made to divine justice, nor any guilt removed, but still remains to be further avenged. Such punishment the scriptures call convictions of wrath, furious rebukes, Ezek. v. 15. of these it is said, Psal. 1. 21. I will convince, reprove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes. Judiciary sufferings are those which are inflicted by God as an impartial Judge, for a compensation, or satisfaction to his justice, and in which there is wrath; and thus they are the same with compensating punishments. Warlike sufferings are those to which Christ was exposed when conflicting with the devil, who persecuted him immediately upon his birth by means of Herod, afterwards tempted him in the wilderness, and many ways reviled and mal-treated him by the enraged ministers of his malice, according to what God says, Gen. iii. 15. And I will put enmity, &c. In these, with respect to Christ, there was no wrath of God; but rather tended to grace and glory, as when one suffers for righteousness sake, 1 Pet. iv. 14.

XVIII. To this we reply as follows: No doubt, a distinction is to be made between the calamities, whereby God brings believers and his elect, to the knowledge and sense of their sins, and which spring from love, and are called Heb. xii. 6. fatherly chastisements; and the calamities, which are inflicted on the wicked, who are under the wrath and curse of God. But to make some of the punishments of the wicked only convincing, and others compensating, has neither the countenance of scripture nor reason.

ης

XIX. The scripture, indeed, speaks of the wrath to come, which, doubtless, is compensating; but they also frequently mention a present wrath and curse, Psal. lvi. 25. lix. 8. compare 2 Thess. ii. 16. John iii. 36. "the wrath of God abideth on him." Wherefore unregenerate sinners are called, Eph. ii. 3. rexva og ng children of wrath, not only because they are liable to the wrath to come, but also on account of the wrath and curse of God actually hanging over them, while they are not translated into the kingdom of his dear Son. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, Rom. i. 18. Which wrath of God against the wicked, being very different from that with which he is said to be angry against the sins of his own children, no reason can be assigned why it may not be deemed compensating, as it is the beginning of the eternal curse, from which it differs not in essence, but only in degree.

XX. Add, that this present wrath is a judiciary punishment, inflicted by the righteous sentence of God on the wicked. The obstinate unbeliever non mengira is condemned already, John iii. 18. God, in punishing the wicked in this life, executes judg

ments in anger and in fury, Ezek. v. 15. As in Egypt, he executed great judgments, Exod. vi. 6. and vii. 4. That all may know, that he is a God that judgeth in the earth, Psal. Iviii. 11. But why may not a judiciary punishment be also deemed compensating?

XXI. And then those punishments of the wicked, called in scripture, rebukes, are sometimes so described, as that they must be compensating. For what else is a compensating punishment, but the vengeance of an offended God on those that despise him, in order to manifest his hatred against them? But all this is contained in those convincing rebukes, which the Lord denounces against the Philistines, Ezek. xxv. 17. And I will execute great VENGEANCE upon them with FURIOUS REBUKES; and they shall know that I am the Lord, when I shall lay my VENGEANCE upon them.

XXII. Convincing, or rebuking punishments are no less compensating. Who shall deny that it is a compensating punishment when God consumes the wicked in his fury? For that, in the highest degree, convinces them of their guilt. Psal. lix. 18. "Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be; and let them know, that God ruleth in Jacob, unto the ends of the earth." And surely nothing can convince the wicked more of the heinousness of their sins, than a punishment heightened to the greatest degree, as a compensating punishment is, and in which there is a most evident demonstration of the wrath of God. Deservedly therefore we reject that distinction, which has not any foundation in scripture, and whose parts are contrary to the rules of sound logic.

XXIII. But though we should admit that distinction in general, how is it applicable to the sufferings of Christ? Here, I own, I do not fully understand the learned author's meaning. To what purpose is this distinction of convincing and compensating punishments? Is it, that as the punishments which the wicked endure in this life, are only convincing, and a compensating punishment will at length be inflicted at the day of wrath and judgment; so also the sufferings which Christ underwent during the whole time of his life, answer to those convincing punishments, and the three hours sufferings, to the compensating punishment? But what necessity to exact convincing punishments of Christ, seeing he both perfectly owned, and voluntarily confessed the guilt of those sins he had taken upon him, and most willingly performed every thing by which he might expiate that guilt? Was it perhaps with this view, that, from a sight of the sufferings of Christ, believers might be convinced of their sins? But that cannot be done more effectually, than when they consider them as punishments due to their sins, and

as a satisfaction for them. As therefore no punishments of
Christ can be said to be merely convincing, it remains, that all
of them are compensating or satisfactory; which is what we
contend for.

XXIV. The distinction between judiciary and warlike suf-
ferings is no less impertinent. For Christ incurred no suffer-
ings but by the sentence of God, the Judge. When Christ 73
afflicted, the iniquity of us all was, was exacted, Isa. liii. 7.
But that was the exaction of the Judge. When Satan, with
his infernal powers, assaulted Christ, then was the power of
darkness, Luke xxii. 53. God, in consequence of a determi-
nate sentence, permitted the prince of darkness to harass Christ.
And Christ, in preparing himself for that conflict, had in view
that sentence, or commandment of God, as he himself speaks
John xiv. 31.

XXV. What else is that very word of God, from which the original of the warlike sufferings is derived, than the sentence of God the Judge against the serpent, who was to be destroyed by Christ, and against Christ's human nature, in which he trod the earth, which was to be harassed and slain by the serpent? I would fain know, if what is foretold concerning the bruising of his heel, does not also comprise those sufferings of Christ, which are judiciary. If not, the first gospel promise does not explain the method of obtaining salvation by the satisfaction of a Medi ator: and if the words contain an enigmatical summary of our belief, we must then be obliged to believe that they signify less than they can, or is proper that they should; but if, as is certainly right, we allow that the satisfactory sufferings of Christ, are comprehended in these words, it is wrong to build this new distinction upon them.

XXVI. Let us dwell a little longer on this meditation. Whatever power the devil has to harass wicked men, before they are dragged to eternal death, he has it by the righteous sentence of the Judge; * Peter mentions the consequence of this, 2 Pet. ii. 19. The elect themselves as sinners, were also subject to that power, and on that account are truly said to be not only the prey of the mighty, but Isa. xlix. 24. are likewise called lawful captives, he having a right over them by the sentence of the supreme Judge. But as Jesus the Surety came in their room, so in virtue of the same sentence, he became subject to the buf

* The apostle, in the last quoted text, speaks nothing, as I apprehend, of Satan's power, but only of the servants of corruption and of the bondage; and therefore, instead of saying what the author in his short way of expression, which Peter has expressed, 1 have rendered it as above.

!

fetings of Satan. And by this means all he suffered from the devil, was in the most proper sense judiciary.

XXVII. It is no objection to this truth that those conflicts with Satan proved glorious to Christ, as having endured them, because of the justice and for advancing the glory of God. For all Christ's sufferings, even those which according to this new bypothesis, we shall call judiciary, if the cause and event be considered, were highly glorious to him. He never more glo riously displayed his love to God and man, he never undertook a more excellent work, which the whole choir of angels beheld with greater applause, and God the Father himself was never more pleased with it than when hanging on the cross, he reso lutely struggled with the horrors of eternal death. But if we consider this thing as an evil, contrary to nature, which is earnestly bent upon its own advantage, certainly in these harassings of Satan, there was the wrath of God against sin, which Christ had taken upon himself.

XXVIII. And why should not those sufferings be called warlike, which according to this hypothesis are judiciary? For who will deny that Christ, when hanging on the cross, was as it were wrestling with the infernal powers, and the horrors of eternal death? Indeed Paul testifies that Christ had then "spoiled principalities and powers, made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in the cross," Col. ii. 15. But who can refuse that there was first a conflict before such a noble triumph and victory? From all these things we conclude, that the distinction of punishments into convincing and compensat ing, and of sufferings into warlike and judiciary, is both unscriptural, antiscriptural, and irrational.

XXIX. Let us now come to the arguments of the opposite side, as far as they have come to our knowledge. Some of them are general against all the sufferings of Christ, and others more special against some parts of his sufferings. The general are partly taken from scripture, partly from the Apostle's Creed, and partly from the catechism.

XXX. From scripture they argue in the following manner: 1st. That the sin of the whole earth shall be removed in one day, according to Zech. iii, 9. And Paul several times affirms, that the one offering of Christ, once made on the cross, was that expiatory sacrifice, by which all the elect are perfected, Heb. ix. 28. and x. 10, 12, 14: and therefore the preceding sufferings of Christ were not satisfactory. 2dly. Further that Christ from the beginning of his life, was neither a priest who could offer an expiatory sacrifice, nor a sacrifice which could be offered. Not a priest, because he could not lawfully be one before the thirtieth year of his age: not a sacrifice, as a lamb could not be

VOL. I.

such before the seventh day. But the truth of the types ought to appear in Christ. 3dly. Moreover that Christ through the whole of his life, except for a few hours, was in the favour of God, Luke ii. 52. increased in favour with God:" Matt. iii. 17. was declared to be the beloved Son of God, Matt. xvii. 2. was glorified in the mount: Luke x. 21. rejoiced in spirit. But at the time, in which he was in the favour of God and re joiced, he did not bear the wrath of God.

XXXI. From the creed it is observed, that professing our faith concerning the satisfactory sufferings of Christ, we do not barely say, that he suffered, but that he suffered under Pontius Pilate, words never to be disjoined, to teach us, that only those sufferings were satisfactory which he endured under Pilate.

XXXII. From the [Heidelberg] catechism are quoted ques tions 81, 67, 70, 75, 80, where the impetration of our salvation is referred to the one offering of Christ, once made on the cross. But as to what is alleged to the contrary, from question 87. where it is said, that " for the whole time of his life which he lived upon earth, especially at the end thereof, he sustained the wrath of God against the sin of all mankind, both in body and soul;" they answer, that to sustain the wrath of God there cannot signify to feel the wrath of God, but to be bound to endure it. They illustrate and prove this explication by question 84. where it is declared concerning unbelievers and hypocrites, that "the wrath of God and eternal damnation do lie on them so long as they go on in their sins:" which cannot be understood of a compensating punishment, unless we would suppose, that the wicked by suffering on earth, make satisfaction to divine jus tice, which is absurd. It therefore follows, that we explain this of their being obnoxious to divine wrath, and eternal damnation. Since in the same sense, our Lord declares, John iii. 36. “he that believeth not the Son, the wrath of God abideth on him," that is, he is obnoxious to wrath.

XXXII. To these arguments we humbly reply, as follows: and to the first we say, that all Christ's sufferings together, ought to be esteemed one full accomplishment of that sacerdotal office, which our Lord undertook, in order to expiate our sins, which was at last fully completed, when Christ, dying on the cross, offered himself to the Father for a sweet smelling savour: then the utmost farthing was paid; this being done, God declared, he was satisfied to the full, and on that day he blotted out the sins of the whole earth, and crossed them out of his book. But from this it cannot be inferred, that the preceding sufferings of Christ were not satisfactory; but that then only the satisfac