"dured, and the death he suffered, were occafioned by our fins; for had we not finned, there had been no "occafion for them :" but notwithstanding this conceffion, they exprefsly deny his fatisfaction, or that, properly, he underwent the punishment due to our fins; wherein they deny alfo all imputation of them unto him. Others fay, that " our fins were imputed "to him, but not as to the guilt of them ;—that he "fuffered on the special command of God; not that "his death was any way due on account of our fins, " or required in justice." I fhall therefore inquire into the meaning of the words guilt and guilty in Scripture.

The Hebrews express fin and guilt by the fame word (x), and this they use both for the punishment due to it, and a facrifice for it *. Guilt is the refpect of fin to the fanction of the law, whereby the finner becomes obnoxious to punishment: there is, therefore, no imputation of fin, where there is no imputation of guilt; for the guilt of punishment, which is not its refpect to the defert of fin, is a mere fiction; there is no guilt of fin but its relation to punishment.

What we affirm herein is, That our fins were fo transferred to Christ, as that thereby he became (vx Uπodinos TW Dew, reus), refponfible unto God, and obnoxious unto punishment in the justice of God for them. And this includes, both the act of God, imputing fin to him, and the voluntary act of Chrift himself, in undertaking it.

1. The act of God is expreffed by " his laying all our iniquities upon him; making him to be fin for us,

I 3

who

*So David prays: "Deliver me from blood;" (Heb.) which we render, from blood guiltinefs;" because, by the law of God, hc, who was guilty of blood, was to die. In the New Teftament, he that is guilty, is faid to be vodixos, Rom. iii. 19. obnoxious to judgment, or vengeance from fin, as Acts xxviii. 4. See alfo Matt. xxiii. 18.

and I Cor. xi. 27.

Reatus in the Latin was formed of reus, guilty; and fignifies obliga tip ad pœnam.

who knew no fin ;" and the like. For, as the fupreme Governor, Law-giver, and Judge of all, unto whom it belonged to take care that his holy law was obferved, or the offenders punished, He admitted upon the tranfgreflion of it the Suretifhip of Chrift, to anfwer for the fins of men. In order to this, "he made him under the law," or gave the law power over him, to demand of him, and inflict upon him the penalty which was due to the fins of those for whom he undertook. For the declaration of the righteousness of God in this fetting forth Chrift to be a propitiation, the guilt of our fins was transferred to him in an act of the righteous judgment of God, accepting and esteeming of him as the guilty perfon; as it is with public fureties in all cafes.

2. Chrift's voluntary fufception of the ftate of a furety for the church, to appear before the throne of God's juftice for them, to answer whatever was laid to their charge, was required hereunto. And this he did abfolutely. There was a concurrence of his own will in and to all thofe divine acts, whereby he and the church were conftituted one myftical perfon: And of his own love and grace did he, as our furety, ftand in our ftead before God, when he made inquifition for fin ; he took it on himself, as to the punishment which it deferved. Hence it became juft and righteous that he fhould fuffer, "the juft for the unjust, that he might bring us to God;" for if this be not fo, I defire to know what is become of the guilt of the fins of believers If it were not transferred to Christ, it remains still upon themselves, or it is nothing. It will be faid, that guilt is taken away by the free pardon of fin but if fo, there was no need of punishment at all; which, indeed, is what the Socinians plead; for if punishment be not ior guilt, it is not punishment *.

CHAP.

*Bellarmine, and others, object, that "if this be true, then Chrift ← was made a finner (et quod horret animus cogitare, filius Diaboli); and

СНАР. IX.

The formal Caufe of Juftification. Objections anfwered.

THE Righteoufnefs of Chrift (in his obedience and suffering for us) imputed to believers, as they are. "united to him by his Spirit, is that righteousness whereon they are juftified before God, on the account whereof their fins are pardoned, and a right is granted to them unte "the heavenly inheritance."

In this pofition, the substance of what we plead for is plainly and fully expreffed; and I have chosen to express it in thefe words, because it is that Thefis in which the learned Davenant laid down that common doctrine of the Reformed Churches, whofe defence he undertook. This is the fhield of truth in the whole cause of Juftification, which, whilft it is preserved safe, we need not trouble ourselves about the differences that are among learned men, about the most proper stating of fome leffer concerns of it. This is the refuge, the

only

" and that God muft hate Chrift, for he hateth the guilty." I anfwer, nothing that Chrift undertook could constitute him subjectively, inherently, and thereon perfonally, a finner. To bear the blame or guilt

of other men's faults, makes no man a finner: befides, this is abfolutely inconfiftent with the hypoftatical union. And, I confefs, it hath always feemed fcandalous to me, that Socinus, Crellius, and Grotius grant, that, in fome fenfe, "Chrift fuffered for his own fins;" which they attempt to prove from Heb. vii. 27. where it is positively denied. Again, none ever dreamed of a transfufion of fin from us to Chrift; nor of fuch an imputation of them to him as that they fhould ceafe to be our fins, and become his abfolu ely; which would overthrow what we affirm; for, on that fuppofition, Chrift would not fuffer for our fins, for they ceased to be ours, antecedently to his fuffering: but the guilt of them was fo transferred unto him, that through his suffering for it, it might be pardoned to us. Chrift fuffering for our fins was an high act of obedience, for which the Father loved him, Heb. x. 5, 6. John X. 17, 18.

only refuge of diftreffed confciences, wherein they may find reft and peace.

Before I proceed to state the arguments for Juftification, by the imputation of the righteoufnefs of Chrift, I fhall take notice of the principal objections which are made to it; because the answers given to them will tend to the further explanation of that truth, which I fhall afterwards confirm by Scripture teftimonies.

We are not to wonder at the objections frequent. ly made to this doctrine, seeing it is a part, yea, an eminent part of the mystery of the Gospel, and not fo exposed to the common notions of reason, as fome pretend More is required to the true fpiritual understanding of fuch myfteries; yea, unless we intend to renounce the Gospel, it must be afferted, that reason, as it is corrupted, diflikes every fuch truth, and rises up in enmity against it *. Hence, the minds of men are wonderfully fertile in coining fophiftical objections against evangelical truths, and raising cavils against them: for carnal reaj, being once fet at liberty, under the false notion of truth, to act itself freely and boldly against Spiritual myfteries, is fubtle in its arguings, and pregnant in its invention of them.

Thefe objections generally arife from not confidering. the order of the works of God's grace, and of our compliance with it in a way of duty (as was before obferved); for they confist in oppofing those things as inconfiftent, which in their proper places are not only confiftent, but mutually fubfervient to each other; and are fo found in the experience of true believers. These objections, also, are all taken from certain confequences, which, it is fuppofed, will enfue on the admiffion of this doctrine; and, as this is the only expedient to perpetuate controverfies; fo, to the best of my observation, I never met with any one, who, in order to give an appearance of abfurdity to the confequences, from whence

whence he argues, did not frame his fuppofitions to the difadvantage of his oppofers; a courfe of proceeding, which I wonder good men are not ashamed or weary of.

I. It is objected, "That the imputation of the righteousness of Chrift doth overthrow all remiffion "of fins on the part of God."

A confident charge this feems to them, who fteadfaftly believe, that without this imputation, there could be no remiffion of fins. But they say, "That he who "hath a righteoufnefs, abfolutely perfect, imputed to "him, fo as to be made his own, needs no pardon; "hath no fin that should be forgiven; nor can he ever "need forgiveness."

"Whereas we

Satif

Grotius fhall answer this objection "have faid, that Chrift hath procured two things for freedom from punishment, and a reward; the "ancient Church attributes the one of them diftinctly "to his fatisfaction, the other unto his merit. "faction confifteth in the tranflation of fins, merit in "the imputation of his moft perfect obedience per"formed for us." In his judgment, the remiffion of fins, and the imputation of righteoufnefs, were as confiftent as the fatisfaction and merit of Chrift; as indeed they are.

2. Had we not been finners, we should not have needed the imputation of the righteoufnefs of Chrift, to render us righteous before God: being fo, the first end for which it is imputed, is the pardon of fin; without which we could not be righteous by the imputation of the most perfect righteoufnefs. These things therefore are confiftent; namely, that the fatisfaction of Chrift should be imputed to us for the pardon of fin, and the obedience of Chrift be imputed to us, to render us righteous before God; and neither of them fingly was fufficient to our Juftification.

# Socinus, de Servat. lib. 4. cap. 2, 3, 4.

II. It