« AnteriorContinuar »
give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
The sinner who dies in his sins, will undoubte edly suffer, in his own person, the curse of the law as the just recompense of crime. By this curse, however, we are not to understand the punishment denounced against sin in the aggregate, but the punishment connected with his own personal transgressions. So, when it is said, That Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us; it is not to be supposed that he sustained the aggregate punishment denounced by the law against the whole of our apostate race; for, were this the case, one man is as much redeemed as another, and on the ground of that redemption should, in justice to Christ, be exempt from suffering; but that curse, or debt of suffering, which attached to those on whose account he became a Surety, whose sins were imputed to him, and with which he became, by his infinitely gracious and voluntary consent, legally chargeable.
It was for his sheep that our blessed Lord laid down his life. "He bore the guilt of no others than those to whom he is a head, who are his Body, and for whom he became a Surety. For that was the foundation on which sin was imputed to him: and therefore the sins of such persons only were imputed to him who are related to him as members. They are the Church which he loved, and gave himself for it, that he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but, that it should be holy and without blemish.'
If this statement be denied, and it be said, That Christ sustained the curse denounced against sin in the aggregate; then all men are redeemed from that curse, and all must be saved. But the fact is otherwise: numbers perish in their sins; suffer me therefore to ask, with an old Member of Parliament, when addressing the Bishop of Lincoln, “ If the Saviour bore the sins of every individual, and blotted them out by his own atoning blood, how comes it that any perish? Surely it will not be said, That Christ redeemed those from the curse of the law, who suffer that curse in their own persons! The supposition is absurd.
Now what is the curse of the law, but the infiction of the evil of suffering for the evil of sin? If therefore Christ suffered for those that perish, he must have effected their redemption; but if he did not suffer for them, he must (unless a part be equal to the whole) have suffered less than he would have done, had the weight of their sufferings been added to what he endured for the redemption of those who will finally be saved. This conclusion will, I think, inevitably follow from the certainty of there being degrees of punishment in a future state. There is no penal suffering but for sin, and so much suffering as is deducted from what sin in the aggregate de
merits, must in such proportion unquestionably . Jessen those sufferings.
· That evangelical prophet Isaiah, says, when refering to the humiliation and sufferings of our Lord, The chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. Now
observes Mr. Brooks, because some produce this scripture to justify that corrupt doctrine of universal redemption, give me leave to argue thus from it: That chastisement for sin which was laid upon the person of Jesus Christ, procured peace for them for whom he was so chastised; but there was no peace procured for the reprobate, or those who should never believe; and therefore the chastisement of their sin was not laid upon Christ. Further; by his stripes we are healed: whence I reason thus; the stripes inflicted upon Christ, are intended, and do become healing medicines for them for whom they are inflicted; but they never become healing medicines for reprobates or unbelievers; and therefore their stripes were not laid upon Christ.'
The learned Du Moulin, who was chosen to represent the French Protestants at the Synod of Dort, observes, when speaking on this subor ject, “If Christ by his death obtained reconciliation for Cain, Pharaoh, Judas, &c. it must needs be that Christ redeemed them: but he hath not redeemed them, because they always do, and shall remain captive: nor is it
credible that Christ would pay the price of redemption for them whom he knew were never to be freed; or that Satan would take away those souls redeemed by Christ with so great a price.'
Christ, says Dr. Manton, will infallibly, and without miscarrying, obtain the end of his death. He died not at uncertainties, nor laid down his life at a venture, that some might be saved if they would; but his intention is fixed. He laid down his life for his sheep, John x. 17; for his Church, Ephes. v. 26; for his people. These expressions are exclusive; those and not all.'
The four divines who appeared at the Synod of Dort, in behalf of the English church; viz. the Bishops Carleton, Hall, Salisbury, and Dr. Ward, remark, when writing to the Archbishop of Canterbury on the subject of redemption• Nor do we, with the Remonstrants, leave at large the benefit of our Saviour's death, as only propounded loosely to all-but we expressly avouch, for the behoof of the elect, a special intention, both in Christ's offering, and God the