he himself has done; but upon the account of what his surety has done. For Christ has satisfied justice fully for his sin; so that it is but a thing that may be challenged that God should now release the believer from punishment; it is but a piece of justice that the creditor should release the debtor, when he has fully paid the debt. And again, the believer may demand eternal life, because it has been merited by Christ, by a merit of condignity."

19

Another extract I will here give you from the writings of a more ancient pious divine, containing the same sentiment, and expressed in still bolder terms. His words are as follow: "He [Christ] fully merited, by way of purchase and complete payment made unto divine justice, the removal of all that evil we had deserved, and the enjoyment of all that good we needed, and could desire; and that by a valuable consideration tendered into the hand of divine justice in that behalf. However it is out of free mercy and rich grace that redemption is given to us; (for its out of mercy that Christ is given, that he gave his life, that both are bestowed upon us and not upon the world:) yet in regard to the Lord Jesus Christ himself, and the full payment he hath laid down, out of his own proper cost and charges, his own blood, it is justice it should be bestowed. and by justice it may be challenged, as that which he hath purchased in a righteous proceeding."

This he afterwards applies in a use of reproof to diffident believers, in the following words: "Why? have you laid down the purchase? Take possession then into your hand. Have you tendered the payment? Take the commodity It is your own; nay,

your due. Ile that knows at what the purchase will come, and hath the sum in sight, and under his hand,

can lay it down upon the nail; pay it, take it; here is one and there's the other Here's the blood of Jesus which thou art well pleased with, hast accepted of, therefore, Lord, give me my due: that comfort, that peace, that wisdom, that assurance, which I stand in need of."*

This notion of the atonement and imputed righteousness, it must be acknowledged, is frequently to be met with in our most orthodox books, though it may not be often improved just in the manner last quoted. But we may call no man master, or father. We must search the scriptures, whether those things be so.— Where do we find our infallible teacher, instructing his disciples to make such challenges from the Father, even on his account, of deliverance from all evil, and the bestowment of all good, as their just due? Did he not direct them humbly to pray, for even a competency of outward comforts, as of God's free gift: and for the pardon of their many offences, of his mere mercy? "Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors." He encouraged them indeed to seek unto God for all needed good, in his name, with an assurance of obtaining their requests; but he ever taught them to seek in the way of petition, not of demand. "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the Father, in my name, he will give it you." Did our Saviour, that we find, ever insinuate an idea that the salvation of his redeemed ones was of debt from the Father? Did he not, in the most explicit manner, acknowledge the contrary? “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and of earth,

* Mr. Thomas Hooker, first Minister in Hartford.

because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight."

Do the inspired apostles, in any of their epistles or discourses, teach us that the salvation of believers, or any part of it, is of justice to the exclusion of grace? Do they not constantly express themselves most clearly in opposition to this sentiment?" By the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord. He that spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things ?"

The doctrine that justification, and all subsequent, as well as antecedent blessings, are free gifts-matters of mere grace, is certainly a doctrine of scripture.But still the great question remains; how is this doctrine self-consistent? The redemption that is in Jesus Christ implies full satisfaction for sin, and the highest possible merit of eternal life; how then can being jus. tified through this redemption be of free grace?— What grace can there be in cancelling a debt when full payment hath been made? or in liberating a captive when an adequate ransom hath been received? or in reconveying an alienated inheritance after ample recompence? how is this difficulty to be removed?

I answer; just as other difficulties are removed into which we are led by following the allusions and metaphors of scripture too closely. We are not to imagine a resemblance, in all points, between the redemption of Christ, and redemptions among mankind, any more than we are in other instances when divine things are spoken of after the manner of men: any more

than we are to imagine that God is angry just as we are, or that he repents just as we do, or that he hath an arm, and hands, and eyes like ours, because these things are ascribed to him in a figurative manner.— From the use of the words ransom, and redemption, we are no more obliged to suppose a literal purchase, or an obligatory satisfaction in what our Saviour did and suffered, than we are to suppose there was occasion for such kind of satisfaction, and for the same reasons as among men. We are selfish, and looking for gain every one from his quarter: but surely we ought not to form a like idea of the infinitely benevolent and ever blessed God. Certainly, "He who so loved the world as to give his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him might not perish, but have everlasting life," would have pardoned and saved the world' without any atonement or vicarious righteousness, had nothing but want of goodness prevented. The thing was, sin could not be pardoned, and sinners saved, consistently with just law and good government; and therefore not consistently with the glory of God or the good of the universe. The removal of this just obstacle to the reign of grace, not the laying God under obligation, for value received, was what rendered the redemption of Christ necessary and the former of these, not the latter, is the end effected by his obedience and death.

It hath indeed been said, in the present dispute, that a door could not be opened for the salvation of mankind, without making it necessary in justice that they should be saved. That justice requires whatever is consistent with justice. But this is a new and strange position. The perfection of justice no more requires that every thing which is just should be done, than the perfection of truth requires that every thing which is

true should be spoken. If justice required whatever is consistent with justice, no grace could be exercised— no free favour could ever be bestowed in any instance, either by God or man: nothing more than mere justice could ever be done. That justice which excludes grace, which is the only proper notion of justice, at least the only one now under consideration, certainly doth not require many things which might be just. Justice did not require that God should give his only begotten Son, yet this was consistent with justice. Christ was not obliged in justice to consent to become. incarnate and to pour out his soul unto death, yet there was nothing inconsistent with justice in his so doing. In like manner it is now consistent with justice for God to pardon sinners through the propitiation of Christ, yet this is not what justice requires. Grace requires that the guilty should be forgiven, provided it may be done consistently with justice, and without doing hurt upon the whole; but this doth make it no more grace. Wisdom requires whatsoever things are for the best. Goodness requires whatsoever things are for the greatest universal good But justice, as excluding grace, requires only whatsoever things are deserved.

Still, perhaps, it will be said, Were not the sufferings of Christ really adequate to all the punishment due to us for sin? and did not his obedience actually merit eternal life by a merit of condignity? and have not believers, at least, a just right and title to the atonement and merit of Christ? Is not his righteousness imputed to them so as to become actually theirs? And if these things be so, where can there be any grace in their justification? In answer to all this, let me observe the following things.