Take it for an actual freeing of their persons from the breach of it, and its curse, and so it differs not from justification, and is not the immediate effect of Christ's death, in Mr. Baxter's judgment.

Take it for the not immediate executing of the law upon the first offence, and I can as well say, Christ died because the law was suspended; as you, that the law was suspended because Christ died; had not either been, the other had not been. Take it for the actual forbearance of God towards all the world, and so it falls under my two first arguments.

Take it thus, that God for the death of Christ, will deal with all men upon a new law, freeing all from the guilt of the first broken law and covenant; so it is non ens.

If you mean by it God's entering into a new way of salvation with those for whom Christ died: this on the part of God is antecedaneous to the consideration of the death of Christ, and of the same free grace with itself.

For the question itself, as I said before, I shall not here in terms take it up, the following discourse will give light into it: I have also spoken largely to it in another place; and that distinctly.

The sum is: I conceive that all the intermediate effects of the death of Christ, tending to its ultimate procurement of the glory of God, are all in respect of his death immediate; that is, with such an immediation as attends moral causes. Now these concerning them for whom he died, as they are not immediately bestowed on them, the ultimate attingency of the cause, and the first rise of the effect, lying in an intervening compact, so not simul, at once neither though simul, and alike procured; the cause of this, being that relation, coherence, and casualty, which the Lord hath appointed between the several effects, or rather parts of the same effect, of the death of Christ, in reference to the main and ultimate end to be thereby attained; as at large I have discussed; lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 52, 53, &c. In one word, the first effect of the death of Christ in this sense, is the first fruit of election. For, for the procuring, and purchasing of the fruits thereof, and them alone, did Christ die.

If I mistake not, Mr. Baxter himself is not settled fully

:

in this persuasion, that the suspension of the rigorous execution of the law, is the most immediate effect of the death of Christ for, p. 52. these words which he useth, God the Father doth accept the suffering and merits of his Son, as a full satisfaction to his violated law, and as a valuable consideration upon which he will wholly acquit and forgive the offenders themselves, and receive them again into favour, so that they will but receive his Son upon the terms expressed in the gospel,' seems to place the ultimate efficacy of the death of Christ in God's acceptation of it, as to our good, on the condition of faith and obedience.

Which first makes the suspension of the law to be so far from being the first effect of the death of Christ, that the last reacheth not so far: and, secondly, the fond absurdity of this conditional acceptation I have before declared.

Neither am I clear to which of those assertions, that of p. 92. where he affirms, that some benefit by Christ the condemned did receive, is most accommodate: neither can I easily receive what is here asserted; if by benefit you understand that which in respect of them is intentionally so. For,

(1.) Condemned persons, as condemned persons, surely receive no benefit by Christ, for they are condemned.

(2.) The delay of the condemnation of reprobates, is no part of the purchase of Christ; the Scripture says, nor more nor less of any such thing, but peculiarly assigns it to another cause; Rom. ix.

CHAP. X.

Of the merit of Christ, and its immediate efficacy; what it effecte'h; in what it resteth; with the state of those for whom Christ died, in reference to his death, and of their rights to the fruits of his death before believing.

THAT they for whom Christ died, have a right to the things which he purchased thereby, that is, an actual right, for so men may have, to what they have not in actual possession, is no singular conception of mine. Our divines freely express themselves to this purpose.

Even the commender, and publisher of Grotius's book

of 'Satisfaction,' the learned Vossius himself, affirmeth, that Christ by his death purchased for us a double right: First, A right of escaping punishment, and then a right of obtaining the reward. By the way, I cannot close with his distinction in that place, of some things that Christ by his life and death purchased for us, and others that he daily bestowed; for the things he daily bestoweth, are of them, which by his death he purchased.

My expressions then alone are not subject to the consequences charged on them, for asserting a right to life, and salvation in them for whom Christ died, even before believing. Yea, some have gone farther, and affirmed," that those for whom Christ died, are in some manner restored into saving favour. Not to mention some of them, to whose judgment Mr. Baxter seems to accede, who assert universal justification, and restoration into grace upon the death of Christ: but I lay no weight upon these things.

To clear my thoughts in this particular, two things must necessarily be inquired into, and made out.

1. Seeing the satisfaction and merit of Christ, do tend directly for the good of them for whom he died, and that there is a distance, and space of time, between that death, and their participation of the good things purchased thereby, wherein lieth, or in what resteth, the efficacy of that his death, with the principle of the certain futurition of the spiritual things so procured, which those for whom he died. shall assuredly in due time enjoy.

2. Wherein lies the obligation unto death, hell, and wrath, which before believing the Scripture affirms to be upon the elect, seeing Christ hath actually purchased for them freedom from these things: and this without more ado, will be cleared in the former.

1. For the first, then, upon the issue of the death of Christ, something being supposed in God beyond his mere purpose, of which before, some things being actually procured and purchased by it, which yet they for whom they are so purchased, neither do, nor possibly can, upon the purchase immediately possess and enjoy: it is inquired, wherein resteth the efficacy of his death, which in due time causeth

a Omnes illi, pro quibus Christus ex intentione Dei satis fecit, sunt Deo reconciati, i. e. in favorem saluti ferum aliquo modo restituit, Ames. Antisinod. p. 104.

the making out of all those spiritual blessings, which by it are so procured?

Now this must be either in those for whom he died, or in himself as Mediator, or in his Father who sent him.

(1.) That it is not in them for whom he died, is apparent. Upon the death of Christ, in purpose and promise, when first its efficacy took place, they were not: I mean actually existent. True! they were potentially in the purpose of God; but will that make them a meet subject for the residence of his right and merit whereof we speak? As is the thing, such are all its affections and adjuncts; but possible if it be no more. This is something actual whereof we speak.

(2.) That it is not in Christ as Mediator, is no less evident. He that makes satisfaction, and he to whom it is made, he who meriteth any thing, and he at whose hands he meriteth it, must be distinguished. The second person under the notion of performing the work of mediation, receiveth not satisfaction. The power Christ receiveth of the Father, because he is the Son of man, to give eternal life to those given him of his Father, is of later consideration to that we have in hand, being a result and consequence thereof.

(3.) It must therefore be in the Father, or God, as receiving satisfaction.

Of all the attributes of God where this may be placed, to speak after the manner of men, one of these four must needs be the proper seat of it: power, will, justice, truth.

[1.] His power: and then it must be, not that God hath any addition of power, for that cannot be to him who is omnipotent; but that a way is made for the exercise of his power, which before by somewhat from himself was shut up.

And as some suppose it is no otherwise. That whereas the Lord could not make out grace and favour unto sinners, because of his justice necessarily inclining him to their punishment and destruction. Now that justice being satisfied in Christ he can collate any spiritual blessings upon them, as he seeth good.

But this I have disproved elsewhere, and manifested.

1st. That the foundation of this apprehension (being an impossibility in God to forgive sin, without satisfaction, be

cause of the contrariety of it to the properties of his nature), is a groundless assertion. And,

2dly. The foundation of God, in sending his Son to die for his elect, is oppugned hereby. And,

3dly. It is destructive to all the proper fruits and effects of the death of Christ, &c. lib. 2. cap. 2.

[2.] In the will of God, it seems that the merit and fruits of the death of Christ, whereof we treat, seem better to be treasured; and from hence it is that he can will, or willeth, to us the good things purchased by it. But,

1st. That the will of God should by the death of Christ be changed into any other habitude, than what it was in before, was before disproved.

2dly. That now God can will good things to us, holds out the enlargement of his power as to the acting thereof, mentioned above, rather than any thing properly belonging to the will of God.

3dly. God's willing good things to us it cannot consist in ; his willing of a thing is operative of it; it is his efficacious energétical will whereof we speak. When he actually willeth grace, we have grace; and when he willeth glory, we have glory; but that concerning which we speak, is antecedent to the actual making out of grace and glory to us, being the procuring cause of them; though not of that act of the will of God, whereby they are bestowed.

[3.] His justice and truth only remain. For justice, that which is commutative properly, with one consent is removed from God. Who hath given first unto him, and it shall be rendered unto him again?' Neither is distributive justice to be supposed in him, antecedent to some free engagement of his own. Where no obligation is, there cannot be so much as distributive justice properly. All obligation from God to the creature, is from his own free engagement; otherwise he stands in no relation to it, but of absolute dominion and sovereignty. All the justice of God then (we consider not the universal rectitude of his nature, but) in reference to the creature, is 'justitia regiminis;' Psal. xxxiii. 4, 5. 1 John

bSi de debitum quæratur, respectu creaturæ in Deum cadere non potest; nisi ex aliqua suppositione ipsi Deo voluntaria et libera: quæ non potest esse nisi promissio aut pactio aliqua, ex quibus fidelitatis aut justitiæ debitum oriri solet, Suares, Relect. de Lib. Div. Vola. Disp. L. Di. Sec. 2. n. 5.