there is an express commutation, or interchange of obedience and reward.

XXXIII. And the thing speaks for itself. For as there is a covenant between the Father and the Son; when thou shalt make bis soul (if the soul of the Son shall devote himself) an offering for sin, Is. liii. 10. upon performing the condition, the Son acquired a right to the reward, and so has a merit according to the covenant. Nay, as it is not the obedience of a mere man, but of Christ God-man, an infinite person, it is also of an infinite value, consequently bears the justest proportion to the greatest corresponding glory; and thus far it is a merit of condignity, as it is called; such as no mere creature is capable to acquire.

XXXIV. The passages of Scripture which represent the humiliation of Christ as the antecedent to the subsequent glory, are not contrary to this doctrine. For every cause is an antecedent, though every antecedent is not a cause. And the merit of Christ for himself is so far from being prejudicial to his merit for us, that on the contrary, they are inseparably conjoined. For if he merited for himself, in order to be the head of the elect in glory, and to receive gifts for them, he certainly at the same time, merited for the elect, in order to their being glorified, and enriched with gifts becoming the mystical body of Christ. Neither by this doctrine is the excellency of the love of Christ towards us diminished, tho' in his state of humiliation, he had likewise an eye to his own exaltation. For he might have been glorious as to himself, without going to it by this way of death, and the pains of hell. Besides he looked upon his own glory as the beginning and cause of ours, and whose fruit was all to redound to us. And it was the highest pitch. of love, that he would not be glorious without us. Nor should the word xapıŝiobai, given, which the Apostle uses, Phil. ii. 9. be urged too closely, as if the rewards there mentioned were of mere grace freely given to Christ, without any regard to his obedience, as the cause of his right or title to them. For Paul there expressly asserts, that they were given to Christ on account of his obedience. And that term does not always denote mere grace. Hesychius, that very excellent master of Greek, explains it by pāvlà xixapiopiva, to do what is acceptable. But those things also are called acceptable, which are due: the Greeks say, Quis xixagiopia moui, to do what is acceptable to the gods. Whence the same thing, which here, in respect to Christ is called xà, is Isaiah xlix. 4. called his work, or the reward of his work, adjudged to him by the just judgment of God. "My judgemnt is with the Lord, and my work with my God." So that the plain meaning of this passage in Paul is this; because

Christ

Christ submitted himself to the Father, by free or voluntary obedience, the Father therefore also rewarded him by giving him a name above every name.

CHAP. IV.

Of the Person of the Surety.

1. H AVING with some degree of care explained the nature of the covenant between the Father and the Son, it is fit we treat a little more distinctly of the surety himself, concerning whom these are the principal particulars; and first we shall consider the PERSON of the SURETY, and what is requisite to constitute such and then that SATISFACTION which he undertook to make by his suretiship; the TRUTH, NECESSITY, EFFECTS, and EXTENT, of which we shall distinctly deduce from the Scriptures.

II. These four things are required as necessary to the PERSON of a SURETY, that he might be capable to engage for us. 1st, That he be true man, consisting of a human soul and body. 2dly, That he be a righteous and holy man, without any spot of sin. 3dly, That he be true and eternal God. 4thly, That he be all this in the unity of person. Of each severally and in

order.

III. That our surety ought to be true man, is what Paul declares more than once, Heb. ii. 10, 11, 16, 17. Exgxi, it became him, it behoved him, it was becoming God that he who sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, be all of one, of one human seed, so that they might call each other brethren. In all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, in order to be their Gocl or kinsman-redeemer: for verily be took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, (did not take upon him to deliver angels, but to deliver the seed of Abraham.)

IV. This assumption, or taking, does not seem to me to denote the assuming human nature into personal union, but the assuming of the elect, in order to their deliverance. For, 1st, The causal conjuction for, indicates, that the Apostle uses this middle term [or this as an argument] to prove, what he had said v. 14. about the partaking of flesh and blood, and which v. 17. he deduces by the illative particle, wherefore. But the middle term must be distinguished from the conclusion: and so there is no tautology in the Apostle's very just inference. 2dly, Since the assumption of the human nature was long before the

2

Apostle

Apostle wrote those things, he would not speak of it in the present tense, as he does here, but in the preterperfect, as he did ver. 14. 3dly, As it would be an uncouth expression to say, the Son of God assumed or took man, if we suppose he only meant, that the Son of God assumed human nature; and in like manner this other expression would appear harsh, the Son of God did not assume angels, to denote that he did not assume the nature of angels. 4thly, In the Scripture stile außantal signifies to deliver by laying hold of one: thus Mat. xiv. 31. "and immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, andλagro uru caught him:" and this signification is most opposite to the context. For, in the preceding verse, the Apostle had said, that Christ delivered them who thro' fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage, alluding it seems to the bondage of Egypt. But God is represented to us in Scripture, as with a stretched out hand laying hold on, and bringing his people out of Egypt, Jer. xxxi. 32. " in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt. Which the Apostle expresses by saying, " in the day when I took them by the hand, 'to lead them out of the land of Egypt:" where we have the same word außavelas. And in profane authors, it denotes to claim something as one's property, and say, according to Virgil, these are mine. Thus Plato, XII. de legibus v ræs x:x]n• μέιος ἦν καὶ μηδεὶς επιλάβητας, « if one is in possession of any thing, and none claims it as his own." To this answers the Hebrew Which makes me, with many learned men, think that these words of the Apostle, whose genuine sense we have been enquiring into rather contain an argument for the incarnation of Christ, than assert the incarnation itself.

X. Moreover, it may be proved by invincible arguments, that it was necessary our surety should be man. Let us pause a little here, and see whether we may not possibly search this truth to the bottom. The legal covenant entered into with the first man, is founded on the very nature of God; at least with respect to the commands of the covenant, and the threatenings annexed to them. So that it would be a contra diction if these precepts of the law of nature should not be proposed to man, or if man, after the violation of them, should be saved without a satisfaction; which I now pre-suppose as having proved it before, and shall further confirm it in the sequel. I therefore proceed: this satisfaction can be nothing else but the performing the same precepts and the undergoing the same penalty with which God had threatened the sinner. Because from our hypothesis it appears to be unworthy of God to grant life to man but on condition of his obeying those VOL. I. • precepts

Bb

precepts; nor possible for the truth and justice of God to be satisfied, unless the punishment which the sinner deserved should be inflicted. I add, that as those precepts were given to man, so no creature but man could perform them. This appears, 1st, Because the law, which is suited to the nature of man, requires, that he love God with all his soul, and serve him with all the members of his body, seeing both are God's. None can do this but man, who consists of soul and body. 2dly, The same law requires the love of our neighbour; but none is our neighbour but man, who is of the same blood with us. To this purpose is that emphatical saying of God to Israel, Isa. Iviii. 7. "that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh." And thus our surety ought to cherish us, as one does his own flesh, and consequently we ought to be of his flesh and of his bones, Eph. v. 30. 3dly, It requires also, that we lay down our lives for our brethren, which we have shewn was contained in the royal law of love, and none but man can do this. For who else is our brother? Heb. ii. 11.. or who besides could lay down his life for us. No other creature but man could undergo the same sufferings, as hunger, thirst, weariness, death. It became God to threaten sinning man with these things: that even the body, which was the instrument of sin, might also undergo its share of the punishment. And after the threatening, the truth of God could not but inflict these things, either on the sinner or the surety. The dignity of the sufferer might indeed sufficiently compensate for the duration of the punishment. But the truth of God admits of no commutation of the species of punishment. Wherefore our surety was "partaker of flesh and blood that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death," Heb. ii. 14. All these things put together, incontestably prove that our surety ought to be man; that he might satisfy the law for us.

VI. This is what the Apostle means when joining these two together by an inseparable connection, Gal. iv. 4. " made of a woman, made under the law." For he intimates, that the principal and immediate scope and end of Christ's incarnation was, that in the human nature he might be subject to the law, to which it is under obligation and so that God, according to the same right, might renew with him the same covenant which he had before entered into with the first man; which he could not have done with any other created nature, without a contradiction.

VII.. There is this further consideration : our surety ought to have such a nature, in order to our being united to him in

one

one body. For it is necessary that the satisfaction of one be as it were the satisfaction of all, and the Spirit who fits for a holy and happy life, should flow from him as the head to us as his members; and so that he become "the saviour of the body," Eph. v. 23. The Scriptures frequently call this mystical union a marriage. But it is the inviolable law of marriage that the persons married be of the same nature: " and they two shall be one flesh," Gen. ii. 24. Paul hath taught us, that the mystery of the spiritual marriage of the church with Christ lies concealed in these words, Eph. v. 35, 32.

VIII. We observed that the second condition required in the surety was, that he be "a RIGHTEOUS and HOLY MAN: in all things like unto his brethren, yet without sin," Heb. iv. 15. This holiness required that from the first moment of his conception he should be free from all guilt and stain of sin of his own; and on the contrary, be endowed with the original rectitude of the image of God: that moreover, through the whole course of his life, he should keep himself from all sio, and perfectly fulfil all righteousness: and in fine, constantly persevere in that purity to the end, without yielding to any temptation.

IX. And this also is clear from what has been already said. For seeing our surety ought to save us, according to the first treaty of the covenant, whereby perfect holiness was required of man, it also beloved him to be perfectly holy. And as sin shut the gates of heaven, nothing but holiness could set them oper again. This the Apostle urges, Rom. v. 19. "for, as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." But that obedience excludes all sin. And then, how could a sinner satisfy for others who cannot satisfy for himself, for by one sin he forfeits his own soul? "For who is this (from among sinful men) that can engage his heart to approach unto me?" says God, Jer. xxx. 21. Or who but one who is free from every sin can be our priest, familiarly to approach to God, and offer an acceptable sacrifice and prevalent intercession to him?" Such an High-Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners," Heb. vii. 26. He then can offer himself, as a lamb "without blemish and without spot," 1 Pet. i. 19. whose offering may be to God "for a sweet-smelling savour," Eph. v. 2. For none else who cannot offer himself to God "without spot, can purge the conscience from dead works," Heb. ix. 14. This was formerly signified by the legal purity of Bb 2

the