignorant of the first. For, a reasonable Belief of the Possibility of the [Page 77]Thing, will wipe away all Arguments that shall pretend to maintain its Absurdity; and the Possibility of it, when backed with several express and literal Revelations of its Cer­tainty, will be abundantly sufficient to make our Belief of it certain. Those who pretend to go farther, and are not contented till they offer to others a nice Explication, how this, and other such like Mysteries are brought to pass, do only place themselves in the Dark, and ever after that stumble and founder at every Step they take. It is better in such Cases to be modest and wise; and truly we shall therefore approve our selves wise, if we keep our selves modest. Alas! we know not how any one Effect in Nature is produced, tho' such Things lie exposed to our narrowest Search and Disquisition. And if we are Stran­gers to the Methods of God's Working in these ordinary and obvious Things, with which we daily converse, why should we pretend to trace him in his deeper and more mysterious Counsels; in such Things, which he has cover'd with a thicker Veil; Things, that are hid from Principalities and Powers, and such as the Angels themselves desire to look into? In such Cases then it is well enough with us, if we have sufficient Ground for our Faith, tho' we can discover nothing to gratifie our Curiosity. And our Faith in such Truths must then be stronger, and more firm, when we have not only the express and plain Word [Page 78]of God, that so Things are; but when w [...] have also the concurrent Satisfaction of ou [...] own Reason, that so they may be. And i [...] any thing that has been said, may but only so far help our Faith in the Article of the In­carnation, then I hope that we shall no longe [...] question it, much less contradict and gain [...] say it, and least of all despise and ridicule it.

But tho' I would willingly hope, that wha [...] has already been offered may help to persuad [...] the Possibility, and therefore also the Cred [...] bility of the Incarnation; yet I do not at a [...] question, but that a great many other Thing will fall in to confirm and ratifie such a Po [...] ­sibility. For, when we shall come to mak [...] out the Expiation made by our Saviour, w [...] shall then perceive such an Harmony an [...] Congruity between that Expiation and th [...] Incarnation, that we shall be satisfied, that a [...] those Revelations, which mention the one, d [...] at the same time confirm the other; and tha [...] the Truth of each is therefore the more cer­tain and firm, because the Support is mutual. Which they seem to be aware of, who endea­vour to invalidate the Doctrine of the Incar­nation; because for that purpose they neverr boggle in their Attempts to evacuate an [...] make null the Doctrine of a Gospel-Redempti­on; and break through a multitude of expres [...] Texts, not to say the Tenor of the whole Go­spel, to make good such their Attempt. But we must leave the farther Prosecution of these [Page 79]Things to another Place, because when they are laid together, their Evidence and Reason­ableness will appear more plain and satisfa­ctory.

In the mean time, I would offer some Pra­ctical Considerations from what has been al­ready laid down; that so the Doctrine deli­vered may as well promote our Piety, as in­crease our Faith.

Now the Doctrine of our Saviour's Incar­nation in order to our Redemption, does con­tain in it

1. First, Matter of Praise and Thanksgiv­ing; and,

2. Directions how to pay such Praise and Thanksgiving, as we ought.

In our Prosecution of the First of which Things, I would desire all Christians seri­ously to consider, that they ought the more heartily and devoutly to praise God our Sa­viour, that he was pleased to take upon him our Flesh, in order to our Redemption, be­cause our Condition, by reason of our Sins, was so desperate and forlorn, that neither our own Repentance, nor our own Punishment, no nor the Punishment or Interposition of the Angels, could ever have redeemed us from that Curse, which we, by such our Sins, had brought upon our selves. For, as for our selves, it is most certain, that we are less able to return to our Innocence, after we have sinned, than we were to retain our Innocence [Page 80]before we had lost it. For, every Sin (as our sad Experience may easily inform us) weak­ens our Ability to resist Sin; and it is far more easie to preserve our Innocence, than to restore it: And then, when our Ability is made weaker, and our Business is become greater, we may easily judge, that such our Business is very likely to go undone. For which Reason, as well as for several others, formerly mentioned, we may be sure, that when we had once brought our selves into a sinful, and, for that Reason, into a miserable Condition; we had, by the same Means, put it out of our Power to redeem our selves from such Sin, and from such Misery. And it is as certain, that no Man ever was or will be [...] able so to do, as it is certain, that all Men are Mortal: For, Death is the Wages of Sin. And as the Experiment has passed the Test, that Mankind cannot save it self from its Sin; so it has as good as done so, that neither can the Angels save it: For if they could, then they would in Nature first have done such a Kindness for themselves. But the Condition of the faln Angels discovered to us by Reve­lation, assures us, that there is no Possibility for them to do such a Kindness for them­selves; and then Reason will tell us, that nei­ther can they do it for Man. Herein then was the Love of our Saviour manifested, and mightily inhanced, that he was pleased to step in for our Rescue, when we can discover [Page 81]no other Way for our Escape. And, if there be not Salvation in any other, then we may be sure, that our greatest Praise and Acknow­ledgments are due to him, who alone could bring us Salvation, and who alone has brought it; and so has not refused us that Mercy, which he alone was qualified to be­stow.

2. We ought to magnifie and praise our Saviour, not only because he was pleased to undertake our Redemption, when he alone could make good such an Undertaking; but that also, to make such his Undertaking good, he was pleased to take upon him our Nature, and to come down to us in that Nature. The Condescension of the Mercy ought to magni­fie his Praise in our Mouths, and in our Hearts too; and with Astonishment, and an humble Adoration, we may well cry out with the Psalmist, Lord, what is Man, that thou art thus mindful of him? or the Son of Man, that thou so regardest him? We know well enough, that God does every day stoop to the Relief of our Necessities: His Eye goes through the World, and all Things are under his Inspection and Care; and he, who feedeth the young Ravens, that call upon him, and cloaths the very Grass of the Field with Ornament and Beauty, does also provide for the Support and Welfare of him, who is made after his own Image. But then this is the Care of his ordinary Providence: And be­cause [Page 82]the Providence is ordinary, therefore also it is too generally neglected by us, an [...] the Familiarity of it does bring it into Con­tempt. But when he engages himself to fre [...] us from a greater Mischief than Famine [...] Nakedness, that is, from our Sins, then, a [...] the Mercy is greater, so also is the Method, b [...] which he brings it to us, more wonderful an [...] astonishing. For, in this last Case, he doe [...] not only stoop to our Wants, but to our Co [...] ­dition also: And he, who would not execu [...] his Judgments upon Sodom, till he came dow [...] to see, whether the Cry of their Sins were s [...] or no, would neither bestow his greatest Bles­sing without a personal Visit. He brough [...] the Salvation, which he designed to bestow and then appeared in the greatest Humility when he was about to display the Glory o [...] his most endearing Attribute. For, his Con [...] ­descension, then to take upon him the Form of a Servant, when he designed to become a Saviour; nay, therefore to do the First, be [...] cause he designed to be the Last, was Mercy mixed with Sweetness; and when he put on [...] our Condition, in order to the conveying such his Mercy to us, we stand bound in Gratitude to acknowledge the Condescension, as well as the Mercy. We receive the Fa­vours of great Personages (especially if they do them to us in Person, and not by Proxie) with Deference and Respect: And tho' it may perhaps be but a Smile, or a gracious Nod; [Page 83]yet because even such little Things bring along with them the Tokens of a condescend­ing Kindness, they are therefore entertained with a joyful Welcome, as well as with an hum­ble Acknowledgment. If therefore we would but behave our selves in proportion to our condescending God, as we do to our conde­scending Fellow-Creatures, we ought in reason to receive his Visit to us, that brings Salva­tion with it, not only with humble Acknow­ledgments, but with humble Adorations too. And when we find, that he does not disdain to take care in his own Person (if I may so speak) of our Happiness and Salvation, we should be officiously ambitious of setting forth his Honour and Praise, for such his Con­descension, and for such his Care.

3. We ought to praise our God, not only that he condescended to be united to our Nature, and so to take upon him our Condi­tion, in order to our Redemption; but his Praise ought still to be so much the more mag­nified, that he stooped to Sinners, as well as Creatures; and that the grand Design of his Condescension, was the Saving of his Ene­mies. We stand at an infinite Distance from him, as we are his Creatures; but we stand in an infinite Opposition to him, as we are Sin­ners. In the First Case we are capable of his Bounty; but in the Last, we forfeit his Mercy; and had he obliged us to stand the Award of our own Deserts, Vengeance had been, as [Page 84]our miserable, so our just Portion. Now our Natural Sense tells us, that a Favour to an Enemy is at least a double Favour: It requites Good for Evil, and does a Man a Benefit, even against his own Endeavours. Now he, who has so much Bowels of Mercy, as to relieve his Enemy; as he has a very noble Temper, so he deserves a very noble Character. But still this Character must run higher, if he shall rescue his Enemy from that Mischief which he had pulled upon himself by his En­mity towards his Deliverer. And this is the Case of sinful Man with Relation to his Sa­viour: For our Sins had not only deserved, but had also provoked the Plagues of Justice; they were Acts of Hostility against God, and carried in them Malice, as well as Ingratitude. And in such a Case, Reason and Justice will teach us to expect, that abused Omnipotence should vindicate it self with Severity of Ven­geance. But the Condescension and Mercy of our Saviour has taught us otherwise, and may easily convince us, that the Hostilities of impotent Creatures do not always extinguish the Love of him that made them; that he pities the Peevishness, and even Wilfulness of his Children; and that he so considers their Weaknesses and Imperfections, that, in com­miseration to their feeble Condition, he lets his Pity take place of his Severity, and is so far from dealing with them according to their Deserts, that he interposes for their Rescue; [Page 85]for their Rescue from the Folly, and from the Vengeance of Sin; and even stoops to the Lowness of their Condition as Creatures, that he may save them from the Misery of their Condition as Sinners. And because in doing so, he does many ways make the Wonder of his Love and Condescension appear still greater and greater; therefore it will be our Duty more and more to magnifie him for such his Condescension, and for such his Love.

4. We ought to praise God our Saviour, as that for our Redemption he was pleased to condescend to our Condition, by being clo­thed with our Flesh; so also, in that by being so clothed, he passed the faln Angels, and took not their Nature upon him. It is a Re­mark made by the Author to the Hebrews, that he took not on him the Nature of Angels, but he took on him the Seed of Abraham. I know well enough, that it is objected, That the Original imports, that he took not hold of the Angels, but he took hold of the Seed of Abraham; and it is confessed, that the Greek will admit and approve such an Inter­pretation; and (which is more) the Inter­pretation is close and proper so far as con­cerns the Language; but then it is not full, so far as concerns the Context: For when we are told before, that he took part of the Flesh and Blood whereof his Children were made; and when we are told immediately after the Words, that in all things it behoved him to be [Page 86]made like unto his Brethren, that he might be a merciful High-Priest; we may easily al­low, that he took on him the Nature of such his Children, and of such his Brethren. But that by the by, to assert and make good the Propriety and Validity of our English Translation, against the Adversaries of the Incarnation. But more directly to our pur­pose: Since the Son of God, the Saviour of Mankind, was pleased to interpose for the Redemption of faln Man, but did not do so for the Redemption of faln Angels; it must be confessed, that the lost and forlorn Con­dition of the one, when compared to the restored Condition of the other, must needs afford a weighty Argument of Praise and Thanksgiving to Man, when he finds his own Safety and Welfare preferred by the Saviour, to that of Angels, and has not only a Possibi­lity, but also the comfortable Hopes and (if it be not his own Fault) an Assurance of that Salvation, of which they must for ever de­spair. Now, Natural Reason might perhaps incline us to think, that the Rescue of the faln Angels by a Saviour might therefore have been a more honourable Purchase, be­cause the Angels are a more noble Creature; and the Dignity of such a Creature might seem to countenance the preference of such a Purchase. But in these Things our Reason is short-sighted, and we may easily judge amiss, because we judge in the Dark. Thus much, [Page 87]however, to our present purpose, we are sure of, and that is, that it is a greater Con­descension to stoop to the Relief of an infe­riour Creature; and that where there is such a Condescension, there that Creature is obliged to the greater Gratitude. And this is confes­sedly our Case; and therefore such Gratitude is undoubtedly our Duty. Let us therefore with Heart and Voice rejoice in this miracu­lous Salvation of our God; the Salvation which old Simeon saw, and embraced before his Death; the Salvation, which St. John, the Beloved Disciple, tells us, was from the be­ginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our Eyes, which we have looked up­on, and our Hands have handled of the Word of Life: That is, in a few Words; The Word of Life, the Son of God, the Saviour of the World, by his Incarnation made manifest to our Senses, and by the same Incarnation qua­lified to be our Sacrifice, our High-Priest, our Redeemer. To him therefore be Glory and Praise in all Churches of the Saints. Amen.

But that we may learn to praise him aright, both for the Greatness and Condescension of his Mercy too; let us take these few, and fol­lowing Rules, to guide us in our Practice of such Praises. For a verbal Thanksgiving is too poor an Offering for so superlative a Blessing; and to praise God, who searches the Heart, with our Lips, when we do not do it with our Hearts, is in deed and truth to [Page 88]mock him. That we may not therefore in­crease our Sins, when we pretend to perform our Duty, we may do well to guide our Gra­titude in the Case by these following Dire­ctions. And,

1. Did our God condescend to take upon him our Flesh, that he might by his Instru­ctions, by his Example, by his Life, and by his Death, purchase to himself a peculiar People, zealous of good Works, and so from a sinful and degenerous Condition, exalt us to a State of Holiness, and by consequence of Happi­ness? Then we ought to meet our God in such his gracious Design; and by lifting our Hearts towards Heaven, and so by setting them upon Heavenly Things, to endeavour to be holy, as he is holy. It is a noble Ambi­tion, and complies with the Counsel and De­sign of his Incarnation: For it will engage our Souls in higher Flights of Duty, and render us fit Inhabitants of that Place, where Holiness is both the greatest Happiness, and the greatest Ornament. For, tho' some of God's Attributes are so peculiar to himself, that they are utterly incommunicable to any of his Creatures; such are his Omnipotence, his Omniscience, and the like; yet there are others, which he has not only proposed to our Imitation, but which also he has commanded us to imitate; and such are his Love, his Mercy, his Justice, in one Word, his Holi­ness. And therefore he does require us to be [Page 89]holy, because he is holy. And it would be no hard matter to make it out, that his Holi­ness is his prime and leading Attribute, such as guides and conducts all the rest: And there­fore tho' he be Omnipotent, yet for all that, he cannot do any thing that is unjust, be­cause he is holy. Does God then allow, nay require us to imitate him in his prime and leading Attribute, and by stooping to our Na­ture, provoke us to exalt that Nature so far, as to make our selves like to him in those Things, for which his Praise is chiefly cele­brated? Then let us for once gratifie our Ambition the right way; and tho' we are but Men, yet let us in this attempt to make our selves like to God, as he in his Incarnation was pleased to make himself like to us. The Attempt is great and generous, and worthy the Endeavours of our best Endowments, and most noble Faculties: For, if we chearfully cast off our Sins, and, by a constant and sin­cere Practice of Holiness, do make it our Bu­siness to be like our Saviour, holy and unde­filed, as he our High-Priest was, we shall in some sense lift our selves above the Earth, even while we inhabit in it; and tho' we can­not get up to Heaven, yet we shall, by that means, bring Heaven down into our Souls, and so shall in some measure anticipate our consummate Happiness. And since the grand Design of our Saviour's Humiliation in his Incarnation, was to engage us to this holy [Page 90]Ambition; let us have a care, that we do not defeat such his Design, and our own greatest Hopes.

2. Did our Saviour, by taking our Flesh and Blood, and so uniting it to himself, con­secrate our Nature to the great and noble Purposes of Holiness and Mercy? And did he also, by so doing, so intimately unite us to himself, that we are Flesh of his Flesh, Bone of his Bone, and Members of his Body? Then this should teach us, to have a more sacred and especial Care, by no means to pol­lute That, which he has so consecrated. And therefore what St. Paul says in the Case of Fornication, [Shall I take the Members of Christ, and make them the Members of an Har­lot? God forbid,] that we may say in all other like Cases; Shall we take the Members of Christ, and make them the Members of a Drunkard, of an unclean, of an intemperate Person, or indeed of any other Sinner what­soever? God forbid. For, we should be asha­med to abuse our Bodies, which by his Incar­nation are so nearly allied to his Body, that they are the same Flesh and Blood with it: I say, we should be ashamed to abuse them by such Practices, which we must needs know, his Soul abhors: And this our Shame should therefore be attended with the greater Confu­sion, because whereas he took upon him our Flesh, that in that Flesh he might work out our Salvation; we, when we employ it in any [Page 91]Sin, do indeed employ it to its own utter Ruine and Damnation. Let us therefore have a care, that we be sober, chast, temperate; because otherwise we bring a Scandal upon our greatest Friend and Benefactor: For, by abusing our own Bodies, when we our selves are Members of his Body, we do by the Slan­der of such our Doings abuse his Body also.

And here I take my self to be obliged to leave a Mark upon one Practice too too ge­neral among Christians; and that is, That when they do professedly pretend to comme­morate the Infinite Mercy of their Saviour's Incarnation, they are so far from doing it in a way agreeable to his Honour, that, instead of that, they do too commonly do it by Ex­cesses, Surfeitings, and Drunkenness: And so when they pretend to offer to God, for their Saviour's Incarnation, the Praises of Men, by their Manner of doing it, do render them­selves more vile than Beasts. Which Practice, as it is in it self profligately vile and wicked; so it has brought such a Scandal upon the Duty by such its Wickedness, that not a few (and those too devout and zealous Christians, tho' their Zeal and Devotion does indeed want Wisdom) have leaped over into the other Extreme, and have utterly disallowed any Commemoration of the Infinite Blessing at all. So easily do foolish Men run into Ex­tremes on both Sides, and leave the Golden Mean to be practised only by a few, that is, by the truly Wise.

3. Did our Saviour humble himself to our Nature and Condition, in order to the work­ing out of our Salvation? Then this should teach us to be like him in this very respect, and not to disdain to stoop to our Inferiours, when by such our Condescension we may any ways advantage their Welfare and real Interest. And for our doing so, we have in him the most noble Example, that ever yet the World was made acquainted with: For, in this Case we imitate the Condescension of our Lord and Master: Nay, when our Com­passion stoops lowest, it only stoops to our Fellow-Creatures, those who are made of the same Lump of Clay with our selves, and those who (as Things may fall out) may be as helpful and useful to us again. So that when we condescend to relieve them, we do, by so doing, teach them to relieve us, if ever the same, or the like Miseries with theirs, should become our own. And we are as sure, that Things may so fall out, as we are sure, that we are Men. Now because our God did condescend to our Nature for the Relief of our Misery, when the Condescension and the Kindness was only His, and when the Be­nefit was only Ours; shall not we the rather practise such a charitable Condescension, when by such our Practice we do commise­rate at least our Own possible Condition? Shall the Son of God, by taking upon himself our Nature, make our Condition His, in order [Page 93]to his more sensible Compassion of such our Condition, and shall not we condescend for the Relief of those of our own Kind; which, after one Remove, is for the Relief of our selves? For, if we be too proud in the Case to stoop to our Inferiours; yet methinks we should not be too proud to imitate our God: And if the Infirmities of the one will not engage us to Condescension in order to Compassion; yet one would in reason be apt to think, that the Example of the other might do such a thing. We ought therefore, in order to our Exaltation, to learn from him, that to do any good to our calamitous Brother, is not to debase our selves: For our Charity is not the less, but rather the more noble, for being extended to a thatched Cottage; and a per­sonal Visit to the meanest Man, where it is likely to prove beneficial to him, will always wear this Character. That it is a glorious Imitation of the Lord of Glory, who did not disdain a personal Visit to the meanest of his Creatures, whom he had endowed with Capacities of receiving that his inestimable Blessing, without which they must have been for ever miserable.

4. Did our Saviour not only come to us clothed in our Flesh, but did he also put on the Form of a Servant, in order to the Pur­chase of our Redemption? Then this his Ex­ample should instruct us to do our very best Works with Meekness and Humility. We are [Page 94]very apt to think our ordinary Performances (if in any degree Pious) to be extraordinary good; and not a few of us put such a Value upon our good Deeds, that we spoil that little Goodness that is in them, by our over-valuing them; and our spiritual Pride, like the Fly in the Box of Ointment, robs them of their good Smell and Savour: But it must be con­fessed, that in so doing we do not imitate our Lord and Master, who was meek and lowly, and by his Self-denial ascribed such his Good Works, which could not be hid, entirely to God's Glory. Why! what Gra­ces we have, do confessedly come from God, the Author and Giver of every good thing; and therefore to ascribe the Goodness of any thing we have, or of any thing we do, to our selves, is Usurpation and Robbery. For, we may as well ascribe to our selves our Na­tural, as we may our Spiritual Life: Both the one and the other derive from an higher Spring, and from a nobler Fountain. And he who has taught us by his Word to account our selves, when we have done all we can, but unprofitable Servants, has taught us by his Example to do more. For, He did exactly fulfil the Law, and his Obedience was per­fect; and yet, for all that, his Humility was great. And then, in Reason, because our Per­formances are less, our Humility ought to be greater. For, as Modesty should make us humble, when we do well; so our Defect in [Page 95]so doing, should make us more so. And there­fore our Saviour's Example, which shewed forth the greatest Humility in the Archieve­ment of the greatest and noblest Performan­ces, should oblige us, poor, impotent, defe­ctive Creatures, to a greater (were that pos­sible) Humility.

5. Lastly, Did our Saviour come down in our Flesh to save Sinners, both from the Sla­very and Filth of Sin, and from the Wages of Sin too? Then this should engage our Endea­vours to rescue Sinners from the Errour of their Ways, and to do as he did, that is, to bring them to God by the Ways of Holiness. This is a noble Lesson, and has our Saviour's Love and Good-will, as well as his Holiness, for its Pattern. For, a Man may be good and holy himself; and yet Self-interest (I mean an allowable Self-interest) may be at the bot­tom of it: He may fear God's Vengeance, should he be wicked; and so his Goodness may have an Eye to his Security. But he, who endeavours to reclaim another Sinner from the Errour of his Ways, mixes Charity with his Piety, by making anothers Welfare his Aim, and by making more People happy besides himself. Indeed, the Grand Business of our Saviour's coming into the World, was to redeem us from the Slavery and Dominion of Sin, (for, if we be not redeemed from our Sins, it is utterly impossible that we should be redeemed from the Vengeance of [Page 96]them:) And therefore he, who endeavours the Conversion of Sinners, imitates his Savi­our in That, that was his chiefest and noblest Design. He endeavours to bring Rebel-Sub­jects under the Dominion of their first and rightful Lord: He endeavours to defeat the Designs of the Devil for their utter Destru­ction: He endeavours, as far as his little Sphere reaches, to restore the Creation to that Order and Harmony that God gave it, when he first made it. And in all this, he does that which is his greatest Glory; for he copies out the gracious and merciful Work of the Lord of Glory.

CHAP. V.

IN order to our Vindication of the Coun­sel of God for the Salvation of sinful Man, so far forth as he has been pleased to make manifest such his Counsel by the Re­velations of his Word; we have made it out, that we had brought our selves into so for­lorn a Condition by our Sins, that, so far as Reason guided by Revelation can discover, there was no possible Way left for our Re­demption, but only by the Incarnation of the [Page 97]Son of God. And in pursuit of such our Design, we have in our last Chapter made it good, That the Son of God was very God and very Man; God and Man united in one Person, or God Incarnate. That this is a Truth professedly and expresly declared in the Scriptures, and that too in such Words, that it is impossible to express any thing what­soever more plainly or more fully. That what the Spirit so declares in the Scriptures, is in no wise disagreeable to our Natural Rea­son; and that upon both Accounts in Con­junction, it is to be admitted into our Chri­stian Belief. For, undoubtedly, whatever God speaks, that is not disagreeable to our Rea­son, ought by us so to be admitted.

Now because, in order to a Gospel-Salva­tion, a Gospel-Forgiveness is required; and because, in order to a Gospel-Forgiveness, an Expiation is required; and because we have already made it good, That no mere Crea­ture can by any Means whatsoever make out such an Expiation: Therefore we shall, in what is now to follow, make it our Business to shew, That the Incarnation of the Son of God is (as by the Scriptures, so also) by Na­tural Reason, the most congruous Means, and the best accommodated, for the making good of such an Expiation. For, we may be very sure, that the All-wise God always makes use of the most proper Means to bring about the Designs of his Counsels: And we may [Page 98]be sure also, that where he himself tells us, that he makes use of any Means for the bringing any such his Designs to pass, that what in such a Case he tells us, is Truth. If therefore he tells us, that he employed the Incarnation of his Son for the Expiation of Sin, or that his Son was Incarnate in order to such Expiation; we may, for that Reason alone, (if yet there were no other) be ratio­nally satisfied, that such his Son's Incarnation was a proper Means of bringing to pass such an Expiation. For, the Methods of God's Pro­ceedings in any Case whatsoever, are therefore Wise, because they are his: And if at any time we cannot discover the Wisdom of such Methods, it would be both modest and wise in us to impute the Want of such Discovery, not to the Impossibility of the Thing, but to the Short-sightedness of our own feeble and impo­tent Capacities. Now all this I therefore speak, not that I think that the Wisdom and Con­gruity of the Incarnation, in order to the Expiation of Sin, cannot be rationally ac­counted for, (for, I hope, we shall by and by find it otherwise) but only to check the Con­fidence of some, who make great Pretences to Reason, (even such Pretences, that they do laboriously and industriously endeavour to bring down the most express Revelations of God to the Standard of such their Reason) but seem to take no care to bring their Rea­son to an Accommodation with such Revela­tions.

But to return to our Design, which is to make it out, That the Incarnation of the Son of God is a Means wisely, as well as mercifully ordained for making good the Ex­piation of Sin: Let us first hear what the Spirit saith, who in the Fourth to the Ephesi­ans, the Fourth and Fifth Verses, tells us, That when the Fulness of Time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a Woman, made under the Law, (that is, his Son was Incar­nate, and was under the Law, and therefore made so, as to be obliged to be obedient to it) to redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the Adoption of Sons. And when we are told in one place, That the Son of God was manifested for this very purpose, that he might destroy the Works of the Devil; and in another, That he was manifest to take away Sin: And when to answer to, and explain the Meaning of these Places, we are assured from other Places, that at least one Way of his taking away Sins was by the Sa­crifice of himself, as in the Twenty sixth Verse of the Ninth to the Hebrews; and that he appeared for that very purpose, in the same Place: And when we add to all this, what we find in the Fifth Verse of the following Chapter, that God had prepared him a Body; and in the Tenth Verse, that we are sanctified (that is, our Sins are put away) through the offering of the Body of Jesus Christ once for all, who (as St. Peter speaks) his own self bare [Page 100]our Sins in his own Body on a Tree: I say, when the Spirit of God does all along in the Scriptures expresly and categorically tell us, That our Saviour suffered in his Body, shed his Blood, lost his Humane Life for our Sins, for the Remission of Sin, for the Redempti­on of Sinners; when it does in several Places compare his Death to the Expiatory Sacrifices under the Law; when it calls him the Lamb of God, (alluding to the Paschal Lamb) that taketh away the Sins of the World; when it tells us, that he is the Propitiation for our Sins, and the like; It does by these, and such like Expressions (as much as Words can do it) acquaint us at the same time, that he suf­fered in his Body, and died to atone for and to expiate our Sins. And therefore all the un­couth and forced Interpretations of these and such like Texts (which yet are a multitude) that attempt to evacuate their plain Meaning, may as soon persuade an honest and sincere Man, that the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament are a Book full of Collusion and Prevarication, as they may, that Jesus Christ our Saviour did not die to expiate the Sins of Mankind. And were I not assured of God's Providence, I should be apt to fear, that the Devil might in time so bring Things about, that if he could upon Pretences of Reason wipe away that Part of the Bible that concerns our Saviour's Incarnation, and the Relation which that has to Man's Redemption, [Page 101]that he might at last raise his Hopes of blot­ting out the whole Christian Religion. For, to tell us, that our Saviour is only such a Man, as other Men are, but only conceived in a different, and therefore more wonderful manner; to tell us, that he died patiently, tho' wrongfully, only that he might give us an Example of an exact Patience, and of an entire Submission to God's Providence; to tell us, that he was slain a Sacrifice only to confirm the Covenant of Grace, but that there was no such Design in his Death, as to suffer for, or to expiate our Sins; as it is a notori­ous Contradiction to, and not an Exposition of the Scriptures; so, for that very Reason, it will appear to have a direct Tendency to­wards the overthrowing the Grand Design of the whole Book of God: All which, to them who shall scan the Scriptures exactly, is di­rected to, and does center in the Saviour, and that Redemption which he purchased for Mankind by his Death and Merits.

Having therefore thus in short taken no­tice of what the Scripture tells us, concerning the Expiation of Sin by the Susserings of our Saviour; and having already made it out,

1. That no Creature can by any means expiate the Sin of Mankind; and,

2. That our Saviour is God Incarnate, or God and Man united in One Person, we do, in pursuit of our main Design, lay it down in the

3. Third place, That the Way and Method of Man's Salvation (as it is expresly and fre­quently laid down in the Scriptures, which is by the Sufferings and Death of the Son of God manifested in the Flesh) is agreeable to right Reason, and exactly congruous to the Measures of Truth, and to the Rules of Ju­stice. And, in order to our making this plain and clear, we take notice,

1. That that Law, about the Transgression of which, and the Release from the Penalty of such Transgression, the Gospel-Forgiveness is only concerned, was given to Man. For, the Scriptures give us no Account of the For­giveness of the Breach of any other Law, but only of that Law, which God had prescribed to Mankind. And therefore, tho' in the Scri­ptures we have several broad Hints of the Fall of the Angels; and tho' our Reason tells us, that that which put them under the Dis­pleasure of God, must needs be Sin in the general; yet we are therefore ignorant what their Sin was, because we are ignorant what that Law was, against which they sinned.

2. We take notice, That as that Law, about which alone the Gospel-Forgiveness is concerned, was the Law given by God to Man; so the Gospel takes no other or farther notice of the Transgression of that Law, than as that Law is broke by Man. From whence we infer in the

3. Third place, That that Punishment, which the Law threatens against those who transgress it, can only in Justice belong to those, to whom the Law was given and di­rected. For, they can never transgress a Law, who have no Law assigned them; and they can never be justly punished, for the Trans­gression of the Law, who can never transgress the Law. The Law therefore, about which alone a Gospel-Forgiveness is concerned, being the Law given to Man, and transgressed by Man; Man alone can justly suffer the Penalty of such Transgression. From whence we infer in the

4. Fourth place, That if any Penalty can ever justly expiate that Guilt, which is con­tracted by the Breach of the Law; that Pe­nalty, that must make such Expiation, must be a Penalty laid upon Man. And therefore our Common Sense of Justice will not allow us to think, that either Angels, which are ranked above Mankind; nor Beasts, which are ranked below them, can by any Sufferings whatsoever expiate or atone for the Breach of such Law, which being given by God to Man, does so far forth concern Man alone. And tho' we have before made it out, that neither Angels on the one Hand, nor brute Beasts on the other, can expiate the Sin of Mankind, as both the one and the other are Creatures; yet what we now say, is, that they cannot do it as they are different Creatures. [Page 104]For, it seems necessary, and that too in the Nature of the Thing it self, that Creatures so different should be under different Laws; and that therefore neither their Obedience to, nor their Transgression of those several Laws, un­der which they are, should have any such Concern or Relation to one another, as that one sort of Creature should in any Case un­dergo the Penalty of the Transgressions of the other sort of Creature. And therefore, for the same Reason that we should look up­on it as absurd and unjust, that a Man should suffer for the Sin of an Angel; I say, for the same Reason, we should think it no less absurd and unjust, that an Angel should suffer for the Sin of a Man. The Thing might be made out in more Words: But it needs not.

Now these few Remarks being left by the way, to give Perspicuity and Strength to those Things which are to follow; the Wis­dom, Justice, Reasonableness, and Congruity of the Redemption of Mankind by the Suffer­ings and Death of our Saviour (as that Re­demption is expresly laid down in the Scri­ptures) will appear from these following Considerations.

1. And first, Our Saviour, who by his Death and Sufferings undertook the Purchase of Man's Redemption, was as really and ve­rily a Man himself, as were those, whom he undertook to redeem. This is evident, be­cause he is all along in the New Testament [Page 105]called Man, the Son of Man, and the like, (as we have made it out already.) And this so far accommodates the Scripture-Account of the Purchase of Man's Salvation, to the Law, that,

1. As the Law threatned the Punishment to Man alone, and to no other Creature; so in the Purchase of the Redemption, Man alone suffered such Punishment, and no Crea­ture besides.

2. And secondly, As it accommodates the Scripture-Account of the Purchase of Man's Redemption, to the Law; because our Saviour, who suffered in order to such Pur­chase, was a Man: So it accommodates the Scripture-Account of the Purchase of Man's Redemption, to the Rules of Justice; because our Saviour, who suffered in order to such Purchase, was an Innocent Man. It may per­haps at first sight look strange, when I say, that the Purchase of Redemption by the Death of an Innocent Man, is accommodated to the Rules of Justice: But the Wonder will then vanish, when I shall come to make it out, that tho' an Innocent Man cannot with­out his own Consent be justly punished; yet that with such his Consent, he may be so pu­nished. But because That belongs to another Place, therefore in this I pass it by. For, that that I design at present, is only to shew, that it is not agreeable to the Laws of Ju­stice, that a Criminal against the Law should [Page 106]expiate another Man's Sin, by suffering the Penalty of the Law: Because the Penalty, which he suffers, being the just Demerit and Wages of his own Sin, he cannot, by under­going the Punishment of his own Sin, add any such Desert to such his Punishment, as to make it meritorious of Impunity to any other Sinner. As therefore under the last Head we learnt, that he who by his Punishment expi­ates the Sin of another Man, must in Reason and Congruity be a Man himself; so under this Head we may learn, that he must be an Innocent Man likewise. And so the Sufferings and Death of our Saviour for the Redempti­on of Mankind, will afford us a further Con­gruity to the Rules of Reason and Justice, in that that Saviour is exhibited to us in the Go­spel, not only to be a Man, but also to be an Innocent Man.

3. The Wisdom, Justice, and Reasonable­ness of the Redemption of Mankind, by the Sufferings and Death of our Saviour, as that Saviour was a Man, will yet farther and more notoriously appear, if we consider the first Rise and Formation of Mankind according to that Account which the Scriptures give us of it: For, there we are told in general, that God did of one Blood make all Nations of Men, for to dwell on the Face of the whole Earth, in the Seventeenth Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. And then, if we look back to the original Creation of Mankind, and there [Page 107]enquire more particularly how this was done; we shall from thence be informed, that God first made Adam out of the Earth, and that after that he made Eve out of Adam, (both of them extraordinary and miraculous Pro­ductions) and that then, through all succeed­ing Generations, he formed all the rest of Mankind out of both, or such succeeding Pairs which proceeded from both, (to an un­derstanding Man as miraculous, tho' a more ordinary Production than that of the first Man and Woman.) So that all Mankind are by the Scripture-Account of the Thing a continued Propagation of the Blood of Adam, branched out through the several Dissemina­tions of all succeeding Men and Women, from his Days to this present Time. Now our Saviour, as he was Man, took part of this Flesh and Blood, (so the Scripture) and by doing so, became a Part of that Common Blood, out of which all the particular Men in the World are, and always have been made, as well as he. he stands therefore in as near a Relation to all Mankind, as can possibly be made by the same Flesh and Blood; and that Relation may well be granted to be very near, because it is that very Relation, which the se­veral Parts of a Thing (by continued deri­vation the same) have to one another. And so far the Relation of our Saviour to the rest of Mankind is in all Circumstances exactly the same with that Relation, which every [Page 108] other Man has to every other. But yet there is something peculiar to our Saviour in his becoming Man, which does not belong to any other Man whomsoever: And that is, that as the first Woman was formed only out of the Man, so our Saviour was formed only out of the Woman. And accordingly, the first Promise of Redemption, that God gave to Adam after he had sinned, was Propheti­cally worded, when he told him, that the Seed of the Woman should break the Serpent's Head. And therefore, as Adam is in the Scriptures called the first Man, because he was formed out of the Earth; so our Savi­our is called the second Man in the same Scriptures, because he was formed out of the Woman; that is, he was the first Man after his Kind, as Adam was in his. To our pre­sent Purpose and Design then: As we cannot but take notice, that God's Counsel and mer­ciful Purpose for the Redemption of Mankind was very early, (for that Counsel must needs be so, that was in a manner Cotemporary to Man's first Sin, as the immediate Discovery of that Counsel to Man upon the Commissi­on of that Sin does make it appear) so some Glimpses of that Counsel do (to me) seem to shew forth themselves in the Scripture-Account of Man's Creation. For, when God tells us in his Word, that he has so ordered the Creation, Propagation, and Disseminati­on of Mankind, that tho' their Numbers are [Page 109]to us Innumerable, yet we do for all that know, that they all came from one single Fountain, that is, from one single Man; and so, that they are all but so many Rivulets from that Fountain: And when, moreover, we are assured, that our Saviour is One of those Rivulets; (For, tho' our Saviour was only to be made of the Woman, yet because the Woman was made out of the Man, there­fore our Saviour did by the Woman derive from the same one single Person with the rest of Mankind) I say, when we consider all this, methinks it is no hard matter to con­ceive, that God himself does in his Word lay the Ground-work of Man's Redemption by a Saviour (if I may be allowed so to word my self) in that near and intimate Relation, which our Saviour, by becoming Man, has to all Mankind besides; and that the Intimacy of such Relation consists in this, that the Saviour and all Mankind do derive from one single and common Fountain. And hence we are told in one Place, that as by Man came Death, (there is the Sin of Adam, and the Wages of such Sin) by Man came also the Re­surrection of the Dead, (there is the Redem­ption of our Saviour, and his Purchase.) And more expresly still to our present Purpose, speaks the same Apostle in the same Chapter, (the Fifteenth of the First to the Corinthians) For as in Adam all died, so in Christ shall all be made alive: And to the same purpose [Page 110]again, in the Fifth to the Romans and the Eighteenth Verse, Therefore as by the Offence of one, Judgment came upon all Men to Condem­nation; even so by the Righteousness of one, the Free-gift came upon all Men unto Justification of Life. In all which Texts, and several others that might be named, it is notorious, that the Redemption of Mankind is so ascribed to the second Adam, the Man Christ Jesus, as the Sin and Death of Mankind is ascribed to the first Man Adam. And I do not at all que­stion, but that those Hints, which the Scri­ptures do frequently offer to us, of our Savi­our's taking the Humane Nature in order to our Redemption, of his taking Part of the same Flesh and Blood with us, of his being our Brother, and the like; I say, I do not at all question, but that, when seriously consi­dered, they may mightily assist and facilitate both our Conceptions and Belief of the Wis­dom, Justice, Reasonableness, and Congruity of our Saviour's Incarnation, Death, Resur­rection; in one Word, of that Redemption, which he, by being made one with Mankind, by taking their Nature upon himself, has purchased form them: And may mightily con­duce to the Removing of those Difficulties which the Enemies of the Cross of Christ have thrown as so many Stumbling-blocks in the Way of plain and honest Christians.

4. The Wisdom, Justice, Reasonableness, and Congruity of our Saviour's Incarnation, [Page 111]in order to his Purchase of Man's Redempti­on, does yet farther appear, in that by be­coming Man, he put himself into a Capacity of suffering Death, that is, of suffering that Punishment, which the Law had denounced against those that should transgress it. For, it is a gross Mistake, and does indeed bring a Scandal upon God's Veracity, to affirm, That he threatens greater Vengeance in any Law, before the Transgression of it, than he will execute after the Transgression, that so he may the more effectually prevent such Transgres­sion. For, God never yet threatned any per­emptory and unconditional Punishment in any Law, which he has not, or, when the Time comes, he will not as certainly execute. In the Day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die, says God. The Threatning, we see, is peremptory; and the Execution, we find, is so too; and therefore all Sinners die. And I cannot in the least doubt, but that, for the same Reason, an eternal Punishment will be the certain Vengeance upon a final Impeni­tence. But that is not so direct to my present purpose, and therefore here I pass it by. But, to confirm what I am now upon, I say, that God does not pardon the Death threatned in his Law against Sin, no not in Consideration of the Death of our Saviour; and therefore, notwithstanding his Death, and that too in our stead, we see, that all Men, and even those who hope for Salvation by such his [Page 112]Death, do yet die. What therefore our Sa­viour in this Case has puchased for us, is not a Freedom, but a Release from Death: And therefore that Redemption from Death, which is the Purchase of his Blood, is to be accom­plished (after we have been dead) by a Re­surrection. A Resurrection then is to make good the Purchase of his Death; and there­fore his Death purchased for us not a Free­dom, but a Release from our Death by such Resurrection. Now, as his Death was neces­sary for such a Purchase; so his Incarnation was necessary in order to such his Death: And he was therefore made of the same Blood with all Mankind, that by shedding that Blood for Mankind, he might after his own Resurrection restore the Lives of all Men, which had been forfeited by Adam's Trans­gression. So that as his Death was the meri­torious Expiation of Sin; and as a Resurre­ction is the Fruit and Effect of such his Ex­piation: So his Incarnation was a necessary Forerunner of such his Death; and therefore before he could possibly die for Man, and so purchase a Redemption of Man from Death, it was agreeable to the Laws of Wisdom, Ju­stice, and Reason, that he should become Man himself.

But then, how his Death came to be of so valuable a Price, as to make so glorious a Purchase, we must leave to farther Enquiry. For, by that it will appear, that as it was ne­cessary, [Page 113]that he should die the Death of a Man; so it was necessary, that such his Hu­manity should be united to the Divinity: And by both it will appear, that God was ma­nifested in the Flesh to destroy the Works of the Devil; and that therefore, when the Scriptures tell us so much, they tell us no more than what is agreeable to Wisdom, Justice, and Reason.

CHAP. VI.

HAving therefore seen, that our Lord Jesus Christ was qualified by his Incar­nation to make an Expiation for Sin by the Sacrifice of himself; and that such his Qua­lification is agreeable to the Laws of Justice, and to the Rules of Reason, and Wisdom: Our next Enquiry must be, How such his Sa­crifice came to be of such a Value, as to be justly sufficient to make good such an Expia­tion. For, because the Death of an Inno­cent Man (if he be no more than a mere Man) is but the Death of a Creature; and [Page 114]because no Creature can by its Punishment in another Creature's stead, expiate the Sin of that other Creature; (for if it could, then a Creature might by its own Punishment expi­ate its own Sin, both which we have already shewed to be impossible;) Therefore it was necessary, that as our Saviour, in order to his undertaking the Expiation of Sin, should be a real Man, a Creature; so, that he should be more than a Creature, in order to the ac­complishing of such his Undertaking. For, tho' by becoming Man, he did accommodate his Condition to his Design of undertaking an Ex­piation (as we have just now seen) yet, for all that, his Humanity had sunk under, but but had not taken away the Burden, had it not been supported by his Divinity. For, that that crushes both Angels and Men, (and that too, while they cope against it only with their own Strength) beyond the possibility of a Recovery, must, for the same Reason, have crushed him also, (when once he had put himself in Man's stead, and by conse­quence into Man's Condition) had he not been endowed with a Power superiour to both, to enable him to subdue and conquer it. And what Power, but that of God, can we think sufficient to conquer Sin and Death; and that too, when they had got to such an heighth, as to have infected and over-run the whole Race of Mankind? Can we think, that when the Contagion and Mischief had [Page 115]spread it self so wide, that even the best of Men (and those whose Graces are chiefly ce­lebrated by the Spirit of God himself) could not preserve themselves from the overflowing Inundation; I say, can we think, that in such a Case any one single Man (were he no more than a Man) could have saved himself from the universal Mischief, by the Strength of his own Resolution or Vertue? And if in Reason we must think, that he could not; then how can we in Reason think, that his Strength should be sufficient to rescue and save all the Rest? No! Such Salvation belongs only to the Arm of God; and He, who can save from Sin, Death, and Hell, and can over and above extend such Salvation over all the Earth, and that too through all the successive Generations of Mankind, that ever did, or ever shall live upon the Earth, must be God, and God alone. The Extensive Merit there­fore of the Death and Sufferings of the Man Christ Jesus, derives it self from the Infinite Dignity of Jesus the Son of God. For, had not this Jesus been the Son of God, as well as the Son of Man, he had never been the Saviour of Man, And if there be not Salvation in any other, (as in effect the whole Book of God does tell us) it may seem inconceivable, how this Seed of the Woman should extend this Salvation, and so break the Serpent's Head, from the Days of Adam to the Consumma­tion of all Things, unless all Things were in [Page 116]his Disposal, that is, unless he were God. No! He who considers the Thing seriously and wisely, may be satisfied not only by the Scriptures, but by his own Reason also, that there is the same Mercy, and the same Power required to redeem sinful Man, that was re­quired to make Man; and that He only, who did the first, can do the last. And therefore, as we are taught by God, that all Things were made by his Word; so are we also, that this Word was made Flesh, and that by being so made, he became to us, after we were dead in Trespasses and Sins, the Word of Life. From all which, and a great deal more that might be offered, both from Reason, and from Revelation, (some of which Things we have already spoken to, and some of which we shall have occasion to speak to hereafter) we may be not only informed, but assured, That the great Merit of our Saviour's Expi­ation made for Sin by his Death and Passion, did arise from hence, that his Divinity was personally united to that Body, which under­went such Death; or, that nothing less than the Death of the Son of God could expiate that Death, which the Law had denounced against the Sin of Man. But because these Thing will appear in a more full and clear Light, in the farther Prosecution of our De­sign; therefore we here leave them for a while, and proceed.

For, it having appeared, as to Matter of Fact, and that too by most express Declara­tions of Scripture, that our Saviour was made an Expiatory Sacrifice for Sin; and it having also appeared, that he did by his In­carnation accommodate his Condition to the making good of such Expiation, and that too in a Way very agreeable to our Natural Sense and Reason: The next Thing to be spo­ken to, is, the Matter of Right, or whether or no he could make such Expiation in Ju­stice? But before we proceed to speak to That, it will be proper that we make some Inferences of weight and moment, from what has been already spoken. And,

1. By what has been said, it appears plain­ly, That tho' our Saviour made good the Purchase of our Redemption by his Death and Resurrection; yet that such his Purchase shall not be fully made over to us, till our own Resurrection. That he made good the Pur­chase, his Resurrection is a Demonstration: For, because the Wages of Sin is Death, and because he died for our Sins, and not for his own, and because after such his Death he rose again, and because such his Resurrection was a Discharge from the Penalty of those Sins, for which he died; I say, from all these Things it is evident, that he accomplished his designed Purchase, that is, he made good his Expiation by his Death and Resurrection. But then, on the other side, because it is most [Page 118]certain, that we are not redeemed from the Curse or Penalty of the Law, till we are re­deemed from Death; and because we are not redeemed from Death, till we rise from the Dead, that is, till our own Resurrection; there­fore it is as evident, that till such our Resur­rection we are not put into the Possession of such his Purchase. And therefore (strictly speaking) no Man (be he who he will) is [...]actually justified in this Life. For, because every Man that lives shall certainly die, and because Death is the Penalty threatned to Sin by the Law; it therefore grates too hard upon our common Sense, to tell us, that any Man is then justified, when he is not only liable to the Vengeance of the Law, but when he is also sure in a little time to undergo such Vengeance. If therefore any Man be, according to a Gospel-estimate of Righteous­ness, a righteous or good Man, we may upon that Account say, (and we shall say true) that he is in a justifiable Condition; but we cannot truly say, that he is a justified Person. Justification then in the Execution belongs to a future Life, and not to this. And when we shall come to discourse on the second Thing contained in a Gospel-Salvation, which is a Restitution to Holiness, and the Conse­quent of it, the Gift of Eternal Life, we shall then be more fully satisfied, that Justification cannot belong to any Man in this World, because no Man in this World is restored to [Page 119]that Holiness, which was lost by the Trans­gression of the Law; and because no Man shall be compleatly and actually justified, till he be so restored.

2. Because the Expiation of our Sin by our Saviour, and by consequence the Pardon of Sin by God, is not Absolute, but Conditi­onal; and because some of those Conditions, upon which such Pardon does depend, are to be performed by us, such are our Repentance, Conversion, and the like; and because, lastly, our Condition in this World is such, that there will of necessity be required Time for our Performance of such Conditions: Therefore we do conclude, that as our Saviour has pur­chased for us such Conditions, in order to our Redemption; so has he also purchased for us a longer Term, in which we may perform such Conditions. For, it is evident, that the De­nunciation of the Law upon the Transgres­sion of it, is, [In the Day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die.] And in strict Justice and Reason, the Punishment is then to be in­flicted, when it becomes due; and it then be­comes due, so soon as the Law is broken: For, were it not due then, it would never be­come due at all. Now because we find, and that too by Experience, that notwithstand­ing not only Adam's Sin, but our own Sins too, we do not presently die; but that God waits our Return, that he may be gracious to us; and because we know, that such his Pati­ence [Page 120]and Forbearance is therefore extended to us, that we may by our Repentance qualifie our selves to be made Partakers of that Expi­ation, which is made by our Saviour, (for, there is not Salvation in any other) therefore we do at last conclude, that the Grant of a Space for Repentance is the Purchase of our Saviour. For, it would have been the same thing for our Saviour to have made no Pur­chase for us at all, if such his Purchase had been clogged with such Conditions on our Part, which it was utterly impossible for us to perform: And it had been utterly impos­sible for us to make out our Repentance, and Amendment, if we had not been allowed a competent Time to make them out in.

And what we have said concerning God's allowing of a competent Time in which Sin­ners may perform the Conditions of the Co­venant purchased by the Saviour, that we say also concerning the Means which are ne­cessary for such their Performance: Such are his Word, the Succours and Assistance of his Spirit, his Sacraments, and whatever else does usually come under the Title of Means of Grace. For, it is not conceivable, that our Saviour should purchase for us the End, and yet leave us without the Means, which are necessary for the bringing about such End. But yet because the Means to enable us to perform the Conditions required of us in or­der to our Salvation, are not, nor indeed can [Page 121]possibly be that very Salvation, for which they are designed or employed as means; and because, while we live in this World we are required, and it is necessary in it self, that we always have, and also employ such Means to the purpose of our Justification; and lastly, because it is so far from being necessary, that it is neither proper, no nor wise, to employ any Means for any End already attained; therefore what we observed under our last Head, will still remain true; and that is, That no Man is actually justified in this Life.

3. From what has been said, we take no­tice, That tho' Afflictions in this Life are undoubtedly the Executions of Justice; yet (which is owing to our Saviour's Purchase) there are always couched in such Afflictions Designs of Mercy. For tho', as they look backward, they have an Eye to our Sins; yet, as they look forward, they have an Eye to our Amendment, or, at least, to our Re­straint. For, had we died for our Sins, ac­cording to the Law, we had been both im­mediately punished for our Sins past, and had by the same Means been prevented from ever sinning for the time to come. (For, a Death without a Resurrection, had proved a sure and everlasting Prevention.) But (as we have seen) our Life being continued in considera­tion of our Saviour's Purchase (tho' Afflicti­ons are laid upon us during the Reprieve) and tho' such Afflictions do confessedly come [Page 122]from the Hand of Justice; yet they are ne­ver laid on without a Design and Mixture of Mercy: And therefore, as they are the Punishments of Sins past, so they are design­ed as Means of Grace for the time to come: And by the wise Counsel of our merciful and gracious God are employed (chiefly indeed for our future Reformation) but at least for our future Restraint; and so are one, and a great Branch too, of what we call Restraining Grace.

As therefore we took notice under our last Head, that the Reprieve of Man from the immediate Execution of the Sentence of the Law, was the Purchase of our Saviour, and that so Man's Life came to be continued, notwithstanding his Transgression; so under this Head we may observe, that tho' Sin, du­ring such Continuance of Life, cannot be re­strained by Death; yet the Just, Merciful, and All-wise God has not, even in such Cir­cumstances, left it without all Restraint; but has by Afflictions fitted such a Curb for it, which (notwithstanding the Saviour's Pur­chase) is an irrefragable Proof of his Justice: But tho' it be so, does in no wise encroach upon such Purchase, but rather promotes the Design of it. For, a Life continued in order to the Performance of those Conditions, by the Performance of which Man, in and through his Saviour, may obtain Salvation; A Life, I say, continued to such a Purpose, is [Page 123]more likely to answer to such Purpose, if its At­tempts after sinful Commissions be restrained, than it could be, were such Attempts left free and at large. For which Reason, such Re­straint, tho' it be caused by Afflictions, does rather fall in with, than controul the Design of our Saviour's Purchase. And tho' it be confessed, that such Restraint is not so effica­cious for the Prevention of future Sins, as Death without any Reprieve had been, (for, in the last Case the Prevention had been neces­sary, whereas in the first it is at the most but possible) yet it must be confessed also, that it is most wisely suited to the Circumstances of those, about whom it is employed; and that for this Reason, Because all Restraint being designed either to keep or to make them Good, it is necessary, in order to either, that it be left to their own Choice, whether they will improve it to either, or both Designs, or no: For, there can be no Goodness at all, without such Freedom. By all which we may at last understand, that tho' Afflictions, as well as Death, are the Wages of Sin; and tho' God does not let the reprieved Life of a Sinner pass on without the Tokens of his Displea­sure, that is, in the present Case, without Afflictions; yet that it is owing to our Sa­viour, that all such Afflictions are employed as Means of Preventing Grace: Whereas otherwise, the Prevention of Sin by a Death without a Reprieve, that is, a Death without [Page 124]a Saviour, and so without a Resurrection, had been no Means of Grace at all, but only pure and mere Punishment.

4. Lastly, From what has been said, I take notice, that our Saviour, by his Expiation of Sin, did not purchase for us an Absolute Free­dom from Death, so that by vertue of such his Expiation we should not die at all; but only a Release from Death, so that after our Death we should be raised to Life again. This I spake to before; and the thing is as certain, as it is certain, that all Men do die; and therefore I shall speak no farther to it at present: Only one Quaere I would make up­on it, and that is this; Whether, because the Law required Death as the Punishment of Sin, and because our Saviour, for the Purchase of our Redemption, and for the fulfilling of the Law, was necessitated in his own Person to undergo Death; I say, Whether upon this Ac­count God, by a Mixture of Mercy and Se­verity, might allow his Expiation to extend no farther than only to release us from Death after we had suffered it, but not to prevent us from suffering it at all? But, as I said before, I leave this as a Quaere, because the Scripture speaks nothing to it, and so the Resolution of it lies in the dark. Only I thought it not amiss to mention it, because it may help to instruct us in the very great Malignity of Sin: As most undoubtedly that must be very per­nicious to God's Creatures, which is down­right [Page 125]Enmity to him, who made them, and which is not wholly expiated by our Saviour himself.

However, the Wisdom and Harmony of God's Truth, Justice, and Mercy do seem to me, from what has been said, to shine forth very conspicuously in his Counsel for the Re­demption of Mankind.

For, tho' God executes that Death upon Man fatally, which, upon his Transgression of the Law, he threatned peremptorily; and so, notwithstanding the Death of our Saviour makes good the Truth of his Threat by the Execution of the Penalty: Yet for all that, he does not so execute such Penalty, but that he first allows Man a Reprieve for a time, to make himself a fit Subject for his Saviour's Purchase; and, secondly, he grants him a Re­lease from Death by a Resurrection, to capa­citate him to be put into the actual Posses­sion of such Purchase.

Again, tho' the Life of Man, continued in Consideration of his Saviour's Merits, be ever and anon overcast with Afflictions; and tho' such Afflictions are a Punishment for his Sins, and so a Proof of God's Justice: Yet still those very Afflictions are, in Consideration of his Saviour, turned into Means of Grace, and so are a merciful Discipline to secure him from those Mischiefs, which otherwise might retard or defeat his Pursuit after the purcha­sed Pardon and Inheritance.

These Remarks being left by the way, we proceed to the next thing proposed, and that is, Whether our Saviour, as he did in Fact, so also might in Justice and Right, die for the Sins of Mankind? For, because the Scriptures do lay down the Matter of Fact not only in express Terms, but also in great variety of Expressions; and because those who deny the Doctrine of the Expiation, do in this Case, as they do in most others, oppose Reason to Revelation: Therefore, as by what has been said already, we have made it out, that our Saviour did die for our Sins; so, in what is to follow, we shall endeavour to make it out also, that he might so die. For, if the Mat­ter of Fact be found to be the Declaration of God, we may be sure, that it will have the Approbation of Justice: For, Justice and Truth can never clash nor interfere. But however, before we begin, I cannot but take notice in the

1. First place, That the Redemption of Mankind by our Saviour, is one of those Things of God, which no Man knoweth, but the Spirit of God; and that, upon that Ac­count, it is not so proper a Subject for the Deliberations of Humane, that is, of short­sighted Reason. And my Warrant for so judging I therefore take to be good, because it was a Thing (as the Scriptures themselves tell us) that was hid from Principalities and Powers, from Ages and Generations, till it [Page 127]was made known by God to his Church, that is, to those who were chiefly, and, as to their own Persons, only concerned in it. And there­fore we are very sure, that no Man, by the Sagacity of his own Reason, could ever have made any Discoveries of it.

2. I cannot but be satisfied, in the second place, that any Man of an ordinary or of an extraordinary Understanding, who is willing in honesty and sincerity of Heart to receive the Scriptures as the Revelations of God; I say, I cannot but persuade my self, that such a Man (and that too by the bare Conduct of his Common Sense) would readily ac­knowledge and accept it for a Truth in those Scriptures revealed, that our Saviour suffered and died to expiate the Sins of Mankind: For, the Texts that assert it, are so often re­peated, and, when compared, do so mutu­ally not only confirm each others Truth, but also explain each others Meaning; and the Management of the whole Thing is so ex­actly accounted for, and that through all the Stages and Periods of it, till our Saviour comes to offer his Sacrifice to God in the Heavens, the Place of his more peculiar Re­sidence and Abode (as the High-Priest did typically in the like Case do in the Holy of Holies, the more peculiar Discovery of God's Residence among the Jews under the Law:) I say, all these Things are so categorically asserted and explained, and so critically ac­counted [Page 128]for in the Revelations of God, that I cannot as yet persuade my self, that Com­mon Sense, and Common Sincerity will not oblige those to receive and believe them, who are willing to receive those Books, in which they are so laid down, for the Word of God.

3. Neither can I persuade my self, that Reason, if it be not spun too fine, (and what is so, may easily break) but, I say, I cannot persuade my self, that Reason, upon a sober Examination of the Matter, (as it is laid down in the Scriptures) can in any wise call in question the Justice of it. For, as it is there laid down, there are only three Per­sons more especially concerned in it, and those are, God, our Saviour, and Man. Let us therefore take the Sum of the Business in these Three Propositions, and then see, if our honest and natural Reason can discover any Injustice in it.

And, First, God does forgive our Sins in Consideration of our Saviour's Sufferings.

Secondly, Our Saviour did suffer in our stead, in order to the obtaining of such For­giveness.

Thirdly, We do obtain such Forgiveness in Consideration of such his Suffering.

Now if we set our plain and honest Rea­son on work to examine, whether there be any Injustice in this whole Transaction; that will readily tell us, that if there be any such Thing as Injustice in it, that Injustice must [Page 129]be attributed to some of the Persons concern­ed in it. For, in this Case, it is not suffici­ent to say, that the Transaction, either in the Whole, or in any Part of it, is unjust, unless we do particularly assign that Person engaged in it, to whom that Injustice does belong. For, all Injustice in Matters of Fact must be ascri­bed to some Person or other: And no Injustice, in any Matter of Fact whatsoever, can be truly ascribed to any Person whomsoever, if that Person be supposed to have nothing to do in that Matter of Fact. Now, in the Case, as it is put, there are (as we observed just now) no other Persons concerned, but God, our Saviour, and our selves. If therefore the Thing prove to be, as by the Revelati­ons of God it will be found to prove, that we Sinners are reconciled to God by the Suffer­ings, Death, and Merit of our Saviour, and so are pardoned for our Sins; then it will follow, that if there be any Injustice in the Case, that Injustice must be either ascribed to God, to our Saviour, or to our selves.

Now there cannot possibly be any Injustice in us, because we are purely passive in the Case: For, so far forth as we are forgiven, (and that is as far as we are concerned) most certainly we are so. And we may be very sure, that Reason will never tell any Man, that he is therefore a Criminal, because he receives a great Blessing from God; and least of all will it tell him, that it is a Sin in [Page 130]him to receive from God the Pardon of his Sins.

And I dare not so far question the Modesty of any Christian, as to suppose, that they will fix any Injustice in the present Case, ei­ther upon God, or upon our Saviour: And therefore because no Injustice can be charged upon any of the Persons concerned in the whole Affair; therefore, if we be but once satisfied, that God himself has told us in his Word, that the Affair was so managed, (as most certainly so he has told us) then the Conclusion at last must be, that there was no Injustice in it at all. I say, I am satisfied, that this would be the way of Reasoning to a sober and modest Christian; and that this would be good and satisfactory, if Men would with Modesty and Humility bring their Ra­tional Sentiments to comply with the Scri­ptures, and not industriously struggle to force the Scriptures to comply with their own pre­judicate Opinions or Surmises. For, in a Thing of that Depth and Counsel, as is the Redemption of Mankind, I am sure it is much more safe, as well as more modest, to com­ply with the Declarations of God, whose Counsel and Work it is, (and that too espe­cially, where, as we have seen, a sober and modest Reason falls in with, and approves such his Declarations) than by a more refi­ned way of Reasoning, and a more tedious and intricate Deduction of Consequences, [Page 131](where any little Flaw or Mistake may spoil the whole Concatenation, and at long run determine in Deceit and Fallacy) downright to controul and contradict such Declarations. For, God is our best and most sure Guide in all things: And then, when he professedly undertakes to be so, and that too in such Things, that our Natural Reason knows no­thing of, without such his Guidance; it would be the best Use that we can possibly make of such our Reason, in all such Cases to follow his Conduct. For, in this very Case, God has himself told us, that he has confounded the Wisdom of the Wise. For, Christ crucified was to the Jews a Stumbling­block, and to the Greeks Foolishness. And it has before our Days been thought very good Reason, that he therefore could not save others, because he could not save himself. Tho' I cannot persuade my self to doubt, but that That, and all other Methods of Reason­ing, that attempt to make out the Injustice of his Suffering in our stead, or any other ways to evacuate the Merit and Purchase of his Blood, will in the conclusion prove frivolous and empty; and that they will be found light, even in the Balance of Reason it self.

But to carry this Business a little farther: As we have made it out, that sober and sound Reason will warrant the Justice of Man's Re­demption, if it was so managed, as we have laid it down; so, that it was so managed, we [Page 132]may be as much assured by the Word of God, as we may of any other Thing con­tained in that Word. And hence we are told, that God made our Saviour to become Sin for us, who knew no Sin, 2 Cor. 5. ult. That he reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, in the Eighteenth Verse of the same Chap­ter: He tells us also, that he was reconciling the World to himself, not imputing their Tres­passes unto them, in the Verse immediately following. And that we may be assured, that God does all this in Consideration of our Sa­viour's Death and Passion, we are told in one Place, that he died for our Sins; in another, that the Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all Sin; in a third, that being justified by his Blood, we shall be saved from Wrath through him. All which, with a great deal more to the same import, that might be al­ledged, amounts to thus much; That our Saviour took upon himself our Sins, and in our stead died for them; and that thereupon God pardoned such our Sins, and was recon­ciled to us. Now, because God himself tells us such a thing, and that too in as plain and express Words, as any thing can possibly be told in, we may be very sure, that what is so told, is plain and open Truth: And because at the same time he tells us, that what was so done, was done by himself; we may more­over be sure, that what was so done, was just and right. However, thus far we are [Page 133]certain, that if in the present Case we will be contented to be determined by the Word of God, that then there neither are, nor can be any Laws of Justice, that can hinder our Sa­viour's Suffering in our stead, in order to our obtaining the Pardon of our Sins by such his Suffering.

The Answer then to what shall be alledged against such Justice, we shall defer to the next Chapter. Only before we break off here, we cannot but take notice, that the Doctrine of our Saviour's Expiation, as it has in part already, and will more fully here­after appear to have more Truth in it, than what is alledged against it; so also it will ap­pear to have more Comfort. For, if there be no other Name, whereby we must be saved; it must needs be very imprudent at least to refuse to admit our own Salvation in and by him: And it is a Doubt at least, whether they, who deny his Expiation, the Purchase of his Blood, and the Forgiveness of Sins in Consideration of his Death, do not so refuse it. And it is at least another Doubt, whether those, who refuse it upon such Considerati­ons, do not refuse it altogether. The Scri­ptures do at least seem to tell us so: And they will give but an ill Account of their Prudence, who will so far hazard their Salva­tion, as to gratifie their Obstinacy in an Opi­nion, that does so palpably controul God's express Declarations.

CHAP. VII.

BUT notwithstanding the Multitudes of such Declarations in his Word, which do avowedly and professedly acquaint us with this great Truth; yet for all that, it has met with many Adversaries: Who, as they have endeavoured by odd and very uncouth Inter­pretations to expound away the plain and categorical Assertions of such Declarations; so have they also to back such their Expositi­ons with Arguments taken from Natural Reason. Now it may be reasonably expect­ed, that those Reasons should be very good, and well-grounded, which pretend to make good such an Interpretation of God's Word, which at first View is a downright Contradi­ction to such Word. And because all those Interpretations, which attempt to annul the Expiatory Sacrifice of our Saviour, are such; therefore, before we proceed any farther, we [Page 135]cannot but take notice, that it looks pre­sumptuous at least to pretend to measure, and much more is it so, to controul the Justice of the Divine Counsels and Actions, laid down expresly and frequently in his acknowledged Word, by so uncertain a Standard as Humane Reason; because it is impossible, that such Reason should comprehend all Possibilities; especially such, which are confessedly brought to pass by the more signal and extraordinary Power of an Omnipotent Arm. But how­ever, because such Attempts have been made, we will consider some, and the chief too, of those Allegations which have been offered in opposition to those plain and express Disco­veries, that God in his Word has made to Man, of the Method of his own Proceedings in the Forgiveness of their Sins.

1. And first, It is pleaded against the Ju­stice of our Saviour's Suffering in order to the obtaining of our Pardon, That such Suf­ferings cannot therefore be just, because in Justice and Equity they are due to us, and not to him. For, since the Justice of the Pu­nishment must arise from the Demerit of the Delinquent, the Punishment can in Justice be only laid on there, where the Demerit is lodged. And therefore, if our Saviour was not the Sinner, (as most certainly he was not) neither ought he in Justice to be the Sufferer. And to confirm this Way of Arguing, we have the Voice of God himself assuring us, [Page 136]that the Father shall not suffer for the Ini­quity of the Son, nor the Son for the Iniquity of the Father, (that is, one Soul shall not suffer for the Sins of another) but the Soul that sinneth, that shall die, in the Eigh­teenth of Ezekiel. And, which is yet a great deal more, God does there appeal to the Sense of Mankind for the Equity and Justice of such his Proceedings. Now then, if every Sinner ought in Justice to bear his own Burden, how can it possibly be just, that the Punishment of our Sins should be laid upon another, who was in no wise guilty of those Sins? And then, lastly, if the Vengeance due to our Sins could not in Justice be laid upon another; then neither can it be true, that God does therefore remit such Vengeance to us, because our Saviour has suffered in our stead. And by consequence, the Forgiveness of our Sins cannot either in Reason or Ju­stice depend upon our Saviour's Sufferings. And if it does not, then it must be a Mistake at least to affirm, that God's Forgiveness of our Sins is just and equal; and yet at the same time to maintain, that he does forgive them in Consideration of our Saviour's Suf­ferings. The Objection (you see) looks plausible at the first sight; but yet, when it comes to be strictly examined, will (as will appear by and by) signifie just nothing. For,

1. There is no doubt made by any of Mankind, that we know of, but that in some [Page 137]Cases one may become a Surety for another; and that if the Principal fails in the Perfor­mance of his just Obligations, the Surety (so far as he stands bound for him) is obliged in Ju­stice to answer and make good such Obliga­tions. This among Mankind is taken as a Thing granted in all those Pecuniary Obliga­tions, which do relate to Commerce or Traf­fick: And therefore it is generally allowed, that he who is bound for the Payment of another Man's Debt, upon default of Pay­ment in the original Debtor, does become Debtor himself, and, as such, is bound in Justice to make good the Debt to the Cre­ditor.

Nay, we may go farther yet, and by do­ing so, may advance one Step nearer to our main Design. For, as all Mankind are agreed, that the Surety stands bound in Justice to pay the Debt, upon the Non-payment of the Principal Debtor, where such Debt is con­tracted by Commerce or Traffick; so also they have the same Sense of the Surety's Obliga­tions, where the Debt is contracted by the Principal Debtor's Crime or Delinquency. Now it is agreed on all Hands (for Common Sense tells all Men so) that a Debt contracted by a Crime is a Punishment, tho' it be but a pecuniary Punishment. And then, if a Sure­ty, upon the Failure in the Principal, be bound in Justice to pay such a Debt; it will be so far from being a Doubt, whether a [Page 138]Surety in such a Case may justly undergo the Punishment of the Criminal; that in deed and truth he is bound, and that too in Justice and Honesty, to undergo it. From whence we conclude, in the first place, that it is so far from being absolutely true, that one Per­son cannot justly suffer the Punishment due to the Crimes of another; that, on the con­trary, it may so happen, that he may be bound, and that too in Conscience, to take up­on himself such Punishment.

2. To which we add, in the second place, That in such a Case, where one Person un­dergoes the Punishment due to the Crimes of another, the Punishment so inflicted can so much the less be taxed of Injustice, if the Person, who undergoes it, do undertake it freely and willingly. And therefore, tho' it be true in Thesi, that is, in the general, that it is Injustice to punish an Innocent Man for the Fault of a Criminal; yet in Hypothesi, or in a particular Matter of Fact, it may not be unjust so to do. And the Reason is, because any Punishment (be it what it will) can only be unjust with relation to that Person who undergoes such Punishment. For, if he does justly undergo it, then, let the Punishment be what it will, yet still it will be just. Now, where a Person does willingly, freely, and o [...] his own accord submit to a Punishment; there the Punishment, tho' he did not by his Crimes deserve it, cannot therefore be [Page 139]thought unjust, because it would be an odd and unheard-of kind of Injustice to any Per­son, to injure him by sulfilling his own De­sires, and by gratifying his Choice. If then we apply this to our Saviour's Sufferings, which he underwent in our stead, we may be informed by him himself, that he laid down his Life, and, that no Man took it from him; that is, he laid it down willingly. And because he did so, therefore tho' God laid upon him, and accepted from him the Ven­geance due to our Sins, in order to our Ac­quittance; yet he did him no Injury by so doing, because he was willing, as our Surety and Proxy, to undergo and suffer such Ven­geance. Indeed it is not to dissembled, that because the Sin was Ours, and not His, that God therefore might, and that justly too, have refused the Punishment to be his, and not ours. But then, withal, we must take no­tice, that tho' God might have done so; yet that there was no Law of Justice, that either did or could oblige him so to do. And there­fore, to clear that, or any other Doubt that may arise from what has been spoken upon this Head, we add,

3. In the third place, That where that Person, who willingly suffers for another's Crime, has an undoubted Right and Title in all those Things, and an uncontroulable Power to dispose of all those Things, which are ei­ther damnified or lost by such his Sufferings: [Page 140]In such a Case, as there is no Injury done to his Person, by reason of his willingness to suf­fer; so neither is there any Violence offered to any Law of Justice, by reason of such his undoubted Right, and absolute Power. Now at once to clear this Matter, and to bring it up to the Point we aim at, we must take notice, that our Saviour tells us himself, in the Tenth of St. John and the Eighteenth Verse, I have power to lay down my Life, and I have power to take it again. And Reason tells us the same Thing: For, because he made the Worlds, and because all things were created by him and for him, and because for these Reasons alone he is the Almighty God; therefore there can be no question, but that he may justly chal­lenge to himself that Power, which the Su­preme God claims, as his most undoubted Prerogative, I kill, and I make alive. To which we may likewise add, that he is to be Judge both of Quick and Dead (as even that Creed, which goes by the Name of the Apo­stles, and even our Adversaries too, in the present Case, do allow.) Now it cannot in the least seem reasonable, that he should have the Power of Damning and Saving, who has not the Power of Life and Death: For, it must needs sound harsh to our Reason, to grant him the greater Power, and in the mean time to deny him the less. Taking it therefore for granted, that he had an abso­lute and uncontroulable Power to dispose of [Page 141]his Life as it seemed best to his own Wisdom; if he was pleased so to dispose of such his Life, as to lay it down in our stead, and for our sakes, there could not possibly lie any Obligation of Justice upon God, to bind him up from accepting the Offer of such his Sa­crifice; because such a Power does in it self suppose, that there neither is, nor can be any Injury, that should forbid such an Offering. And we know well enough, that any thing may be lawfully done, against the doing of which there is no just Law. And therefore the Case of our Saviour, in the present In­stance, does so far forth differ from all the Cases of all other imaginary Innocents in the World. For, tho' another Man be supposed to be Innocent, yet he has no such Power over his own Life, as to dispose of it as he himself shall please: And if he should by any Means destroy it without his own Demerit, it would be in him Self-murder, and that too, tho' he should offer it for a Criminal. But if he should so order his Life, as to deserve Death; then that very Crime, that forfeits his Life, would spoil his Innocence too. And therefore should a Magistrate, who is invest­ed with the lawful Power of the Sword, ac­cept the Life of an Innocent in lieu of the forfeited Life of a Criminal, he would there­fore become a Criminal himself; because in such a Commutation he allows the Innocent Man to become a Criminal, by usurping upon [Page 142]the Prerogative of God himself. Which may serve to shew the Fraud and Deceit of that way of Arguing, which will not therefore allow it to be just, that our Saviour should offer his Life, as a Sacrifice for Sinners, be­cause it cannot be justly allowed, that other Innocent Persons should do so: Whereas the Life, which our Saviour offered in the pre­sent Case, was entirely his own, and absolute­ly at his own disposal; which yet cannot be truly affirmed of the Life of any other Inno­cent Person in the World (if yet we should suppose such a Person) from the Days of the Creation, to the Consummation of all Things. As therefore we learned by the last Head, that God might have refused to accept our Saviour's Death in our stead; because the Life offered was not the same that was for­feited, but another: So, by what has been spoken under that Head, and this, we may now perceive, that there is no Reason in Law or Justice, why he might not accept it. For, if our Saviour might have become Surety for the Discharge of that Debt, which by the Tenor of the Law we owed to Justice, by our Transgression of the Law; and if, upon our Inability to pay such Debt, so as to obtain our Acquittance, he was willing, and fully impowered to lay down his Life, in order to our Release and Discharge; and if God might in Justice accept the Offering of such his Life for so gracious and merciful a Purpose: Then [Page 143]the whole Objection against the Justice of his Suffering in our stead, and for our sake, va­nishes, and comes to nothing.

These Things I have pursued thus far, to put the whole Matter in a true Light, and to lay it down just as it is: Tho' I do frankly confess, that I do not think the Objection against our Saviour's Sufferings, taken from the Injustice of such Sufferings, to be of any force at all, no not upon those very Princi­ples, upon which they go, who make it. For, they themselves allow our Saviour to be In­nocent, and by consequence (tho' they make Death a Natural Thing, which, by the way, is but an Heathen-Notion of it; for it does not in the least agree with what the Scriptures teach us about it:) But, I say, they them­selves allow our Saviour to be innocent; and therefore they must allow, that he did not deserve that Death, which he suffered. But then they tell us, that God did therefore per­mit him to undergo such a cruel and hard Treatment, that he might be an Example of Patience, Submission, and Resignation, to all Men, in any Circumstances, under which they should be brought by God's Providence; and that he was slain a Sacrifice to ratifie and establish the New-Covenant, that God then made with Man in order to the Pardon of Sin. By which it is notorious, that they endea­vour to vindicate God's Justice from those Ends and Designs of his Providence or Mer­cy, [Page 144]for which God delivered up his Son to a cruel and bloody Death, tho' he did not de­serve such Death.

1. Now we are very well assured, in the first place, that our Saviour was delivered up to be crucified and slain, by the determinate Counsel and Foreknowledge of God. For so St. Peter expresly tells us, in the Second of the Acts and the Twenty third Verse. And again, we are told in the Fourth of the Acts the Twenty seventh and Twenty eighth Ver­ses, that Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the People of Israel, were ga­thered together, to do to him, whatsoever God's Hand and Counsel determined before to be done. We know also, that his Crucifixion was prophesied in the Old Testament, and that in sundry Places; and that he himself does both foretell it in the New Testament, and does there also tell us, that it was plentifully fore­told in the Old. And we know, lastly, that what was foretold some thousand Years be­fore it was brought to pass, and then was so actually brought to pass, as it was foretold, must be foretold by God: The Certainty of the Event, in such a Case, being a Demon­stration, that Omniscience gave forth the Prediction.

2. We are assured, in the second place, that our Saviour being perfectly Innocent, as ha­ving never transgressed the Law, could not possibly deserve the Death of the most hai­nous [Page 145]Malefactors, a Death attended with Agony and Torment, tho' he did suffer such a Death.

3. It is agreed, in the third place, between us and our Adversaries, That because our Savi­our did willingly submit to the Counsel and Determination of God, in suffering such a Death; that thereby God's Justice is suffici­ently assoiled and vindicated (to which we spake more largely just now) and that by such his Submission he gave an Example to Mankind, under any Affliction, of an entire Resignation to the Counsel and Will of God, in all Cases whatsoever.

4. But then, in the last place, it may be reasonably demanded, how it comes to pass, that these self-same Sufferings, this self-same Death of our Saviour, do then become un­just, when they are affirmed to have been un­dergone by him for the Expiation of Man's Sin? They were just, because he underwent them willingly; and they were honourable, because they were exemplary; and we are sure they were merciful and charitable, if they were expiatory: And then, shall what is just in it self, and honourable, because it is designed for an Example, or for any other End; I say, shall such a Thing therefore be­come unjust, because it is over and above de­signed for a Charity and a Mercy? The same Thing (we know) may be directed to more Ends and Purposes than one; and those se­veral [Page 146]Ends and Purposes may all be good and warrantable; and where they are so, there (if the Thing be good and just in it self) we may in Reason rest satisfied, that one of those good Endswill no more vitiate and cor­rupt it, than any other End will. If there­fore the Death of our Saviour were just with­out being design'd for an Expiation; it will remain just still, tho' it be design'd for a [...] Expiation. For, Mercy and Compassio [...] (which are undoubtedly included in such Ex­piation) are most undoubtedly just and good Things, when they are designed and brought to pass by just and lawful Means. And there­fore, when the Adversaries of the Expiation do tell us, that the Death of our Saviour was just and lawful, they do with the same Mouth-full of Breath contradict their own Objection against the Justice of the Expiation; and do as good as tell us, that the Expiation is just and lawful too. When therefore Se­cinus, and his Followers, do in very tragical Expressions (and some of those Expresnons so indecent and irreverent, to say no worse, as not fit to be mentioned) exclaim against the Injustice of the Expiation; it is notorious, that they quit their Reason, and fly to Ha­rangue; that is, they hope in this Case to prevail by their Rhetorick, rather than by their Arguments. For, I can hardly persuade my self to believe them so short-sighted, as not to perceive, that any Argument against [Page 147]the Justice of the Expiation does not contra­dict such their own Positions, which main­tain the Justice of our Saviour's Death and Passion.

One Thing more I would remark, and then I shall proceed; and that is, That because the Objection under this Head is only laid against the Justice, but not at all against the Value, Merit, or extensive Influence of our Saviour's Death; therefore I have precisely stuck to the Matter of the present Objection, without mixing other Things with it relating to the Expiation; that is, I have here only asserted the Justice of our Saviour's Death, in order to the Expiation of the Sins of Man­kind.

2. The second Objection against our Sa­viour's Expiation of our Sins by his Death, stands thus: and that is, That tho' it should be granted, that he had Power over his own Life, that he was willing to lay down that Life, and that God was willing to accept it; yet all this will amount but to part of Pay­ment: For, first, the Death that we deserved by our Sins was Eternal; but that which he suffered in our stead, was but Transient and Temporal. It is confessed, that as the Socini­ans do deny the Expiation, so do they also an Etern [...]ty of Punishment: But yet that does not at all take off from the [...]orce of the Objection; because if they, who maintain the Doctrine of the Expiation, do also assert [Page 148]an Eternity of Punishment, it is sufficient for their Confutation to shew, that their several Doctrines do contradict, and so overthrow each other. The Objection then being so far laid right, it goes on further, thus: The Sins of Mankind are the Sins of Many, of Thousands, of Millions, of Myriads, nay, of Multitudes of Myriads; but the Death of our Saviour was only the Death of One: So that if either we consider the Extent of our Guilt, or the Malignity of it, it will by no means seem reasonable, and therefore neither just, that the single Death of our Saviour should be looked upon as a proportionats Expiation of it. Nor indeed would it, ac­cording to those who make the Objection; who (tho' the Apostle tells us in one Place, that in him dwells all the Fulness of the God­head bodily; and in another Place, that being in the Form of God, he thought it no Robbery to be equal with God) will yet, in spite of these, and a Multitude of other express De­clarations to the contrary, still allow our Sa­viour to be no more than a mere Man. Now it is freely confessed, that if the Case were so, then his single Death would be no valu­able Compensation for the Death of all the Sinners in the World; and much less would it be so for the eternal Death of such Sinners. But since the Scriptures have over and over told us, that his Death was such a Compen­sation; and since such a Compensation can­not [Page 149]not exceed the Dignity of that Character, which the same Scriptures have given us of him, tho' their Way of Reasoning says o­therwise; I dare leave it to any sober Chri­stian to judge, whether it does not more con­cern them to answer what the Scriptures do object to them, than it does us, in the present Case, to answer what they do object to us. For, if the Fulness of the Godhead dwelt in our Saviour bodily, and so was united to and with that Body; then it will be no incon­ceivable Strain to imagine, that the Infinite Dignity of the Person suffering must needs add an immense Value to such his Sufferings, and by so doing must make them more than adequate to the Guilt of all Mankind. And tho' this of it self may be sufficient to stop the Mouth of the present Objection; yet if we do but recollect some few Things, that have been spoken to, and made good already, we may still be farther satisfied, that the Ob­jection against the Value of his Sufferings, in order to the Expiation of the Sins of Men, will be of no force at all. If we do consider therefore, that because our Saviour took on him the Nature of Man, and not of Angels, that he did therefore die for Men and not for Angels: If we consider, that the faln Angels are left without any hope of Escape from the Vengeance of the final Judgment, which Man is not: If we consider, that the Vengeance which the faln Angels shall then suffer, will [Page 150] never work out their Redemption, or For­giveness; and that for that very Reason, be­cause that Vengeance shall be eternal: If we consider, that neither would eternal Venge­ance work out the Salvation of any Man, for the same Reason: And lastly, If we con­sider, that notwithstanding the utter Impos­sibility of Man's satisfying the Divine Ju­stice by his own Punishment: yet we are as­sured by the Voice of God, that some Men shall obtain Redemption by their Saviour's Blood, even Reminion of Sins: I say, if we con [...]der all these Things, our Natural Rea­son will help us to conclude, that the Death of our Saviour, tho it were but the Death of One, and tho' it were but a temporal Death neither, yet will do that, which all the Eter­nal Deaths in the World could not do; that is, it will reconcile Sinners to God, and from him obtain their Pardon; and that upon that single Account, it is of more Value in his Signt, than the Death of Angels and Men; and that therefore he, who suffered that Death, was infinitely greater than both. By which we may also understand, that if there be any Absurdity in the thing, that one Per­son, by his single and temporal Death, should satisfie the Divine Justice for the Sins and Demerits of so many; they, who make the Objection, do make the Absurdity too; be­cause, in their Opinion concerning the Person suffering, they do degrade him below that [Page 151]Infinite Station and Dignity, in which the Scriptures do assure us, that he stands ex­alted.

3. The last Objection against our Saviour's Expiation of Sin, and that which does in­deed rather attempt to prove the Impossibility, than the Injustice of the Thing, is this; That if our Saviour be God himself, and if this very Saviour did die to reconcile Sinners to God; then it will follow, That God suffered to reconcile Sinners to himself: Which, at at the very first sight, looks absurd.

1. And so it may indeed, to Humane Rea­son, which in many other Things, but more especially in the Things of God, is very of­ten guided by dark and blind Measures. But still the Apostle twice tells us, in the Second to the Corinthians, chap. 5. ver. 18, 19. That God was reconciling us, and reconciling the World to himself, and that he did this by Jesus Christ, whom yet the same Apostle in ano­ther Place calls, God over all, blessed for ever. Now, in the Contrivance and Enterprise of this Reconciliation, he was the first and prin­cipal Agent; and so indeed the very Begin­ning of the Reconciliation came from the offended Person: Nay, it was he, who con­trived the whole Method of Reconciliation; (for, it was hid from Ages and Generations, from Principalities and Powers, till God made it known to his Church.) And that we may not think, that there is any Absurdity in this [Page 152]his doing, he does in this very Case, as far as our Circumstances will allow, command us to follow his Example. For, in the Eigh­teenth of St. Matthew and the Fifteenth Verse, he requires, that if our Brother offend us, we (that is, we the Offended) should go and tell him his Fault. So that, tho' the Injury be done, not by us, but to us; yet we must make the first Step towards a Reconciliation. Now, a Man of a worldly Reason would in this Case be apt to cry out, What! must I begin to give my self Satisfaction? Is this Sense or Justice? Did not he do the Injury? And is not the whole Reparation to come from him? But, God's Thoughts are not as Man's Thoughts, nor his Ways as Man's Ways. And therefore, tho' your Enemy began the In­jury; yet, if he commands, you must begin the Reconciliation. And if God do not only begin the Reconciliation in the Case before us, but also suffer himself, that he may compleat it; all the Inconvenience that will follow from it, will be, that God can do more than Man: For, he can do any thing, that is not unjust; and any thing, that is not impossible. And, as we have already made it out, that it is not unjust; so we shall go on farther, to make it out, that it is not impossible.

2. For, secondly, our Saviour being (as we have already made it out) a Middle Per­son between God and Man, a Mediator in his Person, as well as in his Office; as he was [Page 153] not so Man, but that he was God; so he was not so God, but that he was Man. And then, if we add, that as Man he suffered for the Sins of Man, so much may be allowed now, because so much has been proved already. And indeed, strictly and closely speaking, it was Man, not God, who suffered in the Per­son of our Saviour. For God, we are sure, is utterly, and in his own Nature, incapable of any such Thing, as that is, which we call Suffering. So far forth therefore as the Ob­jection furmises, that we take God to have suffered; so far the Objection is mistaken and laid wrong. But yet,

3. Because God and Man were personally united in our Saviour, and so made up but one Christ; therefore our Reason will tell us, that the Sufferings of such a Man must re­ceive an immense Value from his Personal Union with God. Take the Thing in an In­stance, and it will be much more plain, and satisfactory. A Man strikes a Prince. No one will say, that he strikes his Dignity, (for the thing is impossible) but only his Body. But yet to think, that the Injury and Malig­nity of the Stroke shall not be rated, as well by his Dignity, as by his Body, would be an Imagination, that an ordinary Reason would condemn of Weakness. And therefore, tho' the Bodies of all Men are made of the same Flesh and Blood, and so the wounding of a Prince is no greater a natural Hurt to him, [Page 154]than the wounding of a Peasant is to him, (supposing their Wounds to be equal or alike) yet we know, that the Difference of their Conditions shall make such a vast Difference in the Value of the Mischiefs done by the se­veral Wounds; that, in the first Case, the Fault of such Mischief shall be esteem'd Ca­pital; when perhaps in the last it shall hard­ly be thought Penal. The Sufferings there­fore of the Man Christ Jesus might be suffici­ent for the Expiation of the Sins of Mankind, not because his Deity suffer'd with his Hu­manity; but because he being IMMANU­EL, his Deity gave an Infinite Value to the Sufferings of his Humanity, by being Inti­mately, because Personally, united to it. And therefore, as my Reason suggests to me the Certainty of the Union of his Deity with his Humanity, from the Expiation made by the Value of the Sufferings of his Humanity; so from the Union of his Deity with his Huma­nity, it rather suggests to me, that he is One Person of the Deity, than that his Deity suffer'd for the accomplishing of such his Ex­piation. And I cannot but think, that the Arguments already offered will in a good measure warrant such a Suggestion: And therefore, to what has been already said, I add in the

4. Fourth place, That tho' the Expiation of the Sin of Man was one Design both of our Saviour's Incarnation and Sufferings; yet [Page 155]that it was not the whole Design of such his Sufferings, and of such his Incarnation. For, he came to destroy the Works of the Devil; the Kingdom, which the Devil had set up in this lower World; to recover sinful Man from that Revolt that he had made from God, and so to restore him to his Duty and Allegiance to his Sovereign Lord and King (as will appear more fully hereafter.) And to this purpose, as it was necessary, that he should purchase to himself a peculiar People zealous of good Works; so it was necessary, that he should free such People from that State of Sin, in which they were in Bon­dage, and by doing both, establish a Kingdom of Holiness and Righteousness, in lieu of a Kingdom of Sin and Darkness. His grand Design then was the enlarging of his Father's Kingdom, by restoring to it what the Devil had torn off from him. And then, if for the accomplishing of such his Design, the Expiation of Man's Sin; and if for the Expiation of Man's Sin his own Death was necessary; it will be no great strain to conceive, that the Man Christ Jesus, united to the second Person in the Trinity, should do and suffer what he did, for the fulfilling the Will of God, by re­storing and so enlarging his Kingdom, by subdu [...]ng his Arch-enemy, and by taking his usurped Dominion out of his Hand, and as­serting it to himself. For, all this our Savi­our did, when by those Methods, with which [Page 156]the eternal Wisdom has acquainted us in his Word, he builds up a Kingdom of Righte­ousness out of one of Rebellion and Wicked­ness: Which Kingdom, when his Work is fully accomplished, he will (which was his main and grand Design) resign up to God, the natural and rightful Lord of all Kingdom and Dominion: See 1 Cor. chap. 15. ver. 24. Tho' therefore our Apprehensions may be startled, when we undertake to conceive, that the Son of God, the Alpha and Omega, the Word of God, by whom he made the Worlds, should suffer to reconcile Man (who had made himself his Enemy by Sin) to him­self, in order to Man's Pardon: Yet when we consider, that by the same Undertaking, he re-settled his Father's Kingdom, asserted his Honour and Dignity, displayed his Mer­cy, and in Conjunction with that maintain­ed his Justice; and that by doing all this, he exhibited God to the World, not only a faithful Creator, but also a gracious and lo­ving Redeemer: I say, when all these Things are considered, our Wonder and our Incredu­lity may not only abate, but cease; and we may be rationally satisfied, that it was as well worth our Saviour's Sufferings, to bring all these Things to pass, (tho his Enemy Man had his Interest in it) as it was for him to make Man at first.

Now, what we have said, is a sufficient An­swer to the Objection, upon supposition, that [Page 157]any or every Sin is of so malignant a Na­ture, that the just Punishment of it shall be Eternal. But tho' there be such a Thing, as Eternal Punishment, most expresly asserted by the Scriptures, (and therefore we do by no means question the Truth of it) what­ever the Socinians may pretend to the con­trary; yet perhaps it is not so certain, that the Scriptures do allot any such Punishment to any other Sin besides Unbelief, or (which amounts to much the same Thing, tho' in other Words) a final Impenitence. For, it is most certain, that all other Sins, if they be truly and heartily repented for, shall, in Con­sideration of our Saviour's Merits, be for­given; and it is as certain, that no Man shall undergo an eternal Punishment for those Sins, which shall be forgiven. If therefore we do assert, what is most true, that our Saviour did not die to save Unbelievers, or Impeni­tent Sinners; and that they are the only Sin­ners, to whom eternal Punishments are as­signed; in such a Case, the Objection, that his temporal Punishment could not take away an eternal Punishment, would be of no force; because, in such Case, eternal Punishment was not designed to be taken away. For, every Unbeliever, and Impenitent Person, shall suf­fer it, notwithstanding our Saviour's Death: And there do not want very good Probabili­ties (and those too in no wise disagreeing to Scripture-Revelations) that the Sins of those, [Page 158]whose Sins shall not be pardoned after the Resurrection, shall have just so much Punish­ment, as they do in Justice deserve, (be that more or less) but that such their Punishment shall not therefore be eternal, because such their Sins did deserve such eternal Punish­ment; but because they refused and rejected those easie Means, which God had provided in a Saviour, by a due Use of which they might have escaped all Punishment whatso­ever. Now, because it is absurd to imagine, that our Saviour under [...]ent Death to save those who should slight or reject that Salvati­on, which he purchased by his Death; and because none but such, who do so, shall, by the Tenor of the Gospel, suffer eternal Pu­nishment; therefore it is no Objection against the Merit of our Saviour's Death, to say, that his temporal Death cannot expiate an eternal Punishment, because he did not suf­fer Death for any such Purpose; and he did not do so, because he did not suffer Death for those, who alone shall suffer eternal Punish­ment; that is, he did not suffer Death for those, who shall refuse and reject the only Means of Salvation, which he purchased for Mankind by his Death.

Much more might be offered upon this Occasion; but this being sufficient in this Place, I shall therefore here add no more.

In the mean while, I do not question, but that the Value of our Saviour's Sufferings s [...] ­fficient [Page 159]to expiate the Guilt of any Sins, for whose Expiation such Sufferings were design­ed; tho' such Guilt should be supposed or allowed to deserve eternal Punishment of it self.

And from the Whole, that has been spo­ken on this Subject, we do at last conclude, That a Release from the Vengeance due to Sin by the Law, and purchased for Man by his Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ, who for Man's sake made his Soul a Sacrifice for Sin, is a just and legal Pardon, and agreeable to the Measures of Right Reason, and to the Laws of Justice.

For, because the Pardon of Sin does imply in it a Desert of Punishment in the Party forgiven; and because the laying the Punish­ment which he deserves, upon another, is in effect a Remission of that Punishment to him; and because, lastly, a Remission of Punishment to the Party, which deserves such Punishment, may be truly accounted a Pardon of his Sin; (For, Pardon of Sin to any Party whomso­ever, is neither more nor less, than the Re­leasing or Freeing him from the Punishment due to his Sin:) Therefore, if, by what has been spoken, it has appeared, that the Pu­nishment due to our Sins was, without any In­justice, translated upon another, and that upon such Translation it cannot justly be exa [...]ed of us; then it will follow, that so far forth as our Sin was pardoned, so far forth the Pardon was just.

And therefore, so far as we have hitherto gone, we may truly and rationally conclude, That that Method, in which the Gospel di­scovers our Salvation to be brought to pass, does exactly square to the Rules of Right Reason and Justice. For, so we have seen, that it does in the first thing, which a Gospel-Forgiveness does imply and contain in it; and that is the Pardon of Sin.

CHAP. VIII.

THo' we have hitherto asserted the Suf­ficiency of our Saviour's Sacrifice, for the Expiation and Pardon of Sin; yet it must be confessed, that bare Pardon of Sin, upon any Considerations whatsoever, (be those Considerations never so valuable) yet can never in Reason or Justice make out a Go­spel-Salvation. And therefore, we laid it down at the Beginning, that as, in order to a Gospel-Salvation, there was first required an Expiation, and, in consideration of such Expiation, a Pardon of Sin; so there is also [Page 161]required a Restitution to Holiness, and the Gift of Eternal Happiness. For, because God's Law (as every good Law besides) does consist of Two Parts; First, the Directive, or what it requires to be obey'd; and, Second­ly, the Vindictive, or what upon Disobedi­ence it requires to be suffered: And because Sin is the Disobedience to, or Transgression of the Law: Therefore, so far as we have dis­coursed of the Justice of the Pardon of Sin, so far we have only discoursed of that Justice which concerns the Vindictive Part of the Law. But by doing that, we have not at all discour­sed of that Justice, which concerns the Dire­ctive Part of the Law. And if, upon our neg­lect to follow such Directions, God does, for any Reasons whatsoever, forgive us the Penal­ty, which we incur by such our Neglect, and nothing more; it must be confessed, that by such a way of Proceeding, all Care of the Di­rective, which is indeed the principal Part of the Law, is thrown away. For, because all Men are Sinners, that is, because none do obey the Law; tho' God upon valuable Conside­rations do remit the Punishment to some, or all of those Sinners; yet still it is certain, that the Duty enjoined by the Law remains undone by all. And I therefore say, it is cer­tain, because it will notoriously appear by what follows, that the Pardon of Sin, that is, the Pardon of the Transgressionof the Law, (tho' such Pardon be granted by God, and [Page 162]obtained by us, in Consideration of our Savi­our's Suffering in our stead) can never pass for the Performance of the Directions of the Law; that is, can never pass for that Righ­teousness, which consists in an Obedience to such Directions; and therefore (as we shall see more fully hereafter) can never be suffi­cient for our obtaining a Gospel-Salvation, which includes in it an eternal Holiness, and an eternal Happiness, as well as the Pardon of Sin.

Now, that the Pardon of our Transgression of the Law, can neither in Reason nor Ju­stice pass for our Performance of the Dire­ctions of the Law, will appear notorious from these following Considerations.

1. Because Forgiveness does imply in the very Notion of it a Desert of Punishment; and a Desert of Punishment does imply in it the Transgression of the Directions of the Law. For, no Man can be truly forgiven, who does not justly deserve to be punished; and no Man can justly deserve to be punished, who does not transgress the Directions of the Law. Now, for the same Reason, and upon the same Account, to esteem a Man Innocent, and yet a Criminal, must needs be absurd, be­cause it is a Contradiction. And then, be­cause in Contradictions only one Part can be true; therefore, so sure as we are, that he, who is truly forgiven, must be a Sinner, so sure we are also, that he neither is, nor can be truly supposed to be Innocent. And there­fore, [Page 163]when God forgives, as it is supposed in Reason and Common Sense, that he does forgive Sins, and is so expressed in general in the Scriptures; so it is supposed in the same Reason, and the same Common Sense, that he does forgive those Sins to Sinners. And therefore we cannot be supposed to have obeyed the Directions of the Law, upon the Account, that God does forgive us the Pu­nishment threatned in the Law.

2. Nor can we be so, secondly, Because should we undergo the Punishment which the Law threatens; yet we could not by so do­ing ever fulfil the Directions of the Law. For, it is notorious in it self, that the suffer­ing what the Law threatens, is not the doing what the Law commands. Now, it is certain, that the Forgiveness of that Punishment, which we have deserved, can give us no bet­ter a Title to Obedience, than our suffering such Punishment could have done, had that Punishment not been forgiven. And it looks absurd at first view, that Guilt should consist in the neglect of Obedience, and that Punish­ment should be the Desert, and therefore in Justice the Effect of our Guilt; and yet that Obedience should be the Effect of our Punish­ment: That is, that Guilt, after one Remove, should be the proper, and in a manner natu­ral, because just Cause of Duty. But, we may be therefore sure, that it is no such mat­ter, because we are told by God himself, that [Page 164]there is a Punishment after this Life, which shall be Eternal; which yet would be impos­sible, if the suffering of Punishment were equivalent to a perfect Obedience to the Di­rections of the Law: Which, because for the Reason alledged, and for more, that might be alledged; it cannot be, therefore neither can the Forgiveness of such Punishment be so. For, it is evident, that the Forgiveness of our Punishment can do no more towards the making us obedient, than the Punishment it self could do, should we undergo it. And therefore the Pardon of our Sins for the Sake of our Saviour's having suffered in our stead, does not of it self suppose us to have fulfilled the Directions of the Law.

3. The Forgiveness of our Sins does imply nothing more in it, than our Freedom from that Vengeance, which the Law has threat­ned, and which we have deserved by our Transgression of the Directions of it; and so does only free us from the vindictive Part of the Law: But does not, for that Reason, en­title us to those Rewards, which the Law pro­mises to those who obey its Directions. Now, it is a very different Thing to be barely freed from the Vengeance of the Law, and to be entitled to the Promises of the Law; because the Case may really so be put, as that a Man may obtain a Release in the First Case, and yet never be entitled to, or possess the Pro­mise in the Last. And in all Cases (let them [Page 165]be what they will) yet still we are certain, that the First can only in Reason, nay, in Na­ture, belong to those, who have transgressed the Law; and that the Last can only in strictness of Law belong to those, who have obeyed the Law: And therefore, that the First can be only Matter of Favour; whereas the Last may be Matter of Right. Now, if there be any Difference in the Two Cases, then, let that Difference be lodged where it will, yet we are from thence assured, that the Cases are not the same; and therefore, neither can the Forgiveness of our Sins upon the Account of our Saviour's suffering the Vengeance of the Law in our stead, be any Argument, that we have fulfilled the Directions of the Law.

And therefore, tho' it be affirmed by se­veral Learned Men, that we are sufficiently entitled to Eternal Happiness by the bare Par­don of our Sins, in Consideration of our Sa­viour's Sufferings; and that for this Reason, because when we are treated by God with Impunity, we are at the same time treated as Innocents; and that he, who is treated as an Innocent by God himself, (who cannot be mistaken in the Case) must therefore needs be so.

Yet these Men, as they do not sufficiently distinguish between an Innocent and a Saint; so neither do they between Impunity and a Reward. For, tho' our Saviour's Sufferings are meritorious of a Reward to himself, (and [Page 166]so the Scriptures tell us;) yet they are only expiatory to us; and that too in the Nature of the Thing. For, the utmost Design, the natural Tendency, and the only Business of an Expiation, is to obtain an Impunity for such, who have deserved, and therefore must in Justice, without such an Expiation, suffer Punishment. But neither Scripture, Reason, or Justice will tell us, that a Purchase of Im­punity from the Vengeance due to the Trans­gressors of the Law, can be a Purchase of that Reward, that is only due to Obedience to the Law. In one Word, Reward and Punishment derive not only from different, but from con­trary Principles: And Impunity has, and that too in the Nature of the Thing, a Respect or Relation only to Punishment, but none at all to Reward: And for that Reason, the me­ritorious Cause of Impunity can have no Concern with Reward neither. Since then the Death of our Saviour is the meritorious Cause of Pardon to those, who have trans­gressed the Law; it is absurd in Nature and Reason to make it also the meritorious Cause of that Reward, which, as it supposes no need of Pardon, so does by the Law only belong to those, who have obeyed the Law. So that an Expiation does at the most but make a Man Innocent, but does nothing to make him a Saint: For it only cancels his Neglect of Duty, but does not do that Duty for him, which he has neglected.

By all which it appears,

1. That Reward does in Propriety and Ju­stice only belong to Obedience to the Law.

2. That Punishment does in Propriety and Justice only belong to the Transgression of the Law.

3. That Expiation has no Relation to the Reward of Obedience; but that it only con­cerns that Punishment, which without such Expiation is in Justice due to Disobedience.

Now because God has taught us, not only that our Sins shall be forgiven in and through our Saviour; but that also, in and through the same Saviour, we shall obtain a glorious Reward: And because (as has appeared in general) Reward does in Reason and Justice as properly belong to Duty and Obedience, as Forgiveness does to Expiation: Therefore our next Enquiry must be, upon what Obedience such Reward is grounded. For, we are very sure, that, because the Distribution of such Reward is lodged in God's Hand, therefore the Reward will be bestowed justly; and be­cause we are sure of that, therefore we are farther assured, that it will be conferr'd upon Duty and Obedience. And indeed, having in what went before seen what Provision God has made for the fulfilling the Vindictive Part of the Law, in order to the Possibility and Justice of Man's Salvation; and being satisfied, that that Provision, which he has made for that purpose, will not also fulfil the [Page 168] Directive Part of the Law; it must be our next Business to enquire, what Provision he has made for the fulfilling of such Directive Part. For,

1. In the first place, We may therefore be certain, that it shall be fulfilled one way or other; because the Law being God's, is in it self Holy, Just, and Good. And we know, (and that too by the Light of Nature) that it cannot be an indifferent Thing to the Ever­wise, and most Holy Law-giver, whether a Law, which is so, be obeyed, or not. For, that would be in effect to cast off all Regard to Duty, Holiness, and Righteousness. Nay, (which is yet more) because every just Law must for that Reason, even because it is just, design the Obedience of them, for whom it is made; I say, because it must principally and in the first place design their Obedience, and not their Punishment, (and therefore not their Forgiveness neither) it would be in ef­fect to contradict his own Design, in giving forth his Law. For, the Design of his Law being the Holiness of his Creatures, resulting from their Conformity to the Directions of such Law; if he should so pardon their Neglect of such Conformity, (that is, the Neglect of their Obedience) as to make no Provision for such Obedience; it is evident, that by so doing he would have no more Regard to the Directive Part of his own Law, than they have had; and so the Manner of [Page 169]Forgiving the Transgression of the Law would unravel the main and principal Design of making the Law. But, we know very well, that such a Way of Proceeding is nei­ther agreeable to Wisdom, nor to Holiness; and therefore much less to Infinite Holiness and Wisdom. And therefore, if the Ever-Holy and Wise God gave up his beloved and only begotten Son to Death for the accom­plishing the vindictive Part of the Law; and if for the same purpose he punishes all Man­kind, not only with many Miseries in this World, but also with Death in their going out of it: I say, if he does all this, (which yet he himself tells us is his strange Work) that so the vindictive Part of the Law may not fall to the Ground; shall we think, that he will do less, or indeed shall we think, that he will not rather do more, to make good the main and grand, and, I may add, the more natural Design of his Law, which is the Ho­liness of his Creatures? No! we are sure, that no Word of God shall return empty; and that therefore his more solemn and ex­press Declarations (and such are his Laws) shall be sure to have their Accomplishment, and shall be fulfilled in their due time, not­withstanding the counter-Endeavours of Hell and Wickedness. For, it shall not be in the Power of any Enemy to defeat the Counsels, or evacuate the main Design of that Law, which proceeds from Eternal and Essential [Page 170]Holiness, and which moreover is backed with Omnipotence. We may therefore very well be satisfied, that God has made Provision for the Performance and fulfilling of the Dire­ctions of the Law, as well as of the Venge­ance of the Law.

2. And we may be satisfied, in the second place, that such his Provision does and must extend it self to Man, to whom the Law was given. For, it would be unreasonable to ima­gine the Design of any Law to be fulfilled, when such Law is not obeyed by any of those, for whom it was proclaimed, and to whom it was given. And therefore, because the Law was given to Man, and requires Obedience from Man, we cannot say, that the Design of the Law is fulfilled, unless Men do obey it.

3. We may be satisfied, in the third place, that no Man in this World (except our Sa­viour alone) has obeyed the Directions of the Law, from the Days of Adam's Transgression, to this very Day. And we may be satisfied moreover, from so long an Experience of the Thing, and from Reason grounded upon such Experience; but, if both will not do, we may be satisfied from Scripture, that no Man ever will or shall pay a perfect Obedi­ence to such Directions. Nay, it is notori­ous, that no Man does so, because we know, that every Man in this World is under the Curse of the Law; and we know, that every [Page 171]Man is so, because we are assured, that every Man in his going out of the World shall un­dergo such Curse, that is, that every Man shall die. Now, Death being the Penalty ex­presly assigned by the Law to the Transgres­sion of the Law; we may be sure, that those, who are not only liable to such Penalty, but who shall also certainly undergo it, are Trans­gressors of the Law. And then, because that is the Case of all Men in this World, we may from hence also conclude, that all Men in this World are Transgressors of the Dire­ctive Part of the Law.

4. We may be satisfied, in the fourth place, (both because it is the Object of each good Christian's Faith and Hope in particular, and because it is an express Revelation of the Will of God in general) that some Men shall be saved; that is, shall obtain an Eternal Happiness in another World; tho' we know most assuredly, that all Men do transgress the Law in this World. Now, because it is im­possible in Justice, and absurd in Reason, that Vengeance and Salvation should both be the Recompence of the Transgression of the Law; and because, tho' all Men are Trans­gressors, and some of those Transgressors shall be pursued with Vengeance, yet others, upon the Account of their sincere, tho' im­perfect Obedience, shall be rewarded with Salvation: Therefore we do infer in the

5. Fifth place, That those who shall be so rewarded, shall, in order to such their Re­ward, be then entitled to a perfect Obedi­ence, when such Reward shall come to be bestowed: That this is a Truth laid down in the Covenant of Grace, the Covenant by which alone Men shall obtain Salvation: That Reason and Justice do fall in with such Covenant, in asserting and maintaining the same Truth; and that therefore it is every way firm and good. For, it sounds harsh to our natural Sense of Justice, that without a perfect Obedience a Man should obtain that Reward, which in Justice and Reason can only be allotted to such Obedience. For, an Obedience that falls short of Perfection, is in truth and reality (whatever it is called) a Transgression: And so is so far from deserving a Reward, that it does indeed stand in need of a Pardon. For, the Defect of such Obedience is Sin; and Sin mixed with any thing, cor­rupts the whole, and makes it unclean and impure; and we know, that nothing that is so can enter into the Kingdom of God. And therefore, in order to his Salvation, St. Paul renounces his own Righteousness, which is of the Law, in the Third to the Philippians, and the Ninth Verse. Alas! the very best of us in this World have our Failings and Imperfe­ctions; and not only sinful Weaknesses, but sinful Wilfulnesses also: Nay, our very Righ­teousnesses are but filthy Rags: And then we [Page 173]may be satisfied, that we shall never in those Rags be admitted to the Marriage-Supper of the Lamb. When the Prodigal Son returned to his Father, the Father not only provided the Feast, but the Robe and the Ring too, to qualifie his Son to be a fit Guest for such a Feast.

Now from these Propositions, so laid down and confirmed, it may seem no very remote Consequence, that that Righteousness, to which those, who shall be saved, shall be en­titled, in order to such their Salvation, shall be the Righteousness of that Person, whom the New Testament sets forth to be the Saviour of Mankind. For, their Salvation must in Justice and Reason depend upon their Obedi­ence to the Law; otherwise such Salvation can in no Sense be truly reckoned a Reward. And if that Obedience, to which such Reward is by the Law assigned, were entirely their own, then that Person, whom yet the Scri­ptures call their Saviour, could in no Sense be truly so called, because in such Case their Salvation would be their own legal Purchase, as being the Reward of their own Obedience. And lastly, to suppose the Saviour to be therefore their Saviour, because he bestows upon them Salvation, in Consideration of an Imperfect Obedience, that is, an Obedience which is so far from deserving Salvation, that it does indeed stand in need of a Par­don, is to suppose him to bestow the Reward [Page 174] there, where the Law does not lay it; that is, upon Supposition that such Law is Just, it is to suppose him to be Unjust. From all which, the Conclusion at last must be, That since their Saviour must save them for their exact Obedience to the Law, (if he save them justly) and since we are sure, that he does save them justly, tho' they have paid no such Obedience; that therefore the Method in which he saves them, is by entitling them to a perfect Obedience. Now, how that is done, will be our Business to make out; as also, that the Manner of his doing it is just and righteous, and therefore reasonable. By which it will appear, that our present Way of Reasoning does not want its Weight, tho' perhaps it may at present seem too light to demand an Assent. But before we proceed to that, we shall offer a few Practical Re­flections upon what has been already laid down.

1. And first, From what has been said, we may easily perceive, that God is not so fond of our Persons, or of our future and ever­lasting Happiness, as to provide for such our Happiness, by his own Neglect of his own Law. For, Heaven and Earth shall pass away; but one Tittle of his Law shall not do so. Tho' therefore we can easily allow our selves to break his Law, and make light of his Commands; yet we may therefore be sure, that he will not do so, because his Commands [Page 175]and his Laws are Holy. For, it is a foolish and vain Imagination to think, that essential Justice and Holiness, that is, in other Words, that God will put Slights upon himself, to gratifie those with Impunity, and much less with Glory and Immortality, who put Slights upon Holiness, by sinning against his Laws. The truth of it is, because we are fond of our selves, and very desirous of our own Happiness, we are (ay! and the very best of us too) too apt to think that God is so too; and in this Case we are foolishly in­clined to think him to be altogether such an one as our selves: And this makes us to en­tertain soft and easie Thoughts of his Mercy; and in the mean time to have no due Regard to his Justice. But, if we would but consi­der, that both his Mercy and his Justice are guided by his Holiness; and that as he will not punish us without our Demerit, so nei­ther will he reward us unless we become righ­teous: I say, if we would but seriously consi­der this, it might be an effectual Means to engage us to look better to our Ways; lest whilst we think we are on our Journey to­wards Happiness, we be found by Mistake to tread in the broad Road, that leads to De­struction.

2. From what has been said, we may learn where to seek and to find what we do all naturally desire, and that is Happiness. I say, we may learn, that it is only to be [Page 176] sought wisely, and to be found certainly in the Ways of Holiness. For, tho' our Sins may be expiated by the Death of our Saviour; yet when we have made our selves Sinners, we are not sure that we shall be made Parta­kers of such Expiation, and so we are not sure of the Pardon of such our Sins; and we are sure, that without returning to the Paths of Holiness, we shall not be made Partakers of such Expiation, and that therefore we shall only enjoy the Benefit of it, when we are found in such Paths. The most certain Means therefore of making our selves happy, will be by keeping our selves holy: For, so long as we do so, we keep our selves within the reach of the Gospel-Promises; and tho' our Holiness be not in this World perfect, yet (as we shall see shortly) God will provide a way to make that and our Happiness perfect in another World.

3. By what has been said, we may learn, how it comes to pass, that we have no sin­cere and entire Happiness in this World; and that is, because we have not here any sincere and entire Holiness. For, were we freed from all Sin, we should be also freed from all Misery. For, we mistake, if we do not think, that Crosses, Losles, Pains, Sickness, and Death, are all of them the Effects of our Sins: And we may be sure, that they there­fore are so, because we are sure, that when our Sins are done away, all these Miseries [Page 177]shall be taken away too. No! Sin is mixed with our Life; That spots, stains, and cor­rupts it; and so Affliction and Misery come to be mixed with it too. And therefore, were Sin once banished out of this lower World, and true Righteousness planted in its Place; were God's Will done in Earth, as it is done in Heaven; his Kingdom would pre­sently come, and the Glories and Beatitudes of Heaven would certainly flow in upon all those, who have arrived to a perfect, that is, to an Heavenly Holiness. Since therefore we may be so easily satisfied, that it is Sin, and Sin alone, that impairs our Happiness, and that too (that Happiness which most of us love so well) our Happiness in this World; one would think, that this Consideration single, and by its self, should engage us to hate Sin, as much as we love such our Hap­piness; and therefore also to endeavour to encrease our Happiness, by destroying our Sins.

4. If our Good Works are so full of Flaws and Imperfections, that, in order to our Sal­vation, it will be necessary, that we be entitled to a Perfect Obedience; then this may in­struct us, not to trust in them alone for our Salvation. For, tho' it be true, that we can­not be saved without them; yet it is as true, that we cannot be saved by them alone; be­cause an Imperfect Cause can never produce a Perfect Effect. Such Salvation then, as the Gospel has taught us to hope and expect, God [Page 178]in our Saviour only can bestow; but we can never by our Good Works deserve. And therefore, even he, who has wrought out such Salvation for us, has taught us (when we have done the best we can) still to con­fess our selves unprofitable Servants.

5. Lastly, If no Man's Obedience be per­fect in this World, then it will but ill become us to boast of our Perfection here: Which in this latter Age has been the known Practice of several proud Seducers, and Enthusiasts; who have therefore despised all other Chri­stians, but those of their own Cast or Sect, as carnal and profane Creatures. A Pride hateful to God and Man, and such, which has constantly betrayed it self to come from that proud Spirit, (which is the great Decei­ver) by the detected Falsities, Forgeries, and Villanies of its most celebrated Pretenders. Let us therefore have a care, that we be so­ber, and humble: Let us not be high-minded, but fear: And seeing there remaineth a Rest for the People of God, let us labour to enter into that Rest, lest any of us fall short, by rea­son, not only of our Unbelief, but of our Confidence also.

CHAP. IX.

HAving laid it down in the former Chapter, that those who shall be re­warded with Eternal Happiness, shall be en­titled to a Perfect Obedience, in order to such their Reward: Our next Business is to enquire, Whose that Perfect Obedience is, to which they shall be so entitled; and whether they can obtain such Title according to the Rules of Reason, and the Laws of Justice.

1. And to satisfie this Enquiry, we lay it down, first, That as the Obedience of our Saviour to the Law, while he was in the Flesh, (and so under the Law) does alone in Justice deserve that Eternal Happiness, which is promised in the Gospel; so the Imputation of such his Righteousness to Believers, is the only true and just Reason, why they shall be made Partakers of such Eternal Happiness. When the Apostle tells us, in the Fourth to [Page 180]the Galatians, the Fourth and Fifth Verses, That God sent forth his Son, made of a Woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law; he seems to insinuate at least, that our Saviour's being under the Law, was in such Saviour a requisite Condition in or­der to his working out of Man's Salvation. Now, had our Saviour been such a Man as other Men are, the Reward (it is confessed) had only concerned his own Obedience: But, because by taking upon him the Nature of Man, he obliged himself to obey that Law, which God had given to Man; and because he took upon himself the Nature of Man, when he might have refused so to do; and lastly, because he took it upon himself for Man's sake alone, and not for his own; there­fore for Man's sake alone, and not for his own, he put himself under an Obligation of obeying the Law. From all which, the least that can be inferred is, that Man was to reap some considerable Benefit and Advantage from such his Obedience.

It is usually alledged in this Place, That had he not obeyed the Law himself, he could not have been qualified to make an Expia­tion by his Death for the Transgression of others: And we may take notice, that they who offer this Allegation, do in ef­fect tell us, that his persect Obedience to the Law, was nothing more, in order to Man's Salvation, than a previous Condi­tion [Page 181]to sit and capacitate him to make such Expiation.

2. And therefore we offer it to Considera­tion, in the second place, That the Reward promised in a Saviour to those, who do con­fessedly pay but an imperfect Obedience to the Law, is greater than that Reward which was promised to Adam's perfect Obedience, without a Saviour. It is true, there is not in the Law given to Adam any express Promise at all: But then it is as true, that there is an implied Promise. For, when the Law does threaten his Transgression with Death, it does as good as promise Life to his Obedience. And indeed, there was no Occasion, much less any Necessity, that the Promise of the Re­ward (which was Life) should be express; because the Law being given to Man in his Innocence, (that is, while he was in actual Possession of the Reward) he was by the Te­nor of the Law secure of such Possession, if he did not forfeit it by his Transgression.

Now we therefore say, that the Reward promised in a Saviour to those, who do con­fessedly pay but an imperfect Obedience to the Law, is greater than that Reward which was promised to Adam's perfect Innocence; because we are assured by the Gospel, that Eye hath not seen, nor Ear heard, nor can it enter into the Heart of Man to conceive, the Reward which God has prepared for those, who in a Saviour shall be saved. But we are sure, [Page 182]that no such Things can be truly said of the Reward promised to Man in his Innocence: For, he knew his Reward experimentally, and therefore it could not be to him Incon­ceivable.

Put we the Question then, How comes the Reward promised in the New Covenant, so far to differ from, and to exceed the Reward promised in the Old? For, no doubt, there is therefore a good Reason for such Diffe­rence, because all God's Words and Actions proceed (if I may be allowed so to speak) from Essential Reason: And it is as certain, that they all proceed from Justice. Now, neither Justice nor Reason do tell us, that an Immense and Inconceivable Reward can be as­signed to a broken and imperfect Obedience; and, in the mean while, a less Reward be as­signed to a perfect Obedience. Since there­fore a less Reward was proposed to Adam's Obedience, (had such his Obedience been perfect) than what in a Saviour is proposed to a Christians imperfect Obedience; it is no­torious, that such different Rewards can nei­ther in Justice nor Reason be assigned to the different Obediences, as such; but that the Reward to the Christian must derive from his Saviour's Merits, as the Reward of Adam must have derived from his own. If therefore it be demanded, upon what Grounds the Christian's Reward does derive from his Sa­viour; the only Answer that can be given, [Page 183]is, That it must derive either from his Savi­our's Sufferings in his stead, or from his Sa­viour's Obedience in his stead. And then, be­cause we have already made it out, that it cannot either in Justice or Reason, or indeed in Common Sense, derive from his Saviour's Sufferings (which do and can, and that too in Nature, only relate to his Punishment, but not at all to his Reward) therefore we do at last conclude, that that immense Reward which the Gospel assigns to the believing Christian, it does assign to him only in Con­sideration of his Saviour's Obedience.

Before we go any farther, we may from what has been said, observe, That the im­mense Value of our Saviour's Person and Dig­nity does shew forth it self, as well in the im­mense Value of his Obedience, as in the im­mense Value of his Death and Sufferings. For, as it is evident, that the Reward of his Obedience is inconceivably greater than the Reward of Adam's had been, (had Adam been obedient) so, for the same Reason, it is infi­nitely greater than the Obedience of any other Man, were that other only such a Man as Adam was. The Dignity therefore of the second Adam is inconceivably greater, than the Dignity of the first.

Now, as by what has been said, it has ap­peared, that the Obedience of our Saviour is the only Obedience, that is or can be en­titled to a Gospel-Reward; so, in what is to [Page 184]follow, we must make it our Business to shew, first, that Christian Believers may in Reason and Justice be entitled to such his Obedience, (which is to be made good by Reason;) and, in the next place, that they shall actually be so, (which is to be made good by Scripture.) And then, if upon the whole Matter it shall appear, that they may be so entitled, and that in order to their Salvation, it is necessary that they be so; then the Conclusion will be, That the Doctrine of the Imputation is therefore true, because the Salvation of Believers is cer­tain. But then I would have it remarked, that I only say, that this Conclusion will fol­low, if our Reasons prove good. For, be­cause the Salvation of Believers is generally agreed to be express Revelation; but the Im­putation in order to such Salvation, is not; therefore, as our Reasons, and those Interpre­tations of the Scriptures which we bring to back them, may be found defective; so, when once they appear so to be, I do profess in this Case, as in all others, that I shall wil­lingly part with them; because to me, ex­press, and on all Sides acknowledged Revela­tions, do weigh a great deal more, than all Reasonings, and elaborate Deductions, or In­terpretations whatsoever.

Now, to make it out, That our Savi­our's Obedience may be justly and reason­ably imputed, or assigned over to Belie­vers, in order to their obtaining the Re­ward [Page 185]of such Obedience, I would take no­tice in the

1. First place, That it is a Thing in a man­ner generally agreed among Mankind, that one Man's Duty (in many Cases at least) may be done by another, and yet the Reward of such Duty shall be thought, and that too justly, to belong, not so much to him who did the Duty, as to him for whom it was done. The Thing is notorious in all Proxies, Deputations, and Substitutions whatsoever: And every Proctor, Attorney, Sollicitor, Fa­ctor, Journey-man, Apprentice, and Servant, is a Witness and Proof of it. For, all such Persons do, as such, act, not for themselves, but for others; and the Benefits and Advan­tages which arise from such their Actions, do accrue to others; and, which is more, and more to our purpose, are by the Common Sense of Mankind thought to do so justly. And tho' it be confessed, that in most, if not all the Cases mentioned, some Benefit does come to him, who actually does the Duty; yet it is known also, that such Benefit be­comes his Due, only by a collateral Con­tract; but that it is neither the full, nor the direct Reward of the Duty done by him. For, the whole Right of such Reward is uni­versally thought to belong to his Principal. And I do hardly believe, that any Man, tho' never so just and righteous, does then think that he wrongs his Journey-man, when he [Page 186]pays him his Wages agreed between them, tho' by so doing he does not allow him all that Profit, which he himself reaps by his Work. But if any Man, the better to main­tain his Argument, shall resolve with him­self to go against the ordinary Sense of Mankind in the Case, and shall pertinaci­ously affirm, that such Dealing is unjust (as I am satisfied, that in some special Cases some Men are so resolved) I shall not at present (because I need not) contend the Point with them; but shall add in the

2. Second place, that which serves as well for our present Design, but what is more free from all Exception; and that is, That if any Friend, purely of his Good-will, with­out any Expectation of Recompence or Re­ward, nay, with a fixed Resolution not to receive any; I say, if such a Friend shall undertake and discharge the Duty of ano­ther; whether his so doing may not so far be imputed to such other, as to entitle him to that Reward, which belongs to such Duty. To say, [It cannot] would go a great way towards the making of all Friendship useless, and would have a great tendency to­wards the rendring of all Peoples Lives for­lorn and comfortless; and, when throughly examined, would be found to contain so much Uncharitableness in it, that (were there no­thing else in the Case) yet such an Opinion, purely upon the account of its Malignity, [Page 187]and ill-natur'd Influence upon Humane Af­fairs, may very well be thought not to con­tain that Justice in it, to which it pretends. And therefore, because a mutual and friend­ly Assistance of each other, in the Discharge of the several Duties that lie upon us; and sometimes in the undertaking and performing each others Duties entirely, is very beneficial to Mankind in general; and because Justice is so too; therefore we shall rather conclude, that it is agreeable to Justice, than that it contradicts it, that one Man may, not only receive, but also have a Right to the Reward of that Duty, which yet is done for him by another. To which we shall add,

3. In the third place, That when one Man is disabled from doing his Duty, and another, in Compassion to his Disability, does it for him; there it will be so far from being un­just, that the disabled Person should receive the Reward of the Duty so done, that it would be uncharitable (and all Uncharitable­ness is at least a Degree of Injustice) to de­bar him of such Reward.

Now before we proceed any further, we do, in order to our main Design, from the Propositions already laid down and confirm­ed, conclude in the first place, That our Sa­viour being made of a Woman, made under the Law, that is, being Incarnate, and made Man, in order to qualifie himself, among other Things, to fulfil the Directions of the [Page 188]Law given to Man, might justly (if he so designed and pleased) do that Duty for other Men, which the Law laid upon them as their Duty; and by doing such Duty in their stead, might entitle them to that Reward, which the Law had promised to those, who should obey it. For, the Reward, by the Tenor of the Law, becoming his Right, upon the Account of his Obedience, there can (I think) no doubt be made, but that he may, and that justly too, Assign over such his Right to whom he pleases; and that he may so much the rather do so, because those, to whom he makes such Assignment, were utterly dis­abled, and that too without their own Perso­nal Fault, to do such Duty themselves. And there can be the less doubt, that he might so do, because, had it not been for Man's Dis­ability, and for Man's sake, there had been no Occasion, and much less any Necessity, that he should have been Incarnate, and so have been made Man himself; that is, (so far as we are concerned at present) there had been neither Occasion nor Necessity that he should have brought himself under any Obli­gation of obeying the Law given to Man.

Now, if we add, to what has been spo­ken, that our Saviour will only assign over the Reward of his Obedience to those, who tho' they neither did nor could obey the Law, yet however were willing, and did testifie the Sincerity of their Willingness by their hearty [Page 189] Endeavours to have obeyed it; and who moreover were heartily grieved and troubled, that they could not make good their Endea­vours, (which yet is really the Case between our Saviour, and all those, who shall be re­warded for his Righteousness:) I say, if we add this Consideration to all the former, it may perhaps help to give us a more ratio­nal Satisfaction in the Case, and may con­vince us, that his Assignment of the Reward of his own Obedience, to such People, is an Act of Justice, as well as Pity; because God, by putting his Creatures into Being, has (and with all Reverence I desire to speak it) in­stated them in a Right to such Things, with­out which they must needs be miserable, and which (tho' they heartily endeavour it) yet they cannot by their own utmost Powers sup­ply themselves with.

From the Whole, we may rest satisfied, that the making over of that Happiness, which was the Reward of our Saviour's Obe­dience, to other Men, is no such absurd or unjust Thing, as it is but too generally taken to be. And I am pretty well assured, that some even of those Men, who have stiffly opposed it in the Case of Man's Salvation by our Saviour, yet both have and will allow it in other Cases, that run parallel with it; and that therefore, in order to their taxing such a Way of Proceeding of Injustice, they do even contradict themselves.

It may perhaps be objected, That our Sa­viour, by assigning the Reward of his Obedi­ence to any others, does by so doing dispossess himself of such Reward; because, by making it over to them, he does in effect make it away from himself.

Which seeming Difficulty (for so I shall only call it in this Place) may be easily re­moved, if we do reflect back upon what has been said in this Chapter, concerning the In­conceivable Value of the Purchase made by our Saviour's Obedience, and the Inconcei­vable Dignity of his Person: And, when we have made such Reflection, shall go on far­ther to compare it with what has been spo­ken to, and made good, concerning the ex­tensive Merit of his Expiation, in the begin­ning of the Sixth, and upon the Second Ob­jection of the Seventh Chapters. For, by comparing what has been said in those two Places, with the Case now before us, and by applying the one to the other, it will be no hard matter so to resolve this seeming Diffi­culty, as that it shall not any longer appear to be any such Thing.

But to return: As it has appeared, that Men may obtain the Reward promised by the Law, in virtue of their Saviour's Obedience to the Law, whereas yet they have not obeyed the Law themselves; so, if the Reward due to their Saviour's Obedience, can therefore only be justly transferred upon them, be­cause [Page 191]their Saviour did obey the Law in their stead: Then the next Conclusion will be,

2. That his Obedience to the Law must, in order to their receiving such Reward, be ac­counted as theirs; that is, in other Words, his Obedience to the Law must be first im­puted to them as theirs, before they can have a just Title to that Happiness, which is only the legal and just Reward of his Obedience. For, if one Man performs that, which it was another Man's Duty to do, but yet does not do it, or, which is more, professes that he does not do it for that other; in such Case, that other can never in Justice either claim or receive the Reward belonging to such Per­formance; because that Performance can ne­ver be made his, till it be made over by him, who was the Author of it. And, on the other side, it is no easie Matter to conceive, how one Man should make over the Reward due by Law to his own Obedience, to another; if such his Obedience, to which alone such Reward is by the Law inseparably annexed, be not some way or other made over also; And if such Obedience, in such a Case, must some way or other be made over; the least that can be supposed, will be, that it must be made over by Imputation. For, the Merit of the Reward consisting in the Goodness or Holiness (which you will) of the Obedi­ence; and the just Gift of the Reward (ac­cording to the Law) depending upon the [Page 192] Merit of that Reward; it is obvious to in­fer, that the Reward can only there be justly given, where the Merit is lodged; and that the Merit is only lodged there, where the Holiness or Goodness of the Obedience is lodged: For, the Promise of the Reward is only made to the Obedience. If therefore Eternal Happiness (the Reward of Obedience to the Law) may be justly transferr'd to any Man, in Consi­deration of his Saviour's Obedience; it will follow, that the Merit of such Reward must (at least Imputatively) be transferr'd also: And if the Merit of the Reward be trans­ferr'd, then that, in which that Merit does alone consist (and that is the Obedience) must be transferred likewise.

And, upon the whole Matter, we do con­clude, that that Part of the Gospel-Salvati­on, which consists in Eternal Happiness, (which is the Reward of the Saviour's Obe­dience alone, in rigour of Law) may by that Saviour be justly assigned over to Man, which was the First Thing which we undertook to make good: And, secondly, That to make good the Justice of such Assignment, that Obedience, to which alone such Reward does in Law belong, must (at least imputatively) be assigned over also.

It may be objected here, That I talk of the Law, when I should talk of the Gospel. For, tho' it be true, that the Reward promi­sed by the Law to Obedience does only be­long, [Page 193]and therefore can in Justice be only bestowed upon a perfect Obedience; yet it is not true, that the Reward promised by the Gospel is so clogged or limited, but that by the Tenor of such Gospel it may belong to an Obedience that is not perfect, provided such Obedience be attended with Sincerity, and followed with Repentance.

Now, in answer to this Objection, it is freely granted,

1. That the Promise of the Reward in the Gospel-Covenant is, as it is said to be; that is, it stands engaged to Sincerity and Repen­tance; and that therefore those Believers that are sincere in their Obedience, and peni­tent for their Failings, (tho' neither their Obedience, nor their Repentance be abso­lutely perfect) yet shall inherit such Promise.

2. But then, in the second place, it must be also acknowledged, that God has made and established that Promise of the New-Co­venant in our Saviour, and in our Saviour alone. Now, the Business of our present En­quiry is not, what is the Promise of the Go­spel, (for in that we are agreed;) but upon what just and rational Consideration such Pro­mise is founded. And since it is agreed in general, that it is founded in our Saviour; all the Debate at present is, Whether the Pro­mise of the Gospel-Reward be founded in that Saviour's Obedience, or in his Death; or, in other Words, Whether the Promise of the [Page 194] Reward be not so grounded upon our Savi­our's Obedience, as the Promise of Pardon is upon his Expiatory Sacrifice. And if those Reasons which we have already, or shall here­after offer, do prove, that in Justice and Rea­son it is so; then the Objection vanishes.

I may add, That the Objection only speaks to the Matter of Fact, that there is a Promise made in the Gospel to an Imperfect Obedi­ence, which no one, so far as I know, denies;) But it does not speak, as to the Matter of Right and Justice, how such a Promise can be justly and reasonably made, without any Vio­lence offered to the Law of Works, which is God's Law, as well as the Gospel is so: And we may be sure, that God's Laws do not ei­ther contradict each other, or controul any the Laws or Rules of true Justice or Reason.

That then, which is the only Thing which is at present maintained, is, That the Promise of the Reward in the Gospel to an Imperfect Obedience had never been made to Man at all, because it could not have been made justly, if the Law of Works given to Man had never been fulfilled by Man; and that the Gospel-Promise was granted in Conside­ration that our Saviour fulfilled that Law. And to this, the Objection, so called, is really no Objection at all.

It is confessed indeed, that the Eternal Life promised to Believers in the Gospel, will be attended with an Happiness inconceivably [Page 195] greater, than the Eternal Life promised in the Law to Adam; and it may be thereupon sur­mised, that the Reward promised in the Go­spel has no Eye to the Obedience required in the Law; and (if it has not) that then the Eternal Happiness of Believers cannot be the Purchase of our Saviour's Obedience to the Law.

To which I shall say no more at present, than this; viz. That it is agreed, that our Saviour by his Death took away Death, the Curse of the Law, and made good such his Atchievement by a Resurrection. Now, the Life after the Resurrection is a Life in a Spi­ritual Body, not in a Natural, (I speak the Apostle's Words:) And our Natural Reason tells us, that a Life in a Spiritual Body, is a more refined and exalted Life, than a Life in a Natural Body; and that in multitudes of Circumstances it must needs differ from it; perhaps in so many, that it may be as incon­ceivable to us now, as the future Happiness of the Saints. And yet this refined and ex­alted Life is no good Argument, that it was not purchased by our Saviour's Death; nor, that such his Death had no Eye to the Law of Works in such Purchase.

And so say we: Tho' the Happiness of the Blessed be greater, vastly greater, than what was by the Law of Works promised to Adam upon his Obedience; yet that can never make it out, that such Happiness is not the [Page 196]Purchase of our Saviour's Obedience, or that such his Obedience was not an Obedience to the Law of Works. It may indeed convince us of the super-eminent Dignity of his Per­son, and of the inconceivable Value of that Reward, which by being purchased by him, derives such its Value from such his Dig­nity, as we observed before; and which is directly to our present purpose, it may fur­thermore convince us, that the Reward of Believers is the Reward of their Saviour's Obe­dience made over to them; but not a Re­ward that does or can belong to their own (at the very best) Imperfect Righteousness.

I know very well, that this Doctrine is denied by many Divines, and other Learned Men; and those too, not only such, who do utterly deny, that God bestows Salvation up­on Men in consideration of their Saviour's Merit and Purchase; but even by the gene­rality of those, who yet do ascribe the Sal­vation of Man to such Purchase and Merits. What Reasons they offer for such their De­nial, we shall speak to hereafter: But, in the mean time, we shall go on to make good the Imputation, against each Party that denies it; and after that, shall shew, that the Rea­sons of such their Denial have not that weight which they seem to have.

1. And first, we shall speak to them, who do not barely acknowledge, but even contend, that the Salvation of Man is obtained in [Page 197]Consideration of the Merits, that is, in Con­sideration of the Death of our Saviour.

And the Men of whom we now speak, do maintain, That in order to Man's Redempti­on, our Saviour died for Man's Sin; and that, by such his Death, he puchased for Man a Freedom from that Vengeance, which is the just Wages of such Sin. Now, what they so maintain, we believe to be true, and are ready to join Hands with them to make it good, against all the Adversaries of the Cross of Christ. So far therefore we are agreed. But then, it may be demanded, How our Saviour can possibly suffer for Man's Sin, if the Sin of Man be not imputed to him? For, in order to his suffering for Man's Sin, he must take upon him such Sin; and the ta­king upon him Man's Sin, is the having Man's Sin accounted as his own; that is, in effect, and in other Words, the having Man's Sin imputed to him. And then, on the other Side, how can Man have any Pretence of Benefit from his Saviour's Sufferings, if the Merit of such Sufferings be not imputed to Man? For, without such Imputation, the Merit (be it what it will) can only belong to the Saviour himself.

It is evident therefore, by what has been said in short, but might be made out in more Words) that they who assert the Expiation of Sin by our Saviour's suffering in Man's stead, do therefore entitle Man to the Bene­fit [Page 198]of such Expiation, because Man's Sin was imputed to his Saviour, and the Merit of his Saviour's Sufferings, at least, imputed to Man.

Things therefore standing thus in the Case of the Expiation, it may be reasonably and further demanded, Why our Saviour's Righte­ousness or Obedience may not as warrantably be imputed to Man, as Man's Sin may be im­puted to his Saviour? or, Why the Eternal Happiness, which is assigned as the Reward of Obedience by the Law, may not be be­stowed upon Man in Consideration, that the Merit of his Saviour's Obedience is imputed to Man; as well as a Release from Punish­ment may be granted to Man in Considera­tion that the Merits of his Saviour's Punish­ment are imputed to Man? For, there is the very self-same Reason, why the Obedience of our Saviour should be imputed to Man, in order to Man's Salvation, that there is, that the Sin of Man should be imputed to our Sa­viour, in order to such Saviour's Condemna­tion: And there is the self-same Reason, why the Merit of our Saviour's Obedience should be imputed to Man, in order to Man's ob­taining Eternal Life; as there is, that the Merits of our Saviour's Sufferings should be imputed to Man, in order to Man's Release from Death. That is, Imputation is as rea­sonable and as justifiable in one Case, as in the other; for they both stand upon one and [Page 199]the same Foot; and for that Reason, he who throws down one, throws down both. And therefore, whoever rejects the Doctrine of the Imputation of our Saviour's Righteousness to Man, does, by so doing, reject the Impu­tation of Man's Sin to our Saviour, and all the Consequences of it: Or, in other Words, he who rejects the Doctrine of the Imputa­tion, does, by so doing, reject the Doctrine of the Expiation likewise.

2. Those Men who do so far maintain Man's Salvation to depend upon the Merits of our Saviour's Death alone, as to deny Imputed Righteousness to have any thing to do in the Purchase of Salvation, do not seem to me sufficiently to consider, that there are Two Things contained in the Death of our Saviour; 1. The Death it self; and, 2. His Obedience to the Will of his Father, in sub­mitting himself to such a Death. Now, be­cause Death is, properly speaking, what he underwent for the Expiation of Man's Sin, (for the Vindictive Part of the Law does ex­presly assign Death as the Punishment of Sin) hence it is (as I conceive) that most of those who have discoursed of Man's Redemption for the Sake and Merit of our Saviour's Death, have placed the Merit of the Purchase only in such Death; and in the mean time have wholly laid aside all Consideration of the Merit of that Obedience, which attended it. But because the Scriptures in the Case [Page 200]speak otherwise, and because we must needs be best instructed out of them, in any thing which concerns our Saviour; therefore, lay­ing aside at present all Schemes of Humane Reasoning or Contrivance, we shall entirely apply our selves to them for such Instruction. Take we notice therefore, that they inform us, that our Saviour was delivered to death by the determinate Counsel and Foreknowledge of God: So St. Peter tells us, in the Second of Acts, and Twenty third Verse; and so we are told in other Places. From which we infer, that the Sufferings and Death of our Saviour was an Act of Obedience to the Will and Counsel of God. All which St. Paul gives us in a few Words, but those very full to our pre­sent Purpose, when he tells us, in the Second to the Philippians, the Eighth Verse, that Jesus Christ being found in fashion as a Man, humbled himself, and became obedient unto Death, even the Death of the Cross. Since therefore our Saviour's Death was, at least, one Branch of his Obedience to the Will of his Father; that is, since his Obedience in the Scripture-Account was shewed in his Death, as well as in his Life; and therefore Both, when in Conjunction, were one and the self­same thing: I would desire to know, upon what Ground, or by what Warrant, it can be imagined, and much less defended, that Man is saved for the sake of his Death, but that he is not saved for the sake of his Obe­dience. [Page 201]And I would so much the rather in­sist upon this Inquiry, because tho' it should be granted, that our Saviour's Death was me­ritorious of Man's Everlasting Happiness, (and that is the present Case) then, if we must make an Opposition between his Death and his Obedience, (and to ascribe Man's Happiness to his Death, but not to his Obe­dience, does make such an Opposition;) but, I say, if there must be an Opposition made between them, it seems much more agree­able to Reason, nay indeed to common Sense, to ascribe such Merit to the Obedience of his Death, than to his Death. For, it is the Voice of Natural Justice, that Duty and Obe­dience may deserve a Reward; but it is a Strain beyond Conceit, that Punishment should do so too: For, if that were allowed, then the suffering of Punishment for the Breach of the Law, might be justly meritorious of a Re­ward, as well as Obedience to the Command of the Law; and so at long run it would come to the same Event to break the Law, as to keep it. But, because that cannot be al­lowed, therefore, if People will have an Opposition in the Case, where the Scripture has made none, we should rather ascribe Man's Eternal Happiness to the Obedience of our Saviour's Death, than to the Death it self. And then, if our Eternal Happiness may be ascribed to the Merit of our Savi­our's Obedience in one Case, why may it not [Page 202]be so in more? For, for the same Reason that a Believer may be interessed in the Obedi­ence of his Death, he may be interessed in the Obedience of his Life too. Since then, in the present Case, it is allowed, that a Be­liever has his Interest by Imputation in the first Case; it will follow, that he may, and (considering what has already been said) that he must have it so in the last. That is, in a few Words, That the Obedience of our Saviour both in his Life, and in his Death, must purchase for Man that Happiness, which by the Tenor of Justice is the proper and ap­propriated Reward of Obedience.

It being evident then, that for the same Reason, for which the Merits of our Savi­our's Death may belong to Believers, the Me­rits of his Obedience may do so too; and that both the one and the other do therefore be­long to them, because they are imputed to them: Our next Business must be with those Men, who deny all Imputation whatsoever, and therefore neither allow the Merits of his Life or Death to have any thing to do in the Purchase of Man's Salvation.

And because we have already and largely discoursed of the Purchase made by his Death: Our only Business at present will be to enquire concerning the Purchase made by his Obedience. And because the Men, we have now to do with, do deny all Impu­tation of what our Saviour did or suffered [Page 203]whatsoever; therefore we shall lay down, and attempt the Proof of this following Pro­position: That that Righteousness, by which Believers shall be judged, and in consideration of which they shall obtain Salvation at the Re­surrection, and the Great Day, shall be the Obedience of their Saviour, while he lived in the Flesh, imputed to such Believers.

1. In order to this, we take notice; in the first place, That the Scriptures do tell us, That all Men shall be judged according to their Works, that is, according to their Obe­dience, or Disobedience in this Life.

2. We lay it down, in the second place, That all those who shall be adjudged to enjoy an Eternal Happiness, must, in order to that blessed Sentence, be first entitled to a perfect Righteousness. This, we reckon, is proved before.

3. We take notice, in the third place, That no Man, tho' never so righteous, yet ever did, does, or shall arrive at a perfect Righteous­ness in this Life.

The Question then, that remains to be resolved, is, How any Man shall come to be entitled to a perfect Righteousness, that so he may be entitled to Eternal Happiness? And because no Man can warrantably say, how he shall not be, unless he do assign some Way how he shall be so entitled; therefore they who in this Case deny all Imputation whatsoever, do tell us, that a perfect Holi­ness [Page 204]shall be bestowed by God upon Believers by Infusion; that is, (for so they must mean) God shall by his Mercy and Free-Grace bestow such a Stock of Holiness upon Believers, as shall cleanse and fill all their Capacities, and so make them perfectly holy, and by conse­quence capable of Eternal Happiness.

1. Now tho' it be freely, granted, that God will in the next World bestow such an holy, God-like, and eternally-durable Frame of Spirit, upon all those who shall be saved, (as we shall discourse more fully hereafter) yet it is not in Consideration of such Holi­ness, that Believers do obtain that Eternal Happiness, which is the promised Reward of the Gospel. For, by what is to follow, it will, we presume, appear, that Salvation ob­tained in Consideration of our Saviour's Obe­dience imputed, is, First, Better accommoda­ted to the Rules of Reason, and the Laws of Justice, than Salvation obtained in Conside­ration of an Holiness infused after a Resur­rection: And, Secondly, That as it is better accommodated to the Rules of Reason, and to the Laws of Justice; so, that it is so also to that Account which the Scripture gives us of this Matter.

1. For, the Obedience by which Believers are to be judged at the last Day, is that Obe­dience which was required of them in this World: And accordingly as Men have be­haved themself here, so they shall receive the [Page 205]Reward of such their Behaviour there. So St. Paul, in the Second to the Corinthians, chap. 5. ver. 10. We shall all appear before the Judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the Things done in his Body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. By which we may understand, that the Distributions to be made by Justice upon a Resurrection have an Eye to the Lives of Men before their Death: And from thence we may infer, that they are not to be guided by an infused Holiness, which does (even by those who plead for it) not take place, till after the Resurrection. (For, it is agreed on all Hands, that no Man's Holiness is perfect in this Life.) Now, it does not look alto­gether so rational, nor so agreeable to the Measures of Justice, or the Revelations of Scripture, that a Man should be judged ac­cording to what he has done in the Body before his Death; and yet, that he shall by the last Judicial Sentence be everlastingly rewarded for an Holiness infused by God after his Resurrection. And therefore, if we will adhere to Reason, Justice, and Revelation, we must conclude, that Believers do not af­ter this Life obtain an everlasting Happiness in consideration of such an infused Holiness.

2. And, secondly, we may do well to take notice, that the Obedience of our Saviour to the Law, was the Obedience which was required of Man, and which was also paid [Page 206]by Man in this Life; and that because such his Obedience was perfect, therefore the Re­ward assigned by the Law to Obedience, was in strictness of Law and Justice due to such his Obedience. If therefore his Obedience, while he was in the Flesh, may by any Means be so made over to Believers, as to be justly accounted theirs; then there can be no doubt, but that their Right to the Reward appointed to such Obedience will be just and good too. And that it may be justly ac­counted theirs, we have, as we believe, made it good already. But an Holiness infused by God after a Resurrection, can in no Sense, nor in any Congruity be accounted, and much less can it be, an Obedience paid by Man (while in the Body) to the Law; and there­fore it cannot in any Sense, or in any Con­gruity, be such an Holiness, to which the Reward, allotted only to Obedience, can belong. And therefore, neither can Eternal Happiness be bestowed upon Believers, in consideration of such an infused Holiness. In one Word, Infused Holiness in order to Man's Salvation, does in no wise agree to that Ac­count which the Scriptures give us of the Last Judgment; and tho' it pretends to mag­nifie God's Mercy, yet it takes no care in the mean while to assert and vindicate his Justice; but makes the whole Process of that great Assize to be arbitrary and illegal, whilst it opens a Way to Man's Happiness, by an [Page 207]Holiness, which has nothing to do with the Cause, upon which alone his Trial depends. For, a Reward conferr'd in another World, upon an Holiness infused in another World, does in no wise look back to, or pass a Judg­ment upon the Life that was led in this World. But because we know assuredly, and that by many express Testimonies of Scri­pture, that that will be the Work of the Last Day; therefore, for that Reason alone, if yet there were no other, we cannot ascribe a future Happiness, the happy, just, and final Sentence of that Day, to such an infused Ho­liness. No! the Holiness, for which we are to be rewarded in a future Life, must be an Obedience practised in this Life. The Duty is laid upon Man by the Law here; and the Reward stands engaged to the Performance of such Duty. And if the Righteousness of Man at the Resurrection be not an Obedi­ence paid to the Law then, when the Law required such Obedience; the Reward pro­mised by the Law can in no wise belong to such Righteousness. And therefore, to fansie a Reward for an Holiness, in which the Law is not at all concerned, (as it is not in an in­fused Holiness) is to have no regard to the Law at all. For, Happiness bestowed in con­sideration of an infused Holiness, may as well be granted without the Law, as with it; nay, indeed much better: Because, had there been no Law at all, then such a Management had [Page 208]not affronted the Law: Whereas the Law ha­ving been once setled, to bestow the Reward promised by the Law upon an Holiness, which has no Eye to the Law, (as an infused Holiness has not) is to slight and overlook the Law; for it allows the Law to have no­thing to do in the Allotment of such a Re­ward.

It may be plausibly objected in this Place, That while I vindicate the Cause which I un­dertake, against one Adversary, I give it up to another: Because, while I assert, That every Man shall at the last Day be judged ac­cording to his Behaviour in this World, I do in effect refer the Reward, that shall then be adjudged to Believers, to such their Behavi­our; that is, in the present Case, to their Obedience in this World: And that, because I do so, I therefore pull down with one Hand that which before I had set up with another, viz. the Imputation of their Saviour's Righ­teousness, in order to their Salvation.

1. But this Objection is grounded upon a Mistake; which Mistake is, that the Obje­ction supposes an Opposition between the imperfect Obedience of Believers, and the Imputation of their Saviour's Righteousness; from which supposed Opposition, it infers, That if Salvation be bestowed upon them in consideration of the one, that it cannot for that Reason be bestowed in consideration of the other. And indeed, such a Suppo­sition [Page 209]being granted, the Inference would be good.

2. But then, secondly, we do assert and maintain, That there is no such Opposition between the Imputation, and the imperfect Obedience of Believers, as that Salvation must be disjunctively bestowed in considera­tion of the one, in opposition to, and exclu­sive of the other. For, tho' we allow a Be­liever's imperfect Obedience to be a subordi­nate; yet we do not allow it to be the meri­torious Cause of Man's Salvation; that is, tho' he shall have the Benefit of the Impu­tation, in consideration of his sincere, but imperfect Obedience; yet he shall only obtain his Salvation in consideration of such Impu­tation. For, Justice only bestows the Reward there, where it is deserved; and to bestow it elsewhere, may be called Mercy, or may be called Favour; but cannot, either in propri­ety of Speech or Truth, be called Justice. Since therefore it is our present Business, to maintain that Method, in which God be­stows not only Pardon of Sin, but over and above an eternal Happiness, to be just; and since, in order to its being so, it must con­form to his Law, which is so; or else the Law cannot be fulfilled; and since, lastly, the Law does not assign its Reward to an im­perfect Obedience; (For, it requires a per­fect, not an imperfect Obedience; and its Reward can and does only belong to what [Page 210]it requires, not to what it does not require.) Since, I say, the Case stands thus; it is ob­vious to observe, First, That because the Re­ward is only bestowed upon the Saviour's, that is, upon a perfect Obedience, to which alone by the Law it does belong; that there­fore the Execution of the Law, in the Di­stribution of its Reward, is just: And, Se­condly, That because (as we have already proved) such his perfect Obedience is justly imputed to Believers, in consideration of their sincere, tho' imperfect Obedience; that there­fore, as by his Obedience alone they are en­titled to the Reward, so, according to the Tenor of the Gospel, by their own Obedi­ence they are entitled to His. When there­fore Believers come to be judged in another World, according to what they have done in this, the Enquiry shall not be, Whether by their Life led in this World, they have deser­ved an eternal Happiness in that? (for that needs no Enquiry, because it is most certain in it self, and confessed on all Sides, that they have not:) But their Trial shall be, Whether their Obedience in this Life, tho' imperfect, (and therefore in it self undeserving of eter­nal Happiness) be such, as may so far enti­tle them to their Saviour's Purchase, as that his Obedience may be imputed to them, in order to their obtaining such Purchase.

I have therefore pursued this Thing the farther, because the Socinians do, as much as [Page 211]in them lies, vilifie the Imputation of our Sa­viour's Righteousness; for by that Means they gain great Advantages, to run down the Doctrine of the Expiation. And yet too ma­ny of our own People do here close with them; and do not, to me, seem to discern the mischievous Consequences that will fall upon the whole Doctrine of Redemption, if once our Saviour's Obedience be excluded from being the meritorious Cause of Man's Salvation. For, as to my self, I am at pre­sent very well satisfied, that if the Law had never been fulfilled by Obedience, the Breach of it had never been expiated by any Pu­nishment inflicted for such Breach whatsoever. For, God's Design in promulging his Law was, that it should be obeyed. For, most cer­tain it is, that it cannot be indifferent to him, whether we obey what the Law commands, or suffer what it threatens. No! his Design is, that we should be holy, and safe: Such a Design flows from his Nature, and is an Ef­fect of his essential Bounty and Goodness, and therefore came from him freely, without the Invitation or Sollicitation of any Thing besides his own Propension or Inclination. But Judgment, that is, Punishment for the Breach of his Law, is his strange Work, that is, it does not come from him, as his Good­ness and Bounty does, freely and spontane­ously; but is extorted from him by the In­terposition and Provocation of Sin. To ac­complish [Page 212]therefore the principal and more natural Design of his Law, it is necessary, that his Law should be obeyed; for there is no other way of fulfilling of it. And therefore He who told us, that not one Jot or Tittle of it should fail; told us likewise, that he came to fulfil it: Fulfil it, not only as the Antitype of it, but likewise as a Subject to it. The Law then was fulfilled by our Saviour's Obedi­ence; and by his Obedience alone: For all the rest of Mankind broke it. And had he not fulfilled it by obeying it, the Vengeance of it had always continued: For, it must have continued, so long as it was justly due; and it must be justly due, so long as the Law remains broken, and not obeyed. We owe our Reward therefore to our Saviour's Obedi­ence, as we do our Redemption to his Death. Nay, which is more, and more direct to our Text, because the Law must of necessity be obeyed, and because He alone did obey it; therefore, for that Reason, as well as for se­veral others, there is not Salvation in any other. I would desire them, whom it chiefly concerns, seriously to consider it.

And now having seen what Reason says to the Doctrine of our Saviour's Imputed Righteousness; the next Thing to be enqui­red, because the next Thing proposed, will be to see, what the Scriptures say to it. In order to which, take we notice in the

1. First place, That our Saviour, at his In­carnation, did take upon him the same Flesh and Blood with us Men. For, because he, the Man Christ Jesus, and we, do both of us derive from one and the same single and common Stock, Adam; and because we are several Propagations and Branches from that one Stock; therefore we may be truly rec­koned, because in reality so we are, the seve­ral and distinct Parcels of that common Flesh and Blood, out of which all Mankind are made. But tho' the Son of God became Man, in order to be the Saviour of Man; and tho' he was made of the same Blood with all Men, in order to his becoming Man; yet because we know, that the distinct Par­cels of this common Flesh and Blood have, and that justly too, very different and some­times contrary Allotments of Justice; there­fore we take notice,

2. In the second place, That all those, who, according to his Gospel, are sincere and penitent, are secure of having the Commu­nications of his Spirit. And then, tho' that Flesh and Blood, of which they with him are made Partakers, be common to all Mankind besides; yet by such Communications it is so far particularized, (if I may so speak) as that in the estimation of the Gospel, those who enjoy such Communications do become a Part of himself. And hence it is, that such People are in the Scripture said to be Mem­bers [Page 214]of his Body, of his Flesh, and of his Bones; and that he is so often, in the same Scri­ptures, called their Head. And we may know, that he himself does so account them, because he reckons those Kindnesses, which are done to his distressed People, as done un­to himself. These Things then being so, how does the Scripture teach us to reason upon them in relation to our present Busi­ness? Why, as Sin was the Transgression of Adam entailed upon all his Posterity, because the Covenant was made with him, and with all his Seed; for, all Mankind (as the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks in the like Case) were in the Loins of Adam in the Day of his Transgression: So Believers, in con­sideration of their Saviour, being regenera­ted by the Spirit, and so becoming the Chil­dren of God; the Righteousness of such their Saviour does so belong to them, who are his Seed, [See Isaiah 53. ver. 10.] as Adam's Sin did to his. And therefore, in him they are the Sons of God, and the Heirs of the Co­venant of Grace. And to this very purpose, and in this very manner too, (if I be not very much mistaken) the Apostle argues, in the Fifth to the Romans and the Nineteenth Verse: For, as by one Mans Disobedience ma­ny were made Sinners; so by the Obedience of one shall many be made Righteous. And we may safely pronounce it, that the Parallel of the Apostle would be no Parallel at all, if [Page 215]the Obedience of Christ did not so affect Men in reference to their Righteousness, as the Dis­obedience of Adam did to their Corruption. And therefore, the same Apostle tells us, in the First to the Corinthians, chap. 1. ver. 30. That Christ is made to us Wisdom, and Righ­teousness, and Sanctification, and Redemption. And the same Apostle still, after he had re­nounced his own Righteousness, as well know­ing, that it would not avail him for the Pur­chase of that Happiness which the Gospel promised, does confide only in that Righte­ousness, which is through Faith in Christ, in the Third to the Philippians, ver. 9. And in another Place, we are said to be made the Righteousness of God in him; and, in the Prophet Jeremiah, he is twice called the Lord our Righteousness. Other Places might be produced, which, tho' they have been inter­preted to a different Sense; yet, by that Light which has been already offered, it does appear, that they do more than barely coun­tenance what we now maintain, viz. That our Saviour's Obedience shall be made ours; and how it shall be made so. For, what we have said concerning that Intimate Relation between him and his People, will be a suffici­ent Warrant for the Imputation of his Righ­teousness to them.

CHAP. X.

NOW besides those Objections, which lay directly in our Way; and which we were therefore constrained to speak to, in order to clear and open our Passage in the Profecution of the present Argument; there are some others, which lie against our whole Discourse, and which, because we have pro­mised so to do, we must now speak to apart, and by themselves.

1. And first, it is objected against the Im­putation of our Saviour's Righteousness, That such his Righteousness, which is meant in the present Case, is his Obedience to the Law, and that his Obedience to the Law does consist in the Conformity of his Actions to the Law. His Obedience therefore being lodged in his Actions, unless his Actions can be made ours, it is impossible, that his Obe­dience should be so. For, so long as the Actions of one Man are not the Actions of any other Man; so long it must and will be true, that the Obedience, which is only paid by such Actions, and which is therefore un­doubtedly lodged in such Actions, cannot be that others neither. This is the Substance of [Page 217]the Objection, which might be put in more Words; but because I think the full Force of it is sufficiently expressed in what we have spoken, therefore it needs not.

1. Now, in order to clear this matter, we observe, first, That the Right which one Per­son has in a Thing, may be made over, or transferred to another Person, by the delivery of such Thing to him; provided, that he who delivers it, do some way or other sig­nifie, that it is his Mind, by such his Deli­very, to transfer such his Right: Where we must take notice of Two Things; First, That bare Delivery of the Thing, without such Signification, does not alter the Right in such Thing: For, in such Case, the Thing being only transfer'd naturally, but not legally, the Right in it is not transferred with it. Take the Thing in an Instance. A Man puts a Purse of Money into another Man's Hand, who stands by him, to hold it. In this Case, the Purse and Money is actually and naturally transferr'd from one Man to another; but tho' it be naturally transferr'd, yet it is not (for all that) legally transferr'd: For, the Alteration of the Possession, does not in the Case alter the Right; and so, tho the Money be removed from one Man to another, yet the Propriety in the Money is not. On the other Side, one Man by Deed of Gift, or some other legal and sufficient Conveyance, makes over his Right in the Purse of Money [Page 218]to another, but still keeps the Money in his own Possession: In such a Case, tho' the Mo­ney be not naturally, or locally, (call it which you please) transferr'd or made over to that other, yet it is legally so. For, tho' the Pos­session remain in the Donor; yet the Right is transferr'd to, and therefore is in the Donee. The second Thing to be observed in this Case, is, that that Thing, whose Right is trans­ferr'd by Delivery, must be something which is capable (as our Law speaks) of Manual Occupation. For, tho' the Right to some Things may be transferr'd by Delivery; yet the Right to others cannot be so transferr'd.

2. Secondly, therefore, The Right in a Thing may be transferr'd from one Person to another by Deed, or any proper and legal Instrument of Conveyance there, where the Nature of the Thing is such, that the Thing it self cannot be transferr'd by Delivery. And such a Thing (for Instance) is a Privilege: For, we may bestow upon another a Privi­lege, which of Right belongs to our selves, and, by so doing, may give him a Right in such Privilege; tho' we cannot so put him in the possession of it, as we can do of a Ring, or a Garment. Such a Thing then may be legally and rightfully transferr'd to another, tho' (because it is not capable of Manual Occupation) it cannot be transferr'd locally or naturally.

3. Thirdly, Where a Thing not capable of Manual Occupation does so inseparably by Law belong to one, that it cannot but do so, without Breach of the Law; yet even such a Thing shall by Act of Law be so imputed to another, that that other shall receive the Benefits, or suffer the Mischiefs, which legally flow from such Thing, as if the Thing it self, which was the Cause of such Benefits or Mischiefs, had been his own. And such are the Actions of some Persons, when they stand in some sorts of Relations to other Persons. And, to come up a little closer to our present Design; it is a known Practice in our own Law, the Law of England, that in some, if not many Cases, the Actions of the Wife shall be so reckoned the Actions of the Husband; and, in some Cases, the Acti­ons of the Husband shall be so reckoned the Actions of the Wise, that they shall, and that too by Law, receive the Advantages, and suffer the Disadvantages, of each others Actions. And I do the rather instance in this Case, (tho' several others might be offered) because we know, that the Scriptures do ex­presly tell us, that the Saviour is so the Head of his Body, the Church, as the Husband is the Head of the Wife.

These Things being laid down, in order to make plain what is now to follow,

1. It is to be observed, in the first place, That the whole Transaction of Man's Salva­tion [Page 220]is managed by way of Covenant; that is, it is managed in a judicial or legal, not in a natural way. This is as notorious, as it is, that the Transaction is carried on by mutual Obligations of the respective Parties engaged, by Promises, by Rewards, by Punishments, and the like. It appears likewise by the Sacra­ments, which are legal, not natural Convey­ances of those Graces or Blessings, of which they are the Pledges. For, Water in Baptism does not naturally wash away Sin; nor are the Bread and Wine natural Seals or Ratifi­cation of the Covenant in the Sacrament: They only give us a Title to the Benefits of it, as the Delivery of a Deed, a Turf, or a Wand, do to an Estate: That is, they are only legal Ways of Conveyance, and there­fore do loudly proclaim a Covenant.

2. The Transaction of Man's Salvation being managed by way of Covenant, (that is, in a legal or judicial, not in a natural way) tho' it be granted, that the Obedience of one Man cannot naturally be made over to another; yet it will not from thence fol­low, that it may not therefore be made over judicially, or in a legal way. Nay! by what has been said already, it is notorious, that it may be so made over. And therefore, besides the Instance already offered between an Hus­band and Wife, (which will in the Scripture-Account as well belong to our Saviour and Believers) it is in some Cases the agreed Sense [Page 221]of Mankind, that he who does not hinder the bad Action of another, when it is in his Power, (at least, when it is his Business, and so ought to be his Care so to do) by not hin­dring it, does in Law make such bad Action his own: That is, the Action in Law shall be so imputed to him, as if he himself had done it; and he shall accordingly be ob­noxious to the just and legal Consequences of it. And then, if the ill Action of one Man may (in a judicial way) be justly im­puted to another, and so be rated as that others; then there can be no good Reason, why the good Actions of one Man may not be justly so rated and imputed likewise.

All therefore that the Objection offers, is, That one Man's Action (be that Action Obe­dience, or what it will) cannot naturally be­come or be made the Action of any other Man: But that it may not legally or judicially become so to all Intents and Purposes of Law, whether of Rewards or Punishments, as it does not affirm it, so, should it do so, it may, for the Reasons offered, be truly de­nied, because in deed and truth it is false.

But we shall have occasion to speak more to this Matter hereafter; and therefore shall not pursue it any further here. Only one Remark I would leave upon it, and that is this: That it is too frequent a Practice, when Men discourse upon Points of Christian Do­ctrine, to treat of such Points rather as Na­tural [Page 222] Philosophers, than as Lawyers, or Di­vines: That is, that I may speak my Mean­ing as plain as I can, they fall upon the Na­ture of the Things, of which they discourse; and so argue from their Natural Properties, Qualities, and Powers; and from thence draw such Conclusions, which (tho' they call them Theological) yet have nothing to do with Divinity, or indeed with the Christian Re­ligion. Whereas they should treat of those Things, which are concerned in Religion, in a legal and judicial way: They should exa­mine, what Relation and Regard they have to that Holy Covenant; how far they agree with, or differ from the Design and Purport of it; and, by consequence, what Share they have, or what Influence they may or may not have, for the hindring or promoting, or ac­complishing its Designs. The Case under our present Consideration will make my Mean­ing still plainer: For, they who tell us, that our Saviour's Obedience cannot be made over to Man, because it consists in Action, and because one Man's Action cannot, in the Na­ture of the Thing, be made over to another; do only discourse of his Obedience in a na­tural Sense, that is, as Natural-Philosophers; but do not discourse of it in a moral or judi­cial Sense, that is, as Divines, or Lawyers: And because they do not, therefore they start from the Business of Religion; and so instead of discoursing of the Christian Covenant, they [Page 223]give us a Lecture concerning the Nature and Properties of Animal Motions and Powers: And, in the mean time, overlook that that is, or, at least, should be their Business, which is, the legal or judicial Consideration of such Obedience; as, what Relation it has to the Law; what Influence it has by Law upon the Person whose Obedience it is, or upon others; how far the Merit and Desert of it may go, and the like. And, to come close to the Business we have been all this while upon, Because Imputation is an Act of Law, and not of Nature, to undertake to overthrow the Possibility of it by the Laws and Rules of natural Motions or Actions, is much the same thing, as to attempt to open a difficult Place of Scripture with a Knife, or a Saw: The Things are of different Na­tures; and there is no Congruity in the Ap­plication of the one, for the Resolution of the other. And I am very well satisfied, that the Church of Christ had never been trou­bled with the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, if the Romish Priests had never heard of nor read either Aristotle, or his Commentators, concerning Substance and Accident. It was the jumbling of his Natural Philosophy, and Re­ligion together, that produced the Monster. Nay, which is yet something more; had they been trained up in any other sort of Na­tural Philosophy, they had been very well satisfied and contented without that new and [Page 224]uncouth Article of their Christian Faith. Other Instances might be produced to shew, that gross Fooleries and Corruptions have crept into Religion at this Door. Whereas a due Consideration, that the Christian Reli­gion is a Covenant, and the treating of it as such, would acquaint us much better with the Nature, and engage us more effectually to the Duties of it. But this useful Remark being left in this place, we proceed.

2. The second Objection therefore against the Imputation of our Saviour's Obedience to Believers, in order to their obtaining the promised Reward of the Covenant, stands thus: That supposing, that our Saviour did provide for the Directive Part of the Law by his Obedience; and that he did also fulfil the Vindictive Part by his Death: In such Case, there does therefore seem to be a Su­perfluity in his Provision; because, should his Obedience alone be imputed to us, we should by that Means be entitled to a perfect Righ­teousness; and then there had been no need of his Death to expiate our Sins, because then we should have had no Sins to be expiated. And that which may add some Strength to what is thus alledged, is this: That our Sa­viour paying that Obedience to the Law, while he was in the Flesh; the Obedience so paid was paid before his Death; and there­fore, in the Course of Things, it should seem, that it might be imputed before his Death, [Page 225]and, in the Course of Justice, without it. For, when by such Imputation we were once en­titled to his Righteousness, the Plea of his Death, in order to qualifie us for Happiness, must needs be useless and superfluous.

Now, tho' it may seem indeed, that Things might have gone so, if we only have a Re­gard to the Order of Time; yet if we look to the Order of Reason and Justice, we shall easily perceive, that they could not. For, we cannot by any Estimation of Justice what­soever be reckoned Righteous, so long as our Guilt lies upon us; and, when once by our Sins we have made our selves guilty, such Guilt must needs lie upon us, till it be one way or other expiated. Now, because we have already and fully made it out, that it neither is, nor can be expiated any other way, than by the Death of our Saviour; therefore the Death of such Saviour must, in the Order of Justice, first expiate such our Guilt, before we can possibly be entitled to a perfect Righteousness. For, who can put a clean thing into an unclean? It is neither agreeable to the Methods of Wisdom or Ju­stice, so to do: And therefore we may be sure, that it cannot be the Practice of the most Wise and Just God. No! we know well enough, because we are told so by the Spirit of God, that our Saviour first died for our Sins, and after that rose again for our Justifi­cation. And we know moreover, that when [Page 226]God had once given forth his Law, tho', had an exact Obedience been paid to it, the Ven­geance of it, which was only Conditionally threatned, had never been executed, (for, the Justice and Execution of such Vengeance does entirely depend upon our Transgressi­on;) yet after we had transgressed the Law, the Execution of such Vengeance was as ne­cessary, as was the Happiness promised, if we had not transgressed it. For, Vengeance does, by the Tenor of the Law, stand in the same Relation to Sin, as Happiness does to Obe­dience. The first becomes our Due, in case we neglect our Duty; the last, in case we perform it. And the Distribution both of the one and the other, must as necessarily follow, upon our Performance or Non-performance of those Conditions to which each of them do stand respectively engaged, as it is necessary for God to love Holiness, and hate Wicked­ness. One Part of the Law therefore is in Justice to be provided for, as well as the other. And then, if neither the Punishment of Man could fulfil the Law, on the one Hand; nor the imperfect Obedience of Man, on the other; and if our Saviour undertook for Man's sake to supply Man's Defects; then there was the same Necessity in Justice, that he should fulfil the Vindictive Part of it, by his Death; that there was, that he should fulfil the Directive Part of it, by his Obedience. And therefore, as neither his Obedience, not [Page 227]his Death, had been necessary, (no, nor his Incarnation neither, upon which such his Death, and such his Obedience do depend:) But, I say, as neither his Obedience nor his Death had been necessary, if Man had obey­ed the Law himself; so, upon Man's Trans­gression of the Law, they both became ne­cessary: Because, as we have already seen, Man's Punishment is in Justice as necessary upon his Breach of the Law, as his Obedi­ence was upon God's Promulgation of the Law. And therefore, when our Saviour un­dertook to save sinful Man, that is, Man who had transgressed the Directions of the Law, and Man who lay exposed to the Ven­geance of the Law; it was necessary, in order to his doing so justly, that he should have a Regard to one Part of the Law, as well as to the other; that is, that he should fulfil the Vindictive by his Death, and the Directive by his Obedience. And had he not done both, one Part of the Law (at least) had been neglected, and so the Redemption had not been just. By which we may by this time understand, that there is no Superfluity in his providing for Man's Salvation, both by the Obedience of his Life, and by the Sufferings of his Death. For, that cannot in Reason be accounted Superfluous in the doing of any Thing whatsoever, without which such Thing cannot be done justly.

Now, as in our Answer to the former Ob­jection, we made good not only the Possibi­lity, but the Legality too of the Imputation of our Saviour's Righteousness; so, in our Answer to this, we have shewed the conjunct Necessity both of the Imputation, and of his Death, in order to Man's Salvation. By all which, we may at last come to understand, that God in his Counsel for Man's Salvation, as he consulted his Mercy, so did not lay aside the Care of his Justice. For, the whole Transaction, as we have largely seen, was in him, Justice; as it was to us, Mercy: Justice, as it fulfilled the whole Law; Mercy, as it redeemed us from the Curse, and invested us in the Promise of the Law. A strange Mix­ture! and (had it not been discovered to us by Revelation) by our Natural Reason not to be fathomed: But, as it is revealed, agree­able, as we have seen, to such Reason so assisted.

1. By which we may, in the first place, un­derstand, That tho' Christ crucified be to the Jews a Stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foo­lishness; yet to us he is (and that notori­ously) the Wisdom of God, and the Power of God. For, his Wisdom and his Power can, we see, bring Things to pass beyond the reach of Angels and Devils, and therefore much more beyond the reach of short-sighted Man: And yet by his Light he can, because he has, instructed us, that such Things are [Page 229]not only the Effects of an Almighty Power, but of an Almighty Wisdom, of an Almighty Justice, and of an Almighty Mercy too. For, in the Business of Man's Salvation, as in all Things else, he does so display his Attributes, as that they never clash nor interfere. His Mercy does not fight against his Justice, nor his Justice against his Mercy; and neither fights against his Wisdom. By the Revelati­on therefore of the Christian Religion God has admitted us to a nearer View of his Dealings with the Children of Men, and has, at least, communicated so much of his Coun­sel to us, as may assist us (if we be not want­ing to our selves) to provide for our own everlasting Happiness and Security; and to vindicate and assert his Justice and Mercy. Let us therefore thankfully receive the Mer­cy, as it is graciously offered; and not pre­tend to regulate his Revelations by our fee­ble Reason; but guide our Reason by his Re­velations. For, we know, that he can do more than we can; and therefore also we may know, that he can guide us better, than we can guide our selves. And because he has vouchsafed in Mercy so to do, it will but very ill sort with that Deference we owe him, to do, as too many now-a-days do, that is, to return from Revealed to Natural Religion, and so to walk in Paths, not only of our own chusing; but, many times, of our own making too. For, since the Day-Star from [Page 230]on High hath visited us, it is our Duty, as to guide our Lives, so to guide our Faith by that Light which it affords us.

2. Since we can only be saved in Consi­deration of our Obedience to the Law, and since none of us have paid such Obedience; and so, if we stand the Award of our own Deserts, we must needs fall short of Salva­tion: I say, since Things are so, we ought with Heart and Voice to praise our Saviour, who by an Infinite Condescension both obli­ged himself to obey the Law, and so inti­mately united us to himself, as to entitle us to his Obedience, by which we may be sa­ved. For, as there is no other way of ob­taining Salvation, but by Obedience; so there is no other Name given but his, whereby we must be saved; and therefore we may safe­ly conclude, that that Obedience, by which we must be saved, is his. His Love to Righ­teousness then made his Obedience perfect; and his Love to us made his Obedience ours; and Both (if we be not wanting to our selves) will make our Condition happy and secure. And then surely our Security and Happiness, as they do very well deserve, so they do re­quire a Thanksgiving. For, we therefore stand bound to be grateful to, and to love the Author of our Happiness, because we find, that we cannot but love our selves.

3. As we cannot be saved without our Saviour's Righteousness; so, as we desire our [Page 231]own Safety, we should heartily endeavour to qualifie our selves to be made Partakers of such his Righteousness. And we may be sure, that our Desire, at least, after Righte­ousness, and our Good-will to entertain it, are necessary even for our obtaining the Imputa­tion of it; because it cannot in any Sense be ours, if we be not willing that it should be so. We must be therefore disabled to re­ceive it, if we be unwilling to entertain it. So much Righteousness God requires of us, in order to our being entitled to a perfect Righteousness. I know, that some Divines do speak of Irresistible Grace, and that some few do defend it: That is, in a few Words, they make God, by the arbitrary Determina­tions of his own Pleasure, to bestow Grace upon some Men, whether they will or no, and even against their Inclinations. And, to make good what they so maintain, they in­stance in the Conversion of St. Paul, and such like Cases. But tho' St. Paul, and some others, have been converted by Miracle; yet we know well enough, that Miracles wrought for the self-same purpose, have not always been attended with Success; and that the Miracles even of our Saviour himself, and those too wrought before their Eyes, did fail of their designed Effect, and that, in a man­ner, upon the whole Nation of the Jews. And we know not the Hearts of Men, nor the inward, but real Preparations of Soul, [Page 232]that may duely qualifie them to admit God's Grace. But we do know, that St. Paul thought verily, that he ought to do as he did: And then, tho' he was defective in his Knowledge, yet because he acted according to such Know­ledge, he was therefore honest and sincere in his Practice. And then, if God in pity to his Ignorance, and in approbation of his Sin­cerity, did reward that Sincerity with an ex­traordinary Direction for the guidance of his Practice; we may from thence be taught, that his Grace was suited to St. Paul's Will. For, he willed that after the Miracle, which he willed before it; that is, he willed that, which he took to be good. And indeed, we may as well think any other Creature to be capable of Righteousness, as we may think Man to be so without his own Will and Con­sent. Let us therefore take care, that we will and endeavour to obey God's Law, that is, to be righteous; if we design, that God our Saviour should make us so: For, we can­not be like him, unless we are willing to be so. He therefore who would appear at the Wed­ding Supper of the Lamb, must take care to wash and cleanse himself from all Filthiness of Flesh and Spirit, in order to his putting on the Wedding-Garment. For, as they only shall be pronounced Blessed, who shall be found Righteous; so they only shall be found so, who do sincerely desire and endeavour to be so.

CHAP. XI.

AND now having gone so far, before we proceed any farther, we shall bring all that we have hitherto spoken, to our De­sign at the Beginning; and by so doing, shall endeavour to make it out, That there is not Salvation in any other, but in Jesus Christ alone; and, That there is no other Name under Heaven given among Men, whereby we must be saved.

1. And to do this, we shall first shew, That no other, but our Saviour alone, could so suffer for Sin, as to obtain a Release from the Penalty, which the Law had threatned against it: Or, which is much one and the same Thing, That no one, but our Saviour alone, could make an Expiation for the Sin of Man.

2. And, secondly, That no one, but our Saviour alone, could, by an exact Obedience to the Law, purchase that Reward, the Gift [Page 234]of Eternal Life, which the Law had promi­sed to such Obedience.

1. Now, in order to our making good our first Proposition, we must examine, what Qualifications are absolutely necessary, in or­der to fit any one to make such Purchase; and then enquire farther, Whether such Qua­lifications either do or can belong to any other, besides our Saviour alone.

1. Now the first and leading Qualification in him, who shall be fitted for the Purchase of a Release from the Penalty of the Law, which they have incurred, who transgress the Law, is, that he, who makes such a Purchase, must be one of the same Kind with them to whom the Law was given; that is, in the present Case, must be a Man. For, the Law was given to Man, was broke by Man; and therefore also the Breach of it, in the Congruity of Things, and by the Laws of Common Sense and Justice, is to be punish­ed in Man. Now, tho' our Saviour was not the only Person in the World, who had this Qualification, (for every Man besides is as real a Man, as he was) yet he was the only Man among all Mankind, who by this Qua­lification was fitted for the effectual enter­prising and bring to pass those other Things, which are absolutely necessary for the Pur­chase of the Release spoken of.

2. For, secondly, The next Qualification of him, who is fitted for the Purchase of a [Page 235]Release from the Penalty of the Law, is, that he must be an Innocent Man. He was to be a Lamb, without Spot or Blemish, and to an­swer to the Paschal Lamb, which in this, as in several other Things, was a Type of that Lamb of God, which should take away the Sins of the World. For he, who is qualified to suffer for others, in order to release those others from the Penalty of Sin, must not therefore be a Sinner himself; because, if he be so, then he must by the Laws of Justice, and even according to the Tenor of that Law, which assigns such Penalty, suffer the Penalty for his own Sin: And he, who suffers the Penalty of the Law for his own Sin, can­not therefore suffer the Penalty of the Law for the Sin of others; at least, in the present Case he cannot; because the Penalty of the Law, upon the Transgression of it, being the loss of Life, his own Penalty exhausts the whole Stock or Possibility of his so suffering: For, he who has but one Life, (and no Man has more) can pay that Life but once: And therefore, if he lays it down for his own Sin, he must for that Reason have nothing re­maining to lay down for the Sin of others.

3. He who is duely qualified to purchase for Mankind a Release from the Penalty of their Sins, must be a Man whose Life is of more value than the Lives of all the rest. And the Reason for it is plain and obvious, be­cause we know, that the Lives of all the rest [Page 236]can make no such Purchase: And the Lives of all the rest cannot therefore make any such Purchase, because the Death of no single Man can make such a Purchase for himself. For, what no single Man's Death can do for him­self, that the Death of all Men cannot do for all: For, there is just the same Propor­tion between all Men, and the Death of all; that there is between one Man, and the Death of one. Besides, supposing a Man to be a Transgressor of the Law; it looks very ab­surd to affirm, that the Death of such a Man, which is the Punishment of his Transgression, can be the Purchase of his Release from such Punishment: For then, the self-same Thing (and that is his Death) will bear a quite con­trary Character; for, it will be both the Wa­ges of his Sin, and the Purchase of his Ran­som; that is, it will be the Vengeance of the Law, and the meritorious Cause of his Free­dom from the same Vengeance. Every Sin­ner therefore against the Law, must be a Suf­ferer under the Vengeance of the Law; and that Law, which adjudges those who trans­gress it, to Death, does not, by so doing, de­sign to return them to Life: For, if it did, then, by inflicting its Sentence, it must de­sign to revoke that Sentence, and, by making the Punishment a Release from the Punishment, must look like Trifling, and not like Justice.

The Loss of no Sinner's Life then is of Value sufficient to put a Period to the Execu­tion [Page 237]of that Sentence, which the Law pro­nounces against those who do transgress it: And every Man's Death, in the Course of the Law, had been eternal, were there no­thing else to remove it, but his own Strength, that is, in the present Case, but his own Death. For, if the Death of a dead Man can do nothing for him, we are sure, that no other of his Powers or Merits can: For, in the Case before us, he can have no other Me­rits of his own to restore him to Life, but the Merits of his Death; and the Merits of his Death, as we have seen, are none at all. And to expect any Relief from a dead Man's Powers, is to expect Relief from no Powers at all; for Death crushes all the Powers of all Men whom it seizes.

Now this being the Condition of all Men who die, because they are Sinners, we may from hence safely conclude, That if any Man, who is not a Sinner, shall undertake by his own Death to make good the Ransom of all the rest from Death, and after that, shall make good his Undertaking; I say, if any Man shall do this; we may be sure, that his Death, or his Life, (which you will) is therefore of more Value than the Life or Death of all the rest, because he does by it make that Purchase, which all the rest could not do by theirs. For, in the present Case, the Value of the Thing may be truly and justly estimated by the Possibility of the Purchase it can make; [Page 238]because the Possibility of the Purchase de­pends upon the Allowance of the Great and Just God. And then when God is willing to release Man from Death, in Consideration of the Death of his Innocent Saviour; and when he is not so, in Consideration of sinful Man's own Death; and when he does professedly declare such his Will in many Places of his Word, and by the repeated Attestations of Matter of Fact, whereby several People have been raised from the Dead, in the Name, and by the professed Power of the Saviour: I say, when we find all these Things to be so, (as we do, or at least easily may find them so to be) we may from the Whole conclude, That the Death of our Saviour is of more Va­lue, than the Death of all Mankind; because it can do that, which the Death of all the rest cannot do, and that too by the Allow­ance of God himself.

Now, from these Propositions, so laid down, we may therefore conclude, That there is not Salvation in any other, but only in our Saviour, set forth in the Gospel.

1. Because it was absolutely necessary in Justice, that the Law being broken by Man, the Punishment threatned by the Law should be inflicted upon Man. For, the Threatning of the Law has the same Eye, and the same necessary Relation to the Transgression of the Law, that the Reward has to the Obedience of the Law; and either, the same necessary [Page 239]Relation to each, that it has to God's Holi­ness and Justice. And therefore, so necessary as it is, that God should be holy and just; and so necessary as it is, that he should in his Laws be serious and true; so necessary also it is that the Vengeance threatned by his Law should there take place, where the Duty commanded by the Law is not observed. Now because no Man, except our Saviour, could so undergo the Vengeance of the Law, as without such Saviour's Help to be ever freed from such Vengeance; therefore we do from hence conclude, in the first place, That there is not Salvation in any other, but in our Saviour alone, as Salvation is taken for our Redemption from the Vengeance and Penal­ty of the Law.

2. Because no Man is qualified to suffer the Penalty of the Law so, as by such his Suf­fering to redeem others, that are Sinners against the Law, from their suffering for their Sin, unless he be Innocent himself; and be­cause no Man, except our Saviour, was ever Innocent, that is, no Man, except him alone, did ever fulfil the Law; therefore no Sinner can be saved, as Salvation is taken for a Re­lease from the Vengeance of the Law, but only by the Death of our Saviour, that is, by the Death of him, who was the only In­nocent Person of all Mankind.

3. Since the Death of all Mankind (be­cause it is the Punishment threatned by the [Page 240]Law against the Transgressors of it) is not of Value sufficient to expiate the Sin of Mankind, whether we consider their Punish­ment and their Guilt in the Gross or Lump, or whether we consider it in Parcels and Particulars; and since Death is the necessary Punishment of the Law; and since, lastly, if there be any Redemption purchased from such Penalty, it must, for the Reasons al­ledged, be made by a Death of more Value than all the Deaths of all Men: I say, from these Reasons in conjunction, we do con­clude, That such a Death is necessary for Man's Redemption from the Curse of the Law. And then, whose Death that Death was, the Scriptures do sufficiently acquaint us; for, they expresly and frequently tell us, that it was the Death of him, whom they set forth to us as our Saviour.

And from the Whole, we do infer, in the first place, that no other, but our Saviour alone, could so suffer for Sin, as to obtain a Release from the Penalty which the Law had threatned against it; and that therefore there is no Salvation in any other; and, that there is no other Name given under Hea­ven among Men, whereby we must be saved, as Salvation is taken for our Redemption from that Vengeance, which the Law threatens and executes upon the Transgressors of it.

2. The second Proposition therefore laid down at the Beginning, comes next in order [Page 241]to be made good; and that is, That no one, but our Saviour alone, could, by an exact Obedience to the Law, purchase that Reward, Eternal Life, which the Law has promised to such Obedience. And to make this good in a few Words, we take notice, in the first place, That as the Law, by the same Tenor of Justice, does engage the promised Reward to the Obedience, as it does the threatned Ven­geance to the Transgression of the Law; so we may from thence infer, under this Head, That every Man, who will be Partaker of such Reward, must pay such Obedience; as we did under the last, That every Man, who was guilty of such Transgression, must suffer such Vengeance. He therefore who does not obey the Law, does lose his Reward, as certainly, as he who transgresses it does pull upon himself his own Punishment. Now because, among all the Race of Mankind, no one, except our Saviour, has obeyed the Law; therefore every Man besides him, when left to the Purchase of his own Obedience, has forfeited his Re­ward. No Man therefore does, upon his own Account, deserve such Reward. And then, because we know, that Justice does deal with Men according to their Deserts; therefore, the Reward being Eternal Life, or Happiness, every Man, when left to himself, has lost such Happiness. That Part therefore of a Go­spel-Salvation, which consists in Eternal Life, is not to be expected by any Man, but by the Saviour alone.

Now, that our Saviour obtained it for himself, is not questioned. And that it was the Gift of God to others, in Consideration of his Obedience to that Law, to which others, as well as himself, stood obliged, we have already, and at large made good. If therefore all other Mens obtaining Eternal Life, does not proceed from their own Obe­dience, but from their Saviour's; then we may now begin to perceive, that there is not Sal­vation in any other, but in our Saviour alone; and that too as Salvation is taken in the Go­spel for the Gift of Eternal Life.

The Socinians, we know, who deny the Salvation of Man to be our Saviour's Pur­chase, do attempt to elude the Force and Evi­nence of that Text, which is the Subject of our present Discourse, and of several other express Places of Scripture, which assert the same Thing with it, by starting the Question, Whether or no God might not, by some other Means, have saved Mankind, had it pleased him so to do? And by that Means have (as we observed at the Beginning) endeavour'd to alter the Controversie from Matter of Fact to Matter of Possibility; and to engage others in that sawcy Dispute of what God can do, and of what God cannot do. Whereas it is sufficient for us to know, what God has done; and abundantly sufficient, when he himself does furnish us with such Knowledge by his own express Word. And if what that Word [Page 243]tells us in the Case, be agreeable to our ra­tional Sentiments, to that Light which he has afforded us to judge Things by; if moreover it be agreeable to the Common Sense, that all Men have of Justice, (and Justice and Rea­son in this Case are the same;) if that our Light, which confirms to us the Reasonable­ness and Justice of his Proceedings in the present Case, does by the same Measures guide all Governments, not only Christian, but others; and if it be more than a shrewd Sign, that because Mankind do, and that too in their Laws and Judicial Proceedings, treat one another, for the most part, as God in the present Case does treat Mankind, that they are guided so to do by that Light, which he himself has afforded them: I say, if all these Things are so; then it may, besides all that has hitherto been offered, make out the Con­clusion, at least, very plausible; That his Dealings with Mankind in and through a Saviour, as we have out of the Scriptures laid it down, are just and reasonable. Let us try the Matter in a sew Instances, which will direct our Meditations to a great many more, and see whether the Business be so, or no.

The Merits of our Saviour's Death, we say, and so do the Scriptures, are made over to us. We may add, but we need not, that they are so made over by his last Will and Testament. And, if we do add it, the Scriptures will bear us out in it.

The Merits of his Obedience also are, as we with the Scriptures say, made over to us.

By the first, we obtain Redemption from the Curse of the Law.

By the last, an Inheritance with the Saints in Light.

Now, what says the Light of Nature, when it discovers it self in the Practices of Mankind in the like Cases?

1. Why, in the first place, The Father has served and obliged his Prince by a due Re­gard to his Laws, and to himself, and by a Defence of both from the disobedient At­tempts, and rebellious or hostile Outrages of all others. In such Defence he has been a great Sufferer; has lost his Estate, his Limb, perhaps his Life. The Son of this very Man, guided more by his own vicious Inclinations, than by his Father's Example, dips his Hand in Treason, and thereby forfeits his Life to the Law, and to his Prince. Suppose we now, that the Prince grants this Son his Life, in Consideration of the Father's Servi­ces and Merits, and so cancels the Demerits of the Son, by putting the Deserts of the Father in the Scale against them; which, especially if the Father died in the Prince's Cause, is the ascribing or imputing (which you will) the good Deserts of one Man to another, who is utterly destitute of such De­serts. Now, such a Case as this being sup­posed; will any Man accuse the Prince of [Page 245]Injustice, for the Grant of such a Pardon? Was not the Injury done to himself? And may he not remit such an Injury, by esteem­ing the great Services of the Father, and the Benefits that he himself received, and the Mischiefs which the Father sustained by such his Services, a sufficient Counterpoise to the Injury of the Son? And may he not be sa­tisfied, that the near Relation and dear Af­fection of the Father to the Son, may make the Son's Pardon a Gratification and Requital to him for all his own Services and Suffer­ings? Surely these Things may be allowed among Men: And I do not at all question, but that these, or such like Things, have been practised in all Governments, and yet that their Justice has not been taxed for such their Practice. And yet I do assert and main­tain, That the Pardon of Man's Sin in Consi­deration of his Saviour's Sufferings, does much more critically and nicely come up to the Rules of an exact Justice, than the Pardon of the Rebel in the present Instance does; and I am well enough satisfied, that what has been already offered, will abundantly make good such an Assertion. But sawcie Man will not allow what his God says or does to be true and just; tho' at the same time he will allow and approve the same, or the like Practices, in his Fellow-Creature.

2. But to proceed: Secondly, The Father, by his Labour and Toil of his Body, or by [Page 246]that of his Brains, purchases to himself an Estate. His Son enjoys his Share in it while the Father lives, and the whole of it after his Death. How comes the Father's Purchase to derive to the Son? You will answer, By the Law. But the Question returns; By what Act does the Law make the Father's Purchase to become the Son's? Why, it may be replied, that as the Son descended from the Father, so it is but fit that his Estate should do so too. Well! be it so, or any thing else; (for more may be said in the Case.) But still in the Case, the Father's Right being extinct by his Death, moves, that is, is transferr'd upon another: So that he comes rightfully to possess the Estate, who yet did not purchase it, nor earn it, nor perhaps do any one Act for the obtaining the Possession of it. Not only the Estate then, but the Right and Title to the Estate, which is un­doubtedly lodged in the Purchase, and must be made good by it, is transferr'd from one Man to another, and that too not by or for any Action of Desert in the Man who enters; but by an Act of Law, call it Imputation, Translation, or what you please. And, which is more, such a Translation both of Estate and Title is accounted just by all Mankind, generally speaking. For, it is not material in the Case, that some arbitrary and despo­tical Governments do in some few Instances vary from it; because not only the rest of [Page 247]Mankind, but even they themselves, do, by their contrary Practice in other and more Ca­ses, condemn their own Practice in this.

Now to our Purpose: Shall the transfer­ring not only of one Man's Estate to another, but even of the Right and Title in that Estate, be thought just between Men among themselves, and that too by that Light of Reason, which is confessedly given them by God? And shall it at the same time be un­lawful and unjust for God so to make over his Purchase, his Right and Title to any Thing, (as he thinks fit) to Mankind, as one Man may do to another? Certainly he has as good a Right, and as full Power of disposing of what is his own, as any Man, or any Law of Man whatsoever. And therefore, when he tells us, that he does so in the Case under our present Consideration, it would become us in Modesty, in Reason, and (because the Case does very much import our Welfare) in In­terest likewise, to believe his Word, and to approve his Doings: And that too more espe­cially, because in those very Writings, in which the Conveyance is contained, he seems all along to word such his Conveyance in Law-Terms; thereby giving us (at least) an Hint, that in the Transaction of Man's Sal­vation by our Saviour, he did in a great mea­sure condescend to those Methods and Ways of Judicial Proceedings, that Men, by that Light of Reason which they received from [Page 248]him, had instituted among themselves. And therefore, when we had forsaken his Family, by revolting from that Duty, which we owed him, as his Natural Children; as he calls himself our Father in Christ Jesus, so he calls us his Adopted Sons, upon his restoring us to such his Family; and in order to the Renova­tion of our lost Title, he does esteem us to be Regenerate, that so by becoming again the Children of God, we may inherit the King­dom of him our Father. So he calls us the Heirs of Salvation, and makes us a Title to the Purchase of our Saviour, by calling us his Brethren. He reckons us as Joint-Heirs with him, and discourses in several Places of our Inheritance. Now, when we are assured, by Multitudes of other Places of Scripture, that all these Appellations and Titles are given to us, not only in Terms in the like Cases made use of, at that Time, by the most ce­lebrated Laws, but also in Consideration of our Saviour's Purchase; I say, when we find Things so, and that too in the Book of God, wrote professedly on this Subject; does it become us to think, that the Holy Ghost, the Indicter of these Things, did only word himself at random? Or ought we not rather to think, that in so doing he had a Regard to those Legal Ways of Conveyances, which were established by Man's Reason and Sense of Justice in those Laws, which were then most current in the World? We cannot, I am sure, [Page 249]we cannot rationally think so. For, why are we told, that we are bought with a Price? Why are we told, that our Saviour purchased us with his Blood? Why are we told, that we are redeemed, not with corruptible Things, as Silver and Gold; but with the precious Blood of Christ; but that our Redemption and Salvation did, as to the Justice and Equi­ty of it, answer to those Legal Ways of transferring of Rights from Man to Man? For, our Redemption was purchased by our Saviour, (so it is expresly worded) and by him therefore conveyed and made over to us, because otherwise it could in no Sense be called our Redemption. Indeed, a Purchase does, in the very import of the Word, im­ply the Acquisition of a Thing in a Legal way; and by so doing, does, in the Nature of the Thing, imply also a Legal Power of making over such Thing to another. For, he can only legally sell, or otherwise give or convey, who has a Legal Right in the Thing sold, given, or conveyed. And he can only legally purchase, who pays a Legal Price. When therefore the Holy Ghost in the Scri­ptures does so word the Manner of God's bestowing and our receiving Salvation in and by our Saviour, as to do it in such Terms, which were at that time Terms of the most celebrated Law (next to his own) that ever yet was, or perhaps ever will be in the World; and when he does so frequently, and [Page 250]almost constantly; it would become us to believe and think, that he designed, and that too even by his manner of expressing the Thing, to insinuate to us, that the Salvation he all along speaks of, was bestowed in a way of Conveyance at that time familiar among Mankind; in such a way, as was established both by their own Laws, and by their own Practice; in such a way, that their best Rea­son, granted to them by himself, had set on foot: And that, upon this Account, his way of doing it so, as is by him expressed, (and that too all along in that very Book, where he affords us the Discoveries of it) is just, equitable, and legal. I do but run over these Things, and in a manner glance at them; because I rather design to give an Hint to others more able so to do, than to pursue them my self. For, if a Man well­studied in the Civil Law (a Law that will weigh with Mankind so long as good and sound Reason has a free Passage in the World:) But, I say, would such a Man so throughly acquaint himself with the New-Covenant, the Covenant of Grace in Jesus Christ, as to be able exactly to compare it with that Law, which is the Business of his Profession; I do not at all question, but that such a Comparison, judiciously managed, would go a great way in removing those Doubts which have been started by People of all Parties, concerning Man's Redemption. [Page 251]And because several Learned Men, I know, are very well versed in both those Laws; I do the rather hope, that God will put it into the Heart of some of them, to bless the World with such a Christian and beneficial Piece of Learning. But this by the by. In the mean time, from what has been said in short, we may learn thus much; That the Salvation of Man is the Purchase of the Son of God; that the Benefit (at least) of such Purchase is by the Purchaser made over to Man; that in Consideration of that Intimate Union that is between him and Man, by his taking upon him the same Flesh and Blood with Man, and by affording to Man the Communications of his Spirit, a Way is open­ed, as for the more congruous and equitable Way of such Conveyanee, on the one Side; so, on the other Side, for the more congruous and equitable Way of Man's entring upon the Possession of such Purchase; and that when the whole Thing is strictly sifted and exami­ned, it will be found to be agreeable to the just and equitable Rules of Law, as well as to the express and plain Revelations of the Gospel. But I desist: Only I would offer an Inference or two, that may relate to our Pra­ctice, before I do so.

1. And first, If God spared not his own Son, when he had put himself into the Place of Sinners; we may from thence conclude, that neither will he spare us, when we our selves [Page 252] are Sinners, and that too by our own default. For, besides that he was, and was so pro­claimed by God himself, his only Son, in whom he was well pleased; I say, besides that; the Generosity, Charity, and Candor of such an Undertaking as our Saviour's was, (by which he shewed more Tenderness to others, than to himself) may be thought to be a very considerable Motive even to Justice it self, so far as is possible, to remit to him a great deal of that Rigour, and Severity, which Sin does deserve. And then, if notwithstanding such his Undertaking, yet he was fain to pay the uttermost Farthing, that is, to die; how can we hope to escape, if we the Original, and therefore also the Principal Sinners, come under the Severity of so exact a Justice? We may be sure, that the Portion of Venge­ance allotted to us in such a Case, will not be less severe. For, if God so treated his Be­loved, because interposing Son; how do we think he will treat avowed and professed Re­bels? Or, as our Saviour himself speaks in the like Case, If these things are done in the green Tree, what shall be done in the dry?

2. And as this Consideration may serve us for Caution; so the next, that is, the second, may serve us for Consolation: And I shall give it in the Words of the Apostle, in the Eighth to the Romans, ver. 32. He, that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely [Page 253]give us all Things? For, his delivering up his Son for our sakes to become Man, to lead an hard and uncomfortable Life, and to die a miserable and scandalous Death, that both by his Life and Death he might work out our Salvation, is such an exalted Evidence of God's Love to us, that Imagination it self can hardly conceive, that any thing can ex­tinguish it, but our Ingratitude for it. And our Natural Reason and Common Sense may easily instruct us, that he, whosoever he be, that is ready and willing (and that too even to Performance) to do us the greatest Kind­ness, will not for that very Reason refuse us in a less. It concerns us therefore, as we would not reject the Kindness already offered, and as we would not exclude our selves from all fu­ture Love and Kindness, to make good our Gratitude, by receiving our Saviour, and that Salvation which he brings along with him, with a due Acknowledgment and Respect; and to make good such our Respect, and such our Acknowledgment, by receiving him up­on any, but more especially upon his own Terms. Let us therefore cast away our Sins, that we may receive him: Let us, by loving each other, practice our selves to love and receive him: Let us receive him, by receiving the Pledges of his Love, exhibited to us in the Sacrament of his most Blessed Body and Blood: And let us not think, that Christ cru­cified will profit us any thing, if we do not [Page 254]so receive him, as he requires, and therefore also so receive him as we ought. For, he does in effect refuse the Gift, who refuses the In­strument of Conveyance by which such Gift is to be signed and made over to him. And it is irrational and imprudent, to expect the Love of him, the Pledges of whose Love we do reject. Let us cast off therefore every evil Work, every Sin, that does beset us, and gird up the Loins of our Mind, (as the Scri­pture speaks) and do the Work of Christians in all Cases whatsoever; that so at last we may receive the blessed Wages of such Work, through Jesus Christ our Lord, and only Sa­viour.

CHAP. XII.

BY what has been hitherto discoursed, we have seen,

1. That God in a Saviour has made Pro­vision for the Expiation of Man's Sin, in or­der to save him from the Vengeance of the Law, the just Wages of such Sin.

2. We have seen, that he has not barely provided for Man's Escape from the Venge­ance of the Law, by the Merits of his Savi­our's Death; but that he has also provided for his positive and future Happiness, by the Merit of his Saviour's Obedience.

3. But yet, in what is now to follow, we shall find, that his Mercy has not stopped here; because, in the third place, he will, in and through our Saviour, endow Man with a perfect and inherent Holiness: By which I mean, such an holy, Angelical, and withal durable Frame of Spirit, that shall for ever secure him from all possible Sin, and shall for ever engage him in a vigorous and chearful Discharge of all holy Duties; and in so do­ing, shall both accompany and secure his Hap­piness to all Eternity. For, tho' it be con­fessed, that Believers do by the Communi­cations and Assistances of the Spirit arrive to a Degree of such an Holiness in this Life; yet it must be confessed also, that it is but an imperfect Degree: For, it is not vigorous, nor uniform, nor constant; but irresolute and weak; and therefore has its frequent Inter­missions and Failings. But, as we shall see more fully in what is to follow, the Holiness of the Saints in Glory is, like their Happiness, firm, lasting, and immutable; and therefore will be found to be a Gift of God in Christ, that does vastly, if not infinitely, exceed the most refined Holiness of the very best Man [Page 256]in this Vale of Sin and Misery. It shall be the Business then of our present Underta­king, to make it good, that besides that Ti­tle, which Believers in another World shall have to their Saviour's Righteousness, in order to their future Happiness, that they themselves shall be endowed with a perfect, inherent, and indefectible Holiness, in order to the secure Eternity of such their Happiness.

Now, to put this Matter into a clear Light, that so we may be the more rationally sa­tisfied in all that is to follow; we lay it down, First, That God by his Almighty Power having made the World, and all par­ticular Beings in it, has by virtue of such his Creation an undoubted Right and Title to the Dominion over all Things so by him cre­ated: And that therefore all his Creatures ought to be in Subjection to him, and to act according to the Determinations of his Will. And it is hardly to be doubted, but that all those Creatures, which by the Boundaries of their Creation are devoid of Understanding and Free-will, do constantly act (according to those Impresses and Powers that God in their Formation has stamped upon them) in a regular Subordination to such his Will. And the Scriptures do give us, not only fre­quent Hints, but also express Declarations, that so they do.

Now, as God created those lower Crea­tures, so did he the higher, and those which [Page 257]are endowed with more noble Faculties. And because, among such Creatures, upon whom he has bestowed an Understanding, to enable them to know his Will, and with a Will to ena­ble them to chuse Obedience to such his Will, we are not acquainted with any other, but Angels, and Men; and because our Design is only concerned about them, and chiefly about the latter; therefore, directly to our present Purpose, we take notice,

That some of the Angels, first; and, by their Instigation, the first Man; and (be­cause all Men ever since do derive from him in a Lineal Propagation) therefore also all Mankind, by transgressing God's Will made known to them in his Laws, have revolted from their Allegiance to him, and have, by so doing, in effect renounced and disclaimed that their Subjection to his Dominion, which was (if I may so speak) his natural and essential Right. For, Wickedness is a professed and avowed Renunciation of that Subjection which Rational Creatures owe to their Holy and Rightful Lord and King, even the God that made them. And, for that Reason, it is an Encroachment upon his Anthority; for it does lessen and contract the Extent of his Kingdom. For, because a Scepter of Righteousness is the Scepter of his Kingdom; and because all those Laws, by which its Administration is execu­ted, are in themselves Holy, Just, and Good; it is, upon that Account, very obvious to [Page 258]conceive, that Wickedness, so far as it goes, does defeat such Administration, and overturn such Laws; and by so doing, does diminish the Authority, and encroach upon the Jurisdi­ction and Dominion of the Rightful and Supreme Lord.

Now, from what has been thus spoken in short, we may easily understand, that the faln Angels having first revolted themselves, and by their Sin withdrawn their Allegiance and Subjection to their most Holy and Su­preme Lord, did (what other Rebels after their Example, and perhaps by their Instiga­tion, have done to weak and short-sighted People) by false Colours, and taking Delu­sions, invite Mankind into the same Revolt and Rebellion with themselves; and, by so doing, draw away a Part of God's Kingdom and Dominion; and, in opposition to his Ho­liness, that is, in opposition to God himself, set up a Kingdom of their own, a Kingdom of Darkness and Wickedness; in plain English, a Kingdom made up of such Creatures, who by their Sin and Wickedness did rebel against and revolt from their Holy and Rightful Lord and King. All this, being Matter of Fact, is expresly discovered to us by the Revela­tions of God: And the History of Man's Fall, recorded in his Word, with the Account that we there meet with of the Devils King­dom, of his Servants and Subjects, of his Slaves and Captives, of his Wars against the [Page 259]Holy Angels, the faithful Subjects of the True and Everliving King, do afford us a very lively Description of the Thing. And because no Christian, who is but tolerably ac­quainted with the Revelations of God in his Holy Word, can possibly be a Stranger to it; therefore we have thought it less necessary to quote the several Texts, which by being put regularly together, will give us an exact and Historical Account of it. And indeed, we have so much the less need to do so, because we shall be farther and more fully satisfied in it by those Things which are to follow. Well then! Things standing in this State, God was pleased to send his Son, his Beloved Son, made of a Woman, made under the Law, made Man, to be a Saviour, a Redeemer, a Light to Mankind; that is, he sent him in Man's Nature, to guide and direct, to save and redeem Man from that Condition, into which he was brought by his Sin and Rebel­lion. What that Saviour did in order to the obtaining of such Salvation, we have seen al­ready; and what is to be done in order to the everlasting Continuance of such Salvati­on, is to be enquired now.

As therefore it was one Part of God's Counsel in sending his Son to Mankind, to expiate their Sins; so it was another, and in­deed the main and grand Design of such his Message, to rescue them from their Slavery to Sin, and from their Subjection to Satan; and [Page 260]so to bring them back to his own Kingdom, and to resettle them under the Jurisdiction of his own most holy Dominion. For, it is a very great Mistake (which, I am apt to believe, has proceeded chiefly from our over­sondness of our selves) to think, that God's chief Design in sending our Saviour, was to free us from the Vengeance due to our Sins; thereby vainly imagining, that God has a greater Concern for our Impunity, than he has for our Holiness; and that he had rather we should be safe, than that we should be good. Whereas our Reason will tell us, that God must needs love Holiness, as he loves him­self, because he himself is (if I may so speak) Essential Holiness: And then the same Rea­son will tell us, that he must needs love himself better than he loves our Safety; and that more especially, when we our selves, by slighting and neglecting of Holiness, had be­trayed such our Safety. As therefore Man did, by his Compliance with the Devil, that is, by his Sin, expose himself to the Prose­cutions of God's Vengeance; and as he did, by the same Means, so far forth revolt from his Dominion, and withdraw himself from his Jurisdiction, as to become the Subject of Sa­tan, and Slave of Sin, (by which Means God was ousted of his Natural and Original Right to Man's Obedience, and his Subjects so far forth drawn of from their Allegiance to him, as to slight his Authority, by slight­ing [Page 261]his Laws, and to fight against him, by opposing his Holiness;) so, when the Hosti­lities were come to this pass, that Man did fight against God by his Sins, and that God did fight against Man by his Justice; tho' God, in order to a Reconcilation, sent his Son into the World, and by him a Proclama­tion of Pardon to all who should return to their Duty; yet our Reason, nay, our Common Sense will tell us, that the Restoration of God's just Right and Dominion by Man's Return to Holiness and Duty, is in it self a Point of greater moment, than Man's Pardon. And therefore, by the Tenor of that very Cove­nant, in which the Articles of Reconciliation are contained, it is stipulated, that Man shall first be obliged to repent and return, before God shall be obliged to forgive. And we know, that our Saviour himself, in that Prayer which he taught his Disciples, and in them all Christians, does put that Petition, [Thy Kingdom come,] before that, by which we pray, that God would forgive our Trespasses. Why, all the Nations of the Earth are before him, but as the Drop of the Bucket, or the small Dust of the Balance: And then, can we think, that his Honour and Natural Right is not to be consulted before Man's Safety? It cannot be; and because it cannot, there­fore we do conclude, that tho' God did de­sign the Pardon of Man's Sin by a Saviour; yet for all that, the grand and principal De­sign [Page 262]of sending him, who was to be that Sa­viour, was the bringing Man from a State of Sin to a State of Holiness, the purchasing to himself a peculiar People, zealous of good Works; or, as it is in the Fifth to the Ephe­sians, ver. 27. a glorious Church, not having Spot or Wrinkle, or any such Thing; and there­by restoring to God so much of that Part of his Dominion, which, by the Temptation of the Devil, and by Man's Revolt, had been broke off from his Kingdom, and which was willing, upon the Gospel-Conditions, the Pro­clamation of Pardon, to be restored again to it.

Now, from what has been spoken, I would infer, That it is a great Mistake, to make the Sending of our Saviour in its first, prin­cipal, and grand Design, to be the Pardon of Sin. For, as Obedience to the Law is the first and principal Design of the Law; and as Punishment is but a secondary Design of the Law, and is only grounded upon the Defeat of its grand and principal Design: So Par­don of Sin, in the very Nature of the Thing it self, depending only upon the Desert of Punishment, can therefore rise no higher than its Fountain, and therefore can at the most be but a secondary Cause of our Saviour's Coming.

And therefore, should we suppose God to pardon Sin, tho' in and through our Saviour, without any Regard had to the fulfilling of [Page 263]the Directive, that is, of the grand and prin­cipal Part of the Law; we should, by that means, suppose him to break the Directive Part of the Law, in order to his contradicting the Vindictive Part; that is, we should sup­pose him to break both Parts of the Law, in order to such a Pardon. For, Veracity is one Branch of Holiness; and when God tells Man in his Law, that upon his Transgression he should surely die, as we may perceive by the manner of the Delivery, that the Denun­ciation is serious and solemn, not only because it is backed with an Asseveration, but because also it is incorporated into the Law; so, to tell us, that God may by a Pardon (that has no Regard to the Directive Part of the Law) revoke such his solemn Threat and Assevera­tion, is in effect to say, that he may start from his Veracity; and that is the same as to say, he may start from his Holiness; or, in other Words, that he may himself break the first and principal Part of the Law, by re­mitting the Penalty of the last and less prin­cipal. For, Holiness is so refined a Thing, and so all of a Piece, (if I may so speak) that he who transgresses its Rules in any one Case, does, by so doing, forfeit his Title to the whole, and therefore is truly called Unholy.

And therefore, I cannot but wonder, that Men, after almost Six thousand Years Expe­rience in the Case, in which, because all Men have been Sinners, therefore all Men have [Page 264] died; I say, I cannot but wonder, that, after so long an Experience to the contrary, any Man should now think, that Men may be freed from the Curse of the Law, before they have fulfilled the Directions of it. For, me­thinks, by that Experience alone we may be instructed, that Men should never be blessed with Impunity, till they first return to their Duty; and that they must first be obedient to the Law, before they shall be freed from the Vengeance of it.

But because some Things under this Head may bear a Dispute; and because some others may seem hard to be understood; therefore, to be more plain and open, and to offer something which is so, and which will as well conduce to my main Purpose and Design, I lay it down,

1. First, That as it is asserted in the Go­spel, and is generally agreed among all Chri­stians, That an Eternal Life and Happiness is contained in that Salvation which the Go­spel promises; so is it, That whosoever shall be made Partakers of such Happiness and such Life, must be so perfectly Holy, as to be eternally free from all Sin. For, as without Holiness no Man shall see the Lord; so, the Blessed in Glory are by all allowed, as to be eternally without Misery, so to be eternally without Sin. And we do not question, but that it may be made out, and that too by Force of Reason, without the Assistance of [Page 265]Revelation, that compleat Happiness (and an Happiness that is not eternal, is not com­pleat) and that too in the Nature of the Thing, is inconsistent with Sin, which does certainly and constantly bring Misery along with it, wheresoever it is permitted to come. And the Reason why I say, I do not question it, is, because what has Been done already, may be done again: And we know very well, that the Thing has been done already, and that too beyond all possible Contradiction. But because it is an allowed Thing, That where the Seat of eternal Happiness is, there nothing can either enter or remain but pure and unspotted Holiness; therefore we shall spend no Time in the Proof of it; but shall take it for granted, and so proceed to our

2. Second Proposition, which is, That the Holiness of those, who shall inherit eternal Life and Happiness, does not come from themselves, nor is either the Archievement or Fruit of their own Powers. This we may be sure of, because a clean Thing cannot come out of an unclean; and all Men here are unclean, because all Men are Sinners. And since Man in his Innocence did not keep himself Holy, it is unreasonable to expect, that after the Fall, when Mens Abilities are lessened, that any Man should make himself so. And we are moreover assured, that no Man does make himself so, because all Men do die: And we are further assured, that no Man can carry [Page 266]any more of his own Holiness with him into another World, than what he was Owner of in this: And lastly, we are infallibly assured, that no Man can secure to himself an Holi­ness to Eternity, which he has not. From which Things run over in short, we may be satisfied, that that Holiness, which shall for ever attend those of Mankind, who shall be made Partakers of eternal Happiness, is not their own. The Thing might be made out in more Words; but it needs not: And there­fore,

3. Since that Holiness, with which Men shall be endowed in Heaven, is not their own; it must therefore be bestowed upon them by some other: To which we may add, That that other can be no other, but God. For, it may be very well presumed, that the very best of Creatures have no Holiness to spare, upon a Supposition, that one Creature could make over any of his own Holiness to ano­ther. For, upon such Supposition, what­ever they should contribute towards the per­fecting of another Creatures Holiness, would be so much pared off from their own; and so a Defect of their own Holiness would be the Consequence of that other's Perfection; and an Abatement, at least, if not the Loss of their own Happiness, a Consequence of such De­fect. But then it is a vain Thing to conceive, that one Creature can make over its own in­herent Holiness to another; and it is as vain [Page 267]a Thing to think, that it can bestow on that other an Holiness, which it has not to be­stow; and it is certain, that it has no Holi­ness, but its own. But neither shall I pursue this any farther, because I shall at one View offer a short Prospect of all that has been already laid down, in order to make it good, That our Saviour has made Provision, that Believers shall be endowed with an indefecti­ble Holiness in a future and happy Life.

Take we notice therefore, That as a Go­spel-Salvation does imply in it, not only the Pardon of Sin, but the Reward of Righteousness too; so the Reward of Righteousness (as the Gospel, and as he, who is both the Author of that Gospel, and of that Reward, does set it forth) is to be eternal and everlasting. Now, tho' it should be granted, that Heaven and Happiness is in it self the just Reward of Duty and Obedience; yet it cannot be so freely granted, that an Eternity of Happiness is so; unless that Duty, or Obedience, to which that Happiness is assigned, be eternal also. And the Reason why such a Thing cannot be granted, is grounded upon Matter of Fact, and that Matter of Fact authorized by God's own Judicial Proceedings. For, we may safe­ly affirm, that the faln Angels were once Holy; and we may affirm it so much the more safely, because being in their Nature Creatures capable of so noble a qualificati­on, there can no doubt be made, but that [Page 268]they came forth such out of the Hands of their most Holy Creator. Tho' therefore, while they remained Holy, that is, while they did their Duty, we do not question their Hap­piness; yet we do maintain, that that Hap­piness then ceased, when their Holiness did so: And from thence we do conclude, that their Happiness was therefore not eternal, because their Holiness was not so. Now be­cause such their Holiness, which was not eternal, was their Original, or their Natural, or their Personal Holiness, (for you may call it which you please) therefore we do far­ther conclude, that there is no Security, that any Creatures Personal or Natural Holiness shall be eternal.

If therefore we shall bring our present Business to this Case, and by comparing one with the other, take leave to judge of what may be, by having seen what has been; we may take notice, that if our Saviour did no­thing more for Man's Salvation, but only ex­punge the Guilt of his Sins, and so restore him again to his Original Innocence; all this would warrant no more, than that Man should by this Means have been restored to that Innocence, or Holiness, of which Adam stood possessed before his Transgression. But that this Holiness should be lasting and eter­nal, we have not all this while any the least Ground of Warrant, no nor of Conjecture: Nav, we may rather conclude, that it would [Page 269] not be so; because we know, to our Cost, that Adam's was not so. For, I would ask, Whether this Innocence, or Holiness, be suffi­cient to make Man happy? If it be both answered, and granted, That it is; then I would further demand, Whether it will se­cure that Happiness to Eternity? If it will, then it must be something more than a Re­storation of Man to a State of an Adamical Holiness; for we are sure, that that first Ho­liness could do no such thing: If it will not, then it will not answer to a Gospel-Salvation, because such a Salvation does imply in it everlasting Happiness, and everlasting Hap­piness must (as we have seen) be attended with everlasting Holiness. In one Word there­fore, if, as Man's Happiness does depend upon his Holiness, so his everlasting Happi­ness must depend upon his everlasting Holi­ness; then we may well reckon, that that Holiness of Man, which shall accompany eternal Salvation, must be an indefectible Ho­liness, that shall never fail, and therefore whose Reward shall never cease.

And by this time, we hope, that the Truth of what we have laid down, and of what we designed to make good, may begin to ap­pear; which is,

1. That the Chief Design of our Saviour's coming into the World, was to bring sin­ful Man to a State of perfect Holiness; for, by that Man's chief Happiness, and (which [Page 270]is yet a great deal more) God's original Do­minion and Jurisdiction over Man, is provided for.

2. That an everlasting Holiness is required to an everlasting Happiness.

3. That such an Holiness is none of Man's own, and that therefore,

4. It must come from some other; and that that other must be God.

Having therefore seen, by what has been said, that an everlasting Holiness is necessary, in order to Man's everlasting Salvation, and that such Holiness must come from God: Let us proceed, and by that Light, which his Revelations have afforded us in this Case, enquire, what Provision God has made for the furnishing Man with such an Holiness, in order to such his Salvation. And,

1. We are instructed by such Revelations, That God sent his Son, our Saviour, into the World, cloathed with the same Flesh with sin­ful Man, to instruct and direct him in the Ways of Holiness, by his Doctrine, and by his Example: That upon this Account he is called the Light of the World; for he made our Duty plain and intelligible, took off that Veil from Mens Understandings, by which they were induced to believe, that Holiness did consist in outward Washings, in Cere­monies and Formalities, and such other or Modes or Gestures, which contained nothing of true Holiness in them, because they did [Page 271]not form our Spirits to God's Likeness, nor make us holy, as he is holy. And because he found Men laden with Sin, he did advise them to unburden themselves by Repentance, that so they might the more expeditely set about the Attainment of that Holiness, which he recommended to their Practice. And hence it was, that his Fore-runner, John the Baptist, first, and he himself, and his Apostles, afterwards, did all begin their great Work with an Exhortation therefore to Repent, be­cause the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand. In a Word, in order to terrifie Men from their wicked Courses, and to invite them into the Paths of true Piety and Godliness, he did by his Threats acquaint them with a more ex­press, grievous, and future Punishment; and by his Promises, with a more express, happy, and future Reward, than either Natural Rea­son or Revelation had as yet discovered. These, with some other, were the Methods which our Saviour, when in the Flesh, took to persuade Men to add their own Endea­vours to his, for their obtaining Salvation. And because these Things were designed for such a Purpose by him, and because they have in themselves a natural tendency to bring such Design to pass; and because, lastly, the Salvation of Man does in the whole Oeco­nomy of it proceed from the Grace of God; therefore these Things, when summed up to­gether under one Denomination, are called [Page 272] Means of Grace. These therefore, and the like Means of Grace, and them too backed and confirmed by Miracles, our Saviour made use of, to engage Men to practise and attain that Holiness, by which alone they could in Justice be fitted for Salvation.

2. But then, secondly, we are instructed, both by God's Word, and by our own Ex­perience, That all these Means made use of by our Saviour, did never yet produce that Holiness in any Man, which is to fit him for his designed Salvation. For, what from Weaknesses and Irresolutions from within, and what from Temptations from without; what from the Temptations of the Devil, and what from his own wicked, habitual, and over­ruling Practices, every Man falls short of the Grace of God; and his very best Practices being corrupted with Carelesness, or Inad­vertency, or Wilfulness, (and all of them Evil) do not beget in him that Holiness, to which alone eternal Salvation can in Justice belong. It may be then demanded, How any Man comes to be saved? To which I answer in the next, that is, the

3. Third place, That tho' the Means of Grace do not beget that Holiness in any Man in this Life, in Consideration of which he can in Justice obtain eternal Salvation; yet we are assured, that the Means of Grace ten­dred in the Gospel, and made use of by Man, may, and often have this Effect, as to en­gage [Page 273]Men heartily to desire and wish for such an Holiness. This is what our Saviour calls hungring and thirsting after Righteousness: An hearty and sincere Desire to be what we ought to be; and (to make good the Sincerity of such our Desire) an hearty and sincere En­deavour to be what we desire to be. For, no Man does or can heartily and sincerely desire any Thing, who does not also heartily endeavour to obtain it. Now, an hearty De­sire, and an hearty Endeavour after Holiness, does (if I may so speak) open and enlarge the Soul to admit and receive such Holiness, whenever God shall be pleased to bestow it. And because every good and perfect Gift comes from above, from the Father of Light, we may be therefore sure, that Holiness, the best and most perfect Gift, whereof we are capable, does so too. And we are moreover sure in Reason, that God will more freely bestow his best Gift there, where it is most heartily de­sired, and therefore also most kindly received: And we are the more sure, that he will do so in the present Case, because the Will of Man must in this Case concur with the Grace of God; or else it is impossible, that the Ho­liness to be bestowed should ever become his own. For, no Man can in Reason or Nature be holy against his own Will. He then, who by the Means of Grace has advanced so far as to hunger and thirst after Righteous­ness, shall be sure to be filled. We have his [Page 274]Promise for it, who is able to make it good; and we have his Promise for it, whose Pro­mise cannot fail. And then we cannot but be sensible, that he who is filled with Righ­teousness, cannot want that Holiness which accompanies Salvation. And truly, when I consider, how these lower good Things, the Blessings of Nature, which are confessedly the Bounties of the God of Nature, do freely flow in upon all his Creatures, where their natural Appetites or Wants do desire or re­quire them, and (where their Powers and Faculties are such) in pursuit of such their Desires, they endeavour to obtain them; it mightily inclines me to think, that his Bles­sing of Holiness will also there flow in, where the moral Appetites of his Rational Creatures do sincerely desire it; and where they are so sensible of their Want of it, as to endeavour after it.

4. We proceed, and add, in the fourth place, That we are instructed, both by God's Word, and by our own Experience, that tho' a perfect Holiness may be heartily desired, and sincerely endeavoured after; yet, that it is never attained by any Man in this Life; and therefore so neither is a perfect Happiness. The Evidence for the first is, because all Men in this World are Sinners; and the Evidence for the last is, because all Men in this World are Mortal. Now, as Sin is an infallible Confutation of a perfect Holiness; so Mor­tality [Page 275]is an infallible Confutation of a per­fect Happiness. We are therefore at last ar­rived thus far, that no Man shall arrive at a perfect Holiness, till he is translated to ano­ther World: And because it is difficult, if not impossible, to conceive, how any Man should arrive at a perfect Holiness in the Grave; therefore we may go one Step farther, and add, that no Man shall attain to such an Ho­liness, till the Resurrection: And we may ve­ry fairly and rationally conjecture, (I may say, infer) That then the Faithful shall: For, we know, that by the Resurrection we shall be released from the Curse of the Law on the one Hand, and shall enter upon the Reward of Obedience and Holiness on the other.

5. And then, lastly, Because that Happi­ness, which our Saviour has purchased for Believers, is an eternal Happiness; and be­cause (as we have seen) it is impossible, that there should be any such Thing as an eternal Happiness, without an eternal Holiness; and because to pretend to bestow an everlasting Happiness upon Man, and not an everlasting Holiness, without which such an Happiness is impossible, is to mock Man, and not to save him; and because, lastly, we cannot without Blasphemy and Absurdity tax the Counsels and Purposes of our Saviour, in the Business of Man's Salvation, of such gross Prevari­cation: therefore we do at last conclude, [Page 276]That God in our Saviour will endow Believers, at or upon their Resurrection, with an Inhe­rent, Immutable, and Eternal Holiness.

Now we have observed before, That the Punishment threatned by the Gospel against those, who shall refuse their Salvation by the Neglect of the Conditions of the Gospel, is greater than what was threatned against the Breach of the Law of Works, the Law given to Adam.

And that the Reward proposed by the Go­spel to those, who shall admit the Conditi­ons of it, is greater than what was by the Law proposed to Adam upon his Obedience.

And we have observed in this Chapter, That that Inherent and Indefectible Holiness, which is a Part of such Reward, is greater and nobler than Adam's Holiness before the Fall; because it is more lasting than that of him, or indeed of the faln Angels.

Now it is certain, that the Degrees of the Punishments are by Justice proportioned to the Degrees of the several Sinners own De­serts. And it is certain, that the Rewards of eternal Life, and of an Indefectible Holi­ness, do in Justice exceed the Deserts of all that are saved, (for they have been all Sin­ners.) And then, what Grounds these Con­siderations may afford for the magnifying of God's Grace, and the Merits and Dignity of our Saviour's Purchase and Person, may be a Matter worthy our Meditations. But I [Page 277]shall not pursue it here, because tho' there be an Occasion for me to enlarge what has been said already; yet I am unwilling to repeat.

CHAP. XIII.

HAving thus far discoursed, First, Con­cerning the Pardon of Sin; and, Se­condly, Concerning the Gift of an Happy and Eternal Life, (the Two Things in which a Gospel Salvation does consist:) And ha­ving made it good, That Believers do obtain both the one and the other only in Conside­ration of our Saviour's Merits; and that their so doing is agreeable to Reason and Ju­stice: Two Things do still remain to be ex­amined.

1. By what Way or Means they shall be put into the Possession of such Eternal Life? And,

2. Wherein the Happiness of such Life does consist?

1. And in order to the Resolution of the first Thing, we lay it down, as a certain Truth, in the first place, That Man, in or­der to his entring upon the Possession of Eter­nal Life, must first rise from the Dead. For, [Page 278]all Men die, because all Men are Sinners: And because it is absurd so much as to ima­gine, that Man can enter upon the Possession of Eternal Life, while he remains under the Power of Death; therefore, without any more ado, we shall take it for granted, that Man must be freed from that Death, which is brought upon him by his Sin, before he can obtain that Eternal Life, which is purchased for him by his Saviour.

2. We lay it down, in the second place, as a certain Truth, That because our Saviour underwent Death himself for the Expiation of Man's Sin; and because our Saviour could not in Nature or Possibility be qualified to bestow upon Man the Purchase of such his Death, till he himself should rise from the Dead: That therefore, in order to Man's entring upon the Possession of an Eternal Life, it was necessary, that our Saviour him­self, as well as Man, should first rise from the Dead.

3. We lay it down, in the Third place, That if the Merits of our Saviour's Death were of Value sufficient to make good the Expiation of Man's Sin; that then, in Reason and Justice, he ought to rise again from the Dead. For, because, in the Case so put, he could have no Concern with Justice, but what was his own; and because he himself had paid an exact Obedience to the Law; and because Life is the Reward of such Obe­dience, [Page 279]as Death is the Wages of Disobedience; Therefore, if we do allow him to have un­loaded himself of the Sin of Man, which he had taken upon himself, by his Death; we must, and do, by so doing, reinstate him in his own Right; that is, we must allow, that he had a Right to be, and therefore in Justice ought to be restored to Life again. And there­fore it is not at all to be questioned, but that our Saviour had never died at all, if he had never taken upon himself the Sins of other Men. But of this more by and by. In the mean while, these Things being laid down, we proceed, and,

1. Observe in the first place, That our Saviour's Resurrection is almost constantly by the Scriptures of the New Testament ascri­bed to God the Father: And Multitudes of Texts might be quoted for it; as, the Se­cond of the Acts, ver. 24, & 30. The Fifth Chapter of the same, ver. 26, & 30. The Tenth, ver. 40. The Seventeenth, ver. 31. The Tenth to the Romans, ver. 9. The First to the Corinthians, chap. 6. ver. 14, &c. We know well enough, that they, who make it their Business to degrade our Saviour below his most exalted Dignity and Station, do make use of these Texts for such their Pur­pose: But we know withal, that there are other Texts, tho' indeed not so many; and some of them, when compared with their Context, not so Categorical; which yet [Page 280]ascribe his Resurrection to himself. Such is that in the Second Chapter of St. John, v. 19. Destroy this Temple, and in three Days I will raise it up. And so again, in the Tenth of St. John, v. 18. No Man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my self: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. Now, as we made it out just now, that after the Expiation finished he had a Right to rise from the Dead; so we do not at all question, but that he had a Power to raise himself too. But tho' it should be al­lowed, (as we do not at all question, and that too from several Things already laid down, and made good, but that it may be proved:) But, I say, tho' it should be allowed, that he had both a Right and a Power to raise himself from the Dead; yet notwithstanding that, it was not altogether so congruous or agree­able to the equitable Proceedings of Justice, that he should exercise such his Power, or put himself into the possession of such his Right, in the present Case. For, because he had submitted to offer his Life an Expiatory Sacrifice to the Divine Justice, for the Sin of Man; he had by such his Submission so far resigned such his Right and Power into the Hand of God, as that, both by the Laws of Reason and Justice, as well as by the Rules of Decency and Congruity, God was now become the sole Judge of the Validity of such his Sacrifice, for the Accomplishment of the designed Expiation. And if God was the [Page 281]sole Judge of the Validity of his Sacrifice; he had by the same Means the rightful (and I may add, the sole) Power of declaring such Validity: And because the Resurrection of our Saviour from the Dead, was in effect such a Declaration; therefore we may now be sa­tisfied, why the Holy Ghost does so very fre­quently, and in a manner constantly, ascribe the Resurrection of our Saviour in the Scriptures, to God alone. To which we may add, That the High-Priest under the Law (who in this very Case was a Type of our Saviour) was obliged once a Year to enter into the Holy of Holies, but (as the Author to the Hebrews words it) not without Blood, which he offered for himself, and for the Errors of the People. In which Case, it must be confessed, that the offering of the Blood to God was in order to his acceptance; and that God's acceptance of the Blood, that is, of the Life of the Sacri­fice, was the Ratification of that Expiation, that was made by such Sacrifice. And in deed and truth, our Saviour in the Business now before us, being both the Priest and the Sa­crifice to God for the Sins of Man; and his Resurrection being the first Testimony or Declaration of the Acceptance of such his Sacrifice: We cannot in any Congruity sup­pose, that such Testimony or Declaration should be ascribed to any other, but to God alone. And therefore, as all those Texts, which ascribe our Saviour's Resurrection to [Page 282] God, do in this Case speak strictly and pro­perly; so we may now, by what has been said, perceive, that they are no Prejudice to his Divinity; because he having obliged him­self to offer that Body, to which his Deity was united, a Sacrifice for Sin; he had by the same Act obliged himself to expect from God the Approbation and Allowance of such his Sacrifice; and therefore also to receive from him his Resurrection, which was an effectual Declaration of such Allowance: And there­fore,

2. I do offer it to Consideration, That the Resurrection of our Saviour from the Dead, was an undoubted Argument, that he had fi­nished and compleated that Expiation, which he had undertaken to make by his Death for the Sins of Men. For, as we are assured by the Scriptures, that he was crucified, dead, and buried; and so, that he died the Death of a Criminal: So we are assured by the same Scriptures, that he did not die for his own Crimes. For, it is utterly impossible, and that too in the Nature of the Thing, that he should die for his own Sins, who yet did no Sin, neither was Guile found in his Mouth; that is, who had no Sins of his own to die for. Now, because we are taught by the Scriptures, and (as we have already made it out) because our Reason, guided by them, does fall in with them, and so both do tell us, that the Wages of Sin is Death; that is, [Page 283]that there is a Natural Justice in the Case, that Death should be inflicted as the Punish­ment of Sin: And because we are assured by the same Natural Reason, that it must needs be unjust to inflict the same Punishment up­on an Innocent Person, which is the just Pu­nishment of a Criminal: I say, for this Rea­son, we may be satisfied, that our Saviour, tho' he was in himself a Lamb without Spot, yet did die for some Sins or others, (be those Sins whose they will at present:) And there­fore because the Spirit of God has by his ex­press Word told us, that he died for our Sins; we may, upon his Testimony, rest satisfied, that so he did. Thus far therefore we have advanced towards our present Purpose and Argument; That Death was what the Law threatned for our Sins, and that we being Sinners, and so having incurred the Venge­ance threatned, our Saviour (who, as we have shewed, had an absolute and uncon­troulable Power to dispose of his own Life, as he himself pleased) did put himself in our stead, became a Sacrifice for us, and so in his own Person suffered that Death, which we by our Sins had deserved. But then, to the making good of our present Proposition, we add, That as he suffered Death for the Expi­ation of our Sins; so if he had not finished and compleated such Expiation, he had not rose again. For, so long as the Guilt remain­ed, so long the Punishment was, and that too [Page 284]in Justice, to be continued. For, in such Case, there had been the same Reason for the Con­tinuation of the Punishment, that there was for its first Infliction. And therefore, as it was first inflicted for a Guilt, so it must have been continued for the Continuation of such Guilt. From which we do infer, That if he was justly acquitted from the Continuation of the Punishment, then he was also acquitted from the Guilt; and if he was justly acquitted from the Guilt, that then he had by his Pu­nishment made a sufficient Expiation for it. And that he was acquitted from the Punish­ment due to the Guilt, and that he was justly acquitted too, the Resurrection singly and by it self will make out an undoubted and un­controulable Argument. For, our natural and common Sense does assure us, that a Resur­rection to Life is an Acquittance and Dis­charge from Death: And Reason will tell us, that because a Discharge from Death can only come from God, and because God cannot but be just; therefore that Acquittance and Dis­charge, that is made by a Resurrection, must needs be just too. And therefore, from the Whole we may infer, That the Resurrection of our Saviour from that Death, which he suffered as the Punishment of our Sins, was a demonstrative Argument and Proof, that by his Death he had paid a sufficient Ransom, and had made a sufficient Expiation for such Sins. So that, strictly speaking, in his Death [Page 285]consisted the Punishment of our Sins; in the Infinite Value of his Death consisted the Ex­piation of our Sins; and in the Resurrection appears the full Proof and Evidence of such his Expiation.

Before we part with this Head, it may not be improper to take notice, that because his Death was of infinite Value, that therefore there was a sufficient Ransom paid for our Sins by that Death, so soon as it was suffered. For, it must be confessed, that the Ransom was then made, when the Debt was paid. And because that is Truth and Justice, we do from thence infer, That our Saviour might, and that justly too, have resumed his Life so soon as he had laid it down. And so he might (for any thing that Justice can offer to the contrary) have descended alive from the Cross, after he had once died upon it: Nor needed his Resurrection, in point of Justice, to have been deferred to the third Day, but might (had God so pleased) have been cau­sed on the first. But tho' it might justly have been done so; yet we do not find, that it was actually so done; for the Scriptures tell us, that he did not rise till the third Day. From whence we observe, That as he died to save Man from Sin; so he did for some time continue in a State of Death, to satisfie and assure us, that he did so die. And so as his Death had a regard to God's Justice; so his Continuance so long under the Power of [Page 286]Death had a regard to our Faith. The first was the Purchase of our Salvation: The last was our Assurance of, and therefore also our Comfort in such a Purchase. By which we may understand, that his Love was expressed to us even in the Grave; and tho' (as the Psalmist speaks) no Man remembreth God in the Pit; yet we may hence learn, that even in the Pit our God both can, and has remem­bred us.

We may also under this Head take notice, That as our Saviour had never died at all (as we observed before) because he himself was perfectly Innocent, if he had not by his own Choice put himself in the stead, and so ex­posed himself to the Punishment of the Guil­ty; so we may be confident, that he, whose Innocence was so singular and illustrious, as not to be in the least tarnished, whilst he in­habited in mortal Flesh and Blood, must, now that Flesh and Blood is spiritualized, (see the First to the Corinthians, chap. 15. ver. 44.) be rather the more free (if that were possible) from all possibility of Stain or Guilt. And we may be secure, that if his glorified Body shall ever live free from Sin, it shall for that single Reason, if yet there were no other, live free from Death too. So true is that of the Apo­stle, in the Sixth to the Romans, ver. 9. that Christ being raised from the Dead, dieth no more, Death hath no more Dominion over him: and that in the Revelations, I am he, that was [Page 287]dead, and am alive, and live for evermore. So that the Victory which our Saviour ob­tained over Death, by his Resurrection, can­not so well be looked upon as a single Con­quest, since it is to extend it self to all Suc­cessions of Ages and Time; and is to last, when Time shall be no more; that is, for ever and ever.

3. As our Saviour, by his Resurrection, did so far subdue Death, as to obtain to him­self a future and secure Immortality; so also he did, by the same Resurrection, so far sub­due Death, as to secure a future and glorious Resurrection to all those, who are so far plant­ed into the likeness of his Death, as to be dead to Sin, and alive to God. For, if we live to him, while we live here; we may, from his Resurrection, have a comfortable Assurance, that notwithstanding we die for a time, as he did; yet we shall be raised again, and live with him for evermore. To this purpose, we must recollect, that when he died, he did not die for his own Sins, but for ours. And then, if in his Death he laid down his Life in our stead; we may be easily satisfied, that it was in our stead that he took it up again at his Resurrection. For, if our Guilt had not been cancelled, and so our Debt discharged, by his Death; then his Death (as we obser­ved under the last Head) had been continued still. And as then we did conclude, that he had therefore satisfied the Debt, because he [Page 288]was released from the Penalty; so now we do conclude, that because the Debt so discharged was ours, and not his own; therefore the Be­nefit of the Release must redound to us, as well as to him. For, it must needs be unjust in the Creditor to detain us in Prison for that Debt, which our Surety has paid. And be­cause we know, that the Creditor in the pre­sent Case is God himself; and because we know also, that such a Creditor can do no Injustice; therefore we know, that as when our Saviour laid down his Life, he laid it down in our stead; so also, that when he took it up again, he took up with it the Lives of all those, who by the Conditions of the New Covenant shall have an Interest in such his Death. And therefore, as our Christianity does acquaint us, that they who live to Christ, do live by the Spirit; so St. Paul, to our present purpose, does tell us, in the Eighth to the Romans, ver. 11. that if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, do dwell in you; he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal Bodies, by his Spirit, that dwelleth in you. In a Word, Christ is our Head, and we are his Members; and because he, and we, do make up one Body; and because, as Members of such his Body, we are quickned by his Spirit; there­fore we may confirm our own Resurrection by his. And therefore, as he is called the First­born from the Dead, in the First to the Colossi­ans, [Page 289]ver. 18. so we are called the Children of the Resurrection, in the Twentieth of St. Luke, ver. 36. So that a good Man, from the Certainty of his Saviour's Resurrection from Death to Glory and Immortality, may safely conclude his own; may lie down in his Grave as securely, as in his Bed; and when the Morning of the Great Day shall down forth, may be more secure of rising again, and put­ting on his Body; than he can be, that he shall rise on the Morrow-morning, and put on his Clothes: For, for the first he has the Se­curity of Truth and Omnipotence; but for the last he has only the Promises of his own Presumption, or (at the very best) but of his Hope.

4. As the Faithful shall, in Consideration of our Saviour's Death and Resurrection, ob­tain their own Resurrection from Death to Life; so the Life, which by such their Re­surrection they shall obtain, shall be Life Eternal. This is express Scripture; and a Christian may therefore be satisfied in, and assured of its Truth. For, our Saviour him­self tells us as much, when giving an Ac­count of the Last Judgment, he closes such Account, in the Last Verse of the Twenty fifth Chapter of St. Matthew, with these Words; [And these shall go into everlasting Punishment:] and then follows that, which is directly to our present Purpose, [But the Righteous into Life Eternal.]

And Reason tells us, that so it must needs be; because where the Cause of all Death whatsoever is taken away, there the Possibility of Death must be taken away too; unless we should imagine, that Death should be brought upon a Rational Creature, subject to Law, without any meritorious Cause of Death at all. But (as we have often laid it down, and proved it already) that cannot be supposed in the present Case; because the Death, we now speak of, is supposed to come from God's Justice; and the Justice of God cannot either truly, or rationally be suppo­sed to inflict Death there, where there is no Desert of it. Now, we therefore know, that the meritorious Cause of Death is Sin, be­cause we know, that the Wages of Sin is Death. If therefore, as we have already seen, the Sin of the Faithful be taken away by the Expiation, and if upon their Resur­rection they obtain an indefectible Holiness; the Inference will be, That the Cause of Death, Sin, will upon the first Account be cancelled, and blotted out; and that, upon the last Account, it cannot be renewed or resto­red; and that therefore, upon both Accounts in conjunction, Death, the Wages of Sin, can never more return. And then, when a Life restored is secured from all possible return of Death, we may be sure, that such Life so re­stored must be Eternal. And agreeable to what we now say, St. Paul tells us, in the [Page 291]Third to the Philippians, the last Verse, that our Saviour, whom we look for from Hea­ven, shall change our vile Body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious Body, accord­ing to the mighty working, whereby he is able even to subdue all Things unto himself. Now we know, that when our Saviour appeared to St. Paul, that is, to that very Apostle who tells us these Things, he does expresly affirm to King Agrippa, in the Twenty sixth of the Acts, that the Light of the Appearance was above the Brightness of the Sun, (and yet the Context will tell us, that the Appearance was made about Mid-day.) And perhaps our Sa­viour's Transfiguration on the Mount was a Proleptick Discovery of that Glory, with which his Body was to be cloathed upon his Ascent into Heaven, the Mount of God. But be that as it will; yet to our Purpose: If the Bodies of the Saints shall be fashioned like unto his glorious Body, then it will be no im­probable Conclusion, That they shall with that Glory put on an Immortal Frame and Constitution. And this Conclusion will then advance from Probable to Certain, when we know, that the same Apostle does acquaint us, not only, that our Body, which is sown in dishonour, shall be raised in glory; but, over and above, that this Corruptible must put on Incorruption, and that this Mortal must put on Immortality. Much more might be offered on this Subject; but, from what has been [Page 292]glanced at, we may now perceive, that our Body, in imitation of our Saviour's Body, shall after its Resurrection be indued with a glorious Frame, and an immortal Constitu­tion; that it shall be done by his Power, as it shall in Consideration of his Merit; that the Power that shall do it, is able to subdue all Things to it self, that is, is Omnipotent. And then, where we have the Promise of Truth, and the Power of Omnipotence, to se­cure to us an Eternal Life; there we can have no Reason to doubt the Eternity of such Life.

The Second Thing should now in Order follow, which is to shew, wherein the Hap­piness of such Eternal Life does consist. But before we speak to that, I shall lay down two or three Practical Considerations; which, as they look back to what has been spoken al­ready, so will be no improper Introduction to those Things which are to follow.

1. And first, We should be sensible of, and grateful for that blessed Provision, that our Lord and Saviour has made for our Everlast­ing Happiness and Security. And this we should so much the rather be, because, by what has been said, we may now understand, that such Provision does fully answer to our highest natural Desires and Inclinations. For, our Anxiety for our own Welfare will tell us, that among all the several Appetites, by which we pursue after our own Happiness, [Page 293]our Desire of Life does hold the first and chief Place with us. And the Reason is plain, because the Loss of Life must needs be fol­lowed by the Loss of all other Enjoyments whatsoever, that can in any wise conduce to our Happiness. And, as we are told by our Common Sense, that our grand and topping Appetite is that of Life; so we are told by the same Common Sense, that Immortality is a sure Fence for that Life. If therefore God has graciously made Provision for the Gratifi­cation of this our most exalted Appetite, by securing to us a future Immortality; and if, over and above, he has engaged to secure that very Immortality from the Loads and Incumbrances of all those Miseries, which do constantly attend our Mortal Life in this World: I say, if God has done so great Things for us, we ought to look upon our selves to be obliged in Gratitude to endeavour a Re­turn (as far as our slender Abilities go) in some measure proportionate to the Almighty Bounty. For, if ever our Thanks be due to any one whomsoever; then most certainly they must be so to him, who is willing, and able, and has promised to gratifie the utmost Pitch, and the most exalted Desires of our own Self-love.

2. Has God provided an Immortal and Se­cure Life for us in another World? Then that should engage us not to set up for Happiness in this. For, tho' it be granted, that the [Page 294]Good Things of this Life are present, and at hand; but that those of a better Life are lodged at a distance; and so we are engaged in our Pursuit after the first by our Senses, but we can only pursue the last by our Faith or Hope: Yet, because our Experience, upon innumerable Repetitions, has constantly con­vinced us, that our Senses have alway decei­ved us, (for, our highest and most exalted Enjoyments here do always determine in Emptiness and Dissatisfaction:) I say, for this single Reason, (if yet there were no other) we should for the future rather seek for the Happiness we desire there, where our Faith tells us, it may be had; than to repeat our Disappointments, by pursuing it there, where our Experience has convinced us, that it can­not. Alas! a very little consideration may satisfie us, that in our Attempts after Hap­piness by the Pursuit of the Good Things of this Life, we always blunder; and that too, whether we do, or do not obtain those Good Things, which we so pursue. For, if we do not, then we lose our desired Happiness by our Disappointment: But if we do, then either they must leave us, by reason of their slip­periness and uncertainty; or we must leave them, by reason of our Mortality. And then, be it one, or be it t'other, the Case is much one and the same; for, in both Cases, the expected Happiness vanishes. And because by this we may perceive, that we cannot be [Page 295]made happy by any Thing in this Life; therefore,

3. Let us be exhorted to seek our Happi­ness in a future Life; that is, (as has appear­ed) to seek it there, where it may be had. For, if Happiness be to be had any where, undoubtedly it is to be had in the Favour and Presence of God; who, as he is the undoubt­ed Author of all Things, so for that Reason alone he is the undoubted Author of all that Happiness, which we can possibly reap from the Enjoyment of any Good whatsoever. Now, because the same Revelations, which have discovered to us a Future and Immortal Life, have also acquainted us, that that Life is lodged in the kind and favourable Presence of God, that is, in Heaven; and because we know, that no unholy or impure Thing shall come into the Presence of him, who is of purer Eyes, than to behold Iniquity: There­fore, to the present Exhortation, let me add this Direction, and that is, That we pursue our future Glory and Immortality (or Eternal Life hereafter) by an holy Life here. For, the true and solid Reason, why there is no Misery nor Death in Heaven, is because there is no Sin nor Wickedness there. For, Death and Misery are so far forth the inseparable Companions of Sin and Wickedness, that, as where-ever we find the last, there we are sure to find the first; so, where the first are not, there we may be sure, that the last are shut [Page 296]out. And therefore, because Mortality and Misery have no Place in Heaven, we may, for that Reason, stand confirmed, that Sin and Impiety have no Place there neither. If therefore we do in good earnest design to be lodged in those Regions of Happiness, we must first be sure to cast off our Sins, and to leave them behind us. For, so sure as Death is the Wages of Sin, so sure it is, that Immortality and Happiness shall not be the Portion of the Impenitent. And so long as God is in his own Nature Holy, and that is, so long as he is God, so long he must be displeased with all those, who are pleased with, and make much of Sin, the grand Enemy of such his Nature, be­cause the grand Enemy of such his Holi­ness.

CHAP. XIV.

HAving in the last Chapter shewed, by what Means we are put into the Pos­session of an Happy and Eternal Life, the Purchase of our Saviour's Merits: We must in this, according to our Promise, inquire wherein the Happiness of such Life does consist.

And, in answer to this Inquiry, we lay it down, in short; That the Consummate Hap­piness of the Saints in Eternal Life, does con­sist in that Joy, Pleasure, and full Satisfacti­on, which results from their Loving the Lord their God with all their Heart, with all their Soul, with all their Strength, and with all their Mind; and from their Enjoyment of God (the Party beloved) and his Love. I have chose to express the Love of the glori­fied Saints to God, in the Words of Scripture, because they seem to me to contain in them such an Intense Love, under so large and comprehensive an Expression, that, had I delivered it in other Words, I should more than have doubted, that I should have fallen [Page 298]short of the Thing. And I do believe, that such Caution will then appear to be no scru­pulous Nicety, when we shall come seriously to weigh and consider those Things that follow.

1. And first, we take notice, what every one may easily be satisfied of by their own Experience, That we love our selves best, that is, before and beyond all other Persons, and all Things whatsoever. And there nei­ther is, nor can be any doubt, but that such our Inclination is planted in us at our first Formation, by the Hand of God himself. And therefore neither does God ever require of us to slight or cast it away, but by such Motives, that will more than recompense all the Evil, that we do, or can suffer, by our so doing. And therefore he, who in the Cause of God and Goodness shall so far un­dervalue his own Welfare, as to part with that Welfare (be it what it will) for the sake of such Cause, may be sure of a Compensa­tion from God's Hand, that shall repair his Damages with advantage, and that too, tho' what he so parts with be Life it self. And therefore it was a fixed and undoubted Per­suasion in the Primitive Christians, that whoso­ever suffered Martyrdom for his Saviour's, and Religions sake, was certainly thereupon crowned with Glory; and with them, to be a Martyr, and to be crowned, were equiva­lent Expressions; for, they meant the same [Page 299]Thing, whether they made use of the one or of the other. So confident were they of the Truth of their Saviour's Promise, in the Nineteenth of St. Matthew, ver. 29. Every one that hath forsaken Houses, or Brethren, or Sisters, or Father, or Mother, or Wife, or Children, or Lands, for my Names sake, shall receive an hundred-fold, and shall inherit ever­lasting Life: and of that in the Tenth Chap­ter of the same Evangelist, ver. 39. He that loseth his Life for my sake, shall find it. By which we may understand, that God does so far allow our Self-love, the Work of his own Hand, that where, for his sake, we are wil­ling to lay it aside in lesser Matters, there he has, in requital for our so doing, obliged himself to provide for the gratification of it in greater Matters.

Now, tho' it be confessed, that there is a Thing too frequently, and too kindly enter­tained among Mankind, which wears the Name of Self-love; and which is not only commonly accounted, but which also really is in it self Criminal: Yet, if we narrowly look into such Crime, we shall find, that it is not therefore a Crime, because it is Self-love, but because it excludes our Love of others. It is indeed kind to it self, (as all Self-love, and that too in the Nature of the Thing, must needs be) but then it is kind to very few or none besides. And therefore the Viciousness of it consists, not so much in [Page 300] doing what it does, as in not doing what it ought to do: That is, the Self-love, so far as it is only Self-love, is innocent: But it then becomes a Sin, when it advances to Uncha­ritableness. For, every Man is allowed (per­haps in a degree required) to love himself; but no Man is allowed, no not upon the Pre­tence of such his Love, to hate another. Nay, he may love himself best; but by so doing, he must not shut out all others from any Share in his Love; nor (where his Cir­cumstances and Condition, measured by the Standard of Common Humanity, or Chri­stian Charity, will allow him so to do) must he shut out others from the Proofs and Evi­dences, that he allows them such a Share. So that as we are satisfied by our own Sense of the Thing, (and that is as great a Satisfaction, as we are capable of in any Case whatso­ever) that we love our selves best; so, by what has been said, it may now appear, that we do not transgress any Duty of Morality or Religion by our so doing.

2. Our next Proposition must be, That as we love our selves best, so our Love of any Person or Thing besides is directed by and to our Self-love. For, we therefore love any Thing, because it does, or at least because we think it may conduce to our own Welfare and Happiness. For, all Love has in it a Mixture of Desire; and then, as the Love of our selves is accompanied with a Desire [Page 301]of our own Welfare; so, because we love our selves best, all our other Desires must, for that Reason, be in a subordination to that. And therefore, tho' our Love to other Men may engage us to do very great and conside­rable Kindnesses to such Men; yet, for all that, we should not do so, did we not, by so doing, gratifie our selves. For, tho' it is confessed, that because our Kindnesses to them proceeded from our Love to them, that therefore we design to please and gratifie them by our Kindnesses; yet it is full as true, that if their Pleasure and Gratification were not pleasant and grateful to our selves, we should leave those Kindnesses undone, by which we designed such their Pleasure and Gratification. And as it is thus notorious, that our Love to other Persons is finally re­solved into the Love of our selves; so it is as, if not more notorious, that our Love of Things is so. For, Things have no Sense of our Kindness to them; and therefore our Kindness to them, were it for their sakes, would be irrational and absurd; for there could no Account be given of it in Reason, or Nature. But because we our selves are capable of receiving a Benefit from Things, by our having a Sense of such Benefit; and because we are capable of apprehending such our Benefit, before we do obtain them, as well as when we do possess and enjoy them; therefore we may from thence be satisfied, [Page 302]that our Love, and therefore also our Desire of them, does spring from such our Appre­hension of our own Benefit; and we may be sure, that the Desire of such our own Bene­fit does come from our Self-love. So that now we may be as well convinced, that our Love to other Persons, or to Things, does pro­ceed from our Self-love, under this Head; as under the last we might, that we love our selves best.

3. Let our Third Proposition then be this: That we find in our selves, and that too by our own Sense (I may say, Feeling) of the Thing, such a Want of that, that will satisfie the De­sires of our Self-love, that we are constrain­ed by such our Self-love, (that is, we are constrained by Nature; for Self-love, as we have seen, is natural;) I say, we are con­strained by Nature to seek for a Supply for such our Want from abroad; that is, we are constrained to seek for it out of our selves. This might be abundantly proved from the great Variety of these our Wants, which can only be relieved by a Foreign Supply; and those too, Wants, not only of our Bodies, but of our Minds; without our obtaining of which, we do account our selves in a degree miserable; at least, not so happy, as to gra­tifie our Self-love. But the Thing being Na­tural, and our Conviction of its Truth being so too, it needs not. And therefore I would have it here remarked, that my chief Aim in [Page 303]laying down this Proposition, is to adjust the Coherence, and by consequence the Proof of my main Design, which is to shew, wherein our Grand and Eternal Happiness does con­sist.

But yet (because it may in some measure conduce to such our Design) we shall, before we quit this Proposition, leave this Remark upon it: That it is not unlikely, if it be not certain, that God in our very Formation has so ordered our natural Frame and Constitu­tion, that as the Desires of our Self-love can­not be answered nor supplied by our Self-suffi­ciency; so, that such our Desires should carry our Thoughts abroad to seek such Supply elsewhere. Which is (if I may so speak) the first Step, to which we are obliged by Nature, in order to our seeking after God. And in the next place, That God has made all Things in this World, within the compass of our possible Purchase, so inadequate to the Desires of our Self-love, that when we do actually obtain such Things, our highest and most exalted Enjoyment of them does still fall short and does never fill or satisfie such our Desires. Which is the Second Natural Step to bring us to God.

4. This Remark then being left by the way; let our Fourth Proposition be this: That the more we know, or believe, that other Persons or Things will answer to, and satis­fie the Desires of our Self-love; the greater [Page 304]Value we put upon them; and the greater Value we put upon them, the more we love them. The Truth of which Proposition is as certain, as it is certain, that we desire to gratifie our Self-love: And it is as certain, that we desire to gratifie our Self-love, as it is certain, that we have such a Thing in us as Self-love. For, because our Self-love con­sists in a Desire of our own Gratification; and because a Desire of our own Gratification contains in it a Love of those Persons or Things, from which we expect to receive such Gratification: I say, for these Reasons, to suppose, that we shall not love such Things or Persons in proportion to that Gratification, which we expect to receive from them, is to suppose us to contradict those very Desires, which yet at the same time we do professedly entertain. We shall therefore take our pre­sent Proposition for good and true, and that is, That we must needs love all Persons and Things according as we think or know, that they will answer to, or gratifie the Desires of our Self-love.

5. The natural and immediate Effect of our Love of any Person or Thing, is a De­sire of possessing or enjoying the Person or Thing so loved. For, our Desire of any Per­son or Thing includes in it our present Want of such Thing or Person. Now, if such our Want were not at home, that is, in our selves, we need not seek abroad, or out of our selves, [Page 305]for a Supply of it. And because the Want, which in the present Case we feel in our selves, is fixed and immovable, and so cannot stir abroad; therefore that, that must supply such Want, must be brought home to it. Our Supply then must be caused by the Union of that Thing or Person to our selves, which is to supply such Want. And when that Thing or Person is united to our selves, then, and not before, we may be said to possess or en­joy such Thing or Person.

I do believe, that the Truth of this Pro­position may be doubted; because we may be satisfied with the Assurance of our Friend's Kindness, tho' we do not enjoy his Company. And something very like it may be said of the Satisfaction that we take in several Things, tho' at a distance from us. But when it is considered, that tho' we do not enjoy the Company of our absent Friend, yet for all that, we do at that very time enjoy his Friendship; and that tho' his Person be absent from us, yet that the Assurance of his Friend­ship is present with us, and lodged in our Breasts; we may then begin to be satisfied, that so far forth as our Desires are gratified, or our Want supplied, so far forth that, which does so gratifie or supply them, is present with us, which is an assured Satisfaction of our Friend's Love and Kindness to us. But then we must take notice, that if our Desires do extend themselves farther; as suppose, if [Page 306]our Love of him engages us to desire the Presence of his Person, as earnestly as the As­surance of his Friendship; then, in such a Case, as our Desires and our Want are more than barely the Desire and Want of his Friend­ship and Kindness; so such our greater De­sire and Want cannot be supplied, but by the Presence and Enjoyment of his Person and Company. And therefore, strictly speaking, our Desire of his Company proceeds from our Love of his Person; but our Desire of his Friendship proceeds from our Love of such Friendship, which is a Thing, and not a Per­son. But then it must be granted, that no Man can love another, but that, according to the Degree of such his Love, he must de­sire his Company too; and that the want of his Company would be attended with an Af­fliction proportionate to the Degrees of his Love; if the Absence of his Person were not in some measure compensated by the Assu­rance of his Friendship, which is present. And what is thus true of Persons, is so also of Things. For, we therefore desire any Thing, because we love it, and because we want it: And then the only way to supply such Want, and to gratifie such our Love, is, by bringing such Thing home into our own Possession, that is, within the reach of our Enjoyment. For, an hungry Man may as soon fill his Belly with the Meat that remains in the Market, while he tarries at home, as any Man's Love [Page 307]of any Thing or Person can be gratified, while that Person or Thing is out of the reach of his Possession or Enjoyment. For, as it is absurd to imagine, that any Man can love any Person or Thing, without any De­sire to possess or enjoy them; so it is equally absurd to think, that he can possess or enjoy them, while they are at a distance from him.

These Five Propositions I have laid down, as previous and introductory to the making out the Truth, which we now pursue; and that is, That the Happiness of our Eternal Life will consist in that Pleasure and Satisfa­ction which we shall take in our Love and Enjoyment of God, and in his Love of us. For, it is obvious, because natural, for us to conceive, that all possible Happiness (be that Happiness what it will) must come from something that is grateful to our Inclinati­ons, that is, from something which we love; and therefore also from something, which (if we want it) we do also desire: That what we so want and desire, cannot make us happy, till we possess and enjoy it; because till then our Desires are not fulfilled: That our Make and Frame is such, that we feel in our selves that we do want That, that must make us happy; and that therefore, if we will obtain it, we must seek for it abroad, and out of our selves: And lastly, That our Self-love does, and that too necessarily, en­gage us to seek after such Thing: I say, these [Page 308]are natural and easie Truths, and (as we shall perceive presently) such, as will lead us into the Discovery of what at present we do only enquire after, viz. The Nature of our Eternal Happiness; or, Wherein our Eternal Happi­ness shall consist.

And that we may from Enquiry advance to Discovery, I would offer it to Considera­tion, in the first place.

1. That when our Souls and Bodies shall be refined, by the Resurrection and Glorification of the last, and by the compleat Holiness of the first; that then we shall have such a true Sense of the great and supereminent Value of Holiness, that we shall upon that Account love that above and beyond all Things besides. For then we shall perceive and know, that God therefore makes us holy, that so he may make us happy: That our Happiness begins, when our Holiness does; and that it is then perfected, when our Holiness is so: That Ho­liness is the Perfection of God's Nature, and of our own: That where Holiness is in its most exalted Excellence and Perfection, it is the same Thing with Wisdom and Truth, with Omniscience and Omnipotence; and that it is the true and only Fountain of all real and rational Happiness. And then, that which is the Fountain of all Happiness, and by con­sequence of our own Happiness, must, when once it appears so to us, be the Object of our greatest Love, as sure as it is, that we do love our selves best.

2. Where we find such Holiness (which we shall be better acquainted with by our Glori­fication and compleat Sanctification) in its greatest and most exalted Perfection and Ex­cellence; there our Love of such Holiness must in Nature and Reason, (and our Reason will then be exactly refined and discerning;) I say, that where we find Holiness in its greatest and most exalted Perfection and Ex­cellence, there our greatest and most intense Love of Holiness will be lodged. For, when we come to love Holiness for its own Ex­cellence and Perfection; then we shall be sure to love that Holiness most, which has the greatest and most exalted Excellence and Perfection.

3. This our greatest and most intense Love of the greatest and most perfect Holiness, will (as we may rationally conceive) be still augmented and increased, when we appre­hend it as lodged in an Intelligent Being. For, our Love (and that too in Nature) to such a Being, is (caeteris paribus) greater than our Love of Things; because such a Being is (if I may so speak) more congenerous and cognate to us, than Things are; and we find the Harmony and Sympathy to be in Nature always greater there, where there is the near­est Cognation. The further Use which we make of this Proposition, besides that already laid down, is to unite our Love of God and our Love of Holiness together, and so to [Page 310]exhibit them under one View; as indeed in God they are but one and the same Thing. And therefore, in what follows, we must al­ter our Phrase; and what hitherto we have called our Love of Holiness, must hereafter be styled our Love of God.

4. Our Love of our most Holy God will still receive a considerable Addition of In­crease, when we shall come to know, that his Holiness is not only most perfect and ex­alted; but that it is also accompanied with all other Excellencies and Perfections, and that too in the highest and most perfect Degree. For, tho' God be One with his Holiness, and all other his Attributes; yet it may be doubt­ed at least, whether the Capacities even of glorified Creatures shall ever be so enlarged, as to apprehend his Beauties and Excellencies any otherwise, than by distinct and separate Conceptions: Nay, it may be more than doubted, whether those their Conceptions shall be adequate to those his (to them) se­veral Beauties and Excellencies, which shall be the Objects of such their Conceptions. For, it is hard to conceive, that the glorified Capacities of Creatures shall be made Infi­nite by their Glorification; and unless they be so, we are sure, that the most Seraphick Conceptions must needs fall short of the Dig­nity of their Object. And we know, that it is sufficient for any Creature to have its Crea­ture-capacities (when most enlarged and re­fined) [Page 311]filled and satiated by Happiness. For, no Creature is capable of, and no Creature can desire more, than a full and compleat Happiness: And that Happiness is most cer­tainly full and compleat, which is as much as he can contain.

5. The Increase of our Love to our most Holy God will still grow greater by our As­surance, that he loves us again. For, it is a Truth in Nature, That, as Love slighted or refused does by that Means grow cold, and so in time languishes and expires; so, if it be kindly received, and answered by Love again, it therefore grows the warmer, be­cause then its Hopes begin to turn into Hap­piness. And, as Love for Love between Mankind carries in it Gratitude and Requital; so the Love of God for the Love of Man carries in it Recompence and Reward: And in both Cases it increases the Happiness and De­light. And then certainly it must be Infinite Happiness to be blessed with the Love of him, who is Infinitely Happy in himself, and the undoubted Author and Fountain of all possible Happiness to all others. For, all Love wishes well to the Party beloved at least; and where its Power answers to its Wishes, does well too. And then, when once we are in possession of God's Love, we are therefore secure of our own Happiness, because we are secure, that all possible Happiness is within the Reach of his Power. And indeed, to suppose the glori­fied [Page 312]Saints love of God, and by consequence their Holiness to be perfect, and to suppose their Happiness not to be so, would be in ef­fect to suppose the Creature, in its Love to God, to outdo God in his Love to the Crea­ture. No! Perfect Holiness, where-ever it is, is a Ray of his leading and most beloved Attribute: And we can in Reason no more conceive, that God will not love such an Holiness, than we can conceive, that he does not love himself. And then we may be sure, that the Happiness of the Creature will in the final Issue (and of that only we speak at present) bear a Proportion to its Holiness.

6. The Increase of our Love to God will still grow greater and greater, when we come to find, as most certainly we shall so find it, that his Love of us will engage him to unite us more intimately to himself. The Union of the glorified Saints with God, is, it must be confessed, a great Mystery; for so that must needs be, which neither Eye hath seen, nor Ear heard, nor can it enter into Man's Heart to conceive; and which therefore he can much less express with his Tongue. But yet that such a Thing there will be, we may be satisfied by those Discoveries, that Revelation has afforded us of it in the general. For, it is most certain, by such Discoveries, that we shall at least so enjoy God, as we do our Friend; we shall appear in his Presence; in that Presence, where there is fulness of Joy; [Page 313]and at his Right-hand, where there are Plea­sures for evermore. It is true indeed, that the Nature and infinite Variety of all sorts of Unions (and, among the rest, undoubtedly of those, which God has reserved for future Accomplishments, and for future Discovery) are laid out of the Reach of all mortal Un­derstandings. And therefore we shall rest our selves satisfied with what is certain; or, at least, with what, by the help of Revelation, we may easily believe to be so: That the Union of the Blessed with God in Heaven will be such, as shall be sufficient for the mu­tual Communications of each others Love; of the Love of the Creature in Duties and Praises offered up to God; of the Love of God in the Effusions of such Joy and Delight, such agreeable Transports and Ecstasies, as shall fill the utmost Capacities of his Chosen ones; and shall therefore exceed their Hopes and Wishes, because their first Knowledge of such their Happiness can only come from their Experience of it; and that Experience alone will fully answer to, and gratifie their Self-love.

7. Lastly, The Love of the glorified Saints to God will be still further augmented, and indeed receive its full Complement and Perfection, by their Assurance, that all that Happiness, of which they stand possessed at present, shall be eternal. For, a Fear of a Failure for the future, may dash the Relish of [Page 314]the highest Enjoyment for the present; and our Satisfaction in the Possession of any Good Thing (be it what it will) must needs be abated, if it be accompanied with a Doubt of its Continuance. But Happiness with Se­curity must needs be compleat and perfect. Nay, it must be so much the more compleat and perfect; because tho the Continuance of Happiness be future, yet the Assurance of such Continuance is present; and by such Assurance we do in some Degree compendiously, and at the same time, enjoy both our present and our future Happiness. Now the Blessed in Glory may therefore be secure of the Eternity of their Happiness, because God's Love stands immutably engaged to their Holiness, foras­much as such their Holiness is indefectible and eternal. For, where that is eternal, his Love most certainly is so too.

To conclude, in a few Words: Our Love of our selves makes us desire to be happy: But it must be our Love of something else, that must make us so. For, if the Love of our selves could of it self make us happy, then it could not for that Reason engage us to desire to be so. And nothing can conduce to our Happiness, much less can any thing compleat it, but what is entertained by our Love.

When therefore we fix our Love upon that, which will answer the Desires of our Self-love; we may then be sure, that we love that, which may make us happy; and when [Page 315]we come to possess and enjoy that, which we so love, we may be sure, that we shall be happy; and if our Enjoyment of it be se­curely eternal, we may then be farther assu­red, that we shall be always so. And that our perfect Love of God, and our Enjoyment of his Love and Favour, will bring all these things to pass, we hope our foregoing Dis­course has made good.

1. Now if the Happiness of our future State in Glory shall come from our Love of God, and his Love of us; then this should teach us to have a care, that we do not make our selves unfit for the Happiness of Heaven, by our Uncharitableness whilst we live here upon Earth. For, the Love of God will hardly be perfected in that Man, who does not love his Neighbour. For, He who loveth not his Brother, whom he hath seen; how shall he love God, whom he hath not seen? And he, who does not love God here, how shall his Love to him be perfected hereafter? For, that that is not, can never be made perfect. And, he whose Love to God shall never be made perfect, how shall he be ever made happy? For, there can be no Happine [...]s, no not in Heaven it self, without our perfect Love of God. It is remarkable, that our Saviour, when he taught his Disciples to pray, (tho' he taught them to pray for several Things) yet annexes a Condition to that Petition alone, by which they were to b [...]g Forgiveness of [Page 316]their Sins; and afterwards gives them a Rea­son for his so doing; because if they forgive not Men their Trespasses, neither will their Father, who is in Heaven, forgive them their Trespasses. By which we may understand, that as we shall not be admitted into Heaven, unless we be made like to God; and as we shall not be admitted into Heaven, unless God does forgive us our Sins; so neither shall we be admitted into Heaven, unless we be in this like to God, that we do forgive their Sins to others. In one Word, the malicious, ill-natur'd, and uncharitable Man is one of the worst Companions in the World: For, he is very apt to do it always; and for the most part actually does make all People uneasie, where he comes; and from thence we may be sa­tisfied, that he is very unlikely to come in for a Share of that Happiness, which consists in Love. And for that Reason, we may be satisfied also, that till he lays aside his Un­charitableness, it will be impossible, that he should be made Partaker of the Happiness of the Blessed.

2. If our eternal Happiness must come from our ardent and eternal Love of God and Holiness; then we should have a care, that we do not place our Religion, and by conse­quence our Hopes of eternal Happiness, in such Things, which have no real Holiness in them. For, it is a very great Mistake, (which yet perhaps runs thro all Sorts of Christians) [Page 317]to think, that such Things, that are not good and holy, will for ever make them happy. For, too many People do place not only their Religion, but their Zeal for it too, in such little, and in themselves insignificant Obser­vances and Practices, which may be done, or may be let alone; and yet all the while they themselves be never the more either religious or holy. For, what Holiness (for Instance) can the Confession of the Sinner, or the Absolu­tion of the Priest, confer upon that Man, who has no other Design in his Confession, but that he may go on to sin upon a new Score, and so continue his Sin with a better Relish, and with the less Reluctance? Or, What Holiness can the strict Observance of the Sabbath beget in that Man, who there­fore only obliges himself to a greater Seve­rity upon that Day, that he may by that Means compound with his Conscience for his fraudulent Dealings, or his profligate and vi­cious Life, all the rest of the Week? Or, How can any Man be the more holy, because he lists himself under this or that Party or Sect; when all the while he takes no care to do what God commands, or to avoid what God forbids? No! no! Holiness is a real Thing, tho' it be not the Object of our Sen­ses: And this Thing only lodges in that Heart, which by an humble Obedience con­forms it self to God's Will, and which, by hearkning to his Voice, is conformed to his [Page 318]Likeness. And if any Man thinks to become Holy by any other Means, he does but de­ceive his own Soul, and by a fond and foolish Imagination exclude himself from that Hap­piness, which shall only be bestowed upon those, who shall be made like to him, who is most happy; that is, who shall be holy, as he is holy. All they then who would make themselves happy, must take care, that they make themselves holy. They must, I say, do so; and they must be pleased, that they have so done. For, he only loves God, who de­lights in Holiness; and he only shall be happy, who loves God.

3. Since it has appeared, that our most consummate Happiness does come from our perfect Love of Holiness; and since perfect and unmixed Happiness is most certainly our Aim: we do from thence conclude, That Holiness ought in Prudence to be our Pra­ctice. For, as it is a Short-sightedness, and (at least) a Degree of Folly, not to seek our Happiness there, where it may be found; so not to seek it there, where we are truly, be­cause rationally informed, that it may be found, is Madness. For, that Man may well be taxed of Frenzie, who will not take that Way to Happiness, to which he is directed by such Advice, which is inculcated by the joint Suggestions of Revelation and Reason, that is, by the ordinary and extraordinary Light, that God holds out to direct him in such Way.

Now, to set home this Exhortation, by convincing Men, that the true and rational Way to their Happiness is by Holiness, (besides all that has hitherto been offered) I would propose to their serious Consideration these Things following.

1. That that Religion, which has been confirmed by Prophecies from the Foundati­on of the World, before it was revealed; and which, when, and after it was revealed, was confirmed by Multitudes of other Miracles, and by the Resurrection of him from the Dead, who did reveal it; must as certainly have God for its Author, as it is certain, that such Miracles and such Predictions could only come from God.

2. The Christian Religion, and no other Religion, either truly or falsely so called, is the Religion which has this Character, and therefore has God for its Author.

3. That Religion, which has God for its Author, must needs be a true Religion.

4. That Religion, which has God for its Author, must needs be an holy Religion.

5. Since it is one of the greatest Businesses of Religion to instruct Men how to serve God; the true Religion must, even because it is true, instruct Men how to serve God truly.

6. He who truly serves God, who is most holy, must do so by living holily.

7. He who lives holily, pleases God: For, he complies with the Instructions of that Re­ligion, of which God is the Author.

8. He who pleases God, by complying with the Instructions of that Religion, of which God is the Author, shall not fall short of the End, that God intended in his Insti­tution of Religion.

Now it is most certain, that God institu­ted Religion for the Sake and Benefit of Man; and it as certain, that God wills the Happi­ness of Man: And therefore it is rational to infer, That God instituted Religion to direct Man in the true Way to Happiness; and that Way (we have seen) is Holiness.

1. From all which I would infer, First, that which is to my present Design, That the only Way for us to obtain Happiness, is by our Practice of Holiness: And, what is not indeed so direct to my purpose, but yet of good use,

2. That the best and surest Way of gui­ding our Enquiries after the True Religion, will be to keep our Eye, all the while we are so employed, stedfaitly fixed upon Holiness. For, we can much better tell what is good and honest, than we can tell what is true. Our Knowledge of the first therefore may prove a very good Guide to us in our Search after the last. To which I would add,

3. That to talk of Truth and Certainty, and much more of Infallibility in Religion, [Page 321]when the Determinations and Resolutions of such Certainty or Infallibility are mischie­vous or pernicious to the real Happiness of Mankind, or any other ways wicked, is Nonsense and Banter; and is in deed and truth an Imposition upon Mens Understand­ings, in order to damnifie the honest and real Interests, and true Happiness of Mankind. But to return to our Design.

That Men may be the more heartily en­gaged to believe what has been said, and to practise what they shall so believe; I shall still go on to press the present Exhortation more home, by advising them to try the Experi­ment, whether the Doctrine now delivered (which is, That our Happiness must come from our Practice and Love of Holiness) be true or no. The Proposal is fair and reason­able; and there is no Man who has not one way or other made a great many Experi­ments in the Case: For, our constant Desire of Happiness will always be putting us upon such Experiments. And I dare be bold to say, before we proceed any farther, that if any Man's Trial has succeeded, his Success does fall in with my Proposal, and back the present Exhortation.

Now, because our Happiness cannot (as we have seen) so much as be supposed to be lodged abroad; but if it be our Happiness, it must, for that Reason, be lodged within us, at home, and in our own possession; there­fore, [Page 322]to engage Men to entertain our present Exhortation the more heartily, and by con­fequence to make the Trial of the proposed Experiment the more willingly; I would de­sire them, by a serious Reflection, to consi­der, whether all Wickedness does not con­stantly bring Misery along with it into that Breast, where it self is entertained. For, if we suppose a Man to be wicked, we must at the same time, for the most part, (for, there is but one excepted Case) suppose, that he knows that he is so. And when that is once supposed, such a Supposition will acquaint us with these following Truths: That he will have one Thought employed upon God's Law, which commands his Duty; and another Thought upon his own Actions, which trans­gress that Law; and a third Thought, which shall, by comparing the one with the other, discover the Disagreement, nay the Contrari­ety, that is between the Law, and such his Actions. Now, here are already Thoughts disagreeing and fighting with each other, and by that Means a Civil War raised in his Breast; the Effects of which, in all Cases, are sure to be not only mischievous, but cala­mitous. Let us then see a little farther, and let us suppose (what will yet be more than supposed, for it will be certain:) But, I say, let us suppose, that when by one Thought the Man has discovered the Contrariety between his own Actions, and the Directive Part of the [Page 323]Law, that thereupon he bestows another Thought upon the Vindictive Part of the Law, (and such a Chain of Thoughts is very natural) and that by another Thought he applies such Vindictive Part of the Law, that is, the Threat of the Law, to his own Acti­ons, and, by consequence, to his own dear Self. And when this is once done, then we may begin to be satissied, that Multitudes of other Thoughts will presently rise in his Breast, and those too filled with Doubt, and Fear, and Shame, and Grief, and all those other troublesom, vexatious, and tormenting Passions, which are the natural Effects that follow upon the Contemplation of our own Guilt. Now, when all these boysterous and vexatious Thoughts do oppose themselves against, and make violent Assaults upon a Man's natural Desire of Ease, Content, and Happiness, what a Storm and Tempest must they, by so doing, raise in that Soul, where they all meet, and where they all rage and contend? The poor Man, in this Case, will (in the Words of the Prophet) be like the troubled Sea, when it cannot rest, whose Waters cast up Mire and Dirt: That is, Filth and Wickedness is the Cause of his Disquiet; and Tumult, Confusion, and Agony are the Ef­fects of such Filth and Wickedness: For, there is no Peace to the Wicked, saith God; and we may be sure, that what God saith, is true: For, when our own Thoughts do tell us, [Page 324]that the Miseries which they bring upon us, they do therefore so bring, because we have offended and displeased our God; they do, by so doing, add one great Misery to all our other Miseries. For, in all other Afflictions we have still a Place of Refuge left; and, like a City besieged, tho' all our Communi­cations with the Comforts of this World be hindred and intercepted, yet our Intercourse with Heaven is still left free and open, and in God we have a sure Retreat. But when our Misery springs from our own Wicked­ness, we do at the same time lose our Happi­ness, and our Hopes of Relief too; because our Misery comes from his Hand, who has all Relief and all Happiness in his own dis­posal.

I have described these Things in a plain, familiar, and natural Way, because I would have People convinced of their Truth, without the Trouble or Expence of a Trial. (For, tho' I would have them try, whether Goodness will not make them happy; yet I would not have them try, whether Wickedness will not make them miserable.) For, the Experiment in this Case will be too dear and costly. And that must needs be so, which destroys our Peace, by robbing us of the Peace of God. And if Men are but in some moderate De­gree satisfied of the Truth of these Things, it may be hoped, (and God grant that our Hope do not deceive us) that they will by [Page 325]that means be engaged to try, whether Holi­ness will make them happy, or no. For, now they have a fair and farther Probability of Success to invite them to such a Trial; because Holiness and Wickedness being con­trary the one to the other, our Reason will teach us more than barely to conjecture, that they must produce contrary Essects. For, if (as we have seen) Misery, Confusion, and Agony are sure to be the Effects of Wicked­ness; it may the more reasonably be expect­ed, that the Effects of Holiness should be Joy and Happiness; and therefore it may be the more reasonably expected also, that Men should be persuaded to pursue their Happi­ness by the Practice of Holiness.

And it may be farther expected yet, that Men should be so persuaded, because (which yet may seem strange) there is hardly any wicked Man, tho' he be ranked among those whom the World do commonly account Pro­fligate) but who yet has so much Know­ledge of the Comforts of Holiness, as might (would he but use his natural Reason in the Case) engage him to attempt the Encrease of such his Comforts, by becoming holy. For, tho' he be guilty of many, perhaps of most Sins; yet he cannot be guilty of all. For, Sin is not only an Absurdity in it self, and a downright Contradiction to all sober Reason; but it is in many Cases a Contradiction also to it self. For, one Sin shall stand in such op­position [Page 326]to another, that it shall in a manner be impossible for both of them to be Retainers to the same Man. For, it is as impossible to conceive, that a professed and profligate De­bauchée (while he is what he is) should be an Hypocrite, as it is, that he should proclaim and conceal his Wickedness at one and the self-same time. And yet, even such a De­bauchée, thus abandoned to all sorts of Vices, as far as Possibility and his own profligate In­clinations will permit, shall value himself for his Forbearance of that Vice, from which yet he does not therefore forbear, because it is a Vice, but because (should he admit it to his Practice) it would thwart and controul his other many and beloved Vices. And we cannot but sometimes observe, that some Men, who heartily hug Covetousness, and all those Vices which drudge under its Direction, such as are Extortion, Oppression, Fraud, Lying, Perjury, and all manner of Uncha­ritableness, shall yet raise a Comfort to them­selves, because they are sober, and free from Drunkenness. These Things, as strange as they are, yet are too often found to be true. And the present Use that we make of them, is this: That very wicked Men, and even such, whose Vices are very numerous and very black, shall yet, for all that, perceive such a Beauty and Excellency only in abstain­ing from other Vices, which are not their own. that they shall gather Comfort to them­selves [Page 327]from such their Abstinence; and that therefore even such Men are not utterly void of all Sense, that the Practice of Vertue is a pleasant and comfortable Thing; and that, by consequence, there is an Happiness which does attend and follow it. And then, if it be so true, that Holiness or Vertue (for Ver­tue and Practical Holiness are one and the same Thing;) But, I say, if it be so true, that Holiness has Happiness for its Companion and Follower; that the most wicked Men are sensible of it, and that all other Men do con­fess it; then it is hoped, that the present Ex­hortation will be admitted, and that is, That all Men would try to make themselves happy, by making themselves holy. And it will be a very hard Case, if Men will not put them­selves to the trouble of trying that Experi­ment, which their own Sense of the Thing, and the Sense of all other Men besides, will tell them must needs succeed; and which, when it does succeed, must needs make them happy.

And thus far the present Exhortation is more professedly directed to those, who are in a manner utter Strangers to the Ways of God, and so have need of a Guide to enter them into the right Way.

To all others, I have but One or Two Things to say, and so shall conclude the whole Matter.

1. And first, Because I do suppose them not to be wholly Strangers to Holiness, there­fore I would advise them to look back to their own Experience in the Case: And tho' perhaps that Experience may not be much; yet, such as it is, I am very confident, that their own Reflections will tell them, that whenever they did any Duty heartily and sincerely, they did not go without all Com­sort, that they had so done: That when they have done as they ought, their Condition has been as they desired: That when their Acti­ons have been guided by their Conscience, and their Conscience has been guided by God's Law, they have thereupon been blessed with calm and comfortable Reflections: That a diligent and constant Discharge of their Duty has therefore kept their Souls at peace with themselves, because they have then been sa­tisfied, that God has been at peace with their Souls. Now, such Comforts and smaller Happinesses as these, because they have al­ways accompanied and been proportionate to their fainter Love of Holiness, have given in sufficient Evidence, that their Happiness shall then be perfect and compleat, when their Ho­liness shall be so: And by having so done, may inforce our present Exhortation, which is, That by growing in Grace, and by impro­ving in the Love of God and Goodness, they should fit themselves for an eternal Happi­ness. For, by what has been said, they may [Page 329]now begin to be satisfied, that when their Saviour requires of them to love the Lord their God with all their Hearts, with all their Souls, with all their Strength, and with all their Minds, he does in effect require of them to love their own Souls; since it is by this time notorious, that what in this Case is their Duty, will prove not only their true Way to Happiness, but that it will also put them into the actual Possession of such Hap­piness.

2. I would add, in the second place, That if we do not sincerely love Holiness, and by consequence desire it, we shall never attain to the Perfection of it: And if we fall short of a perfect Holiness, we shall by conse­quence fall short of Eternal Happiness. For, our Saviour will not bestow a perfect Holi­ness there, where it is not desired; and it cannot be desired there, where it is not loved. We must therefore fit our selves to be made perfectly holy, as well as he is willing to make us so. For, as we have seen already, that those only who hunger and thirst after Righ­teousness, shall be satisfied; so we shall here add, That those only who are so satisfied, shall be blessed.