Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

free and willing obnoxiousness unto that punishment, which another hath deserved. Amongst sinful men it is true, that the son shall not bear the punishment of the father's sin : First, Because he is altogether personally distinct. Secondly, Because he is not appointed so to do, as Christ was”. Thirdly, Because he is not able to bear them, so as to take them off from his father, as Christ did ours : he was himself able to stand under our punishment without sinking; and was able, by suffering them, to take them off from us, because his person was answerable in dignity, and therefore (by the grace of God, and the act of his divine jurisdiction, in ordering the way to his own satisfaction) equivalent in justice unto all ours. Fourthly, Because he hath already too many of his own to bear. But yet, if the will of the son go along with the father in sinning,-it is not strange, nor unusual for him to suffer for his father's and his own sin together, as for the continuation of the same offence; because though he do not will the punishment (as Christ did ours), yet imitating and continuing the sin, there is 'volitum in causa,' for the punishment too.

Now for an answer and resolution of the question, Whether an innocent person may suffer for a nocent,—we must note, First, That God, out of his dominion over all things, may cast pains upon an innocent person, as it is manifest he did upon Christ. And what ground of complaint could any creature have against God “, if he should have created it in fire, and made the place of its habitation the instrument of its pain ? Do not we ourselves, without cruelty upon many occasions, put creatures that have not offended us, unto

pain?

Secondly, It is not universally against equity for one to suffer the punishment of another's sin. We see the infants of Sodom, Babylon, Egypt, of Corab, Dathan, and Abiram, were involved in the punishment of those sins, of which themselves were not guilty: the Lord reserveth o to himself the punishment of the fathers on the children P; he punished the sins of three hundred and ninety years altogether 9,

• John X. 18. Vid. Grot, de Satisfactione Christi, c. 4, 5. o Tertul. contr. Marcion. lib. 2. cap. 16. P Lumbard. lib. 2. distinct. 33.-Aquin. 22. quæst. 108. art. 4.-Coquius in Aug. Civ. Dei, l. 16. cap. 1. num. 1.-Danæus in Aug. Enchirid. cap. 46. q Ezek. iv. 2, 5.

Cham committed the sin; and yet Canaan was cursed for it'. The sin was Gehazi's alone ; and yet the leprosy cleaved not to him only, but to his posterity'. The sin of crucifying Christ was the Jews' in that age alone ; and yet wrath is come upon them to the uttermost even unto this day. Achan trespassed alone; but he perished not alone, but his sons and daughters, and all that he had with him.

Thirdly, The equity hereof in the case of Christ doth here plainly appear: when all parties are glorified, and all parties are willing and well pleased, there is no injury done unto any: and in this the case is so; First, All parties are glorified, the Father is glorified in the obedience of his Son. I have both glorified my name, and I will glorify it again W.” “I have glorified thee on earth, I have finished the work, which thou gavest me to do x.”—The Son is glorified: “ thou madest him

a little lower than the angels, and crownedst him with glory and honoury.” And the sinner is glorified: “ I will that where I am, they may be also, that they may behold my glory?.” &c. Secondly, All parties are willing. First, The Father is willing ; for, by his ordination, he appointed Christ to it *; by his love and tender compassion, he bestowed Christ upon us b; by his divine acceptation, he rested well pleased in it: in one word, by his wonderful wisdom he fitteth it to the manifestation of his glory and mercy, to the reconciliation of him and his creature, and to the exaltation of his Son. Secondly, The Son is willing: he cheerfully submitteth unto itd, and freely loved us, and gave himself unto use. Thirdly, the sinner is willing, and accepteth and relieth upon it, as we have seen at large before in the third verse; so that there can be no injury done to any party, where all are willing, and where all are glorified.

Fourthly, That an innocent person may thus, in justice and equity, suffer for a nocent, there is required (besides these acts of ordination in the supreme, of submission in the surety, and of consent in the delinquent) First, An intimate and near conjunction in him that suffereth, with those that should have suffered. Several unions and conjunctions there are; as politic, between the members and subjects in a state; and thus in a commonwealth universally sinful', a few righteous men may, as parts of that sinful society, be justly subject to those temporary evils, which the sins of the society have contracted: and the people may justly suffer for the sins of the princes and he for theirs h. Secondly, Natural, as between parents and children: so the Lord visited the sins of Dathan upon his little ones i Thirdly, Mystical, as between man and wife: so the Lord punished the sins of Amaziah the priest of Bethel, by giving over his wife unto whoredomi. And we see, in many cases, the husband is liable to be charged and censured for the exorbitances of his wife. Fourthly, Stipulatory, and by consent: as in the case of ' fide jussores' or obsides,' who are punished for the sins of others whom they represent, and in whose place they stand as a caution and muniment against injuries which might be feared ; as we see in the parable of the prisoner, committed to the custody of another person. Fifthly, Possessory, as between a man and his goods: and so we find that a man was to offer no beast for a sin-offering but that which was his own'. Now, in all these respects, there was, in some manner, a conjunction between us and Christ. He conversed amongst men, and was a member of that tribe and society amongst whom he lived ; and therefore was altogether with them under that Roman yoke, which was then upon the people, and in that relation paid tribute unto Cæsar: he had the nature and seed of man, and so was subject to all human and natural infirmities without sin. He was mystically married unto his church; and therefore was answerable for the debts and misdemeanors of the church. He entered into covenant and became surety for man; and therefore was liable to man's engagements. Lastly, He became the possession, in some sort, of his church: whence it is that we are said to receive him, and to have' himm: not by way of dominion (for so we are his"), but by way of communion and propriety: and therefore, though we cannot offer him up unto God in sacrifice for our sins, yet we may, in our faith and prayers, show him unto his Father, and hold him up as our own armour and fence against the wrath of God.

I Gen. ix. 22, 25. s 2 Kings v. 27. * Matth. xxvii. 25. 1 Thes, ü. 16. u Josh. vii. 24. 1 Kings xxi. 21. Judg. ix. 56. 1 Kings ii. 33. Jer. xxii. 30.

John xii. 27, 28. 2 John xvii. 4. y Heb. ii. 7. John xvü. 5. * John xvii. 24. • Acts iv. 27, 28. John iii. 16. • Matth. Ivii. 5. x.9.

• Gal. ii. 20.

d Heb

f Navicula, in qua erat Judas, turbabatur ; unde et Petrus, qui erat firmus meritis suis, turbabatur alienis. Ambros. in Luc. 5. "Opg' &motion Añuos åtaobarlas Basianwr. Hesiod.-Delirant reges, plectuntur Achivi. & 2 Sam. xxiv. 17. h 1 Sam. xii. 25. i Num. xvi. 27, 33. j Amos vii. 17.

i Kings xx, 39, 42.

I Levit. v. 6, 7.

Secondly, There is required in the innocent person suffering, that he have a free and full dominion over that, from which he parteth in his suffering for another. As in suretyship, a man hath free dominion over his money; and therefore, in that respect, he may engage himself to pay another man's debt: but he hath a free dominion over himself or his own life; and therefore he may not part with a member of his own in commutation for another's, as Zaleucus did for his son; nor be 'Aythbuxos, to lay down his own life for the delivering of another from death, except in such cases as the Word of God limiteth and alloweth. But Christ was Lord of his own life; and had therefore power to lay it down and to take it up. And this power he had (though he were in all. points subject to the law, as we are) not solely by virtue of the hypostatical union, which did not, for the time, exempt him from any of the obligations of the law,-but by virtue of a particular command, constitution, and designation to that service of laying down his life. « This commandment have I received of my Father P.”

Lastly, It is required, that this power be ample enough to break through the suffering he undertaketh, and to reassume his life, and former condition again. “ I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up." So then the sum of all is this; by the most just, wise, and merciful will of God, by his own most obedient and voluntary susception, Christ Jesus,-being one with us in a manifold and most secret union, and having full power to lay down, and to take up his life again by special command and allowance of his Father given him,—did, most justly, without injury to himself, or dishonour to or injustice in his Father, suffer the punishment of their sins, with whom he had so near an

m 1 John v. 12.

n 1 Cor. vi. 19.

o Rom. xii. 14.

p John xviii. 10.

union; and who could not themselves have suffered them with obedience in their own persons, or with so much glory to God's justice, mercy, and wisdom.

If it be here again objected, That sin in the Scripture is said to be “ pardoned,” which seems contrary to this payment and satisfaction; to answer this, we must note, first That, in the rigour, of the law, ' Noxa sequitur caput,' the delinquent himself is in person to suffer the penalty denounced: for the law is, “ In the day that thou eatest, thou shalt die : and the soul that sinneth, it shall die.-Every man shall bear his own burden 9.” So that the law, as it stands in its own rigour, doth not admit of any commutation, of substitution of one for another. Secondly, therefore, That another person, suffering, may procure a discharge to the person guilty, and be valid to free him,—the will, consent, and mercy of him to whom the infliction of the punishment belongeth, must concur; and his overruling power must dispense, though not with the substance of the law's demands, yet with the manner of execution, and with that rigour which binds wrath peremptorily upon the head only of him, that hath deserved it. So then we see both these things dosweetly concur: first, a precedent satisfaction by paying the debt; and yet, secondly, a true pardon and remission thereof to that party which should have paid it,--and, out of mercy towards him, a dispensing with the rigour of that law, which, in strictness, would not admit any other to pay it for him.

Thus we see how Christ hath suffered our punishment. Secondly, he did all obedience, and fulfilled all actions of righteousness for us; “ For such a High-priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners"." He came not into the world but for us ; and therefore he neither suffered, nor did any thing, but for us. As the colour of the glass is, by the favour of the sun-beam shining through it, made the colour of the wall, not inherent in it, but relucent upon it, by an extrinsecal affection; so the righteousness of Christ, by the favour of God, is so “ imputed unto us," as that we are,' quoad gratiosum Dei con

[blocks in formation]
« ElőzőTovább »