« EdellinenJatka »
red, because Paul, proposes it here as a pattern of the conjugal love of the husband for the wife. But this love ought doubtless to reach do farther than the wife.
XXVIII. Lastly, when Paul reminds his son Titus, that “ Christ gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a people, zealous of good works, Tit. ii. 14. he evidently shews, what was the fruit of Christ's giving himself; namely, redemption from iniquity, and the purification of a peculiar people, &c. And consequently they, who are not redeemed from iniquity, nor purified, nor made his peculiar people, &c. cannot glory in this, that Christ gave himself for them.
XXIX. What the apostle writes in this chapter, ver. 11. that “ the grace of God, that bringeth salvation hath appear, ed to all men, teaching us that denying ungodliness, &c. neither avails our adversaries, nor is any way detrimental to the truth we maintain. For, Ist. The preaching of the gospel by which the saving grace of God is offered, and which is here intended by that expression, had not reached all mankind without exception, nay nor every nation in the days of Paul. Adly. The preaching of the gospel reaches the ears of a great many more than of those, who are the objects of that love of Christ which bringeth salvation ? For it is only an external mean, by which the elect, out of every nation, are brought to the communion of Christ. And therefore the gospel is to
preached to every nation, without distinction, that the elect therein may hear it. 3dly. We should observe the apostle's scope, which is to encourage servants to the exercise of universal piety, that by their holy conversation, they may adorn the doctrine of Christ in all things. The reason he gives for this is, because the saving grace of Christ has appeared, both to masters and servants, teaching us, &c. As if he had said, • That all men, of whatever rank, professing the gospel, ought 6 to reckon it their duty to adorn its doctrine by the
purity of their manners: for as to the doctrine itself, it so plainly, 'so expressly, and so efficaciously instructs us in all good
ness as none, but they who wilfully stop their ears, can be * ignorant of. And therefore all the professors of it, as well masters as servants, should take care, lest they bring a scandal on this most perfect of all rules, by lives which have little or no conformity to it.' This is the full import of these words, so that any may see that they make nothing for the universal efficacy of Christ's death.
XXX. If we search the matter to the bottom we will most clearly discern, that it never was Christ's intention to sa
tisfy for all in general. Certainly, he satisfied only for :
, those he engaged for. But he engaged " to do the will of his Father," Psal. xl. 9. But this is the will of bis Father, not that every man should be saved, but those that were given him, that is, the elect out of every nation, who are to receive the gift of faith. Those the Father gave him for an inheritance by an irrevocable testament. For thus Jehovah speaks, Isa. xlix. 6. “ It is a light thing that thou shouldst be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth." And Christ himself still more clearly, John vi. 39. « This is the Father's will, which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing." But all are not given to Christ, only those that come to him, v. 37.
all that the Father giveth me shall come to me.” He there. fore only engaged for these, according to the will of the Father : took their sine upon him, carried them on bis heart, when he offered himself to the Father; claims them as his peculiar property, in virtue of his merit, according to agreement, challenges them for his own, and will, at length in due time, present them holy and glorious to his father, saying, “ behold I, and the children which God hath givep me," Heb. ü. 13. All those things naturally flow from the very nature of the covenant which subsists between the Father and the Son, as formerly explained.
XXXI. And these particulars may be further illustrated, and confirmed from Aaron's typical priesthood. The high priest, on the solemn day of expiation, slew one of the goats, on which the sins of all Israel were laid, and sent the other into the wilderness. All these things were typical. The high priest, the sacrifice, the scape-goat, all set forth Christ. But who were typically designed by Israel ? Not indeed all men. For what is more absurd than that Israel should be a type of the Edomites and Egyptians, and of all that world out of which they were chosen, and from which, on so many accounts, they were distinguished ? We therefore conclude that they were typical of the elect, who are the true Israelites, Jews , inwardly, and in the spirit, and whom the apostle loves to distinguish by the name of the Election, Rom. xi. 7. For, the nature of the type, consisted in this, that the people of Israel, was chosen by an external pomp of ceremonies, was redeemed, and in their measure was a holy priesthood. They therefore prefigured those, who were truly chosen, redeemed
FOR WHOM CHRIST SATISFIED.
269 and consecrated a royal priesthood to God; as Peter seems not obscurely to signify, 1 Pet. ii. 5. As therefore the high priest formerly offered an atoning sacrifice not for the Egyptians or Canaanites, but for the typical Israel only; So our high priest, according to the order of Melchizedek, offered himself once, not for abandoned reprobates, but for mystical Israel, that is, the truly chosen.
XXXII. This truth will appear very plain, if we attend to some of the inseparable effects of Christ's satisfaction. It would
carry us too far to enumerate all: let us consider some of the principal. “ If they who were enemies to God were reconciled by the death of his Son ; much more being reconciled, they shall be saved by his life,” Rom. v. 10. For whom God, not sparing his own Son, gave him up unto death, " with
“ him freely he gives them all things," Rom. viii. 32. We may
. boldly say to them for whom Christ died, “who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? It is God that justis fieth. Who is he that condemneth ?" &c. v. 33, 34, They whom Christ redeemed from the curse of the laro are not under the curse, but “the blessing of Abraham, cometh upon them,” Gal. ii. 13, 14. But this is not true of all and
every one, but of elect believers only, that they are saved by the life of Christ: that with Christ God freely gives them all things; that none can lay any thing to their charge, or bring an accusation against them; that upon them is come the blessing of
l Abraham. Therefore they alone are the persons of whom the foregoing things may be truly affirmed.
XXXIII. That fictitious satisfaction for the reprobate, and those who perish, is altogether a vain and useless thing. For, whom does it profit? Not certainly God, who by no act can be rendered happier than he is. Not Christ himself, who, as he never seeks them, so he never receives, for his peculiar property, and neither is he enriched by possessing them, though supposed to have purchased them at a dear rate. Not believers, who content with their portion in God and in Christ, and fully redeemed by Christ, enjoy a happiness in every respect complete. In fine, not those that perish, who are constrained to satisfy in their own persons, for their sins to the utmost farthing. But to affirm the satisfaction of Christ to be a vain and useless thing is absurd, and borders upon blasphemy. Remigius, formerly bishop of Lyons, said extremely well, when discoursing at large on this controverted point, “The blood of Christ is a great price; such a price can, in no respect, be in vain and ineffec
tual, but rather is filled with the super-abundant advantage arising from those blessings for which it was paid." See Forbes. Instruct. Hist. lib. 8. c. 16.
XXXIV. Nor are we to say, that therefore the reprobate have no benefit by the satisfaction of Christ, because the condition of faith and perseverance, which the reprobate do not perform, is necessary to that purpose. For first, it is not true that faith and perseverance are pre-requisite conditions, before a person can have any of the fruits of Christ's satis faction. For' regeneration itself and effectual calling which go before actual faith; justisfication, adoption, and sanctification, which precede final perseverance in the faith, are the fruits of Christ's most excellent satisfaction. And then from the want of faith and perseverance in those that perish, we have a most effectual proof, that the blood of the new covenant was not shed for them; for by that Christ has merited for his people the continuance of the new life in faith and love. Seeing he is “ the Mediator of that better covenant, which was established upon better promises," Heb. vii. 6. But these promises are sanctification, ver. 10. “I will put my laws into their mind;" and the continuance thereof, “ I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.” For in the new covenant, to be a God to any, is to be an everlasting Saviour, as we gather from Matt. xxi. 32. and which the opposition made between the new and the old covenant, in like manner shews, Heb. viii
. 8, 9. These promises, be ing graciously and actually conferred on the elect in virtue of Christ's satisfaction, would have certainly been conferred on the rest of mankind, had Christ equally satisfied for them.
XXXV. Nay, the satisfaction of Christ for the reprobate had not only been useless, but highly unworthy both of God and of Christ
. Unworthy of the wisdom, goodness, and justice of God, to exact and receive satisfaction from his most beloved Son for those whom he neither gave nor wanted to give his Son, and whom he decreed to consign to everlasting confinement, to suffer in their own persons, according to the demerit of their crimes. Unworthy of Christ to give his blood a price of redemption for those whom he had not in charge to redeem. And, if we may speak freely, this also, in some respect, would be for Christ to account the blood of the nero covenant, or the new covenant itself, in which he was sanctified, a common or unholy thing.
• There is a deficiency in this part of the paragraph in the first and third editions, which, hy the favour of a particular friend, I got supplied from the second
XXXVI. I should now refute the arguments of those on the other side of the question ; but this has been done at large, and with so much judgment, by very learned men, that we can scarce make any addition. The very accurate dissertation of Gomarus on this head, may especially be consulted, which is inserted in his commentaries on the epistle to the Galatians.
After what manner Christ used the Sacraments. 1. Thus far we have at large treated of those things that relate to the covenant between Christ and the Father, and might seem to have completely finished that subject, was it not proper to add something concerning the sacraments, by which that covenant was confirmed. The apostle has observed, Heb. vii. 20, 21. that not without an oath, Christ was made priest, and Surety of a better Testament. As this manifested the stability of the covenant, and the immutability of God's counsel ; so it likewise contributed to the full assurance of Christ the Mediator. It moreover pleased God, to confirm that com venant by certain external symbols, and indeed the very same by which the covenant of grace was sealed to believers under the different dispensations of it. We have already hinted something on this subject, which we are now to enlarge upon more distinctly:
II. It is evident that the Lord Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day from his birth, Luke ii. 21. that he kept the passover with his disciples, Luke xxii
. 8, 11. and was baptized by John, Matt. ii. 13. Though the evangelists do not indeed expressly assert that he also partook of the holy supper; yet they relate what we think may make it more than probable he did.
III. 1st. It is certain that our Lord, in the institution and use of the mystical supper, borrowed most of the rites from the Jewish passover. The very learned Joseph Scaliger, Ludovi-, cus Capellus, and most particularly Buxtorf, in a peculiar dissertation, have made this as clear as noon-day. Thus our Lord took the bread and cup distinctly, separately blessed them both, and gave them to his disciples after the Jewish manner. It was besides, a custom among the Jews, for the master of the family to eat first of the bread after blessing : to this purpose Maimonides in Hilcot Berachot, chap. vii. says, “ the guests