VIII. Imputation of the sins of the church unto Christ--Grounds of it--
The nature of his suretiship--Causes of the new covenant--Christ and the
church one mystical person--Consequents thereof

Imputation of sin unto Christ--Testimonies of the ancients unto that
purpose--Christ and the church one mystical person--Mistakes about that
state and relation--Grounds and reasons of the union that is the
foundation of this imputation--Christ the surety of the new covenant; in
what sense, unto what ends--Heb.7:22, opened--Mistakes about the causes
and ends of the death of Christ--The new covenant, in what sense alone
procured and purchased thereby --Inquiry whether the guilt of our sins
was imputed unto Christ--The meaning of the words, "guilt," and "guilty"-
-The distinction of "reatus culpae", and "reatus poenae", examined--Act
of God in the imputation of the guilt of our sins unto Christ--Objections
against it answered--The truth confirmed
 

Those who believe the imputation of the righteousness of Christ unto
believers, for the justification of life, do also unanimously profess
that the sins of all believers were imputed unto Christ. And this they do
on many testimonies of the Scripture directly witnessing thereunto; some
whereof shall be pleaded and vindicated afterwards. At present we are
only on the consideration of the general notion of these things, and the
declaration of the nature of what shall be proved afterwards. And, in the
first place, we shall inquire into the foundation of this dispensation of
God, and the equity of it, or the grounds whereinto it is resolved;
without an understanding whereof the thing itself cannot be well
apprehended.

   The principal foundation hereof is,--that Christ and the church, in
this design, were one mystical person; which state they do actually
coalesce into, through the uniting efficacy of the Holy Spirit. He is the
head, and believers are the members of that one person, as the apostle
declares, 1 Cor.12:12,13. Hence, as what he did is imputed unto them, as
if done by them; so what they deserved on the account of sin was charged
upon him. So is it expressed by a learned prelate, "Nostram causam
sustinebat, qui nostram sibi carnem aduniverat, et ita nobis arctissimo
vinculo conjunctus, et 'henootheis', quae erant nostra fecit sua". And
again, "Quit mirum si in nostra persona constitutus, nostram carnem
indutus", etc., Montacut. Origin. Ecclesiast. The ancients speak to the
same purpose. Leo. Serm. 17: "Ideo se humanae imfirmitati virtus divina
conseruit, ut dum Deus sua facit esse quae nostra sunt, nostra faceret
esse quae sua sunt"; and also Serm. 16 "Caput nostrum Dominus Jesus
Christus omnia in se corporis sui membra transformans, quod olim in
psalmo eructaverit, id in supplicio crucis sub redemptorum suorum voce
clamavit". And so speaks Augustine to the same purpose, Epist. 120, ad
Honoratum, "Audimus vocem corporis ex ore capitis. Ecclesia in illo
patiebatur, quando pro ecclesia patiebatur", etc.;--"We hear the voice of
the body from the mouth of the head. The church suffered in him when he
suffered for the church; as he suffers in the church when the church
suffers for him. For as we have heard the voice of the church in Christ
suffering, 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? look upon me;' so
we have heard the voice of Christ in the church suffering, 'Saul, Saul,
why persecutes thou me?'" But we may yet look a little backwards and
farther into the sense of the ancient church herein. "Christus," says
Irenaeus, "omnes gentes exinde ab Adam dispersas, et generationem hominum
in semet ipso recapitulatus est; unde a Paulo typus futuri dictus est
ipse Adam", lib.3 cap.33. And again, "Recapitulans universum hominum enus
in se ab initio usque ad finem, recapitulatus est et mortem ejus". In
this of repapitulation, there is no doubt but he had respect unto the
"anakefalaioosis", mentioned Eph.1:10; and it may be this was that which
Origin intended enigmatically, by saying, "The soul of the first Adam was
the soul of Christ, s it is charged on him". And Cyprian, Epist. 62, on
bearing about the administration of the sacrament of the eucharist, "Nos
omnes portabat Christus; qui et peccata nostra portabet";--"He bare us",
or suffered in our person, "when he bare our sins." Whence Athanasius
affirms of the voice he used on the cross, "Ouk autos ho Kurios, alle
hemeis en ekeinooi paschontes hemen"--"We suffered in him." Eusebius
speaks many things to this purpose, Demonstrate. Evangeli. lib.10 cap.1.
Expounding those words of the psalmist, "Heal my soul, for" (or, as he
would read them, if) "I have sinned against thee," and applying them unto
our Saviour in his sufferings, he says thus, "Epeidan tas hemeteras
koinopoiei eis heauton hamartias"--"Because he took of our sins to
himself;" communicated our sins to himself, making them his own: for so
he adds, "Hoti tas hemeteras hamartias exoikeioumenos"--"Making our sins
his own." And because in his following words he fully expresses what I
design to prove, I shall transcribe them at large: "Poos de tas hemeteras
hemartias exoikeioutai; kai poos ferein legetai tas anomias hemoon, e
kath' ho sooma autou einai legometha; kata ton apostolon tesanta, humeis
este sooma Christou, kai mele ek merous. kai kath' ho paschontos henos
melous sumpaschei panta ta mele, houtoo toon pollooon meloon paschontoon
kai hamartanontoon, kai autos kata tous tes sumpatieias logous, epeideper
eudokese Theou Logos oon, morgen doulou lathein, kai tooi koinooi pantoon
hemoon hemoon skenoomati sunafthenai. tous toon paschontoon meloon ponous
eis heauton analamthanei, kai tas hemeteras nosous idiopoieitai, kai
pantoon hemoon huperalgei kai huperponei kata tous ts filanthroopias
nomous. ou monon de tauta praxas ho Amnos tou Theo, alle kak huper hemoon
kolastheis kai timoorian huposchoon, hen autos men ouk oofeilen, all'
hemeis tou plethous eneken peplemmelemenoon, hemin aitios tes toon
hamartematoon afese hos kateste, ate ton huper hemoon anadexamenos
thanaton, mastigas te kai hutreis kai atimias hemin epofeilomenas eis
auton metatheis, kai ten hemin prostetimemenen kataran eph' heauton
helkusas, genomenos huper hemoon katara. kai ti gar allo e antipsuchos;
dio fesin ex hemeterou prosoopou to logion--hooste eikotoos henoon
heauton hemin, hemas te hautoo kai ta hemetera pasthe idiopoioumenos
fesin, egoo eipa, Kurie ele-eson me, iasai ten psuchen mou, hoti hemarton
soi.

   I have transcribed this passage at large because, as I said, what I
intend to prove in the present discourse is declared fully therein. Thus,
therefore, he speaks: "How, then, did he make our sins to be his own, and
how did he bear our iniquities? Is it not from thence, that we are said
to be his body? as the apostle speaks, 'You are the body of Christ, and
members, for your part, or of one another.' And as when one member
suffers, all the members do suffer; so the many members sinning and
suffering, he, according unto the laws of sympathy in the same body
(seeing that, being the Word of God, he would take the form of a servant,
and be joined unto the common habitation of us all in the same nature),
took the sorrows or labours of the suffering members on him, and made all
their infirmities his own; and, according to the laws of humanity (in the
same body), bare our sorrow and labour for us. And the Lamb of God did
not only these things for us but he underwent torments and was punished
for us; that which he was no ways exposed unto for himself, but we were
so by the multitude of our sins: and thereby he became the cause of the
pardon of our sins,--namely, because he underwent death, stripes,
reproaches, translating the thing which we had deserved unto himself,--
and was made a curse for us, taking unto himself the curse that was due
to us; for what was he but (a substitute for us) a price of redemption
for our souls? In our person, therefore, the oracle speaks,--whilst
freely uniting himself unto us, and us unto himself, and making our (sins
or passions his own), 'I have said, Lord, be merciful unto me; heal my
soul, for I have sinned against thee.'"

   That our sins were transferred unto Christ and made his, that thereon
he underwent the punishment that was due unto us for them, and that the
ground hereof, whereinto its equity is resolved, is the union between him
and us, is fully declared in this discourse. So says the learned and
pathetical author of the Homilies on Matt.5, in the works of Chrysostom,
Hom.54, which is the last of them, "In carne sua omnem carnem suscepit,
crucifixus, omnem carnem crucifixit in se." He speaks of the church. So
they speak often, others of them, that "he bare us," that "he took us
with him on the cross," that "we were all crucified in him;" as Prosper,
"He is not saved by the cross of Christ who is not crucified in Christ,"
Resp. ad cap., Gal. cap. 9.

   This, then, I say, is the foundation of the imputation of the sins of
the church unto Christ,--namely, that he and it are one person; the
grounds whereof we must inquire into.

   But hereon sundry discourses do ensue, and various inquiries are
made,--What a person is? In what sense, and in how many senses, that word
may be used? What is the true notion of it? What is a natural person?
What a legal, civil, or political person? In the explication whereof some
have fallen mistakes. And if we should enter into this field, we need not
fear matter enough of debate and altercation. But I must needs say, that
these things belong not unto our present occasion; nor is the union of
Christ and the church illustrated, but obscured by them. For Christ and
believers are neither one natural person, nor a legal or political
person, nor any such person as the laws, customs, or usages of men do
know or allow of. They are one mystical person; whereof although there
may be some imperfect resemblances found in natural or political unions,
yet the union from whence that denomination is taken between him and us
is of that nature, and arises from such reasons and causes, as no
personal union among men (or the union of many persons) has any
concernment in. And therefore, as to the representation of it unto our
weak understandings, unable to comprehend the depth of heavenly
mysteries, it is compared unto unions of divers kinds and natures. So is
it represented by that of man and wife; not as unto those mutual
affections which give them only a moral union, but from the extraction of
the first woman from the flesh and bone of the first man, and the
institution of God for the individual society of life thereon. This the
apostle at large declares, Eph.5:25-32: whence he concludes, that from
the union thus represented, "We are members of his body, of his flesh,
and of his bones," verse 30; or have such a relation unto him as Eve had
to Adam, when she was made of his flesh and bone, and so was one flesh
with him. So, also, it is compared unto the union of the head and members
of the same natural body, 1 Cor.12:12; and unto a political union also,
between a ruling or political head and its political members; but never
exclusively unto the union of a natural head and its members comprised in
the same expression, Eph.4:15; Col.2:19. And so also unto sundry things
in nature, as a vine and its branches, John 15:1,2. And it is declared by
the relation that was between Adam and his posterity, by God's
institution and the law of creation, Rom.5:12, etc. And the Holy Ghost,
by representing the union that is between Christ and believers by such a
variety of resemblances, in things agreeing only in the common or general
notion of union, on various grounds, does sufficiently manifest that it
is not of, nor can be reduced unto, any one kind of them. And this will
yet be made more evident by the consideration of the causes of it, and
the grounds whereinto it is resolved. But whereas it would require much
time and diligence to handle them at large, which the mention of them
here, being occasional, will not admit, I shall only briefly refer unto
the heads of them:--

   1. The first spring or cause of this union, and of all the other
causes of it, lies in that eternal compact that was between the Father
and the Son concerning the recovery and salvation of fallen mankind.
Herein, among other things, as the effects thereof, the assumption of our
nature (the foundation of this union) was designed. The nature and terms
of this compact, counsel, and agreement, I have declared elsewhere; and
therefore must not here again insist upon it. But the relation between
Christ and the church, proceeding from hence, and so being an effect of
infinite wisdom, in the counsel of the Father and Son, to be made
effectual by the Holy Spirit, must be distinguished from all other unions
or relations whatever.

   2. The Lord Christ, as unto the nature which he was to assume, was
hereon predestinated unto grace and glory. He was "proegnoosmenos",--
"foreordained," predestinated, "before the foundation of the world," 1
Pet.1:20; that is, he was so, as unto his office, so unto all the grace
and glory required thereunto, and consequent thereon. All the grace and
glory of the human nature of Christ was an effect of free divine
preordination. God chose it from all eternity unto a participation of all
which it received in time. Neither can any other cause of the glorious
exaltation of that portion of our nature be assigned.

   3. This grace and glory whereunto he was preordained was twofold:--
(1.) That which was peculiar unto himself; (2.) That which was to be
communicated, by and through him, unto the church. (1.) Of the first sort
was the "charis henooseoos",--the grace of personal union; that single
effect of divine wisdom (whereof there is no shadow nor resemblance in
any other works of God, either of creation, providence, or grace), which
his nature was filled withal: "Full of grace and truth." And all his
personal glory, power, authority, and majesty as mediator, in his
exaltation at the right hand of God, which is expressive of them all, do
belong hereunto. These things were peculiar unto him, and all of them
effects of his eternal predestination. But,--(2.) He was not thus
predestinated absolutely, but also with respect unto that grace and glory
which in him and by him was to be communicated unto the church And he was
so,--

   [1.] As the pattern and exemplary cause of our predestination; for we
are "predestinated to be conformed unto the image of the Son of God, that
he might be the first born among many brethren," Rom.8:29. Hence he shall
even "change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his
glorious body," Phil.3:21; that when he appears we may be every way like
him, 1 John 3:2.

   [2.] As the means and cause of communicating all grace and glory unto
us; for we are "chosen in him before the foundation of the world, that we
should be holy, and predestinated unto the adoption of children by him,"
Eph.1:3-5. He was designed as the only procuring cause of all spiritual
blessings in heavenly things unto those who are chosen in him.
Wherefore,--

   [3.] He was thus foreordained as the head of the church; it being the
design of God to gather all things into a head in him, Eph.1:10.

   [4.] All the elect of God were, in his eternal purpose and design, and
in the everlasting covenant between the Father and the Son, committed
unto him, to be delivered from sin, the law, and death, and to be brought
into the enjoyment of God: "Thine they were, and thou gavest them me,"
John 17:6. Hence was that love of his unto them wherewith he loved them,
and gave himself for them, antecedently unto any good or love in them,
Eph.5:25,26; Gal.2:20; Rev.1:5,6.

   [5.] In the prosecution of this design of God, and in the
accomplishment of the everlasting covenant, in the fulness of time he
took upon him our nature, or took it into personal subsistence with
himself. The especial relation that ensued hereon between him and the
elect children the apostle declares at large, Heb.2:10-17; and I refer
the reader unto our exposition of that place.

   [6.] On these foundations he undertook to be the surety of the new
covenant, Heb.7:22, "Jesus was made a surety of a better testament." This
alone, of all the fundamental considerations of the imputation of our
sins unto Christ, I shall insist upon, on purpose to obviate or remove
some mistakes about the nature of his suretiship, and the respect of it
unto the covenant whereof he was the surety. And I shall borrow what I
shall offer hereon from our exposition of this passage of the apostle in
the seventh chapter of this epistle, not yet published, with very little
variation from what I have discoursed on that occasion, without the least
respect unto, or prospect of, any treating on our present subject.

   The word "enguos" is nowhere found in the Scripture but in this place
only; but the advantage which some would make from thence, namely, that
it being but one place wherein the Lord, Christ is called a surety, it is
not of much force, or much to be insisted on,--is both unreasonable and
absurd; for,--1st. This one place is of divine revelation; and therefore
is of the same authority with twenty testimonies unto the same purpose.
One divine testimony makes our faith no less necessary, nor does one less
secure it from being deceived than a hundred.

   2dly. The signification of the word is known from the use of it, and
what it signifies among men; so that no question can be made of its sense
and importance, though it be but once used: and this on any occasion
removes the difficulty and danger, "toon hapax legomenoon". 3dly. The
thing itself intended is so fully declared by the apostle in this place,
and so plentifully taught in other places of the Scripture, as that the
single use of this word may add light, but can be no prejudice unto it.

   Something may be spoken unto the signification of the word "enguos",
which will give light into the thing intended by it. "Gualon" is "vola
manus",--the "palm of the hand;" thence is "enguos", or "eis to gualon",-
-to "deliver into the hand." "Enguetes" is of the same signification.
Hence being a surety is interpreted by striking the hand, Prov.6:1, "My
son, if thou be surety for thy friend, if thou hast stricken thy hand
with a stranger." So it answers the Hebrew "arav", which the LXX render
"enguaoo", Prov.6:1; 17:18; 20:16; and by "dienguaoo", Neh.5:3. "Arav"
originally signifies to mingle, or a mixture of any things or persons;
and thence, from the conjunction and mixture is between a surety and him
for whom he is a surety, whereby they coalesce into one person, as unto
the ends of that suretiship, it is used for a surety, or to give surety.
And he that was or did "arav", a surety, or become a surety, was to
answer for him for whom he was so, whatsoever befell him. So is it
described, Gen.43:9, in the words of Judas unto his father Jacob,
concerning Benjamin, "'anochi 'e'erbennu",--"I will be surety for him; of
my hand shalt thou require him." In undertaking to be surety for him, as
unto his safety and preservation, he engages himself to answer for all
that should befall him; for so he adds, "If I bring him not unto thee,
and set him before thee, let me be guilty forever." And on this ground he
entreats Joseph that he might be a servant and a bondman in his stead,
that he might go free and return unto his father, Gen.44:32,33. This is
required unto such a surety, that he undergo and answer all that he for
whom he is a surety is liable unto, whether in things criminal or civil,
so far as the suretiship does extend. A surety is an undertaker for
another, or others, who thereon is justly and legally to answer what is
due to them, or from them; nor is the word otherwise used. See Job 17:3;
Prov.6:1; 11:15; 17:18; 20:16; 27:13. So Paul became a surety unto
Philemon for Onesimus, verse 18. "Engue" is "sponsio, expromissio,
fidejussio,"--an undertaking or giving security for any thing or person
unto another, whereon an agreement did ensue. This, in some cases, was by
pledges, or an earnest, Isa.36:8, "hit'arev na"--"Give surety, pledges,
hostages," for the true performance of conditions. Hence is "'eravon",
"arrathoon", "a pledge," or "earnest," Eph.1:14. Wherefore "enguos" is
"sponsor, fidejussor, praes,"--one that voluntarily takes on himself the
cause or condition of another, to answer, or undergo, or pay what he is
liable unto, or to see it done; whereon he becomes justly and legally
obnoxious unto performance. In this sense is the word here used by the
apostle; for it has no other.

   In our present inquiry into the nature of this suretiship of Christ,
the whole will be resolved into this one question,--namely, whether the
Lord Christ was made a surety only on the part of God unto us, to assure
us that the promise of the covenant on his part should be accomplished;
or also and principally an undertaker on our part, for the performance of
what is required; if not of us, yet with respect unto us, that the
promise may be accomplished? The first of these is vehemently asserted by
the Socinians, who are followed by Grotius and Hammond in their
annotations on this place.

   The words of Schlichtingius are: "Sponsor foederis appellatur Jesus,
quod nomine Dei nobis, spoponderit, id est fidem fecerit, Deum foederis
promissiones servaturum. Non vero quasi pro nobis spoponderit Deo,
nostrurumve debitorum solutionem in se receperit. Nec enim nos misimus
Christum sed Deus, cujus nomine Christus ad nos venit, foedus nobiscum
panxit, ejusque promissiones ratas fore spopondit et in se recepti;
ideoque nec sponsor simpliciter, sed foederis sponsor nominatur;
spopondit autem Christus pro foederis divini veritate, non tantum
quatenus id firmum ratumque fore verbis perpetuo testatus est; sed etiam
quatenus muneris sui fidem, maximis rerum ipsarum comprobavit documentis,
cum perfecta vitae innocentia et sanctitte, cum divinis plane quae
patravit, operibus; cum mortis adeo truculentae, quam pro doctrinae suae
veritate subiit, perpessione". After which he subjoins a long discourse
about the evidences which we have of the veracity of Christ. And herein
we have a brief account of their whole opinion concerning the mediation
of Christ. The words of Grotius are, "Spopondit Christus; id est, nos
certos promissi fecit non solis verbis sed perpetua vitae sanctitate
morte ob id tolerate et miraculis plurimis";--which are an abridgment of
the discourse of Schlichtingius. To the same purpose Dr Hammond expounds
it, that he was a sponsor or surety for God unto the confirmation of the
promises of the covenant.

   On the other hand, the generality of expositors, ancient and modern,
of the Roman and Protestant churches, on the place, affirm that the Lord
Christ, as the surety of the covenant, was properly a surety or
undertaker unto God for us, and not a surety and undertaker unto us for
God. And because this is a matter of great importance, wherein the faith
and consolation of the church is highly concerned, I shall insist a
little upon it.

   And, first, We may consider the argument that is produced to prove
that Christ was only a surety for God unto us. Now, this is taken neither
from the name nor nature of the office or work of surety, nor from the
nature of the covenant whereof he was a surety, nor of the office wherein
he was so. But the sole argument insisted on is, that we do not give
Christ as a surety of the covenant unto God, but he gives him unto us;
and therefore he is a surety for God and the accomplishment of his
promises, and not for us, to pay our debts, or to answer what is required
of us.

   But there is no force in this argument; for it belongs not unto the
nature of a surety by whom he is or may be designed unto his office and
work therein. His own voluntary susception of the office and work is all
that is required, however he may be designed or induced to undertake it.
He who, of his own accord, does voluntarily undertake for another, on
what grounds, reasons, or considerations soever he does so, is his
surety. And this the Lord Christ did in the behalf of the church: for
when it was said, "Sacrifice, and burnt-offering, and whole
burnt-offerings for sin, God would not have," or accept as sufficient to
make the atonement that he required, so as that the covenant might be
established and made effectual unto us; then said he, "Lo, I come to do
thy will, O God," Heb.10:5,7. He willingly and voluntarily, out of his
own abundant goodness and love, took upon him to make atonement for us;
wherein he was our surety. And accordingly, this undertaking is ascribed
unto that love which he exercised herein, Gal.2:20; 1 John 3:16; Rev.1:5.
And there was this in it, moreover, that he took upon him our nature or
the seed of Abraham; wherein he was our surety. So that although we
neither did nor could appoint him so to be, yet he took from us that
wherein and whereby he was so; Which is as much as if we had designed him
unto his work, as to the true reason of his being our surety. Wherefore,
notwithstanding those antecedent transactions that were between the
Father and him in this matter, it was the voluntary engagement of himself
to be our surety, and his taking our nature upon him for that end, which
was the formal reason of his being instated in that office.

   It is indeed weak, and contrary unto all common experience, that none
can be a surety for others unless those others design him and appoint him
so to be. The principal instances of suretiship in the world have been by
the voluntary undertaking of such as were no way procured so to do by
them for whom they undertook. And in such undertakings, he unto whom it
is made is no less considered than they for whom it is made: as when
Judas, on his own account, became a surety for Benjamin, he had as much
respect unto the satisfaction of his father as the safety of his brother.
And so the Lord Christ, in his undertaking to be a surety for us, had
respect unto the glory of God before our safety.

   Secondly, We may consider the arguments whence it is evident that he
neither was nor could be a surety unto us for God, but was so for us unto
God. For,--

   1. "Enguos" or "enguetes", "a surety," is one that undertakes for
another wherein he is defective, really or in reputation. Whatever that
undertaking be, whether in words of promise or in depositing of real
security in the hands of an arbitrator, or by any other personal
engagement of life and body, it respects the defeat of the person for
whom any one becomes a surety. Such a one is "sponsor," or "fidejussor,"
in all good authors and common use of speech. And if any one be of
absolute credit himself, and of a reputation every way unquestionable,
there is no need of a surety, unless in case of mortality. The words of a
surety in the behalf of another whose ability or reputation is dubious,
are, "Ad me recipio, faciet, aut faciam". And when "anguos" is taken
adjectively, as sometimes, it signifies "satisfationibus obnoxius",--
liable to payments for others that are non-solvent.

   2. God can, therefore, have no surety properly, because there can be
no imagination of any defect on his part. There may be, indeed a question
whether any word or promise be a word or promise of God. To assure us
hereof, it is not the work of a surety, but only any one or any means
that may give evidence that so it is,--that is, of a witness. But upon a
supposition that what is proposed is his word or promise, there can be no
imagination or fear of any defect on his part, so as that there should be
any need of a surety for the performance of it. He does therefore make
use of witnesses to confirm his word,--that is, to testify that such
promises he has made, and so he will do: so the Lord Christ was his
witness. Isa.43:10, "Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant
whom I have chosen;" but they were not all his sureties. So he affirms
that "he came into the world to bear witness unto the truth," John
18:37,--that is, the truth of the promises of God; for he was the
minister of the circumcision for the truth of the promises of God unto
the fathers, Rom.15:8: but a surety for God, properly so called, he was
not, nor could be. The distance and difference is wide enough between a
witness and a surety; for a surety must be of more ability, or more
credit and reputation, than he or those for whom he is a surety, or there
is no need of his suretiship; or, at least, he must add unto their
credit, and make it better than without him. This none can be for God,
no, not the Lord Christ himself, who, in his whole work, was the servant
of the Father. And the apostle does not use this word in a general,
improper sense, for any one that by any means gives assurance of any
other thing, for so he had ascribed nothing peculiar unto Christ; for in
such a sense all the prophets and apostles were sureties for God, and
many of them confirmed the truth of his word and promises with the laying
down of their lives; but such a surety he intends as undertakes to do
that for others which they cannot do for themselves, or at least are not
reputed to be able to do what is required of them.

   3. The apostle had before at large declared who and what was God's
surety in this matter of the covenant, and how impossible it was that he
should have any other. And this was himself alone, interposing himself by
his oath; for in this cause, "because he could swear by no greater, he
sware by himself," Heb.6:13,14. Wherefore, if God would give any other
surety besides himself, it must be one greater than he. This being every
way impossible, he swears by himself only. Many ways he may and does use
for the declaring and testifying of his truth unto us, that we may know
and believe it to be his word; and so the Lord Christ in his ministry was
the principal witness of the truth of God. But other surety than himself
he can have none. And therefore,--

   4. When he would have us in this matter not only come unto the full
assurance of faith concerning his promises, but also to have strong
consolation therein, he resolves it wholly into the immutability of his
counsel, s declared by his promise and oath, chap.6:18,19: so that
neither is God capable of having any surety, properly so called; neither
do we stand in need of any on his part for the confirmation of our faith
in the highest degree.

   5. We, on all accounts, stand in need of a surety for us, or on our
behalf. Neither, without the interposition of such a surety, could any
covenant between God and us be firm and stable, or an everlasting
covenant, ordered in all things, and sure. In the first covenant made
with Adam there was no surety, but God and men were the immediate
covenantors; and although we were then in a state and condition able to
perform and answer all the terms of the covenant, yet was it broken and
disannulled. If this came to pass by the failure of the promise of God,
it was necessary that on the making of a new covenant he should have a
surety to undertake for him, that the covenant might be stable and
everlasting; but this is false and blasphemous to imagine. It was man
alone who failed and broke that covenant: wherefore it was necessary,
that upon the making of the new covenant, and that with a design and
purpose that it should never be disannulled, as the former was, we should
have a surety and undertaker for us; for if that first covenant was not
firm and stable, because there was no surety to undertake for us,
notwithstanding all that ability which we had to answer the terms of it,
how much less can any other be so, now [that] our natures are become
depraved and sinful! Wherefore we alone were capable of a surety,
properly so called, for us; we alone stood in need of him; and without
him the covenant could not be firm and inviolate on our part. The surety,
therefore of this covenant, is so with God for us.

   6. It is the priesthood of Christ that the apostle treats of in this
place, and that alone: wherefore he is a surety as he is a priest, and in
the discharge of that office; and therefore is so with God on our behalf.
This Schlichtingius observes, and is aware what will ensue against his
pretensions; which he endeavours to obviate. "Mirum", says he, "porro
alicui videri posset, cur divinus author de Christi sacerdotio, in
superioribus et in sequentibus agens, derepente eum sponsorem foederis
non vero sacerdotem vocet? Cur non dixerit 'tanto praestantioris foederis
factus est sacerdos Jesus?' Hoc enim plane requirere videtur totus
orationis contextus. Credibile est in voce sponsionis sacerdotium quoque
Christi intelligi. Sponsoris enim non est alieno nomine quippiam
promittere, et fidem suam pro alio interponere; sed etiam, si ita res
ferat, alterius nomine id quod spopondit praestare. In rebus quidem
humanis, si id non praestet is pro quo sponsor fidejussit; hic vero
propter contrariam causam (nam prior hic locum habere non potest), nempe
quatenus ille pro quo spopondit Christus per ipsum Christum promissa sua
nobis exhibet; qua in re praecipue Christi sacerdotium continetur".

   Answer 1. It may indeed, seem strange, unto any one who imagines
Christ to be such a surety as he does, why the apostle should so call
him, and so introduce him in the description of his priestly office, as
that which belongs thereunto; but grant what is the proper work and duty
of a surety, and who the Lord Jesus was a surety for, and it is evident
that nothing more proper or pertinent could be mentioned by him, when he
was in the declaration of that office.

   Ans. 2. He confesses that by his exposition of this suretiship of
Christ, as making him a surety for God, he contradicts the nature and
only notion of a surety among men. For such a one, he acknowledges, does
nothing but in the defect and inability of them for whom he is engaged
and does undertake; he is to pay that which they owe, and to do what is
to be done by them, which they cannot perform. And if this be not the
notion of a surety in this place, the apostle makes use of a word nowhere
else used in the whole Scripture, to teach us that which it does never
signify among men: which is improbable and absurd; for the sole reason
why he did make use of it was, that from the nature and notion of it
amongst men in other cases, we may understand the signification of it,
what he intends by it, and what under that name he ascribes unto the Lord
Jesus.

   Ans. 3. He has no way to solve the apostle's mention of Christ being a
surety, in the description of his priestly office, but by overthrowing
the nature of that office also; for to confirm this absurd notion, that
Christ as a priest was a surety for God, he would have us believe that
the priesthood of Christ consists in his making effectual unto us the
promises of God, or his effectual communicating of the good things
promised unto us; the falsehood of which notion, really destructive of
the priesthood of Christ, I have elsewhere at large detected and
confuted. Wherefore, seeing the Lord Christ is a surety of the covenant
as a priest, and all the sacerdotal acting of Christ have God for their
immediate object, and are performed with him on our behalf, he was a
surety for us also.

   A surety, " sponsor, vas, praes, fidejussor," for us, the Lord Christ
was, by his voluntary undertaking, out of his rich grace and love, to do,
answer, and perform all that is required on our part, that we may enjoy
the benefits of the covenant, the grace and glory prepared, proposed, and
promised in it, in the way and manner determined on by divine wisdom. And
this may be reduced unto two heads:-- First, His answering for our
transgressions against the first covenant; Secondly, His purchase and
procurement of the grace of the new: "he was made a curse for us,....that
the blessing of Abraham might come on us," Gal.3:13-15.

   (1.) He undertook, as the surety of the covenant, to answer for all
the sins of those who are to be, and are, made partakers of the benefits
of it;--that is, to undergo the punishment due unto their sins; to make
atonement for them by offering himself a propitiatory sacrifice for the
expiation of their sins, redeeming them, by the price of his blood, from
their state of misery and bondage under the law, and the curse of it,
Isa.53:4-6,10; Matt.20:28; 1 Tim.2:6; 1 Cor.6:20; Rom.3:25,26;
Heb.10:5-8; Rom.8:2,3; 2 Cor.5:19-21; Gal.3:13: and this was absolutely
necessary, that the grace and glory prepared in the covenant might be
communicated unto us. Without this undertaking of his, and performance of
it, the righteousness and faithfulness of God would not permit that
sinners,--such as had apostatized from him, despised his authority and
rebelled against him, falling thereby under the sentence and curse of the
law,--should again be received into his favour, and made partakers of
grace and glory; this, therefore, the Lord Christ took upon himself, as
the surety of the covenant.

   (2.) That those who were to be taken into this covenant should receive
grace enabling them to comply with the terms of it, fulfill its
conditions, and yield the obedience which God required therein; for, by
the ordination of God, he was to procure, and did merit and procure for
them, the Holy Spirit, and all needful supplies of grace, to make them
new creatures, and enable them to yield obedience unto God from a new
principle of spiritual life, and that faithfully unto the end: so was he
the surety of this better testament. But all things belonging hereunto
will be handled at large in the place from whence, as I said, these are
taken, as suitable unto our present occasion.

   But some have other notions of these things; for they say that
"Christ, by his death, and his obedience therein, whereby he offered
himself a sacrifice of sweet smelling savour unto God, procured for us
the new covenant:" or, as one speaks, "All that we have by the death of
Christ is, that whereunto we owe the covenant of grace; for herein he did
and suffered what God required and freely appointed him to do and suffer.
Not that the justice of God required any such thing, with respect unto
their sins for whom he died, and in whose stead, or to bestead whom, he
suffered, but what, by a free constitution of divine wisdom and
sovereignty, was appointed unto him. Hereon God was pleased to remit the
terms of the old covenant, and to enter into a new covenant with mankind,
upon terms suited unto our reason, possible unto our abilities, and every
way advantageous unto us; for these terms are, faith and sincere
obedience, or such an assent unto the truth of divine revelation
effectual in obedience unto the will of God contained in them, upon the
encouragement given whereunto in the promises of eternal life, or a
future reward, made therein. On the performance of these conditions our
justification, adoption, and future glory, do depend; for they are that
righteousness before God whereon he pardons our sins, and accepts our
persons as if we were perfectly righteous". Wherefore, by this procuring
the new covenant for us, which they ascribe unto the death of Christ,
they intend the abrogation of the old covenant, or of the law,--or at
least such a derogation from it, that it shall no more oblige us either
unto sinless obedience or punishment, nor require a perfect righteousness
unto our justification before God,--and the constitution of a new law of
obedience, accommodated unto our present state and condition; on whose
observance all the promises of the gospel do depend.
Others say, that in the death of Christ there was real satisfaction made
unto God; not to the law, or unto God according to what the law required,
but unto God absolutely; that is, he did what God was well pleased and
satisfied withal, without any respect unto his justice or the curse of
the law. And they add, that hereon the whole righteousness of Christ is
imputed unto us, so far as that we are made partakers of the benefits
thereof; and, moreover, that the way of the communication of them unto us
is by the new covenant, which by his death the Lord Christ procured: for
the conditions of this covenant are established in the covenant itself,
whereon God will bestow all the benefits and effects of it upon us; which
are faith and obedience. Wherefore, what the Lord Christ has done for us
is thus far accepted as our real righteousness, as that God, upon our
faith and obedience with respect thereunto, does release and pardon all
our sins of omission and commission. Upon this pardon there is no need of
any positive perfect righteousness unto our justification or salvation;
but our own personal righteousness is accepted with God in the room of
it, by virtue of the new covenant which Christ has procured. So is the
doctrine hereof stated by Curcellaeus, and those that join with him or
follow him.

   Sundry things there are in these opinions that deserve an examination;
and they will most, if not all of them, occur unto us in our progress.
That which alone we have occasion to inquire into, with respect unto what
we have discoursed concerning the Lord Christ as surety of the covenant,
and which is the foundation of all that is asserted in them, is, that
Christ by his death procured the new covenant for us; which, as one says,
is all that we have thereby: which, if it should prove otherwise, we are
not beholding unto it for any thing at all. But these things must be
examined. And,--

   (1.) The terms of procuring the new covenant are ambiguous. It is not
as yet, that I know of, be any declared how the Lord Christ did procure
it,--whether he did so by his satisfaction and obedience, as the
meritorious cause of it, or by what other kind of causality. Unless this
be stated, we are altogether uncertain what relation of the new covenant
unto the death of Christ is intended; and to say that thereunto we owe
the new covenant does not mend the matter, but rather render the terms
more ambiguous. Neither is it declared whether the constitution of the
covenant, or the communication of the benefits of it, is intended. It is
yet no less general, that Cod was so well pleased with what Christ did,
as that hereon he made and entered into a new covenant with mankind. This
they may grant who yet deny the whole satisfaction and merit of Christ.
If they mean that the Lord Christ, by his obedience and suffering, did
meritoriously procure the making and establishing of the new covenant,
which was all that he so procured, and the entire effect of his death,
what they say may be understood; but the whole nature of the mediation of
Christ is overthrown thereby.

   (2.) This opinion is liable unto a great prejudice, in that, whereas
it is in such a fundamental article of our religion, and about that
wherein the eternal welfare of the church is so nearly conceded, there is
no mention made of it in the Scripture; for is it not strange, if this
be, as some speak, the sole effect of the death of Christ, whereas sundry
other things are frequently in the Scripture ascribed unto it as the
effects and fruits thereof, that this which is only so should be nowhere
mentioned,--neither in express words, nor such as will allow of this
sense by any just or lawful consequence? Our redemption, pardon of sins,
the renovation of our natures, our sanctification, justification, peace
with God, eternal life, are all jointly and severally assigned thereunto,
in places almost without number; but it is nowhere said in the Scripture
that Christ by his death merited, procured, obtained, the new covenant,
or that God should enter into a new covenant with mankind; yea, as we
shall see, that which is contrary unto it, and inconsistent with it, is
frequently asserted.

   (3.) To clear the truth herein, we must consider the several notions
and causes of the new covenant, with the true and real respect of the
death of Christ thereunto. And it is variously represented unto us:--

   [1.] In the designation and preparation of its terms and benefits in
the counsel of God. And this, although it have the nature of an eternal
decree, yet is it not the same with the decree of election, as some
suppose: for that properly respects the subjects or persons for whom
grace and glory are prepared; this, the preparation of that grace and
glory as to the way and manner of their communication. Some learned men
do judge that this counsel and purpose of the will of God to give grace
and glory in and by Jesus Christ unto the elect, in the way and by the
means by him prepared, is formally the covenant of grace, or at least
that the substance of the covenant is comprised therein; but it is
certain that more is required to complete the whole nature of a covenant.
Nor is this purpose or counsel of God called the covenant in the
Scripture, but is only proposed as the spring and fountain of it,
Eph.1:3-12. Unto the full exemplification of the covenant of grace there
is required the declaration of this counsel of God's will, accompanied
with the means and powers of its accomplishment, and the prescription of
the way whereby we are so to be interested in it, and made partakers of
the benefits of it: but in the inquiry after the procuring cause of the
new covenant, it is the first thing that ought to come under
consideration; for nothing can be the procuring cause of the covenant
which is not so of this spring and fountain of it, of this idea of it in
the mind of God, of the preparation of its terms and benefits. But this
is nowhere in the Scripture affirmed to be the effect of the death or
mediation of Christ; and to ascribe it thereunto is to overthrow the
whole freedom of eternal grace and love. Neither can any thing that is
absolutely eternal, as is this decree and counsel of God, be the effect
of, or procured by, any thing that is external and temporal.

   [2.] It may be considered with respect unto the federal transactions
between the Father and the Son, concerning the accomplishment of this
counsel of his will. What these were, wherein they did consist, I have
declared at large, Exercitat., vol. 2. Neither do I call this the
covenant of grace absolutely; nor is it so called in the Scripture. But
yet some will not distinguish between the covenant of the mediator and
the covenant of grace, because the promises of the covenant absolutely
are said to be made to Christ, Gal.3:16; and he is the "prooton
dektikon", or first subject of all the grace of it. But in the covenant
of the mediator, Christ stands alone for himself, and undertakes for
himself alone, and not as the representative of the church; but this he
is in the covenant of grace. But this is that wherein it had its designed
establishment, as unto all the ways, means, and ends of its
accomplishment; and all things are so disposed as that it might be
effectual, unto the eternal glory of the wisdom, grace, righteousness,
and power of God. Wherefore the covenant of grace could not be procured
by any means or cause but that which was the cause of this covenant of
the mediator, or of God the Father with the Son, as undertaking the work
of mediation. And as this is nowhere ascribed unto the death of Christ in
the Scripture, so to assert it is contrary unto all spiritual reason and
understanding. Who can conceive that Christ by his death should procure
the agreement between God and him that he should die?

   [3.] With respect unto the declaration of it by especial revelation.
This we may call God's making or establishing of it, if we please; though
making of the covenant in Scripture is applied principally, if not only,
unto its execution or actual application unto persons, 2 Sam.23:5;
Jer.32:40. This declaration of the grace of God, and the provision in the
covenant of the mediator for the making of it effectual unto his glory,
is most usually called the covenant of grace. And this is twofold:--
   1st. In the way of a singular and absolute promise: so was it first
declared unto and established with Adam, and afterwards with Abraham. The
promise is the declaration of the purpose of God before declared, or the
free determination and counsel of his will, as to his dealing with
sinners on the supposition of the fall, and their forfeiture of their
first covenant state. Hereof the grace and will of God were the only
cause, Heb.8:8. And the death of Christ could not be the means of its
procurement; for he himself, and all that he was to do for us, was the
substance of that promise. And this promise,--as it is declarative of the
purpose or counsel of the will of God for the communication of grace and
glory unto sinners, in and by the mediation of Christ, according to the
ways and on the terms prepared and disposed in his sovereign wisdom and
pleasure,--is formally the new covenant; though something yet is to be
added to complete its application unto us. Now, the substance of the
first promise, wherein the whole covenant of grace was virtually
comprised, directly respected and expressed the giving of him for the
recovery of mankind from sin and misery by his death, Gen.3:15.
Wherefore, if he and all the benefits of his mediation, his death, and
all the effects of it, be contained in the promise of the covenant,--
that is, in the covenant itself,--then was not his death the procuring
cause of that covenant, nor do we owe it thereunto.

   2dly. In the additional prescription of the way and means whereby it
is the will of God that we shall enter into a covenant state with him, or
be interested in the benefits of it. This being virtually comprised in
the absolute promise (for every promise of God does tacitly require faith
and obedience in us), is expressed in other places by way of the
condition required on our part. This is not the covenant, but the
constitution of the terms on our part, whereon we are made partakers of
it. Nor is the constitution of these terms an effect of the death of
Christ, or procured thereby; it is a mere effect of the sovereign grace
and wisdom of God. The things themselves, as bestowed on us, communicated
unto us, wrought in us by grace, are all of them effects of the death of
Christ; but the constitution of then to be the terms and conditions of
the covenant, is an act of mere sovereign wisdom and grace. "God so loved
the world, as to send his only begotten Son to die," not that faith and
repentance might be the means of salvation, but that all his elect might
believe, and that all that believe "might not perish, but have
everlasting life." But yet it is granted that the constitution of these
terms of the covenant does respect the federal transaction between the
Father and the Son, wherein they were ordered to the praise of the glory
of God's grace; and so, although their constitution was not the
procurement of his death, yet without respect unto it, it had not been.
Wherefore, the sole cause of God's making the new covenant was the same
with that of giving Christ himself to be our mediator,--namely, the
purpose, counsel, goodness, grace, and love of God, as it is everywhere
expressed in the Scripture.

   [4.] The covenant may be considered as unto the actual application of
the grace, benefits, and privileges of it unto any personal whereby they
are made real partakers of them, or are taken into covenant with God; and
this alone, in the Scripture, is intended by God's making a covenant with
any. It is not a general revelation, or declaration of the terms and
nature of the covenant (which some call a universal conditional covenant,
on what grounds they know best, seeing the very formal nature of making a
covenant with any includes the actual acceptation of it, and
participation of the benefits of it by them), but a communication of the
grace of it, accompanied with a prescription of obedience, that is God's
making his covenant with any; as all instances of it in the Scripture do
declare.

   It may be, therefore, inquired, What respect the covenant of grace has
unto the death of Christ, or what influence it has thereunto?

   I answer, Supposing what is spoken of his being a surety thereof, it
has a threefold respect thereunto:--

   1st. In that the covenant, as the grace and glory of it were prepared
in the counsel of God, as the terms of it were fixed in the covenant of
the mediator, and as it was declared in the promise, was confirmed,
ratified, and made irrevocable thereby. This our apostle insists upon at
large, Heb.9:15-20; and he compares his blood, in his death and sacrifice
of himself, unto the sacrifices and their blood whereby the old covenant
was confirmed, purified, dedicated, or established, verses 18,19. Now,
these sacrifices did not procure that covenant, or prevail with God to
enter into it, but only ratified and confirmed it; and this was done in
the new covenant by the blood of Christ.

   2dly. He thereby underwent and performed all that which, in the
righteousness and wisdom of God, was required; that the effects, fruits,
benefits, and grace, intended, designed, and prepared in the new
covenant, might be effectually accomplished and communicated unto
sinners. Hence, although he procured not the covenant for us by his
death, yet he was, in his person, mediation, life, and death, the only
cause and means whereby the whole grace of the covenant is made effectual
unto us. For,--

   3dly. All the benefits of it were procured by him;--that is, all the
grace, mercy, privileges, and glory, that God has prepared in the counsel
of his will, that were fixed as unto the way of this communication in the
covenant of the mediator, and proposed in the promises of it, are
purchased, merited, and procured by his death; and effectually
communicated or applied unto all the covenanters by virtue thereof, with
others of his mediatory acts. And this is much more an eminent procuring
of the new covenant than what is pretended about the procurement of its
terms and conditions; for if he should have procured no more but this,--
if we owe this only unto his mediation, that God would thereon, or did,
grant and establish this rule, law, and promise, that whoever believed
should be saved,--it were possible that no one should be saved thereby;
yea, if he did no more, considering our state and condition, it was
impossible that any one should so be.

   To give the sum of these things, it is inquired with respect unto
which of these considerations of the new covenant it is affirmed that it
was procured by the death of Christ. If it be said that it is with
respect unto the actual communication of all the grace and glory prepared
in the covenant, and proposed unto us in the promises of it, it is most
true. All the grace and glory promised in the covenant were purchased for
the church by Jesus Christ. In this sense, by his death he procured the
new covenant. This the whole Scripture, from the beginning of it in the
first promise unto the end of it, does bear witness unto; for it is in
him alone that "God blesseth us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly
things." Let all the good things that are mentioned or promised in the
covenant, expressly or by just consequence, be summed up, and it will be
no hard matter to demonstrate concerning them all, and that both jointly
and severally, that they were all procured for us by the obedience and
death of Christ.

   But this is not that which is intended; for most of this opinion do
deny that the grace of the covenant, in conversion unto God, the
remission of sins, sanctification, justification, adoption, and the like,
are the effects or procurements of the death of Christ. And they do, on
the other hand, declare that it is God's making of the covenant which
they do intend, that is, the contrivance of the terms and conditions of
it, with their proposal unto mankind for their recovery. But herein there
is "ouden hugies". For--

   (1.) The Lord Christ himself, and the whole work of his mediation, as
the ordinance of God for the recovery and salvation of lost sinners, is
the first and principal promise of the covenant; so his exhibition in the
flesh, his work of mediation therein, with our deliverance thereby, was
the subject of that first promise, which virtually contained this whole
covenant: so he was of the renovation of it unto Abraham, when it was
solemnly confirmed by the oath of God, Gal.3:16,17. And Christ did not by
his death procure the promise of his death, nor of his exhibition in the
flesh, or his coming into the world that he might die.

   (2.) The making of this covenant is everywhere in the Scripture
ascribed (as is also the sending of Christ himself to die) unto the love,
grace, and wisdom of God alone; nowhere unto the death of Christ, as the
actual communication of all grace and glory are. Let all the places be
considered, where either the giving of the promise, the sending of
Christ, or the making of the covenant, are mentioned, either expressly or
virtually, and in none of them are they assigned unto any other cause but
the grace, love, and wisdom of God alone; all to be made effectual unto
us by the mediation of Christ.

   (3.) The assignation of the sole end, of the death of Christ to be the
procurement of the new covenant, in the sense contended for, does indeed
evacuate all the virtue of the death of Christ and of the covenant
itself; for,--First, The covenant which they intend is nothing but the
constitution and proposal of new terms and conditions for life and
salvation unto all men. Now, whereas the acceptance and accomplishment of
these conditions depend upon the wills of men no way determined by
effectual grace, it was possible that, notwithstanding all Christ did by
his death, yet no one sinner might be saved thereby, but that the whole
end and design of God therein might be frustrated. Secondly, Whereas the
substantial advantage of these conditions lies herein, that God will now,
for the sake of Christ, accept of an obedience inferior unto that
required in the law, and so as that the grace of Christ does not raise up
all things unto a conformity and compliance with the holiness and will of
God declared therein, but accommodate all things unto our present
condition, nothing can be invented more dishonourable to Christ and the
gospel; for what does it else but make Christ the minister of sin, in
disannulling the holiness that the law requires, or the obligation of the
law unto it, without any provision of what might answer or come into the
room of it, but that which is incomparably less worthy? Nor is it
consistent with divine wisdom, goodness, and immutability, to appoint
unto mankind a law of obedience, and cast them all under the severest
penalty upon the transgression of it, when he could in justice and honour
have given them such a law of obedience, whose observance might consist
with many failings and sins; for if he have done that now, he could have
done so before: which how far it reflects on the glory of the divine
properties might be easily manifested. Neither does this fond imagination
comply with those testimonies of Scripture, that the Lord Christ came not
to destroy the law, but to fulfil it, that he is the end of the law; and
that by faith the law is not disannulled, but established. Lastly, The
Lord Christ was the mediator and surety of the new covenant, in and by
whom it was ratified, confirmed, and established: and therefore by him
the constitution of it was not procured; for all the acts of his office
belong unto that mediation, and it cannot be well apprehended how any act
of mediation for the establishment of the covenant, and rendering it
effectual, should procure it.

   7. But to return from this digression. That wherein all the precedent
causes of the union between Christ and believers, whence they become one
mystical person, do centre, and whereby they are rendered a complete
foundation of the imputation of their sins unto him, and of his
righteousness unto them, is the communication of his Spirit, the same
Spirit that dwells in him, unto them, to abide in, to animate and guide,
the whole mystical body and all its members. But this has of late been so
much spoken unto, as that I shall do no more but mention it.

   On the considerations insisted on,--whereby the Lord Christ became one
mystical person with the church, or bare the person of the church in what
he did as mediator, in the holy, wise disposal of God as the author of
the law, the supreme rector or governor of all mankind, as unto their
temporal and eternal concernments, and by his own consent,--the sins of
all the elect were imputed unto him. Thus having been the faith and
language of the church in all ages, and that derived from and founded on
express testimonies of Scripture, with all the promises and resignations
of his exhibition in the flesh from the beginning, cannot now, with any
modesty, be expressly denied. Wherefore the Socinians themselves grant
that our sins may be said to be imputed unto Christ, and he to undergo
the punishment of them, so far as that all things which befell him evil
and afflictive in this life, with the death which he underwent, were
occasioned by our sins; for had not we sinned, there had been no need of
nor occasion for his suffering. But notwithstanding this concession, they
expressly deny his satisfaction, or that properly he underwent the
punishment due unto our sins; wherein they deny also all imputation of
them unto him. Others say that our sins were imputed unto him "quoad
reatum culpae". But I must acknowledge that unto me this distinction
gives "inanem sine mente sonum". The substance of it is much insisted on
by Feuardentius, Dialog 5 p. 467; and he is followed by others. That
which he would prove by it is, that the Lord Christ did not present
himself before the throne of God with the burden of our sins upon him, so
as to answer unto the justice of God for them. Whereas, therefore,
"reatus," or "guilt," may signify either "dignitatem poenae," or
"obligationem ad poenam," as Bellarmine distinguishes. De Amiss. Grat.,
lib.7 cap.7, with respect unto Christ the latter only is to be admitted.
And the main argument he and others insist upon is this,--that if our
sins be imputed unto Christ, as unto the guilt of the fault, as they
speak, then he must be polluted with them, and thence be denominated a
sinner in every kind. And this would be true, if our sins could be
communicated unto Christ by transfusion, so as to be his inherently and
subjectively; but their being so only by imputation gives no countenance
unto any such pretence. However, there is a notion of legal uncleanness,
where there is no inherent defilement; so the priest who offered the red
heifer to make atonement, and he that burned her, were said to be
unclean, Numb.19:7,8. But hereon they say, that Christ died and suffered
upon the special command of God, not that his death and suffering were
any way due upon the account of our sins, or required in justice; which
is utterly to overthrow the satisfaction of Christ.

   Wherefore, the design of this distinction is, to deny the imputation
of the guilt of our sins unto Christ; and then in what tolerable sense
can they be said to be imputed unto him, I cannot understand. But we are
not tied up unto arbitrary distinctions, and the sense that any are
pleased to impose on the terms of them. I shall, therefore, first inquire
into the meaning of these words, guilt and guilty, whereby we may be able
to judge what it is which in this distinction is intended.

   The Hebrews have no other word to signify guilt or guilty but
"'asham"; and this they use both for sin, the guilt of it, the punishment
due unto it, and a sacrifice for it. Speaking of the guilt of blood, they
use not any word to signify guilt, but only say, "dam lo"--"It is blood,
to him." So David prays, "Deliver me" "midamim", "from blood"; which we
render "blood-guiltiness," Ps.51:14. And this was because, by the
constitution of God, he that was guilty of blood was to die by the hand
of the magistrate, or of God himself. But "'asham" (ascham) is nowhere
used for guilt, but it signifies the relation of the sin intended unto
punishment. And other significations of it will be in vain sought for in
the Old Testament.

   In the New Testament he that is guilty is said to be "hupodikos",
Rom.3:19; that is, obnoxious to judgment or vengeance for sin, one that
"he dike dzein ouk eiasen", as they speak, Acts 28:4, "whom vengeance
will not suffer to go unpunished;"--and "enochos", 1 Cor.11:27, a word of
the same signification;--once by "ofeiloo", Matt.23:18, to owe, to be
indebted to justice. To be obnoxious, liable unto justice, vengeance,
punishment for sin, is to be guilty.

   "Reus", "guilty," in the Latin is of a large signification. He who is
"crimini obnoxious," or "poenae propter crimen", or "voti debitor", or
"promissi", or "officii ex sponsione", is called "reus". Especially every
sponsor or surety is "reus" in the law. "Cum servus pecuniam pro
libertate pactus est, et ob eam rem, reum dederit", (that is, "sponsorem,
expromissorem",) "quamvis servus ab alio manusmissur est, reus tamen
obligabitur". He is "reus," who engages himself for any other, as to the
matter of his engagement; and the same is the use of the word in the best
Latin authors. "Opportuna loca dividenda praefectis esse ac suae quique
partis tutandae reus sit", Liv. De Bello Punic. lib.5 30;--that every
captain should so take care of the station committed to him, as that if
any thing happened amiss it should be imputed unto him. And the same
author again, "An, quicunque aut propinquitate, aut affinitate, regiam
aut aliquibus ministeriis contigissent, alienae culpae rei
trucidarentur", B.P., lib.4 22;--should be guilty of the fault of another
(by imputation), and suffer for it. So that in the Latin tongue he is
"reus," who, for himself or any other, is obnoxious unto punishment or
payment.

   "Reatus" is a word of late admission into the Latin tongue, and was
formed of "reus." So Quintilian informs us, in his discourse of the use
of obsolete and new words, lib.8, cap.3, "Quae vetera nunc sunt, fuerunt
olim nova, et quaedam in usu perquam recentia; ut, Messala primus reatum,
munerarium Augustus primus, dixerat";--to which he adds "piratica,
musica," and some others, then newly come into use: but "reatus" at its
first invention was of no such signification as it is now applied unto. I
mention it only to show that we have no reason to be obliged unto men's
arbitrary use of words. Some lawyers first used it "pro crimine,"--a
fault exposing unto punishment; but the original invention of it,
confirmed by long use, was to express the outward state and condition of
him who was "reus," after he was first charged in a cause criminal,
before he was acquitted or condemned. Those among the Romans who were
made "rei" by any public accusation did betake themselves unto a poor
squalid habit, a sorrowful countenance, suffering their hair and beards
to go undressed. Hereby, on custom and usage, the people who were to
judge on their cause were inclined to compassion: and Milo furthered his
sentence of banishment because he would not submit to this custom, which
had such an appearance of pusillanimity and baseness of spirit. This
state of sorrow and trouble, so expressed, they called "reatus," and
nothing else. It came afterwards to denote their state who were committed
unto custody in order unto their trial, when the government ceased to be
popular; wherein alone the other artifice was of use: and if this word be
of any use in our present argument, it is to express the state of men
after conviction of sin, before their justification. That is their
"reatus," the condition wherein the proudest of them cannot avoid to
express their inward sorrow and anxiety of mind by some outward evidences
of them. Beyond this we are not obliged by the use of this word, but must
consider the thing itself which now we intend to express thereby.

   Guilt, in the Scripture, is the respect of sin unto the sanction of
the law, whereby the sinner becomes obnoxious unto punishment; and to be
guilty is to be "hupodikos tooi Theoooi"--liable unto punishment for sin
from God, as the supreme lawgiver and judge of all. And so guilt, or
"reatus," is well defined to be "obligatio ad poenam, propter culpam, aut
admissam in se, aut imputatum, juste aut injuste"; for so Bathsheba says
unto David, that she and her son Solomon should be "chatta'im"--sinners;
that is, be esteemed guilty, or liable unto punishment for some evil laid
unto their charge, 1 Kings 1:21. And the distinction of "dignitas
poenae", and "obligatio ad poenam" is but the same thing in diverse
words; for both do but express the relation of sin unto the sanction of
the law: or if they may be conceived to differ, yet are they inseparable;
for there can be no "obligatio ad poenam" where there is not "dignitas
poenae".

   Much less is there any thing of weight in the distinction of "reatus
culpae" and "reatus poenae"; for this "reatus culpae" is nothing but
"dignitas poenae propter culpam." Sin has other considerations,--namely,
its formal nature, as it is a transgression of the law, and the stain of
filth that it brings upon the soul; but the guilt of it is nothing but
its respect unto punishment from the sanction of the law. And so, indeed,
"reatus culpae" is "reatus poenae", the guilt of sin is its desert of
punishment. And where there is not this "reatus culpae" there can be no
"poenae", no punishment properly so called; for "poenae" is "vindicta
noxae",--the revenge due to sin. So, therefore, there can be no
punishment, nor "reatus poenae", the guilt of it, but where there is
"reatus culpae," or sin considered wth its guilt; and the "reatus poenae"
that may be supposed without the guilt of sin, is nothing but that
obnoxiousness unto afflictive evil on the occasion of sin which the
Socinians admit with respect unto the suffering of Christ, and yet
execrate his satisfaction.

   And if this distinction should be apprehended to be of "reatus," from
its formal respect unto sin and punishment, it must, in both parts of the
distinction, be of the same signification, otherwise there is an
equivocation in the subject of it. But "reatus poenae", is a liableness,
an obnoxiousness unto punishment according to the sentence of the law,
that whereby a sinner becomes "hupodikos tooi Theooi" and then "reatus
culpae" must be an obnoxiousness unto sin; which is uncouth. There is,
therefore, no imputation of sin where there is no imputation of its
guilt; for the guilt of punishment, which is not its respect unto the
desert of sin, is a plain fiction,--there is no ouch thing "in rerum
nature." There is no guilt of sin, but in its relation unto punishment.

   That, therefore, which we affirm herein is, that our sins were so
transferred on Christ, as that thereby he became "'ashem", "hupodikos
tooi Theooi", "reus",--responsible unto God, and obnoxious unto
punishment in the justice of God for them. He was "alienae culpae reus,"-
- perfectly innocent in himself; but took our guilt on him, or our
obnoxiousness unto punishment for sin. And so he may be, and may be said
to be, the greatest debtor in the world, who never borrowed nor owed one
earthing on his own account, if he become surety for the greatest debt of
others: so Paul became a debtor unto Philemon, upon his undertaking for
Onesimus, who before owed him nothing.

   And two things concurred unto this imputation of sin unto Christ,
first, The act of God imputing it. Second, The voluntary act of Christ
himself in the undertaking of it, or admitting of the charge.

   (1.) The act of God, in this imputation of the guilt of our sins unto
Christ, is expressed by his "laying all our iniquities upon him," "making
him to be sin for us, who knew no sin," and the like. For,--[1.] As the
supreme governor, lawgiver, and judge of all, unto whom it belonged to
take care that his holy law was observed, or the offenders punished, he
admitted, upon the transgression of it, the sponsion and suretiship of
Christ to answer for the sins of men, Heb.10:5-7. [2.] In order unto this
end, he made him under the law, or gave the law power over him, to demand
of him and inflict on him the penalty which was due unto the sins of them
for whom he undertook, Gal.3:13; 4:4,6. [3.] For the declaration of the
righteousness of God in this setting forth of Christ to be a
propitiation, and to bear our iniquities, the guilt of our sins was
transferred unto him in an act of the righteous judgment of God accepting
and esteeming of him as the guilty person; as it is with public sureties
in every case.

   (2.) The Lord Christ's voluntary susception of the state and condition
of a surety, or undertaker for the church, to appear before the throne of
God' justice for them, to answer whatever was laid unto their charge, was
required hereunto; and this he did absolutely. There was a concurrence of
his own will in and unto all those divine acts whereby he and the church
were constituted one mystical person; and of his own love and grace did
he as our surety stand in our stead before God, when he made inquisition
for sin;--he took it on himself, as unto the punishment which it
deserved. Hence it became just and righteous that he should suffer, "the
just for the unjust, that he might bring us unto God."