|
|
CHAPTER 4
Of
the distinction of impetration and application — The use and
abuse thereof; with the opinion of the adversaries upon the whole
matter in controversy unfolded; and the question on both sides
stated.
THE
farther reasons whereby the precedent discourse may be confirmed,
I defer until I come to oppose some argument to the general
ransom. For the present, I shall only take away that general
answer which is usually given to the places of Scripture
produced, to waive the sense of them; which is pharmanon
pansophon to our adversaries, and serves them, as they suppose,
to bear up all the weight wherewith in this case they are urged:
—
I.
They say, then, that in the oblation of Christ, and
concerning the good things by him procured, two things are to be
considered: — First, The impetrution, or obtaining of them;
and, secondly, The application of them to particular persons.
“The first,” say they, “is general, in respect to
all. Christ obtained and procured all good things by his death of
his Father, — reconciliation, redemption, forgiveness of
sins, — for all and every man in the world, if they will
believe and lay hold upon him: but in respect of application,
they are actually bestowed and conferred but on a few; because
but a few believe, which is the condition on which they are
bestowed. And in this latter sense are the texts of Scripture
which we have argued, all of them, to be understood. So that they
do no whit impeach the universality of merit, which they assert;
but only the universality of application, which they also
deny.” Now, this answer is commonly set forth by them in
various terms and divers dresses, according as it seems best to
them that use it, and most subservient to their several opinions;
for, —
First, Some of them say that Christ, by
his death and passion, did absolutely, according to the intention
of God, purchase for all and every man, dying for them, remission
of sins and reconciliation with God, or a restitution into a
state of grace and favor; all which shall be actually beneficial
to them. provided that they do believe So the Arminians.
Secondly,
Some, again, that Christ died for all indeed, but conditionally
for some, if they do believe, or will so do (which he knows they
cannot of themselves); and absolutely for his own, even them on
whom lie purposeth to bestow faith and grace, so as actually to
be made possessors of the good things by him purchased. So
Camero, and the divines of France, which follow a new method by
him devised.
Thirdly,
Some distinguish of a twofold reconciliation and redemption;
— one wrought by Christ with God for man, which, say they,
is general for all and every man; secondly, a reconciliation
wrought by Christ in man unto God, bringing them actually into
peace with him.
And sundry other ways there are whereby men express their conceptions in this business. The sum of all comes to this, and the weight of all lies upon that distinction which we before recounted; — namely, that in respect of impetration, Christ obtained redemption and reconciliation for all; in respect of application, it is bestowed only on them who do believe and continue therein.
II.
Their arguments whereby they prove the generality of the
ransom and universality of the reconciliation must afterward be
considered: for the present, we handle only the distinction
itself, the meaning and misapplication whereof I shall briefly
declare; which will appear if we consider, —
FIRST,
The true nature and meaning of this distinction, and the true use
thereof; for we do acknowledge that it may be used in a sound
sense and right meaning, which way soever you express it, either
by impetration and application, or by procuring reconciliation
with God and a working of reconciliation in us For by impetration
we mean the meritorious purchase of all good things made by
Christ for us with and of his Father; and by application, the
actual enjoyment of those good things upon our believing; —
as, if a man pay a price for the redeeming of captives, the
paying of the price supplieth the room of the impetration of
which we speak; and the freeing of the captives is as the
application of it. Yet, then, we must observe, —
First,
That this distinction hath no place in the intention and purpose
of Christ, but only in respect of the things procured by him; for
in his purpose they are both united, his full end and aim being
to deliver us from all evil, and procure all good actually to be
bestowed upon us. But in respect of the things themselves, they
may be considered either as procured by Christ, or as bestowed on
us.
Secondly,
That the will of God is not at all conditional in this business,
as though he gave Christ to obtain peace, reconciliation, and
forgiveness of sins, upon condition that we do believe. There is
a condition in the things, but none in the will of God; that is
absolute that such things should be procured and bestowed.
Thirdly,
That all the things which Christ obtained for us are not bestowed
upon condition, but some of them absolutely. And as for those
that are bestowed upon condition, the condition on which they are
bestowed is actually purchased and procured for us, upon no
condition but only by virtue of the purchase. For instance:
Christ hath purchased remission of sins and eternal life for us,
to be enjoyed on our believing, upon the condition of faith. But
faith itself, which is the condition of them, on whose
performance they are bestowed, that he hath procured for us
absolutely, on no condition at all; for what condition soever can
be proposed, on which the Lord should bestow faith, I shall
afterward show it vain, and to run into a circle.
Fourthly, That both these, impetration, and application, have for their objects the same individual persons; that, look, for whomsoever Christ obtained any good thing by his death, unto them it shall certainly be applied, upon them it shall actually be bestowed: so that it cannot be said that he obtained any thing for any one, which that one shall not or doth not in due time enjoy. For whomsoever he wrought reconciliation with, God, in them doth he work reconciliation unto God. The one is not extended to some to whom the other doth not reach. Now, because this being established, the opposite interpretation and misapplication of this distinction vanisheth, I shall briefly confirm it with reasons: —
First,
If the application of the good things procured be the end why
they are procured, for whose sake alone Christ doth obtain them,
then they must be applied to all for whom they are obtained; for
otherwise Christ faileth of his end and aim, which must not be
granted. But that this application was the end of the obtaining
of all good things for us appeareth, — first, Because if it
were otherwise, and Christ did not aim at the applying of them,
but only at their obtaining, then might the death of Christ have
had its full effect and issue without the application of
redemption and salvation to any one soul, that being not aimed
at, and so, notwithstanding all that he did for us, every soul in
the world might have perished eternally; which, whether it can
stand with the dignity and sufficiency of his oblation, with the
purpose of his Father, and his own intention, who “came into
the world to save sinners, — that which was lost,” and
to “bring many sons unto glory,” let all judge.
Secondly, God, in that action of sending his Son, laying the
weight of iniquity upon him, and giving him up to an accursed
death, must be affirmed to be altogether uncertain what event all
this should have in respect of us. For, did he intend that we
should be saved by it? — then the application of it is that
which he aimed at, as we assert: did he not? — certainty, he
was uncertain what end it should have; which is blasphemy, and
exceeding contrary to Scripture and right reason. Did he appoint
a Savior without thought of them that were to be saved? a
Redeemer, not determining who should be redeemed? Did he resolve
of a means, not determining the end? It is an assertion opposite
to all the glorious properties of God.
Secondly,
If that which is obtained by any do, by virtue of that action
whereby it is obtained, become his in right for whom it is
obtained, then for whomsoever any thing is by Christ obtained, it
is to them applied; for that must be made theirs in fact which is
theirs charge; all that he hath purchased for them must be
applied to them, for by virtue thereof it is that they are so
saved, John 10:33, 34.
Thirdly,
For whom Christ died, for them he maketh intercession. Now, his
intercession is for the application of those things, as is
confessed, and therein he is always heard. Those to whom the one
belongs, theirs also is the other. So, John 10:10, the coming of
Christ is, that “his might have life, and have it
abundantly;” as also 1 John 4:9. Hebrews 10:10, “ By
the which will we are sanctified,” — that is the
application; “through the offering of the body of Jesus
Christ,” — that is the means of impetration: “ for
by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
sanctified,” verse 14. In brief, it is proved by all those
places which we produced rightly to assign the end of the death
of Christ. So that this may be rested on, as I conceive, as firm
and immovable, that the impetration of good things by Christ, and
the application of them, respect the same individual persons.
SECONDLY,
We may consider the meaning of those who seek to maintain
universal redemption by this distinction in it, and to what use
they do apply it. “Christ,” say they, “died for
all men, and by his death purchased reconciliation with God for
them and forgiveness of sins: which to some is applied, and they
become actually reconciled to God, and have their sins forgiven
them; but to others not, who, therefore, perish in the state of
irreconciliation and enmity, under the guilt of their sins. This
application,” say they, “is not procured nor purchased
by Christ, — for then, he dying for all, all must be
actually reconciled and have their sins forgiven them and be
saved, — but it attends the fulfilling of the condition
which God is pleased to prescribe unto them, that is,
believing:” which, say some, they can do by their own
strength, though not in terms, yet by direct consequence; others
not, but God must give it. So that when it is said in the
Scripture, Christ hath reconciled us to God, redeemed us, saved
us by his blood, underwent the punishment of our sins, and so
made satisfaction for us, they assert that no more is meant but
that Christ did that which upon the fulfilling of the condition
that is of us required, these things will follow. To the death of
Christ, indeed, they assign many glorious things; but what they
give on the one hand they take away with the other, by suspending
the enjoyment of them on a condition by us to be fulfilled, not
by him procured; and in terms assert that the proper and full end
of the death of Christ was the doing of that whereby God, his
justice being satisfied, might save sinners if he would, and on
what condition it pleased him, — that a door of grace might
be opened to all that would come in, and not that actual
justification and remission of sins, life, and immortality were
procured by him, but only a possibility of those things, that so
it might be. Now, that all the venom that lies under this
exposition and abuse of this distinction may the better appear, I
shall set down the whole mind of them that use it in a few
assertions, that it may be clearly seen what we do oppose.
First,
“God,” say they, “considering all mankind as
fallen from that grace and favor in Adam wherein they were
created, and excluded utterly from the attainment of salvation by
virtue of the covenant of works which was at the first made with
him, yet by his infinite goodness was inclined to desire the
happiness of them, all and every one, that they might be
delivered from misery, and be brought unto himself;” which
inclination of his they call his universal love and antecedent
will, whereby he would desirously have them all to be saved; out
of which love he sendeth Christ.
Obs.
1. That God hath any natural or necessary inclination, by his
goodness, or any other property, to do good to us, or any of his
creatures, we do deny. Every thing that concerns us is an act of
his free will and good pleasure, and not a natural, necessary act
of his Deity, as shall be declared.
Obs
2. The ascribing an antecedent conditional will unto God,
whose fulfilling and accomplishment should depend on any free,
contingent act or work of ours, is injurious to his wisdom,
power, and sovereignty, and cannot well be excused from
blasphemy; and is contrary to Romans 9:10, “Who hath
resisted his will?” I say, —
Obs.
3. A common affection and inclination to do good to all doth
not seem to set out the freedom, fullness, and dimensions of that
most intense love of God which is asserted in the Scripture to be
the cause of sending his Son; as John 3:16, “God so loved
the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son.” Ephesians
1:9, “Having made known unto us the mystery of his will,
according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in
himself.” Colossians 1:19, “It pleased the Father that
in him should all fullness dwell.” Romans 5:8, “God
commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet
sinners, Christ died for us.” These two I shall, by the
Lord’s assistance, fully clear, if the Lord give life and
strength, and his people encouragement, to go through with the
second part of this controversy.
Obs.
4. We deny that all mankind are the object of that love of
God which moved him to send his Son to die; God having “made
some for the day of evil,” Proverbs 16:4; “hated them
before they were born,” Romans 9:11, 13; “before of old
ordained them to condemnation,” Jude 4; being “fitted
to destruction,” Romans 9:22; “made to be taken and
destroyed,” 2 Peter 2:12; “appointed to wrath,” 1
Thessalonians 5:9; to “go to their own place,” Acts
1:25.
Secondly,
“The justice of God being injured by sin, unless something
might be done for the satisfaction thereof, that love of God
whereby he wouldeth good to all sinners could no way be brought
forth into act, but must have its eternal residence in the bosom
of God without any effect produced.”
Obs.
1. That neither Scripture nor right reason will enforce nor
prove an utter and absolute want of power in God to save sinners
by his own absolute will, without satisfaction to his justice,
supposing his purpose that so it should be; indeed, it could not
be otherwise. But, without the consideration of that, certainly
he could have effected it. It doth not imply any violating of his
holy nature.
Obs.
2. An actual and necessary velleity, for the doing of any
thing which cannot possibly be accomplished without some work
fulfilled outwardly of him, is opposite to his eternal
blessedness and all-sufficiency.
Thirdly,
“God, therefore, to fulfill that general love and good-will
of his towards all, and that it might put forth itself in such a
way as should seem good to him, to satisfy his justice, which
stood in the way, and was the only hinderance, he sent his Son
into the world to die.” The failing of this assertion
we shall lay forth, when we come to declare that love whereof the
sending of Christ was the proper issue and effect.
Fourthly,
“Wherefore, the proper and immediate end and aim of the
purpose of God in sending his Son to die for all men was, that he
might, what way it pleased him, save sinners, his justice which
hindered being satisfied,” — as Arminius; or,
“That he might will to save sinners,” — as
Corvinus. “And the intention of Christ was, to make such
satisfaction to the justice of God as that be might obtain to
himself a power of saving, upon what conditions it seemed good to
his Father to prescribe.”
Obs.
1. Whether this was the intention of the Father in sending
his Son or no, let it be judged. Something was said before, upon
the examination of those places of Scripture which describe his
purpose; let it be known from them whether God, in sending of his
Son, intended to procure to himself a liberty to save us if he
would, or to obtain certain salvation for his elect.
Obs.
2. That such a possibility of salvation, or, at the utmost, a
velleity or willing of it, upon an uncertain condition, to be by
us fulfilled, should be the full, proper, and only immediate end
of the death of Christ, will yet scarcely down with tender
spirits.
Obs.
3. The expression, of procuring to himself ability to save,
upon a condition to be prescribed, seems not to answer that
certain purpose of our Savior in laying down his life, which the
Scripture saith was to “save his sheep,” and to
“bring many sons to glory,” as before; nor hath it any
ground in Scripture.
Fifthly,
“Christ, therefore, obtained for all and every one
reconciliation with God, remission of sins, life and salvation;
not that they should actually be partakers of these things, but
that God (his justice now not hindering) might and would
prescribe a condition to be by them fulfilled, whereupon he would
actually apply it, and make them partake of all those good things
purchased by Christ.” And here comes their distinction of
impetration and application, which we before intimated; and
thereabout, in the explication of this assertion, they are
wondrously divided.
Some
say that this proceeds so far, that all men are thereby received
into a new covenant, in which redemption Adam was a common person
as well as in his fall from the old, and all we again restored in
him; so that none shall be damned that do not sin actually
against the condition where they are born, and fall from the
state where into all men are assumed through the death of Christ.
So Bormus, Corvinus; and one of late, in plain terms, that all
are reconciled, redeemed, saved, and justified in Christ; though
how he could not understand (More, p. 10). But others, more
warily, deny this, and assert that by nature we are all children
of wrath, and that until we come to Christ the wrath of God
abideth on all, so that it is not actually removed from any: so
the assertors of the efficacy of grace in France. Again, some say
that Christ by this satisfaction removed original sin in all,
and, by consequent, that only; so that all infants, though of
Turks and Pagans, out of the covenant, dying before they come to
the use of reason, must undoubtedly be saved, that being removed
in all, even the calamity, guilt, and alienation contracted by
our first fall, whereby God may save all upon a new condition.
But others of them, more warily, observing that the blood of
Christ is said to “cleanse from all sin,” ( 1 John 1:7;
1 Peter 1:18, 19; Isaiah 53:6), say he died for all sinners
alike; absolutely for none, but conditionally for all. Farther,
some of them affirm that after the satisfaction of Christ, or the
consideration of it in God’s prescience, it was absolutely
undetermined what condition should be prescribed, so that the
Lord might have reduced all again to the law and covenant of
works; so Corvinus: others, that a procuring of a new way of
salvation by faith was a part of the fruit of the death of
Christ; so More, p. 35.
Again, some of them, that the condition prescribed is by our own strength, with the help of such means as God at all times, and in all places, and unto all, is ready to afford, to be performed; others deny this, and affirm that effectual grace flowing peculiarly from election is necessary to believing: the first establishing the idol of free-will to maintain their own assertion; others overthrowing their own assertion for the establishment of grace. So Amyraldus, Camero, etc.
Moreover, some say that the love of God in the sending of Christ is equal to all: others go a strain higher, and maintain an inequality in the love of God, although he send his Son to die for all, and though greater love there cannot be than that whereby the Lord sent his Son to die for us, as Romans 8:32; and so they say that Christ purchased a greater good for some, and less for others. And here they put themselves upon innumerable uncouth distinctions, or rather (as one calleth them), extinctions, blotting out all sense, and reason, and true meaning of the Scripture. Witness Testardus, Amyraldus, and, as every one may see that can but read English, in T. M[ore.] Hence that multiplicity of the several ends of the death of Christ, — some that are the fruits of his ransom and satisfaction, and some that are I know not what; besides his dying for some so and so, for others so and so, this way and that way; — hiding themselves in innumerable unintelligible expressions, that it is a most difficult thing to know what they mean, and harder to find out their mind than to answer their reasons.
In
one particular they agree well enough, — namely, in denying
that faith is procured or merited for us by the death of Christ.
So far they are all of them constant to their own principles, for
once to grant it would overturn the whole fabric of universal
redemption; but, in assigning the cause of faith they go asunder
again.
Some say that God sent Christ to die for all men, but only conditionally, if they did and would believe; — as though, if they believed, Christ died for them; if not, he died not; and so make the act the cause of its own object: other some, that he died absolutely for all, to procure all good things for them, which yet they should not enjoy until they fulfill the condition that was to be prescribed unto them. Yet all conclude that in his death Christ had no more respect unto the elect than others, to sustain their persons, or to be in their room, but that he was a public person in the room of all mankind.
III.
Concerning the close of all this, in respect of the event and
immediate product of the death of Christ, divers have diversely
expressed themselves; some placing it in the power, some in the
will, of God; some in the opening of a door of grace; some in a
right purchased to himself of saving whom he pleased; some that
in respect of us he had no end at all, but that all mankind might
have perished after he had done all. Others make divers and
distinct ends, not almost to be reckoned, of this one act of
Christ, according to the diversity of the persons for whom he
died, whom they grant to be distinguished and differences by a
foregoing decree; but to what purpose the Lord should send his
Son to die for them whom he himself had determined not to save,
but at least to pass by and leave to remediless ruin for their
sins, I cannot see, nor the meaning of the twofold destination by
some invented. Such is the powerful force and evidence of truth
that it scatter’s all its opposers, and makes them fly to
several hiding-corners; who, if they are not willing to yield and
submit themselves, they shall surely lie down in darkness and
error. None of these, or the like intricate and involved impedite
distinctions, hath [truth] itself need of; into none of such poor
shifts and devices doth it compel its abettors; it needeth not
any windings and turnings to bring itself into a defensible
posture; it is not liable to contradictions in its own
fundamentals: for, without any farther circumstances, the whole
of it in this business may be thus summed up: —
“God,
out of his infinite love to his elect, sent his dear Son in the
fullness of time, whom he had promised in the beginning of the
world, and made effectual by that promise, to die, pay a ransom
of infinite value and dignity, for the purchasing of eternal
redemption, and bringing unto himself all and every one of
those whom he had before ordained to eternal life, for the praise
of his own glory.”
So that freedom from all the evil from which we are delivered, and an enjoyment of all the good things that are bestowed on us, in our traduction from death to life, from hell and wrath to heaven and glory, are the proper issues and effects of the death of Christ, as the meritorious cause of them all; which may, in all the parts of it, be cleared by these few assertions: —
First,
The fountain and cause of God’s sending Christ is his
eternal love to his elect, and to them alone; which I shall not
now farther confirm, reserving it for the second general head of
this whole controversy. Secondly, The value, worth, and dignity
of the ransom which Christ gave himself to be, and of the price
which he paid, was infinite and immeasurable; fit for the
accomplishing of any end and the procuring of any good, for all
and every one for whom it was intended, had they been millions of
men more than ever were created. Of this also afterward. See Acts
20:28, “God purchased his church with his own blood.” 1
Peter 1:18, 19, “Redeemed not with silver and gold, but with
the precious blood of Christ;” and that answering the mind
and intention of Almighty God, John 14:l3, “ As the Father
gave me commandment, even so I do;” who would have such a
price paid as might be the foundation of that economy and
dispensation of his love and grace which he intended, and of the
way whereby he would have it dispensed. Acts 13:38, 39,
“Through
this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him
all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye
could not be justified by the law of Moses.”
2
Corinthians 5:20, 21,
“We
are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us:
we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. For
he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might
be made the righteousness of God in him.”
Thirdly,
The intention and aim of the Father in this great work was, a
bringing of those many sons to glory, — namely, his elect,
whom by his free grace he had chosen from amongst all men, of all
sorts, nations, and conditions, to take them into a new covenant
of grace with himself, the former being as to them, in respect of
the event, null and abolished; of which covenant Jesus Christ is
the first and chief promise, as he that was to procure for them
all other good things promised therein, as shall be proved.
Fourthly,
The things purchased or procured for those persons, — which
are the proper effects of the death and ransom of Christ, in due
time certainly to become theirs in possession and enjoyment,
— are, remission of sin, freedom from wrath and the curse of
the law, justification, sanctification, and reconciliation with
God, and eternal life; for the will of his Father sending him for
these, his own intention in laying down his life for them, and
the truth of the purchase made by him, is the foundation of his
intercession, begun on earth and continued in heaven; whereby he,
whom his Father always hears, desires and demands that the good
things procured by him may be actually bestowed on them, all and
every one, for whom they were procured. So that the whole of what
we assert in this great business is exceedingly clear and
apparent, without any intricacy or the leas difficulty at all;
not clouded with strange expressions and unnecessary divulsions
and tearings of one thing from another, as is the opposite
opinion: which in the next place shall be dealt withal by
arguments confirming the one and everting the other. But because
the whole strength thereof lieth in, and the weight of all lieth
on, that one distinction we before spoke of, by our adversaries
diversely expressed and held out, we will a little farther
consider that, and then come to our arguments, and so to the
answering of the opposed objections.