Several sermons preach'd on the whole eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans eighteen of which preach'd on the first, second, third, fourth verses are here published : wherein the saints exemption from condemnation, the mystical union, the spiritual life, the dominion of sin and the spirits agency in freeing from it, the law's inability to justifie and save, Christ's mission, eternal sonship, incarnation, his being an expiatory sacrifice, fulfilling the laws righteousness (which is imputed to believers) are opened, confirmed, vindicated, and applied / by Tho. Jacomb.

ROM. 8.3, 4.

—And for sin, condemned sin in the Flesh: That the righteous∣ness of the Law might be ful∣filled in us,—

CHAP. XIII. Of Christ's being a Sacrifice, and expiating Sin thereby.

A Fifth Head in the Words discussed, viz. the End of God in sending his own &c. or the Effect thereof. How the Wis∣dom of God is secured by this End. Of the placing of the Words [for sin]. The whole a little descanted upon. What the condemning of sin is; opened more gener∣ally, more particularly in three things. The condemning of sin [for sin] opened: a twofold interpretation gi∣ven of it. Of the Flesh in which sin is said to be con∣demned. The Observation raised from the Words: where

• 1. Of Christ's being a Sacrifice for Sin. How he excels the Old Law-Sacrifices, and of their reference to him. Six things in those Sacrifices, which are all to be found in Christ, the true Sacrifice. 'Tis enquired 1. What a kind of Sacrifice he was? proved that he was an expia∣tory Sacrifice. Of the difference and distinction of the Jewish Sacrifices. Four Heads insisted upon for the confirming of the main Truth: As
  • (1.) that our sins

• • were the meritorious Cause of Christ's Sufferings:
  • (2.) that he did substitute himself in the Sinners stead: (where two Questions are briefly answered,
    • (1) Whether he underwent the same punishment that was due to the Sinner, or only that which was equivalent thereunto?
    • (2) Whether he took the guilt of sin upon himself, or only submitted to the punishment thereof?)—
    • (3.) that he was killed and slain and his blood shed, in correspon∣dency with the Levitical expiatory Sacrifices.
    • (4.) this is prov'd from the Ends and Effects of his Death, viz.
    Atonement and Expiation; (both of which are opened). Of the concurrence of the Heathens in their notions about Sacrifices.—'Tis enquir'd
  (2.) When and where Christ was an expiatory Sacrifice? 'tis answered, when he dy'd upon the Cross.
• 2. Of the Effect of his Sacrifice, the condemning of Sin. Parallel expressions cited. Of the nature of the expiati∣on of Sin: Of the extent of it with respect to the Subject and Object. Whether were all Sins expiated by the Law-Sacrifices? Use 1. I infer from the premises
  • (1.) The verity of Christ's Satisfaction:
  • (2.) The true Nature and principal Ends of his Death:
  • (3.) The vanity and falshood of all humane satisfactions:
  • (4.) The true notion of the Lord's Supper:
  • (5.) The happiness of Believers under the Gospel above theirs who liv'd under the Law.
  • (6.) The excellency of Christ's Priesthood and Sacrifice.
  • (7.) The Evil of Sin.
  • (8.) The severity of God's Justice.
  Use 2. Se∣veral Dutys urged from hence: as Holiness, the Love of Christ &c. Use 3. This improved several ways for the Comfort of Believers.

* 1.1IN the preceding Words [God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful Flesh,] Four things have been observed and opened; in these now read a Fifth Head offers it self to our consideration: and that is the Effect of Christ's mission, incarnation, and of what

followed thereupon, or God's End in all this. Did he pitch upon so admirable a Way and Method? surely some high and glorious Effect must be produced thereby; and so there was, for thereby sin was condemned: and surely too, therein the Wise God must pro∣pound to himself some great and very considerable End to be ac∣complished; and so he did, for he aim'd at nothing lower than that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in Believers.

In the Words then we have both the Effect (what God did by his own Son as first assuming & then suffering in flesh), and also the End of God in his taking this strange and wonderful course: for these two though they be distinct in themselves, and carry in them notions somewhat different, yet here in this place they both are alike applicable to the matter spoken of, and it to them. If it be consi∣dered with respect to God's intention, so it falls under the nature of an End; if with respect to his execution (of what he intended), so it falls under the nature of an Effect. Therefore upon the one∣ness and coalition of these two and the equal applicableness of the matter to each, whereas there are two branches in the Text (each of which contains distinct matter in it), in the former the thing is express'd under the notion of an Effect [and for sin condemned sin in the flesh], in the latter under the notion of an End [that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us].

* 1.2It pleasing God to send his own Son &c. his Wisdom would have been lyable to impeachment, if

• (1.) he had not effected some great thing thereby; if
• (2.) (which indeed should have been first mentioned) he had not designed some great thing therein: For the Wisdom of an Agent lies not only in his having an end in what he doth, but in his having such an end as shall be proportionable to the means which he pitches upon; if they be high and the end but low, this speaks a defect in point of

Wisdom; for that ever shews it self as in the fitting of the means to the end, so in the proportioning of the end to the means. If therefore the blessed God will single out such a medium as the sending of his own Son &c. he then stands en∣gag'd upon the account of his Wisdom, to propound to himself such an end as may be answerable to that medium: which therefore accordingly he did, in asmuch as in that great act he had this great End (or Ends), the satisfying of his Justice, the expiating of Sin, the fulfilling of the Law &c. these were Ends worthy of such Means as the Coming, Incarnation, Death of his own Son. Now all these are set down in the Words before us, in which therefore you have that which is a full vindication, nay the highest manifestation of God's infinite Wisdom.

* 1.3I begin with the first Effect or End here specify'd [and for Sin, condemned Sin in the Flesh]. At my first entrance upon the whole Paragraph, I touch'd upon the reading of this Clause (there being some difference amongst Expositors about it), therefore that I will not again insist upon, only let me take notice of another difference among them which was not there mentioned. That refers to the placing of the Words; for whereas we take in [for sin] into this Branch,* 1.4 Some would have it placed in the former, thus, God sending [for sin] his own Son, in the likeness of sinful Flesh, condemned sin in the Flesh. But though this ranking of them may possibly seem to some to make the words run more smoothly, yet if it be admitted of, the conjunctive particle [and] must be quite expung'd; which I should be loth to submit unto because of its special significancy & em∣phasis in this place: partly as it heightens the thing spoken of, and intimates the wonderfulness of the way in which it was brought about, and partly as it notes the† 1.5 joyning together of that here mentioned with that which went before; God did not only send his own Son in our Flesh, but (which is to be superadded to that as an Effect or Consequent thereof) he also in that flesh for sin condem∣ned sin. I will therefore keep to our methodizing of the Words, and if you take them as here they lie, there will be no necessity ei∣ther of putting in or putting out: yet if you will go by their sense then you may reade them with this addition, And by a Sacrifice for sin condemned sin in the Flesh.

* 1.6[And for sin condemned sin in the flesh:] good and blessed Words! No condemnation to them who are in Christ (Vers. 1.)? Sin it self condemned (Vers. 3.)? what could be spoken higher to raise the thankfulness, encourage the faith, heighten the joy of sincere Christians! The word [condemned] is not so terrible when apply'd to the Sinner, but 'tis as comfortable when apply'd to sin it self: that which had been the condemning is now the condemned thing, how may a gracious Soul rejoyce at this! The non-condemnation of persons spoken of in the first Verse, is secured by and grounded up∣on the condemnation of sin in this, for both must not be condemn'd; if sin be condemn'd, the sinner shall not. Observe here, sin was the thing which God fell upon and dealt thus severely with: the Apostle had told us the Law was weak (unable to help poor fal'n man), whereupon he saith God sent his own Son; but wherefore

did he so do? was it that he might fall upon this Law, and con∣demn the condemning Law? O no! 'twas so far from that, that he would rather have it fulfilled (for so it follows Vers. 4.), he had no evil eye at all upon his Law for that was good; upon what when? why upon sin, for that was evil and very evil; Christ was sent that sin only might be condemn'd. And no wonder that God was so set against it and resolv'd upon this severe process a∣gainst it, it being the principal Offender, the arch Traytor and Rebel against himself, the only object of his hatred, the bold opposer of his glory, the great obstructer of his Grace, the cursed fomenter of breaches 'twixt himself and his creatures, the murderer of Souls &c. did not such a malefactor highly deserve to be condemn'd? yes surely, and therefore so it shall be. O (saith God) I must take a, course with this sin, I must and I will dispatch it out of the way, and then my work is done; all my gracious designs will then be carried on without any let or impediment, then the hap∣piness of my people will be sure and full, neither my own Wrath, nor the Curse of my Law, nor the sting of Death shall then be able to hurt them. Upon such grounds as these God would have sin condemn'd, and he was so set upon it that in order thereunto he will on purpose send his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, yea in that flesh to offer up himself as a Sacrifice, and so to bring a∣bout sins condemnation.

* 1.7But to come to the close handling of the Words! They being somewhat obscure, my first work must be to open them (that I may the better make way for the main Observation which they re∣solve themselves into). There are three things in them to be ex∣plain'd,

• 1. The condemning of Sin.
• 2. The condemning of Sin for sin.
• 3. The condemning of Sin in the Flesh.

* 1.81. What doth the Apostle mean by the condemning of sin? and for sin [condemned sin &c]. The word in its usual acceptation is apply'd to Persons rather than to Things; yet in such a sense 'tis properly enough applicable to them also, (viz.) as it signifies the disallowing, disapproving, sentencing, or judging of them to be so and so evil: according to which signification, sin may as truly be said to be condemn'd as the sinner himself in any other notion. But this will not reach the full scope and emphasis of the Word in this place; for unquestionably there's a great deal more intended in God's condemning sin, than barely his sentencing or judging it to be

a very evil thing; though Christ had never come in flesh nor suffered in Flesh yet God would thus have condemned Sin: its condemnation is here brought in as a singular effect of the Grace of God to Sinners, but (according to this stating of it) it would only be an effect of his Holiness, not at all of his Grace; he may thus judge of Sin and yet the Sinner perish by it. 'Tis very true, that God in the Death of his Son did in this respect signally condemn Sin; O in that he made it to appear what thoughts he had of Sin, what an evil thing he judg'd it to be, how he was set against it &c. but yet this is not the only thing, no nor the main thing held forth in this expression of God's condemning Sin.

Well! for the right understanding of that I conceive we must borrow our light from Condemnation amongst Men, for though sin be not a person yet its being condemned will best be known by what is proper to condemned persons. Amongst us malefactors are seiz'd upon, brought to tryal, arraign'd, prov'd guilty, sentene'd to die (if their Offence be capital), then the Sentence is executed upon them, to cut them off that they may do no more mischief; and this is their being condemn'd: just so (so far as the nature of the thing would admit of) virtually and analogically all this was done by God in Christ's Death against Sin. It had been an heinous malefactor, guilty of high and notorious crimes, had done inex∣pressible mischiefs, for all which God will arraign, judge, sen∣tence, cut it off, that it also may do no more mischief to his peo∣ple, and this is its condemnation. Divers Expositors in their open∣ing of the Words conceive of Sin here as a Person, and according∣ly they open its being condemn'd by this allusive and analogical no∣tion; whatever is commonly done amongst Men in their judicial processes against great Offenders, all that (in effect) was done by God through Christ's death against sin; and so he condemn'd it.

* 1.9But not to take up with Generals this may be more particularly open'd in three things:

• 1. God by Christ condemn'd Sin as he abolished its power. Sin's condemnation is its* 1.10 abolition, wherein doth that lie? why (part∣ly) in the taking away of its power, in the divesting it of that Rule and Command which it had over Sinners for a long time: thus God condemn'd or abolished sin, he put an end to its reign and dominion, pull'd it off from the throne, turn'd it out of Office and authority, yea, adjudged it to die for all the Evils of which it had been guilty. Thus 'tis with condemned men; upon the passing of the condemnatory Sentence upon them they are ipso facto dispossess'd

• of all their power and authority, and further than this too they must suffer the penalty of death for what they have done; so answerably it was with Sin in God's dealings with it. It had acted the Tyrants part in and over the world a great while, had domineer'd and lorded it over its poor Subjects at a strange rate, did with men what it pleas'd; O but in the Flesh of Christ God condemn'd it (that is) he broke it in its power, brought it down to some purpose, stripp'd it of that absolute, illimited dominion which it had before: Christ's cross was the ruine of sins throne. And not only so, but there's a sentence of death too pass'd upon it; it shall not only lose its power but its life also, God will have it kill'd, slain, put to death in all who have an interest in Christ's Merits, he would not suffer such a malefactor to live, hee'l rid the world of it. This condemnatory sentence was pass'd upon it long ago, which though it be but gradually and in part executed whilst the Saints are here below, yet when they shall once ascend to God then it shall be fully executed; insomuch that then sin shall quite be taken out of the way, and shall not have so much as a being in them in the glorify'd state. Thus many* 1.11 Interpreters do open the condemning of sin; and† 1.12 Socinus likes this interpretation so well that he contends for it but fiercely opposes those which follow.
• * 1.132. Sins Condemnation lies in the abolition or expiation of its guilt. It here properly notes the taking away of that which was the hurt∣ful, destructive, mischievous part of Sin. Condemned men can do no hurt, let them be never so hurtful before yet when once the sen∣tence of Condemnation is pass'd upon them they can be so no longer: Sin had been a very huriful thing (and would have been so still) to precious Souls, but God in the flesh of his Son (as suf∣fering and satisfying) put a stop to it, took it out of the way, con∣demn'd it (that is) disabled it from doing the hurt it had done before, and remov'd that in it which was of so hurtful a nature. What was that? I answer, its guilt; O that's an hurtful thing indeed! it binds the Sinner over to answer at God's tribunal for all the evils commited by him, exposes him to the Wrath of the great God, renders him lyable to a Sentence of eternal death: but

• now it pleased God for sin to condemn sin, (i.e.) by Christ's being a Sacrifice to expiate this guilt of sin which in it self was so per∣nicious and hurtful, so that believers should not lie under it or e∣ternally suffer for it. Now this is that explication of the Word which is most commonly given by the best* 1.14 Expositors, and I pre∣fer it before the former upon these Reasons:
  • 1: As to the abolishing of Sins power that the Apostle had spo∣ken to already in the foregoing verse, the Law of the Spirit &c. and he instances in the Spirit there as he doth in the Son here. Now (according to what was said before) as 'tis the proper act of the Spirit to free from Sins power (therefore that must be understood there), so 'tis the proper act of the Son to free from Sins guilt (therefore that must be understood here).
  • 2: The Word here used [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] all along in Scripture points to the guilt of sin and the punishment inflicted thereupon, never to its power or dominion; (for the proof of which several Texts might be cited if it was deny'd). 'Tis usually apply'd to the Sinner, here only (if I well ••emember) 'tis apply'd to sin it self; and in this different application it carries a different sense: for as 'tis elsewhere apply'd to the Sinner, it notes the imputation of guilt to him and the passing of a condemnatory sentence upon him for that guilt, but as 'tis here apply'd to sin it notes the expiation or abolition of its guilt; yet this doth not wealien what I have said, because in both references (though in a different sense) it still points to guilt and punishment (which is enough for my pur∣pose).
  • 3: The Apostle speaks of that abolition of Sin which was effected in Christ's Flesh; therefore it must be understood of the abolition of its guilt rather than of its power, that being the thing which was most directly and immediately done in Christ's Flesh.
  • 4: 'Tis that condemning sin which is for sin (i.e.) by a Sacrifice for sin; wherefore it must be taken in that sense which best suits with what was done in and by Sacrifices. Now they abolished sin not so much by turning men from it, or by lessening its power (though that might follow as a Consequent upon them), as by the* 1.15 expia∣ting of its guilt: this was the proper and primary effect of the Le∣••itical Sacrifices, in allusion to which when Christ (the true Sa∣crifice)

• ...
  • is said to purge away sin, to purifie &c. you are to under∣stand those expressions as respecting the expiation of Sins guilt (as I shall have occasion further to prove in what will follow). For these reasons (though I would not exclude wholly the former sense, yet) I prefer this before it.
• * 1.163. There is a* 1.17 third interpretation put upon the Word; namely God's condemning sin was his punishing of it in Christ's per∣son, or his exacting of Christ that punishment which was due to the Sinner himself. For this Condemning must be joyn'd with that which follows [in the Flesh] and expounded by that; and then the meaning will be this, For sin God condemned sin in the flesh (that is) he fell upon sin, severely punish'd it, inflicted the curse and punish∣ment due to us for it in and upon the Person of his own Son; he† 1.18 laid the iniquities of Believers upon Christ, and then punished them in him, so that he bore that penalty which Sinners themselves should have undergone: God did of him in our Nature paenas peccato debitas exigere, or maledictionem nobis debitam irrogare. Man having fin'd either he himself or his surety must suffer: the punishment thereby deserv'd, God will have sin punnish'd some∣where; therefore Christ having put himself into the Sinners stead he must bear the punishment due to the Sinner, for though God will so far‖ 1.19 relax his Law as to admit of a substitution or com∣mutation as to the Person suffering, yet he will have its penalty in∣flicted either upon the proper Offender himself, or upon the Savi∣our who was willing to interpose for the Offender so as to suffer what he should have suffered: and God accordingly dealing with∣him and proceeding against him in the laying of the punishment due for Sin upon him, this was his condemning Sin in the flesh of Christ. I am not now to prove the truth of the thing (of that hereafter), at present I'me only shewing how 'tis held forth in the Word which I am opening: so much for the first thing what this condemning of Sin is.

* 1.202. The Second thing that needs explaination is the condemning sin [for sin], what may our Apostle mean by this for sin?* 1.21 Austine gives a threefold sense of it:

• (1.) For sin, (that is) by that flesh which look'd like to sinful flesh; which therefore might be called sin, since (as he saith) the resemblances of things do usually pass under the names of the things which they resemble: by that flesh sin was condemn'd.—
• (2.) For Sin he makes to be as much as by a Sacrifice for Sin.—
• (3.) He expounds it of the Sin of the Jews, not as heightning it (in which sense all the Greek Expositors

• take it,) but as pointing to the effect of it, by that sin of theirs in crucifying Christ eventually Sin was condemn'd or expiated. But these things must be further enquired into!

* 1.22'Tis in our Translation exactly as 'tis in the Original, equally concise in both, and as the One is to be filled up so is the Other also. The Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying of or for, accordingly 'tis rendred both wayes: Some reading it of Sin (as the Old Version, Anselme, the Greek Interpreters generally &c.) they making the Words to run thus Of Sin God condemned Sin. Parallel to which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is elsewhere so rendred; as Joh. 8.46. Which of you con∣vinceth me of sin? Joh. 16.8, 9. He will convince the world of sin, &c. Of sin, because they believe not on me: (in all 'tis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, just as it is in the Text). They who follow this Reading make the sense of the Words to be this; God sending his own Son in the like∣ness of sinful flesh, in that flesh of his Son (as suffering and dying) he condemned sin of sin, in as much as by that strange and wonder∣full course he made it to appear to the world that sin was full of sin, highly guilty and criminal,* 1.23 exceeding sinful (as the Apostle speaks upon another account).

Now though I shall not follow this Exposition, yet it containing nothing in at but what is true for the matter of it, and it being given by some Authors of great repute, I will so far insist upon it as to give a double illustration of it.

1. As 'tis applicable to Sin in the general. Take the whole body of Sin or Sin in its utmost extent, 'twas all condemn'd of sin in Christ's flesh (as first assum'd and then crucify'd), how? why, by that it was prov'd and judg'd to be a thing out of measure evil and faul∣ty; thereby God let the world see what sin is, what an excess of poyson and malignity there is in its nature. Did he send his own Son? to be incarnate? yea, to appear in the likeness of sinful Flesh? so to be abased, suffer and die? and was Sin the meritorious Cause of all this? was all this done and suffered for the making of satisfaction for the mischiefs and injuries which Sin had been guilty of? O what a condemnation was here of Sin! Never was there such a demonstration of Sins Evil, what an heinous and capi∣tal Offender it is, as in Christ's being made Man and dying upon the Cross: the strangeness of the remedy shows the malignity of the disease, the high terms of satisfaction the greatness of the crime; God's severity laid upon the Flesh of his own Son in such unparal∣lell'd sufferings, made it apparent to the world that sin is a quite other thing than what men generally take it to be: had it not

been evil, desperately evil God had never dealt with Christ as he did, therefore in his flesh sin was condemned of sin.

2. This may more particularly be apply'd to that sin of killing and murdering the Lord Jesus. God did not only condemn sin of sin in the gross, but in special that sin which was committed against and upon the Flesh of Christ in the crucifixion of him: here 'twas the Sin of Sin, here Sin was sinful indeed. That it should so bold∣ly, so injuriously, so wickedly fasten upon a Person so near and dear to God, so inoffensive and innocent, so holy and gracious, what an aggregation of Sins and what an aggravation of Sins guilt was there in this? Sin never was more sin than in this act; here 'twas in its highest stature and fullest dimensions, this was its master-piece, the vilest thing that ever it did; all its other crimes were but dwarfish things in comparison of this gigantick and over-grown crime. Well! according to its acting and carriage herein so God judg'd it to be very guilty and sinful, and accordingly pass'd Sen∣tence upon it. And as to those that had an hand in this horrid fact, whether Satan (to whom some(a) 1.24 apply the Words), or the Jews, O 'twas in all sin full of sin! their offence was superlative∣ly great in doing what they did to the flesh of God's own Son; Sin in this act did rise exceeding high. Now the(b) 1.25 Greek Expositors are very large upon this notion: of sin God condemned sin &c. (that is say they) God judged the sin of the Jews (according to what it was in its own nature) to be very(c) 1.26 great, it (or rather they) were guilty of a most unparallell'd offence,(d) 1.27 high injustice, prodigious cruelty, inexpressible ingratitude, strange impudency, upon their crucifying of the Holy Jesus, the Lord of Glory. And in the pur∣suance of this Explication these Expositors bring in Sin as a Person, as a person arraign'd by God for this particular crime, after tryal and process sentenc'd to be highly guilty, and accordingly to be dealt with. And they also insist upon God's way and method in his dealing with Sin, which was not in the way of Power but of Justice, he did not down-right subdue it by plain force but he con∣demn'd it after the hearing of that plea it could make for it self: as also upon God's order,(e) 1.28 first he condemn'd it and then he pu∣nish'd it.

This Interpretation some(f) 1.29 latter Writers do fall in with and

much applaud: Bneer himself at first was taken with it, but aft••wards he altered his thoughts;(g) 1.30 Beza passes a severe censure upon it. The truth is, the Apostle in the Words seems to look at another thing, this was not the condemnation of Sin which he had (mainly) in his eye, (viz.) the heightening or aggravating or proving of its guilt, and then passing sentence upon it according to that; no, but there was another condemnation which he drove at (viz.) the aboli∣tion and expiation of its guilt; God so condemned sin as that it might never condemn the Sinner, (that's the Apostles proper and principal scope as I humbly conceive).(h) 1.31 Austine though he reades it too de peccato condemnavit &c. yet he opens it in a different sense, he making this of sin to be as much as by sin: and so he thus glosses upon it, By the sin of the Jews (in their putting of Christ to death) God abolished and took out of the way all the sin of all the Elect; he so over-ruled the matter that even by sin sin was de∣stroy'd, by the greatest sin that ever was committed sin it self was condemned; had not the blood of Christ been spilt (though that in it self was a most wicked act) there had been to believers no remission, no expiation; as Death was destroy'd by Death so Sin by Sin, it condemned Christ but by so doing it was condemn'd it self. So much for the first reading of the Words.

2. Secondly the Preposition is rendred by For; and that rendring of it our Translators (according to other* 1.32 Versions and the general current of Interpreters) follow, and for sin condemned sin &c. If we take it so, the Words then may carry a threefold sense in them:

1. That Sin was the procuring, meritorious Cause of all that which God the Father did in a way of severity upon and against Christ. He condemned sin in Christ's Flesh, fell very severely upon him, te∣stify'd great anger and displeasure against him, inflicted sharp and dreadful punishments upon him; why did such a Father so deal with such a Son? what might be the cause that a person so in∣nocent should suffer as he did? why, 'twas Sin (not his but ours) which brought all this upon him 〈◊〉〈◊〉 had it not been for that, God had never sent his Son in Flesh into the world and then have pu∣nished him in that Flesh as he did. Christ might thank Sin for all his sufferings, and lay all the Evils which he sustain'd in Soul and Body at its doors; that set his Father against him, that laid the foundation of all his sorrows, that brew'd that bitter cup which he was to drink, that was the meritorious cause of all the miseries that ever befel him: 'twas for sin that God so condemned sin in his Flesh. The Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sometimes used in this sense; so

Joh. 10.33. For a good work we stone thee not, but [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man makest thy self equal with God. 1 Pet. 3.18. For Christ also hath once suffered [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] for sins &c. (which is as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gal. 1.4. Heb. 10.12.)

2. The for sin may be taken finally: Wherefore did God thus condemn sin in his Son's Flesh? wherefore was it with Christ as it was? O 'twas for sin! namely that he might take it away, acquit the Sinner from its guilt, make satisfaction for it, over-rule it in all its plea's and power, quite destroy it. God would deal with Sin in the person of his own Son (he having submitted to take the guilt of it upon himself), that thereby he might give a through dispatch to it and throughly rid believers of its hurtfulness. 1 Joh. 3.5. And ye know that he was manifected to take away our sins, and in him is no sin: (Vers. 8.) For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil: In this final notion 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is taken Matth. 26.28.1 Cor. 15.3.

3. It may be understood Materially with respect to Christ's be∣ing a Sacrifice for Sin. For Sin God condemned Sin, how? why, as Christ submitting to be a Sin-offering was and did that by which this effect was produc'd. According to this Interpretation we must reade the words (as is noted in the margent) thus,* 1.33 By a Sacri∣fice for sin God condemned sin; whatever there is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this condemn∣ing of sin (and there is abundance in it,) 'twas all brought a∣bout by that Sin-offering or Sacrifice which Christ in his flesh offer∣ed up to God; 'twas cut off, expiated, disabled as to its destructive and damning nature &c. all this was effected by Christ's being a Sacrifice. So that the words are Elliptical, there being in them something cut off and left out which must be supply'd by the in∣serting or adding of by a Sacrifice, or some other such word. Which Ellipsis is very usual and common in Holy Writ (especial∣ly when 'tis treating of Sacrifices); Levit. 10.17. Wherefore have ye not eaten the Sin-offering (so we reade it but in the Hebrew 'tis only the Sin) in the holy place &c. ('twould be tedious to cite the very many places of this nature which do occur in* 1.34 that Book): Ifa. 53.10. When thou shalt make his Soul sin (we fill it up by an offering for sin): Hos. 4.8. They eat up the Sin of my people, (that is the Sacrifices which were to be offer'd up for the people): Ezek. 45.19. The Priest shall take of the blood of the Sin (we reade it of the Sin-offering).* 1.35 Nothing more usual in the Old Testament

than to make the words (Chattaath and Ascham) to be expressive both of Sin and of the Sacrifice too by which that Sin was to be expiated; answerably to which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 us'd in the New; 2 Cor. 5.21. He that knew no sin was made sin &c. (that is, a Sa∣crifice for sin). An Ellipsis (like to this in the Text) you have Heb. 10.6. In burnt Offerings and [for Sin] thou hadst no pleasure, (where Sacrifices is left out but must be put in); so here in the words which I am upon. This now is that Interpretation which is most* 1.36 generally pitch'd upon, which seems best to correspond with other parallel Texts and with the Matter and Scope of this which we have in hand, and therefore that only I shall iusist upon: and indded the two former Senses are included in this and do most naturally incorporate with it (as you will perceive in the follow∣ing discourse).

* 1.373. There is a Third thing to be opened (which in a very few words shall be dispatch'd); 'tis said here For Sin God condemned Sin in the Flesh, now this being indefinitely propounded it may be ask'd, of what or of whose Flesh doth the Apostle speak? I answer, of the Flesh of Christ: God sent him in the likeness of sinful Flesh and in that very flesh sin was condemn'd. I know* 1.38 Some interpre it of our flesh, but the most apply it to Christ's Flesh: there is in daffer∣ent respecis a truth in both, for in our flesh sin is condemn'd as to the effect and benefit thereof, but in Christ's Flesh it was condemn'd me∣ritoriously and causally. The Syriack therefore (to make this the more express) turns it and for sin condemned sin in his Flesh. Sin shall be punished and expiated in that Nature wherein it had been committed; Man in the flesh had committed sin and God in the flesh (of him who was Man) will condemn Sin, ut caro humana quae peccaverat eadem pro peccato lueret. Our Saviours being† 1.39 a Sacrifice

pointed to his Flesh, 'twas the Humane Nature wherein he offered up himself, and therefore in that God is said to condemn sin. And as Sin shall be expiated in that Nature wherein it had been com∣mitted, so Satan too shall be bafled in that Nature over which he had been victiorious; Christ will beat him upon his own ground, he had overcome Man and Man shall overcome him; O the Wisdom, Mercy, Power of God! (but these things were under the former Head much enlarg'd upon). I will only further take notice of two things:

• 1. This condemning of sin is here brought in as God's act; God sent his own Son &c. and for sin condemned &c. But is not this ap∣plicable to Christ also? yes, if you consider him as* 1.40 God and as the eternal Son of God so 'twas and is his act as well as the Fathers to abolish, acquit and absolve from Sins guilt in an authori∣tative way: but in the Clause (which I am opening) Christ is not spoken of in that notion as he was God, only as he was Man and as a victime and Sacrifice for sin, and so he acquits from Sin not authoritatively but as the Way and Means which God made use of for the bringing about of this mercy for Sinners.
• 2. The Flesh of Christ here is not to be considered simply & abso∣lutely, but under this restriction or special consideration* 1.41 as dying, and thereby satisfying divine Justice. I would take in his whole humiliation, but this being the highest degree thereof therefore emi∣nently by it sin was condemned: O when this Flesh of Christ hung upon the Cross then sin received its condemnatory Sentence, its mor∣tal wound; then when Christ was condemn'd Sin (in another sense) was condemn'd also. This (I say) was brought about in his flesh as suffering the penalty of Death, so the Apostle puts it in Col. 1.22. In the body of his flesh through death—. I'le add no∣thing farther upon this.

* 1.42The Words being thus explain'd, 'tis high time that I come to that Doctrinal Truth which they mainly hold forth; that's this, The Lord Jesus submitting to be a Sacrifice for sin, and offering up himself as such to God, he did thereby take away, abolish, explate all sin, in all its guilt, so as that it shall never be charged upon Believers to their eternal ruine: In the language of the Text 'tis in short For Sin, Sin was condemned. You heard but now in the opening

of the condemning of Sin, that that admits of more senses than that one which I now instance in in the Observation, yet however this being most agreeable to the nature of a Sacrifice (in reference to which Christ is here set forth), I therefore only mention it.

In the handling of this Point (which carries me again into the very midst of the Socinians Camp, where I should not choose to be but I must follow the Word whithersoever it leads me,) there are two things to be spoken to:

• 1. To Christ's being a Sacrifice for Sin.
• 2. To the blessed Effect of that blessed Sacrifice, (viz.) the con∣demnation or expiation of Sin.

* 1.43I begin with the first, Christ was a Sacrifice for sin: Which though in the General none deny, yet when we come to particulars about it as namely the true notion of his being so, the efficacy, ends, effects of his Sacrifice, the time when and the place where it was offered, (with several other things which are incident about it), there many differences do arise. Certainly there are none who believe the Scriptures but (in some sense or other) they must grant Christ to be a Sacrifice, because they are so plain and express a∣bout it: Isa. 53.10. When thou shalt make his Soul an Offering for Sin. 1 Cor. 5.7. For even Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us. 2 Cor. 5.21. He that knew no sin, was made sin (a Sacrifice for Sin) &c. Eph. 5.2. Walk in love as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us, an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour: (where the Apostle seems to allude

• (1.) to the* 1.44 Mincah and Zebach amongst the Jews; the Former of which did refer to their oblations of the Fruits of the Earth (set forth here by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉), the Latter to the Sacrificing and offering of living Creatures (set forth here by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉):
• (2.) He alludes to the pleasinguess and gratefulness of the primitive Sàcrifices to God: Gen. 8.21.

And the Lord smelled a sweet savour &c. Noah's Sacri∣fices (spoken of Vers. 20.) were highly pleasing to God: the like you have of the Levitical Sacrifices Levit. 1.9. an offering made by fire of a sweet savour unto the Lord; (so Vers. 13.17.) answerably to which (yea far above them) Christ was a Sacri∣fice of a sweet smelling savour to God. Heb. 7.27.—This he did once when he offered up himself: Heb. 9.14.—who through the eternal Spirit offered up himself to God: (Vers. 26.)—but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself: (Vers. 28.)—So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many—. Indeed the great business of the Apostle

in his excellent Epistle to the Hebrews, is both to assert and also to illustrate Christ's being a Sacrifice for Sin, (which he doth so fully and plainly as that one would think there should be no doubts or differences amongst any that bear the name of Christians, about either the thing or the true nature and notion thereof).

* 1.45Yea, Christ was not only a Sacrifice (a true, real, proper Sacri∣fice, in opposition to those who would make him but an improper, figurative, metaphorical Sacrifice), but he was the Sacrifice (in a way of eminency); unto which therefore all the Law Sacri∣fices did bear a special reference: For

1. Those were the Types of this, all of them* 1.46 typifying and pre∣figuring Christ the grand Sacrifice and like the gnomon in the Dyall pointing to him in this consideration. I say, all were typi∣cal adumbrations of him; therefore we find they are not only in the body and lump of them, but as taken severally and apart ap∣ply'd and brought down to him: yea, he was shadowed out by them not only with respect to their matter, but also with re∣spect to the several rites and modes used about them; (both of which assertions are sufficiently made out in the forenamed E∣pistle). And whereas† 1.47 Some affirm, that the annual expiatory Sacrifices (of which you read Levit. 16.) only did prefigure Christ and his being a Sacrifice, 'tis a very great falsity; those indeed might so prefigure him eminently but not solely: For we find Others apply'd to him as well as those, as namely the Lamb in the daily Offering, the Paschal Lamb (which was partly a Sacrifice and partly a Sacrament), Joh. 1.29. 1 Pet. 1.19. 1 Cor. 5.7. Rev. 5.6. &c. Chap. 13.8. the red Heifer (to be Sacrific'd upon occasion for the expiating of the guilt of unknown murder, Numb. 19.) Heb. 9.13. the daily Sacrifices Heb. 7.27. Heb. 10.11. But (passing by these things) I say Christ was typified by the old Sacrifices; and probably that might be one End of God in his instituting of them. For that they were of* 1.48 di∣vine and positive institution, and not taken up upon the Light or Law of Nature, is to me (though I know† 1.49 Others think other∣wise

a truth clear enough. But why did God institute them? to appoint the slaying of so many poor Creatures, such various and costly Sacrifices to be offered, so often to be repeated, such for every day, such for every Sabbath, such for every New Moon, such every year at the solemn and anniversary Expiation, besides what were offered at the Passeover, at several Feasts, at the lesser and greater Jubile upon particular and special occasions, as dedications &c? pray what might be God's End (or Ends) in all this? Was it that he might shew his dominion over the Creatures? was it that he might by this demonstrate the Evil of Sin and what the Sin∣ner deserv'd upon it? was it to* 1.50 gratifie the Jews (who having been amongst the Egyptians where Sacrifices did abound might therefore be taken with them and fond of them), and thereby to prevent their Idolatry? Several such Ends and Reasons are assign'd, but surely that which I am upon must not be left out (if not preferr'd before any other,) viz. therefore God† 1.51 did ordain and institute Sacrifices that by them he might typifie and prefigure that great Sacrifice which was to come; thereby the better to pre∣pare and inform the world about it; (but how, or in what measure, and in what extent God did clear up this Notion, Ʋse and End of Sacrifices, I shall not be too forward to determine).

2. As the Law-Sacrifices were Types so they were but Types: there was little in them take away the typical nature of them, what poor things were they further than as they did point to Christ! The Apostle calls them but shadows of good things to come Heb. 10.1. figures for the time then present Heb. 9.9. patterns of things in the Heavens Heb. 9.23. examples and shadows of heaven∣ly things Heb. 8.5.

3. Nay Thirdly, all that* 1.52 virtue and efficacy which was in them was all derived from and did all depend upon this great Sacrifice, the Lord Jesus. Alas! what could they do by any inherent virtue in themselves for the expiating of Sin and pacifying of God! Heb. 10.4.

It is not possible that the blood of Bulls and Goats should take away Sins: how often doth the Apostle go over this (viz.) the weak∣ness of the Levitical Sacrifices with respect to expiation and a∣tonement! doubtless whatever virtue or efficacy was in them in order to the production of these effects it wholly depended upon Christ the Sacrifice that was to come.

Yet here I would not be misunderstood, in such a sense I do not make the Law-Sacrifices to be meer types or altogether weak; for as to that which the Apostle calls the purifying of the flesh Heb. 9.13. they were more than types and had more than* 1.53 a typical expiati∣on; and with respect to that by virtue of God's institution they were able to effect it: But besides this there was the making of persons perfect as pertaining to the Conscience, the purging of the Con∣science &c. Heb. 9.9, 14. now as to this their strength was wholly derived and their use wholly typical. By the purifying of the Fl••••••, is meant exemption from those Civil and Ecclesiastical penalties which upon such transgressions of the Law the Jews were lyable to: God gave them with respect to their polity such and such Laws, which if any did break they were so and so to be punished; yet he was so gracious to them as to allow in several Cases the offering of Sacrifices, in order to the expiating of their guilt and the preventing of the punishment threatned to them (as they stood in such a politick capacity); therefore as to this Sacrifices had a real efficiency and also a full efficacy. By the making perfect as per∣taining to the Conscience, is meant the doing away of Sins guilt in the sight of God, the setting of things right betwixt God and the Sinner, the pacifying of his wrath, securing from eternal punish∣ments: now as to this the Mosaical Sacrifices could do nothing, here they were meer types and altogether weak; this was to be done by the alone Sacrifice of Christ. So that whereas Some do argue against the Sacrifices under the Law as not prefiguring Christ, because they had no power or virtue in them to take away Sin, I answer

• (1.) As to the taking away of external guilt and obliga∣tion to external punishment, so far they had a power:
• (2.) Sup∣pose they had had* 1.54 none at all yet for all that they might have had this use; as (I hope) the brazen Serpent was a real type and prefiguration of Christ, in reference to his Spiritual healing of the poor Sin-stung Soul, and yet that of it self had no virtue at all to bring about that effect which should bear any analogie unto the thing typified.

4. That those old Sacrifices had a special reference to Christ, the great Sacrifice, is evident from this because with him they* 1.55 began and with him they ended: For as soon as ever Christ had been exhi∣bited in that primitive Promise Gen. 3.15. that the seed of the woman should bruise the Serpents head &c. immediately upon this (as Divines do not only conjecture but prove) Sacrifices did com∣mence; and as soon as he himself came and had offered himself up∣on the Cross (as the true Sacrifice), within a very little while the Jewish Sacrifices ceas'd. Within a few years after their Temple was destroy'd, and with that all their Sacrifices expir'd; yea, (in process of time) though† 1.56 Julian gave them encouragement to re∣edifie the Temple (for this very end that Sacrifices might again be used), and the Jews thereupon endeavoured to their utmost so to do, yet God from Heaven blasted them in all their attempts in a miraculous and extraordinary manner:‖ 1.57 O the true Sacrifice was come, therefore there shall be no more use of what was but typical thereof, (as the dark shades of the night vanish when the Sun it∣self arises). The Heathen Oracles entrench'd too much upon Christ's Prophetical Office, and therefore at his coming they must* 1.58 cease; and Sacrifices did as much entrench upon his Priestly Office and the oblation of himself, and therefore after his Death they shall and did cease too. 'Twas prophesied of the Messiah that he should cause the Sacrifice and the Oblation to cease, Dan. 9.27. and Heb. 10.8, 9. Above, when he said, Sacrifice and Offering, and burnt Offerings, and offering for Sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst plea∣sure therein, which are offered by the Law: Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will (O God). He taketh away the first, that he may esta∣blish the second; (that's the observation which the Apostle makes upon it). And this very thing (the ceasing of Sacrifices) was re∣veal'd to some amongst the Jews themselves, for in the Age be∣fore Christ's coming they had got this Prophesie amongst them;† 1.59 Omnes oblationes cessabunt in futuro saeculo, in the Age that is next to come all Sacrifices shall cease. And if there be not something ex∣traordinary in the case, why do the modern Jews (they knowing how express and positive God's institution and command is about Sacrifices) live in the omission of them? (for as to that which‖ 1.60 some speak of as to their annual Sacrificing even now at the time of the great Expiation, I cannot give any great credit to it).

Let not any think that all this Discourse (concerning the reference of the antient Sacrifices to Christ the true Sacrifice) is unnecessary;

for I have gained two things by it;

• (1.) That the Lord Jesus is the great Sacrifice; all former Sacrifices pointing to him as the end, matter, substance,* 1.61 accomplishment of them.
• (2.) That he is also a true and real Sacrifice; for was there reality in the Type, and shall there not be the same (with ad∣vantage) in the Anti-type? or shall they be shadows of a shadow? shall there be such a shell and no kernel, such a bone and no marrow in it?

But to go on! In the old Sacrifices there were these Six things:

• * 1.621. The Person who did institute, ordain, and appoint the use of them; who was God himself, (whose institution of them though it be not express'd in the Scriptures yet it may very strongly be inferr'd from them).
• 2. The Person unto whom they were offered; and he also was God himself.
• 3. The Persons offering (viz.) the Priests, to whom by divine appointment this work was committed, and it was a great part of their work and one great end of their Office, For every high Priest taken from among men, is ordained for men in things partain∣ing to God, that he may offer both Gifts and Sacrifices for sins, Heb. 5.1.
• 4. The Matter of the Sacrifice, or the thing offered: which was very various according to what God was pleas'd to specifie and appoint, Oxen, Bulls, Heifers, Sheep, Rams, Goats, &c.
• 5. The Oblation it self: when the Beast was slain it was to be offered up, and then part of the blood thereof was to be carried in∣to the Holy of Holy's, there to be presented before the Lord; and the main stress of the* 1.63 expiation lay not upon the representation (which followed after), but upon the mactation and solemn oblation of the Sacrifice.
• 6. The Altar upon which all was to be offer'd.

Now answerably and in correspondency to all these,

• 1. God instituted, appointed, ordained Christ to be the Sacrifice; it was his will and ordination that his Son should offer up himself a propitiatory or expiatory Sacrifice. Rom. 3.25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood. 2 Cor. 5.19. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself &c. 1 Pet. 1.20. Who verily was fore-ordained before the foundation of the world &c. It

• was as much the appointment of God that Christ (the true Sacrifice) should die, be slain, offered up, as that under the Law any of those Sacrifices should be so used: and as from all eternity he decreed and appointed Christ to be the Sacrifice, so in time he fitted and prepared him for his being so; therefore saith Christ* 1.64 But a body hast thou prepared me, (without which he could not have been a Sacrifice).
• 2. Christ offered up himself to God. He had to do* 1.65 with God as he stood in the quality and respect of a Sacrifice, for this was a part of his Priestly Office which primarily refers to God; as King and Prophet he hath to do with us, but as Priest he had to do with God (that he might propitiate and atone him). So 'twas with the Aaronical Priests, they were ordained for men in things [pertaining to God] Heb. 5.1. and surely so it must be too with the great Priest whom they did typifie. Heb. 2.17.—that he might be a mer∣ciful and faithful High Priest in things [pertaining to God]: The Apostle speaks it expresly,—and hath given himself for us, an offering, and [a Sacrifice to God] for a sweet smelling savour.
• 3. Here was the Person offering, and that was Christ himself: he as Mediator, as God-Man was the Priest to offer up himself. They under the Law had variety of Sacrifices and variety of Priests, we under the Gospel have but one Sacrifice and one Priest; who first offered up himself and now continues (in another way) to offer up our duties and services to God.
• 4. As Christ was the Priest offering so he was the Sacrifice offer∣ed; for he was both (which was unusual and extraordinary). The Levitical Priests and the Sacrifices which they offered were di∣stinct; they were not bound to offer them∣selves, but our Lord Jesus was* 1.66 Priest and Sacrifice too; in his Person he was the Offerer, in his humane Nature he was the thing offered. 'Twas necessary that he should offer something, For every high Priest is ordained to offer gifts and Sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have also somewhat to offer, Heb. 8.3. what then did he offer? such things as had been offer∣ed before? the blood of bulls and goats? no, he offered his own blood, Heb. 9.12. his own body, Heb. 10. 4, 5, 6, 7, 10.—through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all: that very body which was so miraculously framed,

• with which he liv'd here on earth, which he carried up with him afterwards to heaven, that very body (I say) he freely offered up upon the Cross as a Sacrifice to God: His Soul comes in too, (but that's himself) Isa. 53.10. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin: His whole self in his whole Humane Nature was the matter of this Sacrifice; Eph. 5.2.—and hath given himself for us, an offering &c. Heb. 1.3.—when he had by himself purged our sins—Heb. 9.14.—who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God.—So Heb. 7.27. The Text saith for sin God condemned sin in the flesh; by which flesh the Apostle understands the whole Man∣hood of Christ, and that was the Sacrifice for sin by which Sin was condemned.
• 5. There was Christ's formal and proper oblation performed upon the Cross, by and upon which the sins of Believers were to be expiated. That there was in Christ an oblation none deny, but that this was done at his Death or here on earth, and was expiatory (in that sense which we put upon it), both of these are vehemently deny'd by the SOCINIANS; (but I shall have occasion to vindicate both by and by).
• 6. In Christ's Sacrifice there was an Altar too, namely his God∣head. The Altar sanctify'd the gift Matth. 23.19. so 'twas here; the Deity of Christ did not only sustain and strengthen his Humane Nature in his being a Sacrifice therein, but it also gave merit and efficacy to his Sacrifice: for how did that come to be so meritorious and effectual for the good of Sinners? but from this that he who offered up himself was God as well as Man; therefore the Apostle speaking of the efficacy of this Sacrifice above the Levitical Sacri∣fices, lays it upon Christ's Godhead, Heb. 9.14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit (his Deity), offered himself &c.

The chiefest difficultys not lying in these things, I do not (you see) make any long stay upon them; but there being a twofold En∣quiry which will carry us into the very bowels of the main Truth, and take in what is most struck at by our Adversaries, that I would rather to spend my time upon. The Lord Jesus being a Sacrifice it will be asked

• 1. What a kind of a Sacrifice he was?
• 2. When and where he was that Sacrifice?

* 1.67To the First I answer, he was a propitiatory or expiatory Sacri∣fice, answering unto (yet infinitely exceeding) the Jewish ex∣piatory Sacrifices, by which he was shadowed out and typify'd.

The proof and illustration of this very thing is the design and bu∣siness of the Apostle in that Epistle (I mean that written to the Hebrews), which gives us more light into it than all the Books that ever were written before or besides. Pray reade (again and again) the 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 Chapters thereof, and you'l find the A∣postle there doing these three things;

• —(1.) He proves that Christ was not only a Sacrifice but that he was (truly and really) an expiatory Sacrifice: for he instances in all the proper, constitu∣tive ingredients into and effects of the Law-expiatory Sacrifices, all of which he applys and brings down to Christ.
• (2.) He shows the analogy and resemblance 'twixt those expiatory Sacrifices and this of Christ, and what respect they all carried to this.
• (3.) He shows wherein and how far the latter exceeded the former.

The discussing of these three Heads takes up the greatest part of that most excel∣lent Commentary upon the Law-Sacrifices; the particular Texts in it I will not at present cite (as they are proper to what I have now laid down), but that will be done in what will follow.

* 1.68 For our better procedure in speaking to this important Truth, before I can well fall upon the close handling of it, it will not be amiss for us a little to cast our eye upon and to take a short view of the Jewish Sacrifices. With the general Nature whereof I intend not at all to meddle, only give me leave (that being proper to the business in hand and indeed necessary for the better understan∣ding of it,) to shew how these were diversify'd and distinguished. Concerning which, several Divisions and Distinctions are given of them, but the best and shortest is this viz. Some were gratulatory and some Propitiatory, or some Eucharistical and some Expiatory.

Eucharistical were those that were design'd for the expressing of gratitude, for the giving of thanks and praise to the Lord upon the receiving of mercy: of which you reade Lev. 7.15.—22.29. Psal. 50.14. Hos. 14.2. (but these I am not concerned about).

Expiatory were those that were design'd for the atoning and pacifying of God, the averting of his anger, the doing away the guilt of Sin, and the preventing or removing of the punishment of it: these were the Sacrifices which took up the greatest room in the body of Mosaical Sacrifices, and which did in special point to the grand Sacrifice of our Lord Jesus, and to that too as expiatory.

Now these expiatory Sacrifices were many and various, all of

them carrying something in them whereby they differ'd and were distinguished each from the other; which differences (with the grounds and reasons of them) if we could exactly hit upon, 'twould be of marvellous great use to us in many things; but (alas) ex∣cepting where the Gospel it self opens this for us, we are much in the dark about it! the Jewish Writers that should help therein con∣tribute but very little help (as they tell us who are most conversant in them). If we take a brief and general Scheme of them, this is clear: the old expiatory Sacrifices differ'd in the matter of them; for in some 'twas living Creatures, in others 'twas what grew from the earth; and often these two were joyn'd, the Zebach and the Mincah going together in the same Sacrifice, (as in the daily Sa∣crifice Exod. 29.39, 40. and in diverse others). They differ'd in the Rites us'd about them (all of which were prescrib'd by God himself); some were to be poured out, some burnt; some to be slain and offered by the ordinary Priests, some by the High Priest himself; the blood of some to be carried into the Holy of Holy's, of others not so; some to be wholly consum'd; and God to have all (as in the Holocausts), some but in part consum'd, in which of what was left, one part was to go to the Priests (as in the Sin and Trespas-offering), and the other to the Persons who brought the Sacrifice (as in the Peace-offering, provided that that which was offered was for private persons, for if it was offered for the whole Congregation then no private person might share in the residue, Levit. 23.19, 20.) They differ'd in the Time which was appoint∣ed for them; for some were to be offer'd every day, morning and evening, (call'd the daily Sacrifice); Exod. 29.38, 39, 40. Numb. 28.3, 4, 5. 2 Chron. 8.13. 1 Chron. 16.40. Ezek. 46.13, 14. Dan. 8.11.—9.21.—11.31.—12.11. Nehem. 10.33. Ezra 9.4, 5.—Some to be offered but every Sabbath day, Numb. 28.9, 10. Some at the New Moons Numb. 28.11. Some at the revolution of the Sabbatical year Levit. 25.2. &c. Some at the great Jubile Levit. 25.8. &c. Some at the Solemn Feasts, as that of the Passeover Exod. 12. Numb. 28.26. of Pentecost Lev. 23.17. &c. of Tabernacles Numb. 29.12. Some but once a year at the great aniversary Expiation Levit. 16. per tot. They differ'd in the Rise of them; some being purely from the will of the Offerer (the* 1.69 Free-will Offerings), Levit. 7.16. Levit. 22.21. others oc∣casioned by some special emergency of Providence, (when some e∣minent mercy was received, or some great judgment to be re∣moved &c. 2 Sam. 6.13, 17. 1 Chron. 15.26. 2 Chron. 29.21. &c.

2 Sam. 24. ult.) Others were constant being set and stated by God himself, (as those that have been already mentioned). They differ'd according to the Persons for whom they were appointed; some for the Prince, some for the Priests, some for private men, some for the whole Community, (for each of which directions are given Lev. 4.) And then as to the kinds or Species of them there were the Burnt-offerings (about which Rules are set down Lev. 1.), Meat-offerings (of which Levit. 2.), Peace-offerings (Levit. 3.), the Sin-offering (Levit. 4.), the Trespass-offering (Levit. 5. and 6.)* 1.70 Some re∣duce all to three, the Burnt-offering, the Peace-offering, the Sin-offering;† 1.71 Some to two, the Holoucast and the Thank-offering; (but of such different apprehensions there's no end).

Now though these Sacrifices were thus diversify'd amongst themselves, yet the most (if not all) of them agreed in this that they were in their Ʋse, End, and Effects of an expiatory na∣ture: I say all, for unquestionably it belong'd not only to the Sa∣crifices us'd at the anniversary Expiation nor only to the Sin-offer∣ing and Trespass-offering to expiate sin, but all the rest (more or or less) were designed for this end and accordingly did produce this effect. Agreeably to which, Christ (the true and great Sacri∣fice) in the offering up of himself to God did truly, properly ex∣piate sin; for if they did so, he then much more: because they in their expiation were types of him in his expiation, now what∣ever is in the type must needs be in the thing typified; as also be∣cause their expiation was done in the strength and virtue of Christs Sacrifice, now surely that which gives expiatory virtue to other things must needs have such virtue in it self.

* 1.72 For the better opening and proving of Christ's being an expiatory Sacrifice, by making a collation or parallel between him and the ex∣piatory Sacrifices under the Law; there are these Four things which I shall endeavour to make good:

• 1. That in those expiatory Sacrifices, whatever was laid upon them is was for the sin of the People, as the impulsive and meri∣torious Cause thereof; and that so it was with Christ in his Suffer∣ings.
• 2. That those Sacrifices were substituted in the place and stead of the Offenders themselves, bearing their punishment; and that so it was with Christ in reference to Sinners.
• 3. That those Sacrifices were to be offered up, killed, slain, con∣sumed, and in that way they became expiatory; and that so it was with Christ.
• ...

• 4. That by those Sacrifices God was actually atoned and propitia∣ted, the expiation and remission of Sin procured; and that so it was by Christ: These things being cleared and proved it will be evi∣dent that Christ was a true expiatory Sacrifice; (I'le go over them as briefly as the nature of the thing will admit of).

* 1.731. First (I say) in those expiatory Sacrifices whatever was laid upon them it was for the Sin of the people, as the impulsive and meritorious Cause thereof: For wherefore were the poor in∣nocent Beasts and living Creatures killed and slain as they were? what had they done that so many of them must be put to death from day to day? did God delight in making his Temple a slaugh∣ter-house? was it his pleasure to have it thus that he might shew his dominion and soveraignty over the Creature? surely that was not the great thing which he design'd therein! he had other ways (which might seem more suitable to his goodness and pity to his Creatures) wherein he might have made known his dominion over them: And besides, if this was the thing only aimed at why must the people lay their hands upon the Cattel when they were sacrificed? why must they confess their sins over them (as you'l see under the next Head they were to do)? these rites evidently declare, that God did not here proceed in the way of absolute do∣minion, but that there was sin in the case as the procuring Cause of all this: and if so, they having no sin of their own for which they could thus suffer, their suffering must be resolved into the sin of the people as that which brought it upon them. So it was with Christ our Sacrifice; his Sufferings were exceeding sharp, his pre∣cious life was taken from him, he dy'd upon the Cross, in∣dured hard usage indeed; whence did all this befal him? was there not some special Cause why it should be thus with God's own Son? yes: what was that? why, Sin, Sin was that cause: but whose sin? not his own, for he was perfectly free from all sin; he knew no sin 2 Cor. 5.21. he was holy, harmless, undefiled, sepa∣rate from Sinners, Heb. 7.26. a Lamb without blemish and without spot 1 Pet. 1.19. it must be our sin then that was the meritorious Cause of all Christ's sufferings. Dan. 9.26. After threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: Isa. 53.4, 5, 6. Surely, he hath born our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted: But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastise∣ment of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed: All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his

own way, and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Rom. 3.25. Who was delivered for our offences (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) and raised again for our justification: 'tis the same Preposi∣tion in both branches but its sense is different, (which difference rises from the different nature of the matter spoken of); for when 'tis joyned with sins or offences it imports that they were the me∣ritorious Cause of Christ's Sufferings, but when 'tis joyn'd with Christ's resurrection and the Sinners justification there its significa∣tion and import is final, (yet too in such a sense the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be ta∣ken meritoriously in the latter as well as in the former branch).* 1.74 SOCINƲS tells us that this (with some other parallel ex∣pressions) only notes our sins to be the occasion, but not the impulsive Cause of Christ's Sufferings; as also that the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is both here and else where alwayes taken in a final, never in any merito∣rious sense: But most* 1.75 untruly, for 'tis said Eph. 5.6.—because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the children of diso∣bedience; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for these things as those which merit and bring down the Wrath of God upon Sinners. But I will not stay upon the refuting of the usual Cavils and false assertions about this, be∣cause I conceive this Head may not be so proper to that which I am upon; for I am not now speaking to the Sufferings or Death of Christ under the consideration of a punishment (to which a meritorious Cause doth point), but of a Sacrifice: The expiatory Sacrifices 'tis very true were punished for the Sins of men, but yet that wherein they were expiatory, and as they were expiatory more immediately pointed to something else, (namely to that which will follow in the succeeding Particulars); and so 'tis here too with respect to Christ. Whose Death (as is usually observed) falls under a threefold consideration, 'twas a Punishment, a Sacrifice, a Ransom; with respect to the First, the effect thereof was Satis∣faction; to the Second, the effect thereof was Atonement, to the Third, the effect thereof was Redemption: now I at present considering it in the Second notion as 'tis a Sacrifice, have not so much to do with that which refers to it in the notion of a punishment; there∣fore this first particular I pass over.

* 1.762. Secondly, in the Levitical Expiatory Sacrifices there was the substitution of them in the place and stead of the Offenders them∣selves;

the Peoples sin and the punishment due to them thereupon was laid upon the thing sacrificed; insomuch that whereas they should have dy'd by surrogation and commutation the poor Beasts dy'd for them. This was the great thing* 1.77 intended and designed in those Sacrifices; and that it was really so done in them the Scri∣pture is very clear: Take that one place: Levit. 17.11. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the Altar, to make an atonement for your Souls; for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the Soul. In all the four Books of Moses (which treat so much upon Sacrifices) there is not a more pithy and plain account given of their Ʋse and End than here in this place: the Lord in the 10^th Vers. severely prohibits the eating of blood, in this Vers. he backs his prohibition with a double Argument;

• (1.) be∣cause the life of the flesh was in the blood:
• (2.) because he had set that apart for an high and sacred Ʋse, viz. to be used in Sacrifices in order to atonement; and I have given it you upon the Altar, to make atonement &c. (for this great effect mainly lay upon the blood, it is the blood that maketh atonement for the Soul): Now mark it 'tis to make atonement [for your Souls], and it makes atone∣ment [for the Soul] (that is) in the* 1.78 stead of your Soul (he speaking to the people of Israel), so that in the blood Sacrific'd there was Soul for Soul, Life for Life, the Soul and Life of the Sacrifice for the more precious Soul and Life of the Sinner; was not here sub∣stitution of the one in the room of the other? Hence it is that the Sacrifices were said to bear the iniquities of the people (because of the transferring of the guilt and punishment of sin over to them); so you read Levit. 16.22. Levit. 10.17.

Hence also was the laying on of hands upon the Sacrifice (sometimes by the Priests, sometimes by the People); you have it prescrib'd in the Burnt-offering Levit. 1.4. in the Peace-offering Levit. 3.2, 8, 13. in the Sin-offering Levit. 4.15, 24, 29, 33. at the great Expiation, AARON was to lay both his hands upon the head of the live-Goat, and to confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel &c. Levit. 16.21. Now what might be the meaning of this rite? was it to signifie that the thing offered was now Deo sacrum (as being set apart for God and consecrated for his use, upon which account imposition of hands was us'd in other Cases)? or was it expressive of obtestation, to hold forth the peoples praying to God Quicquid à nobis peccatum est sit in hujus victimae caput, wherein-soever we have offended let all be laid upon the head of this Victime? or did they by this testifie the sense of their deserts to die themselves? these

things I grant may very well be taken in; but the main thing held forth in it, was the translation of the Sinners guilt to the Sacri∣fice and the substitution of it in his stead. Whenever the people thus laid their hands upon the Sacrifice, they did in effect say* 1.79 upon this Beast we lay all our sins; and this was the primary intend∣ment of that rite. And had there not been a strange conveyance or imputation of something of this nature to the things sacrific'd, I would fain know a reason why the messenger that only went with the Scape-Goat into the Wilderness, as also why he who only burnt the residue of the bullock whose blood had been carried into the Holy of Holy's, I say why both of these should be ac∣counted unclean; so unclean, as that before they had been puri∣fy'd and wash'd they were not to be admitted into the Congregati∣on, (for so God enjoyn'd Levit. 16.26, 27, 28.). And now af∣ter all this, when the great Lord and Soveraign was pleas'd to have it thus, hath given out so full a declaration of himself about it, when Scripture is so clear, yea & when Nature too (as you will hear) hath given such a confirmation of it, I say, after and not∣withstanding all this for any yet to deny it, to bring their little Objections against it, (as that because there was* 1.80 no communion of Nature and Species betwixt Men & Beasts, therefore there could be no substitution &c.) this must needs discover excess of pride and folly: The thing possibly (in some respects) may seem somewhat strange, but it becomes us to acquiesce in what God himself was pleas'd to determine upon, and then to order and reveal in his Law.

From these Sacrifices I proceed to the much higher Sacrifice, Christ himself; where we shall find an exact correspondency between the type and the antitype, the one fully answering to the other. Did they carry substitution in them? that eminently was in Christ: he indeed substituted himself in the Sinners room, took our guilt upon him and put himself in our place, dy'd not only for our good but in our stead, did undergo what we should have undergone, vouchsafed to dye that we might not dye, bare himself in his Soul and body (as our 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) the punishment due to us; here was substitution far above what was in the Law-sacrifices. But this* 1.81 SOCINƲS and his Followers cannot indure to hear of; O they rally all their force, unite all their strength, set themselves with all their might to oppose and beat down this great Truth! there are but few of the Evangelical Mysteries which these perni∣cious Gospel-destroyers do not assault (some way or other), but

as to that which is now before us (Christ's suffering, dying, satis∣fying in our stead, the summ of Gospel-revelation, the great Article of the Christian Faith, the main prop and foundation of the be∣lievers Hope), this they make their fiercest assaults upon; what∣ever stands (if they may have their will) this shall not: But alas poor men! when they have done their worst, it will stand firm upon its sure basis as an eternal, unmoveable Truth; 'tis so e∣stablished in the Word and so rooted in the hearts of Christians, that (in spite of the most subtile and fierce oppositions of all gain-sayers) it shall abide for ever. Well! however let us see what ground we have for our belief of it; and surely upon en∣quiry it will appear we have enough and enough. If the Gospel be not clear in this, 'tis clear in nothing; and blessed be the Lord, who in a point of such vast importance to Souls hath given the world a revelation of it so plain and full! Substitution in the case of the old Sacrifices is not so evidently held forth in the Law, but sub∣stitution with respect to Christ and his Sacrifice is more evidently held forth in the Gospel: Rom. 5.6. For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died [for the ungodly]: Vers. 8. But God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we were yet Sin∣ners Christ died [for us]: 1 Pet. 3.18. For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, [the just for the unjust]: 1 Pet. 4.1. Forasmuh then as Christ hath suffered [for us] in the Flesh &c. 1 Pet. 2.21.—because Christ also suffered [for us] &c. Joh. 10.15. I lay down my life [for the sheep]. Joh. 11.50. Nor consider that it is expedi∣ent for us, that one man should die [for the people] and that the whole nation perish not. Heb. 2.9. That he by the grace of God should taste death [for every man] 2 Cor. 5.14, 15.—if one died [for all] then were all dead: And that he died [for all], that they which live, should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died [for them], and rose again. In all these places the Preposition* 1.82 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used, which (though not alwayes yet) most frequently notes substitution, the doing or suffering of something by one in the stead and place of others, (see Rom. 9.3. 2 Cor. 5.20.): and so 'tis all along here to be taken, where it being used of Persons, the nature of the matter spoken of, the use of the word in parallel Texts, as also in Greek Authors, gives this sense the preference before any other. But suppose this may be eluded, the other Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 proves the thing undeniably; Matth. 20.28. Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministred unto, but to mi∣nister, and to give his life a ransom for many, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]:

1 Tim. 2.6. Who gave himself a ransom [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] for all: Christ did not barely deliver poor captive-Souls, but he delivered them in the way of a ransom, which ransom he paid down for them in their stead; so as that what they themselves should have paid that he was pleas'd to pay for them. This is and must be the sense and import of the word, for every one knows that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Composition (out of that I know it hath other senses, see Heb. 12.2. 1 Cor. 11.15.) signifies but two things, either* 1.83 opposition and contrariety, or substitution and† 1.84 commutation; so that the mat∣ter will come to this, we must either carry it thus that Christ gave himself a ransom against Sinners (than which nothing more ab∣surd), or else thus that he gave himself a ransom in the stead and place of Sinners (than which nothing more true).

I might further prove it by 2 Cor. 5.21. He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Gol. 3.13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us: If he had not so been in his own person, woe to poor Sinners! they must then have ly'ne under it themselves to all eternity. What a full and convincing Chapter is that of Isa. 53. for the proof of that which I am up∣on! 'twould take up a great deal of time to go* 1.85 over it, and to draw out the strength and emphasis of the several ex∣pressions in it; I must not engage so far. But surely the tongue of man could not utter, nor the head of man invent, any Words or Phrases more plain and apposite for the setting forth of Christ's substitution, than what you have there: the truth is, its edge is every way as sharp against the SO∣CINIAN who denyes this, as 'tis against the JEW who de∣nies Christ's Messiah-ship. (Vers. 4.) Surely he hath born our griefs and carried our sorrows &c. (Vers. 5.) The chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed: (Vers. 6.) The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all, (or) the Lord hath made the iniquities of us all to meet on him: (Vers. 7.) He was op∣pressed & he was afflicted &c. or (as the words are rendred by some) it was* 1.86 exacted and he answered: (Vers. 8.) For the transgression of my people was he stricken: (Vers. 11.)—for he shall bear their iniquities: (Vers. 12.)—and he bare the sin of many. Is not all this spoken of our Lord Christ? and is there not in it suffici∣ent

proof of his susception of the Sinners guilt, and bearing the punishment due for it? It runs much in the stile of the old Sacri∣fices; they had the sins of the people laid upon them Levit. 16.21. and the Priests too are said to bear their iniquity Levit. 10.17. that Aaron may bear the iniquity of the holy things Exod. 28.38. answerably to which, the Prophet tells us that Christ (our Sacri∣fice and Priest too) had the iniquities of all believers laid upon him, and that he bare them in his own person. So the Apostle Heb. 9.28. So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many &c. and that's a great Scripture 1 Pet. 2.24. Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree—, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he [took them up with him when he ascended the Cross; the Apostle uses the word Heb. 7.27. Who needeth not daily as those high Priests to offer up [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to carry up] Sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the peoples: for this he did once when he offered up himself [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when he carried up himself]: So in the place cited but now, Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: 'tis an allusion to the Priests who carried up the Sacrifice (and with it the sins of the people) to the Altar; Christ did the same with respect to his Cross, whither he first carried up sin and then he carried or bore it away.

I have but just mentioned these Scriptures to prove the thing in hand, to which should I have spoken as largely as the matter in them would have born, or should I now fall upon the refutation of the Adversaries Replys (such as they are) by which they endeavour to weaken them, I should certainly run my self upon unpardon∣able prolixity.

To back this notion of these expiatory Sacrifices (which were of God's own appointment & institution), I thought (though it would have been but as the holding of a candle to the Sun) to have shown, that it was the very notion of the Heathens themselves in their ido∣latrous Sacrifices; which (whether persons or things) they alwayes look'd upon as substituted in the room & stead of the offenders them∣selves: but I have altered my purpose, because I conceive it will be most proper at the close of the Four Heads which I am upon, to bring in all together of what I have to say upon those Pagan-Sacrifices, by way of parallel with the true Sacrifices.

* 1.87'Tis no time for us to divide amongst our selves, or unnecessarily to run into parties, when the common Enemy is in the Field, yea, making fierce assaults upon us; to defend our selves against whom, all our united strength will be little enough. Otherwise

two things should here be further enquired into: As

• * 1.881. It having been said, that Christ did so far substitute himself in our stead as to undergo the punishment due to us, it may be query'd Whether he underwent the idem, the very self-same punish∣ment that we should have undergone, or only the tantundem, that which did amount and was equivalent thereunto? To which I an∣swer (though I'm very loth to meddle in points wherein persons eminent for Learning and Piety seem to differ), that in different respects both may be affirmed: The* 1.89 punishment which Christ in∣dur'd if it be consider'd in its Substance, Kind or Nature, so 'twas the same with what the Sinner himself should have undergone; but if it be consider'd with respect to certain Circunstances, Ad∣juncts or Accidents, which attend that punishment (as inflicted up∣on the Sinner), so 'twas but* 1.90 equivalent and not the same. The punishment due to the Sinner was Death, the curse of the Law (upon the breach of the first Covenant); now this Christ underwent for he was made a curse for us Gal. 3.13; the Adjuncts or Circunstances attending this death were the eternity of it, desperation going along with it, &c. these Christ was freed from, (the dignity of his Per∣son supplying the former, the sanctity of his Person securing him against the latter): therefore with reference to these (and to some other things which might be mention'd) it was but the tantundem, not the idem. But suppose there had been nothing of sameness, nothing beyond equivalency in what Christ suffered, yet that (say some) would be enough for the making good of the main Truth against the Adversary; for 'twas not* 1.91 necessary to his substituti∣on that he should undergo in every respect the same punishment which the Offender himself was lyable unto, but if he shall undergo so much as may satisfie the Law's threatning, and vindicate the Law∣giver in his truth, justice, and righteous government, that was enough: now that was unquestionably done by Christ.
• * 1.922. Secondly, it having also been said that our Saviour took up∣on him the guilt of our sins, it may further be query'd Whether he took the guilt it-self of them, or whether he did any thing more than bear the punishment due for them? Answ. he first took the guilt upon him, and then he bare the punishment. Far be it from me to assert any thing which may reflect the least dishonour upon Christ (I dread with my soul such a thing); but I see nothing, in the

• asserting of his voluntary susception of our guilt which hath any tendency to that, therefore I hope I may affirm it safely and con∣fidently: 'tis so far from that, that 'twas the highest manifestation of his Love and that which was necessary for our Justification. There is in sin the macula and the reatus, the stain (or filth) and the guilt of it; or there is in it the fact, the fault, and the guilt: the* 1.93 two former are solely ours, but the third and last Christ was pleas'd to take upon himself. What is guilt but obligation to punishment? if the holy Jesus will freely put himself under that obligation what can be said against it? certainly that he might do & yet (in himself) be as holy and innocent as ever he was, and neither be the committer of Sin nor in the least be defil'd by it, (for the macula and the reatus are two different things). And indeed I do not well see how he could be said to bear the punishment of sin (that being strictly taken), if first he should not take its guilt: We all grant Christ's sufferings to be penal, but how could they have been so without guilt? there∣fore having no guilt of his own he must be look'd upon as assuming ours, upon which he might be said properly to un∣dergo punishment. Had no guilt lain upon him he might have suffer'd but the could not have been punish'd, (punishment always necessarily presupposing guilt). I would not stretch too far allusive and metaphorical descriptions of Christ; but yet in all-such that which is the first and most natural import of them must be im∣prov'd and made use of: Now such a description of Christ is his being a Surety; of which what is the first and natural import? surely this, a Surety is one who takes the debt of another upon him∣self, and so (in case of the debtors insufficiency) becomes lyable to the payment of it: as to the consequences and inconveniencies that follow if he submits to them that's but more remote, but the first and pro∣per thing in his suretyship is his making of the debt to be his own: the application of this to the thing in hand is plain enough. 2 Cor. 5.21. He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no Sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him: what is this being made sin? is it Christ's being a Sacrifice for sin? yes, but that's not all; it notes also (I'me sure I am not singular in this interpre∣tation) his being under the guilt of sin: where Christ is said to bear sin that may possibly signifie no more than the bearing of the pu∣nishment thereof, (as the phrase is us'd Levi••. 5.1.—20.17. 2 King. 7.9.); but when 'tis said he was made sin that implys his voluntary susception of the Sinners guilt: And that this is the sense of the words in this place is evident from what follows,

• —that we might be made the righteousness of God in him: 'tis not said he bare the punishment of sin, that we thereupon might not be pu∣nished, but he was made sin (under the guilt of it, for 'tis oppos'd to righteousness), that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, (i.e.) that he taking our guilt, (& so taking it away), as that was made over to him so his righteousness might be made over to us upon which we might be made guiltless and righteous before God: For my part (unless this sense be admitted) I do not understand what tolerable interpretation can be put upon the words. He's said to carry up our sins in his own body &c. 1 Pet. 2.24. did he carry up the pu∣nishment of them? that's somewhat harsh; 'twas their guilt that he carried up with him when he ascended the Cross. This was the very way wherein he must justifie and save; for as he could not have saved us if first he had not taken our Nature, so he could not have justified us or taken away our guilt if first he had not taken it upon himself. For the macula peccati that he was not capable of, therefore that shall be remov'd another way; but for guilt (it being not contracted but assumed) that he was capable of, and that was the thing for which satisfaction was to be made; therefore that he must take upon him and so take it away. O the transcendent love of Christ in this submission! his righteousness made over to us and our sin made over to him? we made righteous and he made guilty (by imputation and in a Law-sense)? what grace can be higher than this!

* 1.94I have done with the Second thing, Christ's substituting him∣self in our stead in correspondency with what was done in the old Jewish Sacrifices; the Third follows, viz. those Sacrifices were to be consum'd and slain, their blood to be shed and offered, and so they became expiatory. Such as consisted or were made up of inanimate things, were to be consum'd; others that consisted of living Crea∣tures were to be kill'd: As for instance, the Meat-offering that was to be burnt Levit. 2.1, 2; it follows indeed V. 12. the oblation of the First-fruits was not to be burnt (they being to be kept for the Priests use Numb. 18.13.) but the Meat-offering offered by and for the Priests was to be burnt (Vers. 14.16.): The Sacrifices of this kind and nature were to be consumed as well as others, for where their materials were liquid, those were to be poured out; where solid, those were to be bruised and burnt; still in every Sacrifice some way or other there was destructio rei oblatae. But eminently this was true in those wherein living Creatures were to be Sacri∣ficed, they were to be destroy'd or consum'd indeed: And 'tis

observable, the higher the Sacrifice was the greater was the destru∣ction or consumption of it; for in such as were more ordinary (as those that were offered for private persons), there commonly but part of the Sacrifice was consum'd and part reserv'd for the Priests; but in the higher and more extraordinary (such as were designed for the Priests, and the whole Community, especially those whose blood was carried into the Holy of Holies at the solemn, anniversary Expiation) in them all was to be consumed; (reade Levit. 6.30.—16.27.) The Scape-goat seems to be an exception against this destroying, even of the great expiatory Sacrifices, it being not to be slain but* 1.95 sent into the Wilderness by some fit messenger; but the truth is, though that (for some typical reasons) was not presently and down-right destroy'd, yet virtually and in effect it was; for upon the sending of it into the Wilderness it would in a little time be either starv'd to death or devour'd by wild Beasts. But to come more closely to the business! The living Creatures in Sacrifices were to be kill'd, & then after that their blood (in a special manner) was to be offered upon the Altar, it being that upon which the expiation did main∣ly depend: So the Lord himself tells us Levit. 17.11. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the Al∣tar, to make an atonement for your Souls; for it is the blood that ma∣••eth an atonement for the Soul: where the first words, for the life of the flesh is in the blood, come in not only as a reason to back the prohibition that went before Vers. 10, (in which notion I consider'd them before); but also as a Reason of that which follows, viz. why God appointed the use of blood in Sacrifices for atonement; 'twas upon this ground because therein was the life of the Crea∣ture, now he designing Life for Life therefore he pitch'd upon blood wherein the life did lye. The Apostle tells us Heb. 9.22. And almost all things are by the Law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood is no remission; and if you look into the Levitical Sacrifices you'l find what he saith to be true: In the Burnt-offer∣ing for private Persons there was killing and blood Levit. 1.5. the same in the Peace-offerings Levit. 3.2, 8, 13. the same in the Sin-offerings Levit. 4.7, 16, 17, 18. (and so in the rest). And the observation of these commands (which run so much upon blood) was so necessary, that should any of the Priests have dared to have entred into God's presence in any other way than by Sacri∣fices, and the blood thereof, he would not have taken it well at their hands; yea, should they have brought into the Temple never so many Bullocks, Rams, Goats &c. and not have slain them, or ha∣ving

slain them had not presented their blood before him according to his Institution, they would have done no good either to them∣selves or others; for God (to shew his Justice, Hatred of Sin &c) stood upon blood, and blood he would have. From all this we may infer, that those old Sacrifices did not expiate as bare Antecedents or Conditions (without which God would not pardon), or as the offering of them carried in it some Obedience to God's Com∣mands (both of which were common to many other things as well as to them); surely there was more in it than so!* 1.96 for can we reasonably think, that God would have been so positive and so express in his Injunctions about somany Sacrifices, so severe in the punishing the neglect of them, have ordered the taking away the lives of so many Creatures, and have so much insisted upon their death and blood in order to expiation; had he look'd upon them only as pre-requisite and remoter Conditions of pardon, or common acts of Obedience, and that as such only they should be expiatory? Certainly had there been nothing in them more than this, the mer∣ciful Creator would have spar'd the blood of the poor Creatures, and would have pitch'd upon some other course which might have seem'd (at least) more consistent with his Wisdom and Good∣ness! We may conclude them therefore to be Means instituted by God in order to atonement and expiation, to the effecting of which, by virtue of his own institution and the mevit of the great Sacrifice to come, they had a direct and effectual tendency.

This foundation I have laid for the better understanding of the destroying, killing, shedding of blood that was in the typical Sacri∣fices, I come now to build upon it with respect to the real Sacri∣fice, Christ Jesus. In conformity to them therefore, Christ was slain, died upon the Cross, his body broken, his blood spilt &c. all which speaks him to be a true expiatony Sacrifice: Had he not died and suffer'd he could not have been such, but upon that he is not only such a Sacrifice really but eminently, (the dignity of his Per∣son putting a superlative worth and ••fficacy upon his Death and Sa∣crifice). O what was the death of Greatures to the death of God's Son? what was the blood of Beasts to the blood of him who was God Acts. 20.28.? for such a••person to die, to shed his blood for the expiation of Sin? here was a Sacrifice indeed! And surely one great end of God in ordering the death of the old Sacrifices, was to convince the World of the necessity of the death of this far greater Sacrifice; by them he designed (in ways best known to himself) to lead men to a dying and bleeding Christ. How much doth the

Scripture spake of his blood! and (though his whole humiliation must be taken in, as making up his Sacrifice, yet in special) what a stress and emphasis doth it put upon his Death and Blood (wherein his greatest humiliation lay), with respect to their influence upon the good of Sinners! Eph. 1.7. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins: Rom. 3.25. whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood &c. Rom. 5.9. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 1. Joh. 1.7.—and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. Rev. 1.5. Ʋnto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood. 1 Pet. 1.19.—but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot. Mat. 26.28. This is my blood of the New-Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Heb. 9.12, &c. Neither by the blood of Goats and Calves, but by his own Blood he entred in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us: For if the blood of Bulls and of Goats &c. Col. 1.14.—having made peace through the blood of his Cross. Surely there must be some special reason why this blood of Christ is so often mention'd, and why the great benefits, which Sinners receive by him, are in such a way of eminency ascrib'd to it, (of which some account will be given in the fol∣lowing particular). O the severity of God's Justice, which no∣thing could satisfie but the blood of his own Son! O the love of Christ, who thought not the best blood in his veins too good for Sinners! O the truth of his Satisfaction, for what could such blood be spilt for but for that? what end could be proportionable to such a medium but Satisfaction? O the admirable harmony be∣tween type and antitype, the shadow and the substance, Sacrifice and Sacrifice! under the Law 'twas blood, under the Gospel' twas blood too, (only that was common blood but this excellent and precious).

* 1.974. Fourthly, if we compare Christ with the Jewish Sacrifices in their Ends and Effects, that will further demonstrate him to be a true expiatory Sacrifice. What were they? atonement and ex∣piation; by them God was to be atoned and Sin to be expiated: now both of these were designed and admirably effected in and by Christ, therefore he was what I am proving.

That those Sacrifices were of an atoning nature, and appointed for that end, what can be more plain? Here the so often cited Text (which indeed is the key to the whole body of the Levitical-Sacrifices) doth recur, Levit. 17.11.—I have given it to you upon

the Altar (for what end?) to make an atonement for your Souls: where the word used (as in very many other places) is Caphar, which signifies to* 1.98 pacify, appease, or as∣suage the anger of one that is incens'd; so its taken Gen. 32.20. I will (saith Jacob concerning his brother Esau) appease him with the present that goeth before me; (so 2 Sam. 21.3.): it signifies also to† 1.99 cover, to‖ 1.100 redeem &c. but this of atoning or pacifying is most usual. Now in order to this atoning God appointed Sacrifices, the shedding of whose blood was to make an atonement (saith the Lord here), and he goes over it again for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the Soul. All along in the several kinds of Sacrifices it runs, it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him, the Priest shall make an atonement for them &c. this alwayes comes in as the great end or effect of the Law-Sacrifices: Whence they are said to be of a sweet savour unto the Lord, (not only because of their pleasingness to God, but also because they made him propitious to and well-pleased with such as had offended him); so Levit. 1.9, 13, 17. 'Tis the same word, but sometimes 'tis rendred by reconciling; as Levit. 6.30. No Sin-offering—to reconcile withal in the holy place— Levit. 8.15.—to make reconciliation upon it. We find when at any time in some particular judgments the anger of God did break forth, either against the people or against particular persons, present∣ly they betook themselves to Sacrifices thereby to atone and propi∣tiate him: Numb. 16.46. And Moses said unto Aaron, take a Censer and put fire therein from off the Altar, and put on incense: and go quickly unto the Congregation and make an atonement for them; for there is wrath gone out from the Lord, the plague is begun: 2 Sam. 24, 25. And David built there an Altar unto the Lord, and offered Burnt-offerings and Peace-offerings, so the Lord was in∣treated for the Land and the plague was staid from Israel.

As to the other End or Effect viz. Expiation, that also belong'd to Sacrifices; they had a power or virtue in them to cleanse and purifie from Sins guilt, to procure pardon and remission (whence they were called Expiatory,), and had it not been for this effect they could not have passed under that denomination. A full proof of it you have in that one Sacrifice, the Heifer, which was to be offered for the cleansing of the people, when murder had been committed but the acter of it was conceal'd; Deut. 21.7, 8. And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our

eyes seen it: Be merciful, O Lord, unto thy people Israel, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israels charge: and the blood shall be forgiven them. So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from amongst you &c. was not here expiation? and wherein did that lie, but in the putting away of the guilt of innocent blood and in the obtaining of pardon? for 'tis said and the blood shall be for∣given them. This is that which is set forth by cleansing from sin, Levit. 16.30. For on that day shall the Priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that you may be clean from all your sin before the Lord: Numb. 3.5.—for blood defileth the band, and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it. The Apostle sets it forth by purifying of the flesh Heb. 9.13. (by which he means the taking away of that ceremo∣nial, ritual or civil guilt which any did lie under): And he puts it out of all doubt, that expiation in the old Sacrifices did not point to the abolition of Sins power, but to the ablation of Sins guilt; for having said that* 1.101 almost all things are by the Law purged with blood, he tells you what he meant by that purging, adding, without shedding of blood is [no remission, or expiation of sins guilt]: and this is the notion which alwayes he drives at in that Epistle, in those se∣veral words which he there uses, (viz.) sanctifying, purifying, purging &c. Indeed this was the* 1.102 chief and most proper effect of Sacrifices, other things might be done by them but this was the main; therefore it so often comes in upon this account, And the Priest shall make an atonement for them [and it shall be forgiven them] Levit. 4.20. so Vers. 26.—31,—35.* 1.103 And this might be one Reason why God prohibited the offering of Sacrifices to any but to himself, because the end of them being the forgiveness of sin, and none being able to reach that end but himself, therefore none should be sacrific'd unto but himself.

* 1.104For the better understanding of this double Effect of the Law-Sacrifices, I desire four things may be considered:

• 1. That the atonement and expiation effected by those Sacri∣fices, must be conceived of as done by them in that notion which was proper to them as Sacrifices: None can deny but that they did atone and expiate, but how did they so do? there's the question: I answer, this was done by them as they were substituted in the place of Offenders, and were slain in their stead and for their sake; (other

• accounts I know by some are given of this but that now set down is the true, as appears by what hath been already spoken under the two foregoing Heads).
• 2. That this atoning and expiating virtue was not limited only to the Sacrifices us'd at the anniversary great Expiation, but it be∣long'd to the other Sacrifices. For instance, to Burnt-offerings (I take in those that were made use of before the giving of the Law about Sacrifices); see Job. 1.5.—42.8: after the giving of the Law, to Free-will-offerings Levit. 1.3, 4, &c. to the Meat-offering and Drink-offering Levit. 2. per tot. Levit. 23.13. Numb. 15.7, 10, 13, 14. to the Peace-offering Levit. 3.15, 16. to the Sin-offering and Trespass-offering Levit. 4.6. to the Ram, which was therefore call'd the Ram of atonement Numb. 5.8. (there's no end of such instances).
• 3. That yet the atonement and expiation proper to those Sacri∣fices, is to be limited according to the bounds which God himself was pleas'd to set; for 'twas but in such cases, and for such sins, wherein he did admit of them in order to these effects, (of which more by and by).
• 4. That these effects were not produc'd by any inherent or innate virtue in the Sacrifices themselves, but only as they were instituted by God and as they derived efficacy from the Sacrifice to come, Christ himself. Take away these two things, and what could these Sacrifices have done? what could there be in them to pacisie an angry God, or to to purifie a guilty Sinner? what was the blood of a Beast (as considered in it self) to expiate the sin of a Man? The Apostle plainly tells us Heb. 10.4. It is not possible that the blood of Bulls and Goats should take away sin: therefore he sayes there was no perfection by the Levitical Priesthood Heb. 7.11. and the Law made nothing perfect Heb. 7.19.—in which were offered gifts and Sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as per∣taining to the Conscience, Heb. 9.9. So that whatever virtue those Sacrifices had (further than the taking away of civil guilt, ritual uncleanness, securing from Church and State-penalties,) it wholly depended upon the institution of God and the merit of Christ. The brazen Serpent heal'd such as were stung, yet not from any in∣trinsick power in it self, but only as God was pleas'd to give that power and efficacy to it; and so 'twas here in the case of the old Sacrifices. These four things I have laid down both to clear up the Sacrifices themselves, and also because they are of great use to

• set us right in our conceptions about Christ the great Sacrifice (which must be opened by them).

Answerably now to these two great Ends and Effects of the Mosaical Sacrifices, the same were designed to be done, and were actually done by the Lord Jesus, when he offered up himself to God upon the Cross; whereby he also

• (1.) atoned God,
• (2.) ex∣piated the sin of the Elect.

As God was angry and offended with the Sinner, so Christ by his death procur'd atonement, pacification, reconciliation; as the Sinner lay under guilt, so Christ brought about the purgation or expiation of his guilt: both of these were done by him, and that too not only really but in a much higher way than what was done by the old Sacrifices, therefore he was a true proper expiatory Sacrifice, yea, the most eminent expiatory Sa∣crifice.

* 1.1051. For atonement or reconciliation. By Adams Fall a sad breach had been made 'twixt God and Man, Sin had greatly incens'd the holy God against his sinful Creatures, nay there was a mutual and reciprocal enmity contracted between them: Things being in this dismal state the blessed. Jesus interpos'd himself, in order to the ap∣peasing of an offended God and the reconciling of him and the Sin∣ner (the two parties that were at variance). For the effecting of which, he did not only as a bare Internuntius treat with both, or only offer up prayers to the one (in which respect Moses atoned God Exod. 34.10, 11, 12, 13, 14.) and intreaties to the other (2 Cor. 5.20.), and so proceed by some verbal interposures; but (when nothing else would do it) he was willing even to lay down his own Life, to die as a Sacrifice upon the Cross, by this means to bring God and Man together again in amity and love. By which death of Christ the offended God was perfectly atoned and reconciled to the Sinner; so as that now, upon the satisfaction made to him therein, he could without any injury to his Justice and Holiness receive the Sinner into his favour, and not inflict up∣on him that wrath and punishment which he had made himself ob∣noxious unto: (this is the true notion of atonement and reconcilia∣tion by Christ, and all that we* 1.106 mean by it). But that this was thus done by him, what one thing is there in all the matters of Faith wherein the Gospel is more clear and full? 1 Joh. 2.2. And he is the propitiation for our sins: 1 Joh. 4.10. Herein is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us, and sent his Son, to be the pro∣pitiation for our sins: Rom. 3.25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood &c. Rom. 5.10, 11. For if

when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life: And not only so, but we also joy in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. 2 Cor. 5.18, 19. All things are of God who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ—God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself—Col. 1.20, 21. And (having made peace through the blood of his Cross) by him to re∣concile all things unto himself &c. And you that were sometimes alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath be reconciled, in the body of his flesh through death—So Eph. 2.13, 14, &c.—Isa. 53.6. the chastisement of our peace was upon him (i. e. by his penal sufferings our peace was made with God). 'Tis true (which our* 1.107 Adversanies would fain improve to their purpose), that all along in these Scriptures the reconciliation is said to be on Mans part, as if Sinners were reconcil'd to God, not God to them; but there's a special reason for that, (viz.)* 1.108 because they were the first in the breach, they fell out with God before he fell out with them; as also because the averseness to reconciliation is on their part; wherefore if they be willing to be reconcil'd to God and are actually reconciled to him, there's no question of it but that he is willing to be reconciled to them, and is so actually. Some would have the reconciliation (as on God's part) to be spo∣ken of Heb. 2.17.—that he might be a merciful and faithful high Priest, in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people; (where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is according to the Hebrew Enallage as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as* 1.109 Grotius well observes). Howerver (supposing that this Text doth not so expresly hold forth the thing,) yet there is enough in those convincing Reasons, Arguments, and Consequences which the Word elsewhere affords, to prove the reconciliation to be mutual (as is fully proved by divers). Which reconciliation (you see) was accomplished by Jesus Christ, yea by his death and blood; so that he exactly answers to the first effect of the Jewish Sacrifices.

* 1.1102. The for the Second, the expiation of sin, that also was done (with great advantage) by Christ; his death carried indeed a Sin∣expiating virtue in it and was most truly of an expiatory nature. Let us a little look into the Scripture & see what it saith about this; and that we shall find not only to assert the thing, but so to assert it as withal to set down and determine the nature and true notion of it. I mean this, the Scripture doth not only in general speak of Christ's taking away or expiating of Sin, but it shews in what

manner he did it and wherein the nature of that expiation did con∣sist: as namely that he did expiate it in that way which was agree∣able to what was done in and by the old Sacrifices, and that accor∣ding to the notion proper to their expiation so his must be under∣stood. For in speaking thereof it uses those expressions which point to those Sacrifices and to their expiation; thereby noting

• (1.) that Christ did expiate in that very way wherein they did: and
• (2.) that therefore his expiation (in the nature of it) must run parallel with theirs.

Take a few Instances: Heb. 9.13, 14. For if the blood of Bulls and Goats, and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean,* 1.111 sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit, offered him∣self without spot to God,† 1.112 purge your Conscience from dead works to serve the living God?—Vers. 22, 23. And almost all things are by the Law purged with blood: and without shedding blood is no re∣mission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the Heavens should be‖ 1.113 purified with these, but the Heavenly things themselves with better Sacrifices than these. Heb. 1.3.—When he had by himself* 1.114 purged our sins (or as 'tis in the Greek, he having by himself made purgation or expiation of our sins): 1 Joh. 1.7.——and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son† 1.115 cleanseth us from all sin; (by which cleansing the Apostle meant the expiation or remission of sin, for Vers. 9. he puts them together—he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness). Heb. 10.22.—having our bearts* 1.116 sprinkled from an evil Conscience, and our bodies† 1.117 washed with pure water. Revel. 1.5. Ʋnto him that loved us and‖ 1.118 washed us from our sins in his own blood.

Now pray observe from these Scriptures

• 1. That the expiating of sin (under the terms of purifying, purging, cleansing, washing, sprinkling) is expresly attributed to Christ.
• 2. That he, as being a Sacrifice, by dying and shedding his blood, so did expiate sin.
• 3. That the proper and primary effect of his death and blood was the expiation of sins guilt, and as a consequent thereof its remission. Matth. 26.28. This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many [for the remission of sins]. Eph. 1.7. In whom we have redemption through his blood, [the forgiveness of sins]—(So Rom. 3.25).
• 4. That as the Jewish Sacrifices were truly expiatory, they (in their way) taking off sins guilt and the punishment due thereupon,

• wherein the formal nature of their expiation did consist; so answer∣ably Christ Jesus was a true expiatory Sacrifice, he (in his way too) taking off sins guilt &c. wherein the formal nature of his expiation did and must consist also.

This I ground upon a twofold consideration:

• (1.) Because by those very Words which were proper to those Sacrifices and by which their expiation of sin was seth forth, I say by those very Words the Sacrifice of Christ and the efficasy thereof is described; therefore it must be as truly expiatory of sin as they were; (this is sufficiently proved in the places that have been cited). And I might further add, that the words there used are the very same with those which the Greek prophane Authors do always use, when they are speaking of their expiatory Sacrifices and of the effect of them, (of which many instances are given by the* 1.119 Learned).
• —(2.)Because the Apostle (who most uses these words, and in the place too where he most uses them, I mean in his Epistle to the Hebrews,) doth professedly draw a parallel 'twixt Christ and the Law-Sacri∣fices, shewing there was a great analogie and resemblance betwixt them.

True, he asserts a greater excellency and efficacy in the one than in the other, and as to the manner of working he shews there was a vast difference between them; but yet as to the great effect of a Sacrifice (expiation of sin) in that (so far as the nature of the things would admit of) they did agree. Well then! if they did purifie and expiate, so must Christ; and as they did purifie and ex∣piate (in taking away guilt by death and blood), so must Christ; otherwise where would the analogie be between them? was it not thus there would be expiation in the type and none in the antitype, and one way of expiation in the type and another in the antitype, (both of which are directly contrary to the Apostles scope and de∣sign in the forenamed Epistl••).

Some possibly will ask why I multiply so many words and stay so long upon this point? I'le tell them, I do it to vindicate both the reality and also the true notion of our Saviours expiatory Sacri∣fice. For the SOCINIANS (who have not left us one foun∣tain of Evangelical Comfort un-poyson'd) herein deal with their usual subtilty; very fair words are spoken by them as though they were for and did own Christ's* 1.120 expiation of sin, but when they come to open it and to shew what they mean by it, they make it a quite other thing than what indeed it is; they keep the Word but quit the Scripture-sense thereof: Christ (say they) did expiate sin, but how? why, by begetting Faith in the Sinner, by working

repentance in him, by turning and drawing him off from sin, by de∣livering from the effects of it, by declaring the Will of God about remission and the way thereunto, as his death was an antecedent to his exaltation in Heaven where (say they) he only expiates sin &c. in such things as these, but not in Christ's undergoing the pu∣nishment due to the Sinner and dying in his stead; they make his ex∣piation of Sin to lie. Now though much might be (and* 1.121 is) said against each of these particularly, yet that which I have in the general insisted upon is a sufficient confutation of them all; viz. Christ must expiate sin in that way and sense wherein the Sacri∣fices under the Law did, now did they expiate any other way than as they were substituted in the Offenders room and as they dy'd in his stead? therefore that must be the way wherein Christ our Sacrifice doth expiate also. Thus I have gone over the four Heads pro∣pounded for the proving of Christ to be a true, proper expiatory Sacrifice.

* 1.122Only for the further clearing and▪ confirming of what hath been said, it will not be amiss (before I go off from this) to shew how the Heathens themselves, in their notions about their Sacrifices, did exactly agree with what I have now delivered concerning the Jew∣ish Sacrifices, and also concerning Christ (the far greater Sacrifice). The business of sacrificing was not a thing us'd and practis'd only amongst the Jews, but amongst Gentiles and Heathens also; yea, even amongst those this practice in antient times was so Catholick and universal, as that there was scarce any considerable Nation or People in the world of whose using of Sacrifices we have not some account. Whence this came about I am not now to en∣quire; only (in a word) it proceeded partly from the* 1.123 instiga∣tion and delusion of the Devil, (who loves to ape it after God, and to stir up his blind and deluded followers to do that to false Gods. which should only be done to the true God)▪ partly from the practice and example of the* 1.124 Patriarchs; the knowledge of whose sacrificing (according to divine institution) being dissus'd and spread over the world by tradition, (which commenc'd first from Adam to Seth, then continued from Seth to Noah, then from Noah to his Sons, and they peopling the world transmitted the use of Sacrifices to their posterity), it had this effect to draw men uni∣versally to conform unto and imitate the example of these Patriarchs in this matter. And though they soon degenerated from the pri∣mitive and right use. of Sacrifices, in their departing from the true object of them and in their sacrificing to them that were* 1.125 no Gods;

yet (in their idolatrous way) they continued and kept up the observation of them from one generation to another. In process of time when the Jews (after their coming out of Egypt) were form'd into a distinct politie, & Sacrifices were re-instituted by God, and all things in special Laws made by him precisely ordered about them, 'tis probable that from thence the Gentiles did receive fur∣ther light (which accordingly they in a great measure comply'd with): for do but bate the difference in the object (& in some other things) & there was a great agreement betwixt the Sacrifices of the one and of the other, as also in the conceptions of both about them. This being the thing which falls in with what I design, I must be more particular about it; for instance therefore thus: In the Jewish expiatory Sacrifices there was a surrogation or substitution of the things sacrific'd in the room and stead of the Offenders them∣selves (as hath been shown); the same was also done in the(a) 1.126 Gentile Sacrifices, and this was that very notion which they in them went upon. Nothing more usual amongst them than for one to die(b) 1.127 for another (especially for the Community); and if they apprehended their Gods by the inflicting of such and such evils upon them to be angry, presently they substituted some (whom they call'd Viri piaculares,(c) 1.128 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) to die in the stead of all the people, so to make expiation. And as the Jews testify'd their designing and believing of this by their laying on of hands upon the Sacrifices, so did the(d) 1.129 Gentiles also. In the Jewish Sacrifices there was the killing of them, the shedding of their blood &c. the(e) 1.130 Gentiles in their's too were for death and blood: The Jews hoped by their Sacrifices to propitiate and atone God when offended, the(f) 1.131 Gentiles by theirs design'd and hop'd the same (for they had their Sacrificia 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 too). The Jews had their Burnt-offerings, whole Burnt-offerings, their Sin-offerings, their solemn and annual expiations, and all for purging, purifying,

expiating of sin; the(g) 1.132 Gentiles in all these concurr'd with them. Nay, because they would be sure to do this effectually, by the sacrificing of their best to their Gods, and conceiving that the life of man was most proper to expiate for the life of man; there∣fore (though this was their great sin) in order to the pacifying of their Gods and the expiating of guilt, they stuck not at the Sacri∣ficing of(h) 1.133 men themselves, yea, of their dearest children: (Instances of which, with Commands against it, frequently occur in Scrip∣ture, 2 King. 3.27. 2 King. 17.31. 2 King. 23.10. 2 Chron. 28.3. Jer. 7.31. Jer. 19.5. Jer. 32.35. Psal. 106.37, 38. Levit. 18.21. Levit. 20.2. In other things the Heathens bor∣rowed from the Jews, in this the Jews from the Heathens). Up∣on the whole then it appears, that Scripture and Nature do both concur in that notion of expiatory Sacrifices which I have insisted upon: and surely in the applying of it to Christ (the grand ex∣piatory Sacrifice) the Gospel is exceeding clear. So that when we assert his substitution in the stead of Sinners, his dying for them, his atoning God and expiating Sin by his death and blood; we say nothing but what Jews and Heathens in their expiatory Sacrifices apprehended, believed, and acted upon. They then who differ in these things (as to the general nature, use and end of such Sa∣crifices,) they differ not only from us but from all mankind: of whom it might be expected they would better agree with Heathens since they do so ill agree with Christians.

* 1.134I have dispatch'd the First Enquiry What a kind of Sacrifice Christ was? the Second follows when and where he was such a Sa∣crifice? To which I answer, when he was here on earth and espe∣cially when he died upon the Cross, then and there he was this ex∣piatory Sacrifice. All are not, of my mind herein; the Enemy (who way-lays me in every step I take in these great Truths) is upon me again, and forces me to defend my self (or rather the Truth I have laid down).* 1.135 He saith, Christ's being thus a Sa∣crifice

points to his being in Heaven, and to what he there doth; that his death here was but a preparation to his Sacrifice as there to be made, or but an antecedent Condition to his having of power there to expiate sin, (with much more to that purpose). Here then lies the difference between us and S, we say Christ's being the ex∣piatory Sacrifice belongs to that part of his Priestly-Office which he executed here upon earth, they make it to refer to that part of his Priestly-Office which he now executes in Heaven; we time it in Christ's dying upon the Cross, they in his sitting upon the Throne.

Now that I may at once prove what is true and also confute what is false, I argue thus:

1. It appears that here Christ's Sacrifice was exhibited (or that here he made his expiatory Offering), because the Scripture speaks of it as a thing that is past, and antecedent to his exaltation and glo∣ry; and therefore it must be done here on earth and not in Heaven. Eph. 5.2.—and [hath given] himself for us, an Offering, a Sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour: Heb. 1.3.—when he [had] by himself purged our sins, he sate down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; (mark it, the Sacrifice-purgation or expia∣tion of sin was over and done, and then Christ's exaltation in Hea∣ven followed after): Heb. 9.12. Neither by the blood of Goats and Calves, but by his own blood he entred in once into the holy place, [having obtained] (not to obtain) eternal redemption for us: Heb. 10.12. But this man [after he had offered] one Sacrifice for sins for ever, sate down on the right hand of God: he did not first sit down on the right hand of God and then offer up his Sacrifice for sins, but he first offered and then he sat down on the right hand of God.

2. When the Scripture speaks of Christ's expiation of sin by the Sacrifice of himself, it speaks of it as a thing done but once; there∣fore it must refer to his death which was but once, not to his inter∣cession (or any other act) in Heaven which is a* 1.136 continued, re∣peated and reiterated act. Heb. 9.26. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now [once] in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the Sacrifice of him∣self.—Vers. 28. Christ was [once] offered to bear the sins of many: Heb. 7.27.—this he did [once] when he offered up himself: Heb. 10.10. By the which will we are sanctified, through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ [once] for all. Doth this once agree with any thing that he now doth in Heaven?

3. If Christ had not dispatch'd his expiatory work at his death, why did he then say* 1.137 It is finished? if his expiating of sin was yet to come and to be done in Heaven, how could he with truth have spoken these words that all was finished when the great thing was yet undone?

4. That of the Apostle is pertinent to our purpose, Heb. 10.5. Wherefore when he [cometh into the world] he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared me &c. where∣fore did Christ come into the world? why, to be a Sacrifice and to do that which the old Sacrifices could not; God was e'ene weary of them, could no longer* 1.138 take pleasure in them, he will have Christ (the better Sacrifice) to come into the world, which accordingly he did. I but what was the world into which he came? surely it must be this lower world: for it must be understood of that world into which he came to do the Will of God (as appears Vers. 7.9.), now that was this World below rather than that above; for where do we reade that Christ ascended into the upper World to do the Will of God? especially this Will of God referring to his assuming a body and offering up that body (Vers. 5.10.)? these were things to be done only on this lower stage of earth: whence then it follows that here his Sacrifice was made.

5. There was (as hath been observ'd) to be an analogie and re∣semblance 'twixt Christ's Sacrifice and the Levitical Sacrifices, and he was to expiate in that way wherein they did expiate; but if you do not place his Sacrifice in his death where will that analogie be? or how will he expiate in that way wherein they did? What is there in Christ as in Heaven that carries any resemblance to the killing, slaying, shedding the blood, offering of the Levitical Sa∣crifices? There he sits in great glory, puts forth his Regal power, is Head of Church &c. but what's all this to suffering, dying, pouring out his blood, wherein he was to answer to those Sacri∣fices? Doth the Scripture lay so much upon his death and blood for expiation, and yet shall that be done where there is none of these?

'Twill be said, there's this in Christ in Heaven to carry resem∣blance to the old Sacrifices, their blood was carried by the High-Priest into the Holy of Holy's, and there sprinkled by him towards the Mercy-seat; upon which expiation and atonement followed: now parallel to this Christ himself (our High-Priest) is entred into Heaven, the Sanctuary not made with hands, and there he executes his Priestly Office (after a sort) for expiation and atone∣ment

also. To which I reply, Christ's entrance into Heaven can∣not be deny'd, nor that that doth much resemble what was done by the High-Priest under the Law (all that being but typical of this); Heb. 9.24. For Christ is not entred into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into Heaven it∣self, now to appear in the presence of God for us. And therein we have the second part of his Priesthood (the oblation of himself here on earth being the first and his intercession in heaven the second): which two must not be divided but conjoyn'd, the former must not justle out the latter nor the latter the former. Which second part of his Priesthood was necessary partly in respect of Christ himself; for the com∣pleating and consummating of his Priesthood (the perfection and ex∣cellency of which depended upon it); for (saith the Apostle) Heb. 8.4. If he were on earth he should not be a Priest (i.e. not a Priest of the highest rank, he would come short of the High-Priest and be but as one of the ordinary Priests, if he should only offer with∣out and after that not enter into the Sanctuary as the High-Priest did, and he only): And partly too in respect of Believers, that he might not only make his oblation for them in order to impetra∣tion (which he had done on earth), but that he might further present and plead the merit of that oblation in order to application, and the actual giving out the benefits purchas'd and merited thereby (which was to be done in Heaven): therefore this we readily grant and firmly believe. But that our Lord's whole Priesthood doth lie in this, or that he only in this place and state doth expiate sin, or that his resemblance herein to the High-Priest is sufficient, that we utterly deny: For

1. The Scripture (as hath been proved) in drawing the par∣rallel 'twixt Christ and the Law-Sacrifices, doth not instance only in what was done by the High-Priest in the Holy of Holy's, but also in what was done by the other Priests in the Temple, and in those sacrificial acts which were proper to them as well as to him. Nay

2. It mainly instances in these; making the resemblance chiefly to lie in the mactation and oblation of those Sacrifices which was done without; and therefore it must be Christ's death on the Cross and not his intercession in Heaven which must be meant by them.

3. As that which is asserted by our Opposers would utterly de∣stroy all analogie 'twixt Christ and those Priests, and the far greatest part of Sin-expiating Sacrifices; so it would in truth leave Christ no Sacrifice or oblation at all: inasmuch as what he doth in

Heaven cannot (in any strictness or propriety of speaking) come under the notion of an oblation or Sacrifice. There indeed is the presenting, commemorating, pleading of the Sacrifice which he offer'd here on earth, but that's all; he improves the Sacrifice there upon the Throne, but he made it here upon the Cross; he ap∣plys the expiation there but he wrought it here.

4. 'Tis true, the High Priest entred into the Sanctuary and there expiated sin, but 'twas with the blood which had been shed and of∣fered without: some of that blood (before offered upon the Priest's Altar) he carried into the Holy of Holy's, and there presented it before the Lord, and so made atonement. Had he gone in thither without this blood and only have shown himself before God, it would have signified nothing; what he there did was grounded upon the virtue of the preceding oblation, which was only now in a more solemn manner represented before the Lord. Just so it is with our Lord Jesus, he entred into Heaven and there intercedes as our High-Priest to his Father, but the efficacy of this his intercession is founded upon his blood shed when he was here on earth: take away his oblation here and take away his intercession there, for 'tis that which gives the efficacy and prevalency to this. Therefore he's said to enter into the holy place, but how? why, by his own blood Heb. 9.11. he must first shed his blood here upon Earth, and then carry the virtue and merit of it with him into Heaven, and so he may expect to do something (which upon his meer appearance in Heaven he could not have done). So that there must be some∣thing in Christ's Priesthood and Sacrifice more than what is proper to him now he is above, in correspondency to what was done by the High-Priest in his entring into the Holy of Holy's and there expiating sin. I think if all be put together which hath been spoken upon this account, the Truth (which I contend for) is written as with the beams of the Sun, therefore I'le say no more.

* 1.139Thus I have finished the first thing propounded for the clearing of the Observation, namely Christ's being a Sacrifice for sin. Where I have shown that he was a Sacrifice, what a kind of Sacrifice he was, and when or where he was such a Sacrifice. The Second thing propounded to be opened was the Effect or Efficacy of this Sacrifice, viz. the condemning of sin; [and for sin condemned sin in the flesh]. (In this I'le be but very brief because it falls in with what hath been already insisted upon.

Here was a strange and wonderful Sacrifice, the most costly one that ever was offered up to God, therefore surely something that is extraordinary and great must be effected by it; and so there was: What was that? why, Sin was cut off, taken out of the way (as condemned persons use to be), its guilt abolish'd or expiated, (where∣in you have heard the condemning of it doth mainly consist. How this is set forth by such terms as answer to the Law-Sacrifices, I have already shown: Heb. 1.3. When he had by himself [purged] our sins: 1 Joh. 1.7. and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son [cleanseth] us from all sin: Rev. 1.5. Ʋnto him that loved us, and [washed] us from our sins in his own blood: but there are some other terms by which 'tis set forth which have not as yet been mentioned. As namely the taking away of sin; Joh. 1.29. Behold, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world: 1 Joh. 3.5. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins—: (which taking away of sin was a thing far above the power of the Levitical Sacrifices, Heb. 10.4. For it is not possible that the blood of Bulls and of Goats should take away sins). So also the finishing and making an end of sin; Dan. 9.24.—to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins—: where the finishing of transgression is not the filling up of its full measure (of which you reade Gen. 15.16. 1. Thes. 2.16.), neither is it the compleating or perfecting of it (as we commonly take the word, in which respect Christ is said to be the author and finisher of our faith Heb. 12.2. and to finish what he had to do and suffer Joh. 17.4.—19.30.); but 'tis (as follows) the making an end of sin, such a finishing as is destructive not perfective: by Christ's Sacrifice sin was destroy'd, he thereby made an end of it or seal'd it up (as the word signifies) so as that it should never be seen or come forth again to the hurt of God's people. Again, 'tis set forth by the putting away of sin; Heb. 9.26.—but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself: the word is rendred by disannulling Heb. 7.18. by making void or abrogating Mark 7.9. set it as high as you will the virtue and efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice will reach it: by the oblation of himself he hath quite disannull'd or abrogated and put away the guilt of sin. Put all together, here's purging, cleansing, washing, taking away, putting away, finishing, making an end of sin (all of which are the same with the condemning of sin in the Text), do not all prove the real expiation of the Sin of Believers as the result and issue of the Sacrifice of Christ?

I having (in what goes before) said enough for the opening of the true notion of our Saviours expiating of sin, under the pre∣sent Head I have but two things further to speak unto; the one referring to the nature of the act, the other to the extent of the act.

* 1.1401. As to the nature of the act know, that Christ hath so expiated sins guilt as that it shall never be imputed to the believing Sinner, in order to the inflicting of eternal punishment upon him: (this must be rightly apprehended or else we shall run our selves upon great mi∣stakes). When you read of the expiating, condemning, taking a∣way of sin, (and so on in the other expressions named but now), you are not only to understand them as pointing to the removal of sins guilt (in their proper and primary intention), but also as hold∣ing forth no more about that removal of guilt than the non-imputation thereof to punishment. Christ indeed by the Sacrifice of himself hath done all that which I am speaking of, but how? not but that believers have yet guilt upon them, that that guilt (as consider'd in it self) makes them lyable to the penalty threatned, that the formal intrinsick nature of guilt (viz. obligation to punishment) doth yet remain, and is the same in them which it is in others: all therefore which it amounts unto is only this, that this guilt shall not be charged upon such or imputed to them for eternal condemnation. Sin is Sin in the godly as well as in the ungodly, thereupon there's guilt on them as well as on the other, & upon this guilt they are equally obnoxious to the Laws sentence; but now here comes in the expiation by the Obedience, Death, Satisfaction of Christ, by which things are brought to this happy issue that though this be so, yet these persons shall be exempted from wrath and Hell and the pu∣nishment deserved shall not be inflicted. Thus far we may safely go but beyond this we cannot; we may (for the encouraging of Faith, the heightning of Comfort) set this Sin-expiatory act of Christ very high, but we must not set it so high as to assert Con∣tradictions. (But these things will be more fully stated when I shall come to the handling of the main Doctrine of Justifica∣tion).

* 1.1412. For the extent of the act that must be consider'd two wayes; either as it respects the Subject for which this expiation was wrought, or as it respects the Object, the thing expiated.

1. As to its extent in reference to the Subject: And so Christ's expiatory Sacrifice reaches

• (1.) both to Jew and Gentile; not to the one or to the other (exclusively), but to both. 1 Joh. 2.2. And

• he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.—
• (2.) To those who liv'd under the Law as well as to those who now live under the Gospel: the former had the benefit of Christ's expiation of sin as well as the latter. Rom. 3.25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness [for the remission of sins that are past], through the forbearance of God: where by Sins past you are to understand those that were committed under the first Testament before Christ's coming in flesh: so the Apostle opens it Heb. 9.15. And for this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the trans∣gressions that were [under the first Testament], they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Nay
• (3.) there is a a sufficiency of virtue and merit in Christ's Sacrifice to expiate the sins of all men in the world. Yet
• (4.) in point of efficacy it extends no farther than to true believers; others may receive some benefits by a dying Christ, but this, of the full and actual expiation of Sin, belongs only to those who have saving faith wrought in them. As this (which I here assert) is matter of Controversie I have no mind to engage in it; as it is practically to be improv'd and enlarg'd upon so I shall speak to it in the Ʋse; therefore at present I'le say no more to it.

* 1.1422. As to its extent in reference to the Object or the thing expiated, it reaches to all and every sin. Christ is such a Sin-offering as doth take off from those who believe in him all guilt whatsoever; by his Sacrifice for sin he condemned sin (that is) all sins whatsoever, 'tis indefi∣nitely express'd & to be understood universally. Take sin collectively in the whole heap or mass of it, or take it distributively for this or that particular sin, all is expiated and done away by Christ's blood; the expiation is so full and compleat that there is not the guilt of any one sin (little or great) left unremov'd. 1 Joh. 1.7. the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from [all sin]: Acts 13.39. And by him all that believe are justified from [all things], from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses.

* 1.143Whether the Levitical Sacrifices did thus universally expiate sin is a controverted point; wherein the Socinians hold the Negative, the Orthodox the Affirmative. The* 1.144 former say those Sacrifices did free from the guilt of lesser sins, (such as were sins of ignorance, committed through incogitancy, inadvertency, humane infirmity), but for great and grievous sins (such as were committed against knowledge or willingly and willfully) they did not free from their

guilt: the* 1.145 latter assert and defend the contrary. And not with∣out very good and weighty reasons; for if we look into the an∣nual expiatory Sacrifice we find that all sins were expiated by it: Levit. 16.21. Aaron shall lay his hands upon the head of the live Goat, and confess over him [all the iniquities] of the children of Israel, and [all their transgressions in all their sins], putting them upon the head of the Goat &c. And the Goat shall bear upon him [all their iniquities], unto a land not inhabited. (30.) On that day shall the Priest make and atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from [all your sin] before the Lord. (34.) And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel, [for all their sins], once a year. And as it was thus in the publick Sacrifices for all the people, so also in the private Sacrifices for particular persons: therefore as you reade of the (* 1.146 Chataath) the Sin-offering which was appointed for Sins of Ignorance Levit. 4.2.—13.—22.—27. so of the (Asham) the Trespass-offering which was appointed for sins committed knowingly and willingly, such as were of a more high and hainous nature; as falshood in the de∣taining of what was deposited, lying, violence, perjury, &c. Levit. 6.2, 3, &c. were not these great and horrid sins? and yet God appointed Sacrifices for the expiation of them. Numb. 5.6. When a man or woman shall commit [any sin] that men commit, to do a trespass against the Lord, and that person be guilty; Then they shall confess their sin &c.—The Priest is said Heb. 5.1. to be ordained in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and Sacrifices [for sins]; ('tis set down without any exception or limitation); so Heb. 7.27. 'Tis true (which the Adversaries make great use of) the Apostle sets it forth by the errors of the people; Heb. 9.7. Into the Second went the High Priest alone once every year, not without blood, which be offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: But then you must know that by these errors he means not only smaller sins but all whatsoever, even such as were of a very crimson die. And the Greek word* 1.147 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (here rendred by errors), with the Hebrew word† 1.148 Scagag, do often point to great and grievous sins; therefore why should we limit it to sins of a lower size and stature? especially if we consider that in that Sacrifice (to which the

Apostle here plainly refers) the expiation was general of all sins, (as you heard but now out of Levit. 16.) And 'tis very true too that for Sins which were committed with an high hand, contu∣maciously, in open defiance of God &c. there he would not admit of a Sacrifice for the expiating of sins so circumstantiated: Numb. 15.27. &c. If any Soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a She-goat,—And the Priest shall make an atonement for the Soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the Lord, to make an atonement for him &c. But the Soul that doth ought presum∣ptuously, the same reproacheth the Lord, and that soul shall be cut off from among his people: because he hath despised the Word of the Lord,—that Soul shall utterly be cut off, his iniquity shall be upon him. Heb. 10.26. For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more Sacrifice for sins; But a certain fearful looking for of Judgment &c. But this doth not weaken the truth of what I have said, viz. that even great offences were expiated by Sacrifices; because they might be such and yet not come up to this sinning with an high hand and wilfully a∣gainst the Lord; and thereupon might be expiable. Were there no sins of a middle nature 'twixt such as were of meer infirmity and such as were committed perversly and obstinately, out of open contempt and defiance of God? surely there were, (you have had instances of such); and was there no expiation for such? the con∣trary hath been prov'd.

To clear up this whole matter I would lay down three things:

• 1. When we say that the Law-Sacrifices did take off the guilt of all sins, yea, of great sins, we alwayes except such as God himself did except; where he was pleas'd to make a limitation there we must do the same, but not otherwise.
• 2. 'Tis evident that as to some sins God did make an exception. For the case stood thus;* 1.149 it pleased the Lord to give excellent Laws to the people of Israel, those Laws he back'd with a severe penalty, that penalty was death (which was due upon every vio∣lation of the Law): it being so, yet out of his great compassion he (who being the Law-giver might therefore relax and alter his Laws and the penalties annexed to them as seem'd good to him,) would not proceed in the utmost rigour, but he would graciously moderate and mitigate his threatnings. And therefore though death was incur'd by every sin yet it shall not accordingly be in∣flicted; but a substitution shall be admitted of, the Beast shall die but the Sinner himself shall live: Upon this God appointed

• Sacrifices, wherein the punishment due to the Offender should be laid upon the thing sacrific'd and thereby his Sin expiated. Well! but though he will be so gracious as thus to admit of the expiation of sin, yet (partly out of respect to his own honour, and partly out of respect to the Jewish politie, Civil and Ecclesiastical,) he will do this with some kind of restriction; (that is) he will admit of Sa∣crifices for the expiating of some sins, but not of all. The Mur∣derer was to die and no Sacrifice to be accepted of on his behalf, Numb. 35.30, 31, 32. (with reference to which some understand that of David Psal. 51.16. Thou desirest not Sacrifice, else would I give it, &c.) so the Adulterer Levit. 20.10. the Idolater, (and so in several other cases). Here now was a limitation set by God himself, and therefore here could be no expiation (in the external and ordinary way): indeed upon repentance there might be the do∣ing away of the moral guilt (which made the offender lyable to God and to eternal death), but as to political guilt (which made the offender lyable to temporal death), that (if publick and known) could not by Sacrifices be taken off: when therefore you hear so much spoken of the virtue and efficacy of the old Sacrifices as ex∣piatory, you must alwayes understand it according to this stating of it.
• 3. Those Sacrifices may be considered absolutely or rela∣tively: Absolutely and in themselves, and so their expiation reach∣ed only to some sins and to the removal of some guilt (viz. that which was ritual and ceremonial): Relatively with respect to Christ who was typified by them, and so by virtue of his great Sa∣crifice to come (which they prefigur'd) to persons duly quali∣fied their expiation was general of all sins and of all guilt, (I mean of all moral guilt before God though not of all political guilt before Men).

But though there be this difficuly as to the type, as to the anti∣type there's none: by Christ's offering up of himself to be sure all sins are expiated, even the greatest are wash'd away by his blood, none can stand before his infinite merit and satisfaction; former Sa∣crifices were weak but Christ the grand Sacrifice he is strong,* 1.150 able to save to the utmost all that come to God through him. He is not only a Sin-offering to remove the guilt of lesser sins, but a Trespass-offering to remove the guilt of the greatest sins; therefore as he is set forth by the former in the Text so by the latter in Isa. 53.10. Where final impenitency and unbelief do not hinder the death of Christ is sufficient to acquit from all guilt; by it all

(who perform the Gospel-conditions) have a full and universal discharge.

* 1.151I have now gone through the several things necessary to be spoken unto for the explaining and confirming of the Point; the Ʋse follows.

* 1.152Was Christ a Sacrifice for sin? and did he thereby condemn sin? I shall from hence infer something

• (1.) by way of Information;
• (2.) of Exhortation;
• (3.) of Consolation.

* 1.153First for Information: and so this great Truth may be useful in the informing of our judgements in sundry particulars: As

1. We learn from it the truth of Christ's satisfaction. Here (a∣mongst many others) is a very considerable Argument to prove, that Christ did really satisfie Gods Justice for Mans sin; which there∣fore all, who write upon and for the verity of his Satisfaction, do in special insist upon, with great evidence and advantage to the Cause which they defend. And indeed it carry's such light and con∣viction in it, as that the grand Opposer of this Satisfaction was more troubled to get off from it than from any other Argument whatsoever; for when he came to answer COVETƲS arguing for it from the legal Sacrifices as prefiguring Christ, he was forc'd to say—&c:* 1.154 in quo major vis esse videtur, in which (head of Testimonies) there seems to be greater strength than in any of the for∣mer: And the annual, great Expiation being urg'd, as to that he saith‖ 1.155 difficilis sanè nodus solvendus restat, one hard knot remains to be un∣tyed: ('twas an hard knot indeed, which he might endeavour to loose but could not). The word Satisfaction ('tis very true) we have not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, expressly,* 1.156 in so many letters and syllables in the whole Bible; but the thing we have: yea, as to that the Scripture is so co∣pious and full that 'tis not in any one other thing more copious and full. But suppose we had there the Word as well as the Thing, what would that signifie to those with whom I have now to do? when SOCINƲS is so bold as to say, For my part although I should find that (meaning Christ's Satisfaction) asserted in Scrip∣ture, not once but often, yet I should not therefore believe the thing to be as Dissenters do hold: (wherein he comes but little short of what his friend SMALCIUS dared to speak con∣cerning the Incarnation of the Son of God, of which you had an account before).

'Tis not for me here to launch out into that vast Controversie of Christ's satisfaction, (in the opening, stating, proving, defending of which so many Volumes have been written); I must confine my

self to that one thing which lies before me. And there's enough in it to stablish you in the belief of what we contend for: for was Christ (truly and properly) a Sacrifice for sin? were our sins the meritorious cause of his sufferings? did he put himself into the Sinners stead, taking his guilt upon him and undergoing that pu∣nishment which he should have undergone? did he die, shed his blood, that he might thereby atone God and expiate sin, (all of which have been proved out of the unerring Word)? and doth not all this amount to a demonstration of the truth of Christ's sa∣tisfying the Justice of God for Sin? do we mean any thing by his Satisfaction but these things? and are not they clear enough from Scripture-light? The truth is, all the other Arguments brought for the proof of Christ's Satisfaction, I say all of them do either run into or fall under this one, of his being a Sacrifice for sin. If God would pardon sin, be appeased towards the Creature &c. absolutely and without the intervention of any Satisfaction, why did he appoint Sacrifices under the Law? why must so many Creatures die? why must so much blood be spilt? quorsum perditio haec? he whose* 1.157 tender mercies are over all his works, who hath pity and goodness for all that he hath made, would he un∣necessarily or meerly to shew his absolute dominion have ordered so many Creatures to be killed, slaughtered, destroyed from day to day? why did he so peremptorily stand upon this, that† 1.158 without shedding of blood there should be no remission? But I go higher, if God had not required satisfaction why must* 1.159 Christ himself be made a Sacrifice for sin? why must he take flesh, and then die in that flesh? why must his precious blood be poured out? why must he feel the wrath of his Father? be under a necessity of suffering, and of such suffering too? was there not a cause for this? yes surely! and what could that be but satisfaction? God had great and weighty Reasons which made him to insist upon this, so as that he would in this and in no other way let out his Love and Mercy to Sinners: for instance, he must vindicate his truth, make good his threatning, maintain his own honour, as also the honour of his Laws, make known his Ho∣liness, let the world see what Sin was, what an extreme hatred he had to it, keep up and assert his rectoral righteousness, &c. for though as* 1.160 pars offensa and creditor he might have done what he

pleas'd, yet as rector mundi he must do that which shall speak him to be just and righteous in his Government: now were not these great and weighty reasons for God to do what he did? and could these high ends have been attain'd without satisfaction? All his Attributes were equally dear to him, and thereupon shall all be advanc'd alike; he was not for the advancing of Mercy only but of Justice also; and therefore he will so carry it in his dealings with man▪ as that he may glorifie the one as well as the other. If he justifie the Sinner (wherein he displays so much of Mercy), hee'l do it in such a way as that he may display his Justice too; where∣fore Christ must be a Sacrifice, first to expiate Sin by his blood and then God will not charge it upon the Sinner: Rom. 3.25, 26. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood; to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past &c. (he goes over it again) To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness; (wherein or son what end?) that be might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus: what could the Apostle have spoken fuller & plainer to determine the business in hand? how can the Denyers of Christ's Satisfaction and of the necessity thereof stand before the light of this Scripture? Propitiation must be made by blood, by the blood of Christ, that thereby God might declare his righteousness; that he might be just, not so much in himself and in the general, as in this special act of the justifying of a Sin∣ner. Had we no other Text in all the sacred Records but this one, me-thinks it should be enough to silence and convince gain-sayers; 'tis a bulwark for Faith which will stand firm in spite of all the little batteries that men can make against it. But the truth of Christ's satisfying divine Justice will yet more fully appear from what follows in the next Head, therefore I go on to that.

* 1.1612. Secondly, this may help us to right notions concerning the Nature and Ends of Christ's death. For if it be ask'd, How or in what manner he dy'd? we see he dy'd as a Sacrifice: if it be further ask'd, Wherefore did he die or what were the main ends of his dying? I answer, he dy'd chiefly for such ends as are most proper to Sacrifices. If God's own Son die undoubtedly there must be something special in his death, and some great ends must be design'd to be promoted thereby, (* 1.162 died Abner as a fool dieth?) but what were they? Answ. such as may best comport and suit with the common ends of all Sacrifices, especially of those by which he was more directly typified: & therefore the pacifying of an angry God, the purifying of a guilty Sinner, being the principal ends in

the death of the typical Sacrifices (as you have heard), answerably these must also be the principal ends of the death of Christ, the real Sacrifice.

The SOCINIANS in this matter run into two dangerous Errors;

• (1.) they make that in Christ's death to be supream and principal which was indeed but subordinate: nay
• (2.) they make that which was but subordinate to be the sole thing therein, altogether excluding and denying what was supream and principal.

Now this one thing which I am upon (viz.) Christ's being and dying as a Sacrifice (in correspondency with the Ends of the Le∣vitical Sacrifices), was it rightly understood and firmly believ'd would be a sufficient confutation of, and antidote against their per∣nicious tenents: For do they say that the main end of the death of Christ was to turn men from sin? the contrary appears because that was not the main end in the Law-Sacrifices: or do they say that Christ died only for our good? 'twas not so because that doth not agree with the Law-Sacrifices, which were offered not only for the Sinners good but in the Sinners stead: or do they say that he died only as a Witness of the Truth, as an Example, &c. 'twas not so neither because it shuts out that which was the principal in∣tendment of the Law-Sacrifices.

But besides this there are some other things of considerable strength, which that we may the better take in we must more particularly enquire into those Causes or Ends of Christ's death which* 1.163 they assign; that by the removal of false Causes and Ends (I mean in their exclusive sense), the true ones may the better appear.

They say therefore (1.) Christ dy'd for this End, that he might bear witness to the truth, confirm the Evangelical Doctrine, and give assurance to the world of the verity of what he had taught: To which we reply, the question is not whether these were true and proper Ends (that we readily grant), but whether they were the prin∣cipal, much more the sole Ends of Christ's death (that we utterly deny). And our denyal is grounded upon these Reasons:

• 1. All along in Scripture the confirmation of the Doctrine of the Gospel is laid upon Christ's Works and Miracles, not upon his Death:

• (reade Act. 2.22. Joh. 10.25. & passim). And he having by these given a sufficient proof or evidence of the truth of what he had taught, it cannot be imagined that he dy'd only or chiefly for this, that by his death he might give a further proof or evidence thereof. Besides, if this was the main thing designed and effected thereby, then in the remission of sin, reconciliation with God &c. we should owe as much to Christ's Miracles as to his Death; than which nothing can be more repugnant to the whole tenour of the Word.
• 2. This would take away the peculiarity or speciality of Christ's death. For if there was nothing in it more than bearing witness to the truth, or confirmation of the Gospel-doctrine, then all the A∣postles and Martyrs (who ever died) did the same, in as much as they by dying bore witness also to the truth, and confirmed the Gospel-Doctrine: then as he saith to us* 1.164 What do ye more than others? we may say the same to him What (blessed Jesus!) dost thou more than others? (and would not this be a fine question?) Certain∣ly the death of the Mediator and the death of the Martyr are two different things; not only quoad gradum but quoad speciem: but if it was as this sort of Men would have it, there might be a gra∣dual difference betwixt them but nothing more. Must Christ's dy∣ing for us amount only to his dying as a Martyr for the truth? here's the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but where's the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? Paul laid down his life upon this account, and yet (saith he)* 1.165 Was Paul crucified for you?
• 3. Nay thirdly, if Christ had dy'd only upon this ground and for this end, then several of the Martyrs had gone beyond him. How readily and chearfully did many of them die! how desirous were they of laying down their lives for the Gospel! they did not fear death, all their fear was that God would not so far honour them as to call them out to suffer it for his sake: And when they came to die what abundance of inward peace and comfort had they! how were their Souls brim-full of heavenly consolation! they had as much thereof as ever heart could hold, so much that all their outward torments were nothing to them. But was it thus with Christ? true, he was very ready and willing to die, yet there was a time when he pray'd again and again that the Cup might pass from him;* 1.166 Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me: and he had an innocent, sinless fear of death, for be was heard in what he feared Heb. 5.7. And had he such raptures and extasies of joy at his death as several of the Martyrs had? O no! his Soul was

• ...* 1.167 exceeding sorrowful, he was under bitter† 1.168 agonies and conflicts, had great terrors in his Spirit, &c. Now had he dy'd only as they did, meerly to have borne his testimony to the truth, and for the confirmation of the Doctrine of the Gospel, would it have been thus? what? Saints so full of joy and God's own Son so full of sorrow? Saints in their sufferings to have such a mighty presence of God with them, and God's own Son to cry out My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Surely there must be something special and extraordinary in his death above theirs; and so there was, for he had the guilt of all Believers upon him, lay under the wrath of God, bare the punishment due to Sinners, was under the curse of the Law &c. these were the sad ingredients in his death which put such a bitterness into it. Had there been nothing more in it than bare Martyrdom or what is proper to that, how would he have been said to be* 1.169 a curse for us? what singular thing would there have been in his† 1.170 being obedient to death, even the death of the Cross?

2. Secondly 'tis said, Christ dy'd for this end that he might set before men an example of obedience, patience, submission to God's Will, zeal, (and the like). I answer, that this was one end is very true, but that this was the only end is very false: Christ did not design his death to be only exemplary to us, but that it should also be satisfactory to God; he had in his eye the expiation of our sin as well as our imitation of his example. Christ (saith the Apostle) also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow his steps, 1 Pet. 2.21. but was that all? no, (Vers. 24.) who his own self, bare our sins, in his own body on the tree: here was substitution in our stead, susception of our guilt, as well as the propounding of an example. If Christ should further the happiness of Sinners only in this exemplary way, what then would become of the Fathers and of all those who liv'd before he came and dy'd in the flesh, who therefore could reap no benefit by his example? And this would make the effects of his death to terminate wholly in us, and not at all to reach to God, whereas he is a Priest in things pertain∣ing to God Heb. 2.17.

3. They say, Christ dy'd for this end, that by his death he might strengthen and encourage faith, and thereby raise up men to the as∣surance of the remission of sin, freedom from eternal death, the posses∣sing of eternal life &c. Answ. We grant that Faith receives emi∣nent support and encouragement from this, that it gives the highest satisfaction that is possible as to the certainty of Gospel-blessings; yet

this must not be look'd upon as the primary, much less as the only end of Christ's death. For

• (1.) the blessing must be procur'd before there can be any assurance of it; the thing must be suppos'd to be before persons can be sure of it: now how was that brought about but by the death of Christ? and if so, then the only end thereof was not assurance, but there must be another antecedent end (viz.) the purchasing or effecting of the thing which was to be the matter of that assurance. And by that the Scripture mainly represents Christ's death; Matth. 26.28. This is my blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins: mark it, 'twas shed for the procuring of this great blessing, not for the assuring persons of it.
• (2.) This assurance is as much (if not more) the effect of Christ's resur∣rection as of his death: Indeed for him to die that contributes very much, but 'tis his dying and rising again that hath the greatest in∣fluence upon it; 1 Pet. 1.3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy, hath be∣gotten us again unto a lively hope, (by what?) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. As to purchase and impetration we owe more to Christ's death than to his resurrection, but as to as∣surance and subjective certainty we owe more to his resurrection than to his death; therefore the Apostle brings this in with a rather, Rom. 8.34. It is Christ that died, yea, rather that is risen again. He is said to be delivered for our offences, and to be raised again for our justification, Rom. 4.25. the Sinners justification was merited by his death, but it was manifested by his resurrection; thence there∣fore Faith, in its being assured of that priviledge, must fetch its main encouragement: so that this cannot be the only thing aimed at in his death, since it more properly belongs to another Head.
• (3.) The old-Testament Saints were high in their assurance, and yet they liv'd before the death of Christ.
• —(4.) His death simply con∣sidered gives no such encouragement to faith or ground of assurance: consider it indeed as we state it (that is) as he dy'd in our stead, to satisfie God's Justice, appease his Father's wrath, expiate our sin, &c. and so 'tis highly strengthning to Faith; but if you take it in it-self and as our Adversaries state it, so there's but little in it for Faith's advantage. What inducement or encouragement would this be to Sinners to believe, to set before them the death of Christ (un∣less those Ends and Considerations about it be taken in which our Antagonists oppose)? without which it would rather draw out mens fear than their faith, rather drive them from God than to God; for so, more of his justice and severity would therein appear to de∣terre

• them, than of his Mercy to allure and encourage them: O did God deal so with his own Son, who too was innocent and blameless, what then will he do to such vile, wretched, guilty creatures as we are? must Christ so die? would not God spare him in the least? what then will become of such as we? Upon the whole matter, the Soc. say Christ's death was not at all intended to be satisfactory to God, I'me sure (according to their stating of it) 'tis not at all consolatory to Sinners.

4. They say, Christ dy'd for this end that he might have a right and power after his death, when he should be in heaven, to forgive sin: Answ. Whilst he was here on earth before his death he had that right or power; therefore that could not be any end thereof; Matth. 9.2. Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee: and when some murmured at this see how he stood upon the asserting of it, (Vers. 6.) That ye may know that the Son of man hath power [on earth] to forgive sins &c.

5. 'Tis said, Christ dy'd for this end that he might procure for him∣self such and such power, dignity and glory: But to this we say, it was so far from being the main end, that it was indeed no end at all; it be∣ing but the Co••••••••••ent not the End of his death; (see Phil. 2.8, 9.).

These defective Causes and Ends being remov'd, it remains that I set down those which were the chief and principal. And they were such as these: Christ dy'd to be a Sacrifice for Sin, Heb. 9.26.—10.12. a Ransom 1 Tim. 2.6. Matth. 20.28. a Propitiation 1 Joh. 2.2. to reconcile God to us and us to God, Rom. 5.10. 2 Cor. 5.19. Eph. 2.13, 14. Col. 1.20. &c. to deliver us from the curse of the Law by his being made a curse for us, Gal. 3: 13. to save from wrath to come 2 Thes. 1.10. to justifie and make righteous 2 Cor. 5.21. Rom. 5.9. to procure remission of sin by his blood 1 Joh. 1.7. Eph. 1.7. Matth. 26.28. to overcome death by death Heb. 2.14. to purchase eternal life Joh. 6.51. Heb. 9.12. As he dy'd in our place and stead (taking our guilt and bearing our punishment) so he died for these ends, that he might restore us to God's love and favour, and expiate all our sins by his making satis∣faction for them: these were not only Ends but the supream and primary ends of his Death. I do not exclude the former, provided that

• (1.) they be taken in conjunction with these; nay
• (2.) in subordination to them: Christ in his dying might intend this and that, as his bearing witness &c.

but his main and principal intend∣ments were satisfaction, reconciliation, forgiveness of sin, &c. in the revealing of which the Holy Scriptures are so express and plain, that

(to me) 'tis very strange that any opposition (much more that so vehement opposition) should be made against it: Good Lord! how are Opposers faine to strain their wit, to summon in all their inven∣tion & subtilty, for the finding out of some forc'd and pitiful inter∣pretations of the Texts alledged, thereby to evade the true sense and meaning of them! how do they set these Scriptures (and themselves too) upon the rack, that they may seem to reconcile them with their hypotheses's! but all in vain (as is abundantly prov'd).

* 1.1713. Thirdly from hence I infer the vanity and falshood of all hu∣mane Satisfactions. Was the Lord Jesus himself a Sacrifice for sin? and did he thereby condemn, abolish, expiate all sin for his members? then what needs to be done (or can be done) further by any Creatures in the way of Satisfactions?* 1.172 What can the man do that cometh after the King? I cannot but take notice, how whoever will engage in these weighty Points he must tread upon thorns and bryars every step he takes; no sooner shall he have got off from one Enemy but there will be some other at hand with whom he must encounter also: I find it (I'me sure) to be so, for no sooner have I quit my self of the SOCINIANS, but the PAPISTS (in a full body) make head against me: The former would whol∣ly take away Christ's Satisfaction, the latter would add Mans to it; the One denies the verity, the Other the perfection of it. For they tell us, 'tis very true that Christ did fully satisfie the Justice of God by his being a Sacrifice for sin, and fully expiate the sins of Be∣lievers, in respect of their guilt and of the eternal punishment due thereupon; but not in respect of temporal punishments: these (they say) they are yet lyable unto (notwithstanding all that Christ hath done and suffered), and that too not only in the present but (for some time) in the future state; for the preventing or removing of which, satisfaction must be made to God, either by themselves or by others: (this is the ROMISH-Doctrine). In which so far as I have gone we have falsities enough, but should we go farther to their particu∣lar explication and stating of the latter branch (mens satisfying by themselves or by others), what a mass and heap of ungrounded, un∣scriptural, absur'd Opinions should we there meet with! for there come in their penances, fastings, pilgrimages, corporal punishments, voluntary poverty, masses and prayers for them who are in Purgatory, Indulgences &c. O what a big-bellied Error is this of humane Sa∣tisfactions! what a numerous train of falsities is it attended with! Contrary to this we hold, that* 1.173 Christ by the once offering up of himself to God, did so fully free from all guilt and from all punish∣ment

too whatsoever, as that there is no need of any satisfaction at all to be added to his.

The truth of ours, the falshood of their Opinion might very largely be made out from these following Considerations:

• 1. In the Jewish Sacrifices (with which our Lord's doth cor∣respond) there was no Satisfaction or compensation, but only what was in and by the Sacrifices themselves. Indeed in them God or∣dered, in case any private person had been injur'd that* 1.174 Satisfaction should be made to him by the Sacrificer, but otherwise as to the ex∣piation of all guilt before God & exemption from all punishment, the Sacrifices themselves (their absolute and relative notion too being taken in) were sufficient. Respect being had to Christ and moral conditions being performed, they alone did acquit from guilt and from eternal punishment, and they too of themselves did acquit from temporal punishment; without the intervention of any† 1.175 other Satisfaction: if the guilty person did offer up his Sacrifice that was judg'd enough to free him from all the penalties which other∣wise he was obnoxious unto. And shall more be done by the type than by the antitype? must they not agree in this as well as in other things?
• 2. All punishment (in order to Satisfaction) is inconsistent with the nature and tenor of the remission of sin. This gracious act is set forth by blotting out of sin Isa. 43.25. by covering it Psal. 32.1. not imputing it Rom. 4.8. not remembring it Isa. 43.25. casting it into the depths of the sea Mic. 7.19. It goes so high in its degree as that God promises upon the Sinners repentance his sin should not be so much as mentioned Ezek. 18.22; if it should be sought for it should not be found Jer. 50.20. and 'tis so universal in its extent, that where one sin is pardoned every sin is pardoned; (Isa. 38.17. Mic. 7.19. Col. 2.13.) Now how is punition reconcileable with this? for God to do all this and yet to punish (in a vindictive way or in order to Satisfaction, for I only speak of punishment in that notion,) is a contradiction. I know what our Adversaries say, that in remission God acquits from the guilt but not from the temporal punishment: I reply, this is their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that rotten foundation upon which their whole superstructure is built. I am not afraid (notwithstanding the Decree and Anathema of the* 1.176 Council of TRENT) to averre it to be an utter falshood: for if the guilt be done away (as they affirm) what room is there then for punishment? that being the ground of this, if it be re∣moved this must be removed also: pray let me ask, a person by

• pardoning grace being made guiltless whence should the punishment of this person arise? That common maxime (which our Writers so much insist upon) viz. Sublatâ culpâ tollitur pana is of most unquestionable truth, and back'd with the concurrent suffrages of the Antients; the guilt being taken away the punishment is taken a∣way also (saith* 1.177 Tertullian); and where there is pardon there is no punishment (saith† 1.178 Chrysostome). And indeed to assirm the con∣trary is to make the remission of sin little better than a ludicrous thing; 'twould then be as if the Creditor should say to his debtor, I freely forgive thee all thou owest me only I must throw thee in∣to prison there to lie all thy dayes; or as if the Judge should say to the Offender, I acquit thee from all thy crimes only thou must die for them: just so it would be here if God should remit the fault and yet exact the punishment. I do not deny but that he may lay many evils even upon pardoned persons, but then I deny them to be (properly and strictly) punishments; for the matter of them they may be so but formally they are not so; ohastisements they are but not punishments; medicinal but not penal; they do not come from God's vindictive wrath, nor doth he design them for the satisfaction of his Justice, but they proceed from other Causes and are design'd for* 1.179 other Ends; (as namely to quicken them to repentance, to make them more sensible of the evil of sin, to refine them more from their dross, to heighten their graces, to draw out their patience, to make themselves and others to fear &c). For God thus to afflict or correct is very well consistent with par∣doning grace, but to punish (under any notion of satisfaction, save only that of Christ's) is not. In different respects we may (and do) both affirm and deny punishment to be incident to God's people; for when we have to do with the Antinomian (in such a sense) we affirm it, but when with the Papists (who would have it to be satisfactory to divine Justice) we utterly deny it.
• 3. Thirdly, humane Satisfactions are but meer humane inventi∣ons, groundless, unnecessary, because Christ himself hath made satis∣faction, yea, full and plenary satisfaction: his expiatory Sacrifice being compleat and perfect why should any thing be added to it? Heb. 10.10. By the which will we are sanctified, through the offer∣ing

• of the body of Jesus Christ once for all:—Vers. 14. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are Sanctified: for by that he procured remission of sins, Now (saith the Apostle Vers. 18.) where remission of these is, there is no more offering for Sin, (that is, no need of any further expiatory Sacrifice). Hath the Lord Jesus (by the Sacrifice of himself) satisfied, or not? if he hath (for that our Opposers dare not deny), then I argue shall He satisfie and the Sinner too? will God have the debt twice paid? shall the surety pay it and the debtor too? this double satisfaction would impeach both the* 1.180 Justice and also the Grace of God. I ask further hath Christ fully satisfied, or not? if he hath (for this is not deny'd neither), then I ask what need is there of any additional or supplemental Satisfaction? if he hath paid the utmost farthing what hath the Creature then left to pay (but only duty, love, thankfulness &c.)? The PAPISTS speak very high con∣cerning this Satisfaction of our Saviour, for they say 'tis not only sufficient and full, but redundant and overflowing; they talk of a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a superfluity or pleonasm and overplus, there's enough in it & to spare: (and this overplus they make to be the matter of that treasure which is deposited in the Churches-hands out of which the POPE fetches his Indulgencies). That speech of CLE∣MENT the Sixth is famous, One drop of Christ's blood was suffi∣cient for the redemption of all mankind; (as if all the rest might have been spar'd, which in effect speaks the Father to be too pro∣fuse and prodigal of his Sons blood). But notwithstanding all these high words they are not contented with Christ's Satisfacti∣on alone, but there must be some assumenta some of their own Sa∣tisfactions to peece with it. We do not greatly fancy such high expressions, yet as to the thing we go higher than they; for we fully acquiesce in our Lord's most perfect satisfaction, without ad∣ding any thing (under the notion of satisfaction) thereunto.

All that they say is this, Christ hath fully satisfied with respect to guilt and to eternal condemnation, but not with respect to teni∣poral punishments. Answ. The vanity and unsoundness of this distinction hath been already refuted; all punishment resulting from guilt, if there be a full expiation of that the punishment ceases (let the kind of it be what it will). But where do we find in the Word any such restriction or limitation, that Christ sa∣tisfied for eternal, not for temporal punishments? did he not bear the one as well as the other? Isa. 53.4. Surely he hath born our grief and carried our sorrows &c. and did he not take off from the

Sinner whatever he bare in his own person, (so far as satisfaction is concern'd)? As to that Question of* 1.181 Bellarmine If Christ hath satisfied for our whole guilt and punishment, why after the re∣mission of the guilt do we suffer so many evils? it hath been already answered, they are but chastisements, not punishments; corrections to us, not satisfactions to God.

4. Take one thing further: To satisfie an offended God is Christ's peculiar, an act wherein no Creature must share with him. Hu∣mane Satisfactions do not only derogate from the perfection of his satisfaction (in which the strength of the former Head did lie), but they also entrench upon the confinement of it to himself: 'tis for Man to Sin, but 'tis only for the Son of God to satisfie; this carries glory in it wherein there must be no partner or corrival with Christ. Heb. 1.3. When he had by himself purged our sins: (mark that by himself, he & he alone could do such a thing as this). What can Creatures do in God-satisfying work? can they do any thing for themselves that shall amount to a compensation for faults committed? 'tis not satisfaction unless it be the payment of the whole debt, but (alas!) they cannot pay so much as a farthing; they who when they have done and suffered all they can must say they are* 1.182 unprofitable, are very unfit persons to compensate injurys done to God. And if they cannot satisfie for themselves much-less can they do it for† 1.183 others, (as he that cannot pay his own debts is very unfit to pay the debts of others): the wise Virgins had but just oyl enough for their own lamps, they could spare none for the supply of the foolish Virgins, Matth. 25.8, 9. There's a great difference betwixt suffering for the good of others, and satis∣fying for the fault of others; a Paul may do the former (2. Tim. 2.10. Col. 1.24.) a Christ only can do the latter.

Obj.‖ 1.184 But Christ satisfied that the Saints might satisfie: Answ. we desire a Scripture-proof of that; otherwise our negation is as authentick as their affirmation.

Obj. But Christ's Satisfaction is apply'd by the Saints satisfacti∣ons. Answ. We find no means of applying his Satisfaction, but only the Word and Sacraments without and the Spirit working faith and repentance within.

Obj. But we (say they) make the Saints only subordinate, not co-ordinate Agents with Christ in the matter of Satisfaction: Answ. 1. Even that is too much: 2. They go higher; for their great* 1.185 Writers maintain, that the Saints apart, by and of themselves, without being beholden to Chrst's merit or satisfaction, may as to tem∣poral

punishments make full satisfaction. These are but very weak pretensions to build an Opinion upon which doth so much entrench upon the glory of Christ's person and the perfection of his Sacrifice. There is but one Argument for humane Satisfactions which is con∣siderable, and that is that vast profit, those large incomes and reve∣nues which this brings in to the dispensers of them; and this I confess I cannot answer: were but these taken away I assure my self this Controversie would soon be at an end; 'tis the satis∣fying of corrupt men (in their pride, avarice, filthy lucre), rather than the satisfying of a punishing God that is at the bottom of these Disputes. I look upon this point (with its appurtenances) to have as much of the core and venome of POPERY in it as any one point whatsoever, therefore I could not omit to speak a little about it: but for those who desire to look further into it, to see the things (which I have but touch'd upon) fully made out and vindicated, the Arguments to the contrary answered, they may peruse the* 1.186 Authors cited in the margent.

* 1.1874. Fourthly, hence ariseth matter of information concerning the true Nature and Ends of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper: (when I have spoken something to this I hope I shall be off of all bryars). The difference betwixt PAPISTS and PROTE∣STANTS was not so great about the foregoing Head, but 'tis every way as great about this:* 1.188 they hold, that in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper (or Mass as they are pleas'd to call it,) under the Elements of Bread and Wine, as broken and poured out, the body and blood of Christ are offered up to God as a true and proper propitia∣tory Sacrifice, and that too not only for the living but also for the dead:† 1.189 The Other hold that the Sacrament neither is nor ever was designed to be a propitiatory Sacrifice, but only a commemoration and application of that one and only Sacrifice which the Lord Jesus when he dy'd upon the Cross offered up to God: (now which of them in these different Opinions have truth on their side, it is our present work to enquire after).

In order to which I have two things to do,

• (1.) to show what the Sacrament is not;
• (2.) to show what it is.

For the first, 'tis not a Sacrifice, I mean 'tis not a propitiatory Sacrifice; as if there was any proper oblation of Christ's body and blood in it (further than what is done in a Symbolical and Sacra∣mental

manner) for propitiation and expiation. There is in it in∣deed (in a Sacramental way) that body and blood which was really offered up to God upon the Cross, but not as so offered up in this Or∣dinance. I say 'tis not a Sacrifice, for 'tis a Sacrament therefore not a Sacrifice: these two carry a great difference in them; there's giving in the one, receiving in the other;* 1.190 in the one we offer to God, in the other God offers to us. Accordingly with respect to Christ, as a Sacrifice he was offered for us, in the Sacrament he is offered to us; which are two things of such different notions as must needs be the ground of an inconsistency betwixt them; for can he at the same time be offered for us and to us too? If the Lord's Supper be a Sacrifice it must cease to be a Sacrament, for it cannot be both. True the Passeover was both; it was a Sacrament (as it was a sign or* 1.191 token of Israels deliverance in Egypt, and as it was to be eaten), and it was also (in respect of the mactation and killing of the Paschal Lamb)† 1.192 a Sacrifice; therefore we reade of sacrificing the Passeover Deut. 16.5, 6. Thou maist not sacrifice the Passeover &c.—there thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover at even &c.—But the reason of its being a propitiatory Sacrifice as well as a commemo∣rative Sacrament was this, because it was a special type of Christ the great propitiatory Sacrifice, whereupon 'tis said 1 Cor. 5.7. Christ our Passeover is sanctified for us: had it not been for this its typical nature and reference, it could not have been both. Now in the Lord's Supper there being nothing of this (it being wholly a re∣presentation of what is past, not at all a type of what is to come), it is not capable of being a Sacrifice and a Sacrament too; so that if we give to it the nature and notion of the former, we take from it and destroy the nature and notion of the latter.

But to argue more closely! That the Eucharist is no propitiatory Sacrifice, I prove by these Arguments.

• 1. As Isaac once to his Father Behold the fire and the wood,* 1.193 but where is the Lamb for a burnt-offering? so I would say, behold the bread and the wine, the body and the blood, but where's the Priest to turn these into and to offer them up as a Sacrifice? Are there Priests now under the Gospel entrusted with an Office and invested with a power of sacrificing? 'twas alwayes thought that with the ceasing of the old Law-sacrifices the sacrificing Priesthood ceas'd also. I know 'tis very usual to give the title of Priests to Gospel-Ministers (which if taken in such a sense may be admitted); but if by Priests you understand persons in Office to whom it should appertain to offer up new expiatory Sacrifices, in that sense all

• PROTESTANTS deny any such now to have a being: whence it follows, that as where there are no Sacrifices there there is no Priesthood, so where there is no Priesthood there there are no Sacrifices (for these two mutually depend each upon the other); and consequently that the Lords Supper is no Sacrifice upon the defect of this Priesthood. We are told indeed that our Saviour when this ordinance was instituted by him, did authorize and impower his Apostles, and after them all Ministers successively, at the consecration of the Elements to turn them into a Sacrifice, whereupon they may strictly and properly be looked upon as Priests: Which if it be so (as it is not) they must then be Priests either according to the Aaronical order or according to that of Melchisedeck, (those be∣ing the two Orders to which the sacrificing Priesthood did belong); but neither of these can be true; not the first, the Aaronical Priest∣hood being abrogated; not the second, the Priesthood of Melchisedeck being incommunicable to any but to Christ himself (as the Apostle strongly proves Heb. 7.). 'Tis observable amongst the Levitical Priests, whilst the High Priest himself was ministring in the Holy of Holy's, such as were of a lower rank were not at that time to sacrifice without: and why not so here? Christ our High Priest is now in Heaven, presenting the merit of his great Sacrifice offered upon the Cross; and he himself being so imploy'd, 'tis not for any ordinary Priests to be sacrificing (in an expiatory way) here on earth. And further, those Priests so long as they liv'd were to execute their office themselves, into which none were to intrude till by their death room was made for others succession; so that if they had liv'd for ever none had medled with sacrificing but they: Christ therefore living for ever to manage the business of what is propitiatory, none without great intrusion can pretend in a thing of that nature to joyn with him. Heb. 7.23, 24. And they truly were many Priests, because they were not suffered to continue by rea∣son of death; But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an un∣changeable Priesthood, (or that Priesthood* 1.194 which passeth not from him to another): When Christ was here on earth he offered up himself as a propitiatory Sacrifice, if any now after him should pre∣tend in that way to offer up his body and blood, as to the matter of the Sacrifice they would (in part) do that which he himself did; and so there would be a passing of his Priesthood (in some way of equality though not of cessation) to others.
• 2. It hath been observed, that in every expiatory Sacrifice there was the destruction or consumption of the thing sacrificed, either in

• part or in the whole; there being therefore no such thing in the Lord's Supper, it cannot be look'd upon as a true and proper ex∣piatory Sacrifice. Pray what is destroy'd therein? doth Christ's body and blood cease to be what they were? in his Sacrifice upon the Cross there was a destruction (in the separation of his Soul and Body for a time), but what is there like to this in the Sacrament?* 1.195 BELLARMINE having taken notice of this Argument thinks to elude it with a very pretty distinction; viz.† 1.196 that Christ's body in it-self is untouch'd in the Sacrament, it loosing nothing of its esse naturale when 'tis eaten there; yet it doth loose its esse sacramen∣tale, the bread being eaten by which it was signified and made visible. Answ. As if the ceasing of something which was but external, visible and representative, the thing it self remaining untouch'd and the same that it was before, would amount to that destruction which was in the Levitical Sacrifices? and which was necessary to be made upon the body of Christ at his death in order to his be∣ing an expiatory Sacrifice? Surely either we are a sort of men so weak and sottish as that wee'l believe any thing, or they are a sort of men so wedded to their Opinions as that they'l say any thing that will but suit with their purpose; otherwise so great a Man had never given so pitiful an Answer to so considerable an Objection.
• 3. Thirdly, if the Sacrament be a real, propitiatory Sacrifice, then so many Sacraments so many propitiatory Sacrifices; and as oft as that is administred so oft there is a real, substantial oblation of Christ's body and blood, in a propitiatory way: but this is directly contrary to what the World saith; therefore 'tis by no means to be admit∣ted. For that speaks but of one only propitiatory Sacrifice, of Christ's once offering himself (namely when he died upon the Cross); which one offering was so full and perfect, so effectual to all intents and purpoles for redemption, propitiation &c. as that it is not in any wise to be repeated or reiterated: Heb. 7.27. Who needeth not daily as those high Priests, to offer up Sacrifice, first for his own sins and then for the peoples; for this he did [once] when he offered up himself: Heb. 9.12.—by his own blood be entred in [once] into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us:—Vers. 26, 27, 28. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now [once] in the end of the world hath be appeared to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment; So Christ was [once] offered to bear the sins of many, &c. Heb. 10.10, 12, 14.

• By the which will we are sanctified, through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ [once] for all. But this man after he had offered [one Sacrifice] for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God: For by [one offering] he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified: Now how shall we reconcile the multiplication of propitiatory Sa∣crifices, the reiteration of Christ's offering, with these Texts? there is (saith the Apostle) but one only propitiatory Sacrifice (that which our Saviour offered upon the Cross); nay (say our Ad∣versaries) but there is, the MASS is a propitiatory Sacrifice also: the true propitiatory Sacrifice (saith he) was made but once; nay but (say they) 'tis not so, it is renew'd, repeated, and made over and over again: Christ (sayes he) did once (and but once) offer up himself; nay (say they) but he is offered again and again, as often as the MASS is celebrated, (in which his body and blood are as really offered as they were when he dy'd upon the Cross): Christ (saith he) by the one oblation of himself hath obtained eternal redemption, put away sin, perfected for ever them that are sanctified; nay (say they) but he hath not, for be∣sides that there must be the propitiatory oblation of him in the Sa∣crament. Now let every person judge whether these things be not flat contradictions to the Word of God (according to what we charge them with).

For the solving of this therefore they give us another pretty distinction, (viz.) of our Saviours bloody and unbloody Sacrifice, of that which was offered on the Cross and that which is offered at the Mass: that (they say) 'tis very true was but once and is not to be iterated, but 'tis not so with the latter; wherefore the A∣postle in all that hath been cited, must be understood as designing to exclude only the multiplying and repeating of the bloody but not of the unbloody Sacrifice; and so the Mass is not at all con∣cerned therein.

To which I answer, in shunning one contradiction they run upon another; for what can be more contradictory to the Word (as also to the nature of the thing) than an unbloody, propitiatory Sacrifice? it sayes* 1.197 Without shedding of blood there's no remission: yes (say they) but there is, in the Sacrament there's no shedding of blood and yet thereby there is remission: do they not still main∣tain that which plainly contradicts the Scripture? and instead of stopping one gap do they not make another? The Apostle after he had been speaking so fully of Christ's Sacrifice upon the Cross, in the perfection and unrepeatableness thereof, draws an inference

universally to exclude all other propitiatory Sacrifices; Heb. 10.18. now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin: they then must be highly bold who will presume to except and limit where the Spirit of God doth not, and where the matter spoken of doth not require any such exception or limitation: nay, where indeed the matter will not bear any such thing (as here it will not); for if by Christ's oblation sin be fully remitted, how can any further Sacrifice be joyned with it in order to remission? To me this is a most necessary principle, (viz.) when men will distinguish upon the letter of the Scripture, so as to affirm what that denyes or to deny what that affirms, or so as to enlarge what that straightens and to straighten what that enlarges; it highly concerns them to look to this, that their distinctions be well grounded upon other Scriptures and consonant thereunto; for otherwise they must run themselves into dangerous errors without all possibility of being convinced; and with∣out this all Religion will be undermin'd, and the Word of God made wholly insignificant: Now to apply this Rule! our Dissenters when we urge the forementioned places (which are so clear and cogent for what we hold,) would put off all by distinguishing of a bloody and unbloody Sacrifice; I desire to know what Scripture∣ground or warrant they have for this distinction (in the sense where∣in they use it)? what is there to be found there to justifie such a thing as an unbloody propitiatory Sacrifice?

Something I know they offer at, but (alas!) 'tis that which will not satisfie or command the faith of such who are serious and considerative. For instance, Gen. 14.18. And MELCHISEDECH King of SALEM brought forth bread and wine, and be was the Priest of the most high God: whence they thus argue, MEL∣CHISEDECH did sacrifice bread and wine, there (say they) was an unbloody Sacrifice, and that which was typical of Christ's Sacri∣fice, and of his being offered at the Sacrament modo incruento under the Species's of bread & wine: therefore there was such a Sacrifice thereat to be offered; which accordingly was done first by Christ himself, and yet is done successively by his Ministers: yea, they tell us that this unbloody Sacrifice was the great thing in respect of which he is said to be a Priest* 1.198 after the order of MELCHISEDECH. Answ. all this is deny'd with the same (but better grounded) confidence with which it is affirm'd: 'tis sad that any should build so great an Article of Faith (as this is amongst the ROMANISTS) upon so weak and sandy a bottom; but how much more sad is it, that mens zeal should be so fierce upon it as to make it a matter of

Life or Death, accordingly as 'tis believ'd or not believ'd? (for the truth is, that which they call the unbloody Sacrifice hath occasional∣ly been made bloody enough, in the death of thousands of Martyrs who could not look upon it as Others do). But as to the Argu∣ment our DIVINES reply,

• (1.) 'Tis not evident, that what MELCHISEDECH here did was done in the way of a Sa∣crifice to God: 'tis said he brought bread & wine, 'tis not said that he offered bread or wine to God; there's a great difference betwixt protulit and obtulit, betwixt a civil gift to Men and a religious offer∣ing to God.* 1.199 JOSEPHƲS carries this bringing of bread and wine, no higher than MELCHISEDECHS kindness or hospitality to ABRAHAM and his weary Souldiers.
• (2.) Suppose this was done in the way of a Sacrifice, how will it be prov'd that it was done in the way of a propitiatory Sacrifice? since 'tis only said that he blessed Abraham (Vers. 19.). Nay
• (3.) suppose that too, yet what will it be to those who cannot (justly) pretend to be ••riests according to the order of MELCHISEDECH, (that be∣ing an incommunicable order)? And
• (4.) the Apostle Heb. 7. opening this MELCHISEDECH (in his Priesthood, and in this very act, shewing how he was the type of Christ and wherein Christ the antitype suited with him), doth not at all instance in his bringing of bread and wine or in his offering any unbloody Sa∣crifice (which surely he would have done, had the resemblance or analogie betwixt Christ and him ly'ne in that), but he instances in the oneness of Melchisedechs Priesthood, in his eternity, in his authori∣tative benediction (even of Abraham himself), in Abraham's pay∣ing tythes to him &c. these are the things wherein all along in that Chapter he illustrates Christ's agreement with MELCHISE∣DECH.

So that for any to infer, from his bringing of bread and wine that Christ at the Sacrament (for I do not love the word MASS) is offered up to God, by every ordinary Priest, as an un∣bloody, propitiatory Sacrifice; I say, for any to make such an inference from such premises, it argues them to be either injudicious or over credulous, or too much devoted to a party. The Paschal Lamb also is alledg'd for the making good of this distinction (with some other things), but neither barrel better herrings, (as is fully made out by our PROTESTANT Writers where persons are not resolv'd to shut their eyes upon the clearest light).

4. Fourthly, In the present contest 'twill be best to have recourse to the institution of the Sacrament. Now if that (with the whole ad∣ministration about it) be consulted, what shall we find to give it

the notion of a Sacrifice? Obj. 'Tis said this we find, Christ there faith Do this in remembrance of me Luk. 22.19. 1 Cor. 11.24. now this hoc facite is as much as hoc sacrificate. Answ. What is it to play with the Scripture if this be not so? a few things being con∣fidered the vanity of this Criticism will soon appear. If this do was as much as this sacrifice, certainly that would have been a thing of such high import, as that of the three Evangelists (which set down the Sacramental institution) two of them would not have wholly omitted it; and yet so it is, LƲKE recites it but MATTHEW and MARK make no mention at all of it. And if that was the sense of the word, then the sacrificing act would lie upon the people as well as upon the Priests, for as the Do this was spoken by Christ to the Disciples Luk. 22.19, so it was also spoken by Paul to the body of the Saints at CORINTH 1 Cor. 11.24. When there's nothing spoken in the whole Institution of the Lord's Supper as referring to a Sacrifice, 'tis somewhat strange that this* 1.200 word should come in by it-self and carry such a Sacrificial sense in it. Besides, doth not that which follows sufficiently clear it up? Do this, how? or for what end? to be a Sacrifice? no, but in re∣membrance of me. We deny not but that† 1.201 facere doth sometimes signifie to sacrifice (answerably to the Hebrew word‖ 1.202 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the Greek* 1.203 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉): but where hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (which is here used) that signification? nay, where have the other words that significa∣tion, but when they are joyn'd with a Noune setting forth a thing that is usually design'd and set apart for Sacrifices? whereas the word here is joyn'd with a bare Pronoune.

Object. But they have a stronger plea than this, grounded upon the words of the Institution: where Christ saith This is my body which is* 1.204 given for you, (and† 1.205 broken for you &c.) This Cup is the new Testament in my blood which is‖ 1.206 shed for you &c. now doth not this body as given and broken, and this blood as shed, prove a Sacrifice? yea, that under the bread and wine there was a real ob∣lation of Christ's body and blood?

Answ. No; unless it be understood (as it ought to be) of his oblation upon the Cross, and not at the Table. When he saith This is my body which is given for you &c. and this is my blood which is shed &c. did he mean that giving of his body or that shedding of his blood which was done just at the Sacrament? that we utterly deny: What then did he mean? why, that which would shortly be when he should die on the Cross; then his boody should be broken and his blood poured out in a real and substantial manner, but not till then.

And this Interpretation is not at all weakened by Christ's expressing himself in the Present Tense [which is given, which is shed], it be∣ing usual in the Scripture to put that Tense for the Paulo-post-futu∣rum: and (I hope) this Answer will not be either opposed or slighted by our Adversaries, since the Vulgar translation it self ren∣ders the words in the Future tense, which shall be given, shall be shed; yea, in their Canon Missae too they are so rendred.

2. But Secondly having shewn what the Lord's Supper is not, I am now to shew what it is. As to that (in brief) 'tis a lively represen∣tation & solemn commemoration of that Sacrifice which the Lord Jesus offered up to God when he dy'd upon the Cross: 'tis not a Sacrifice but a memorial of a Sacrifice; herein lies the nature of this Ordi∣nance and this was the great end of Christ in the instituting of it: Do this (saith he) in remembrance of me Luk. 22.19. As oft as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come 1 Cor. 11.26. This too was the great end of the Passeo∣ver (unto which the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper succeeds); Exod. 12.14. And this shall be unto you for a memorial. Great mercies have alwayes had their* 1.207 memorials that they might not be forgotten; what a mercy was Christ's dying and sacrificing him∣self! what glorious and unspeakable benefits do believers receive thereby! therefore least this should wither and decay in their me∣mories this Ordinance was appointed to be a standing memorial thereof. And this is that notion which the† 1.208 FATHERS had of the Sacrament (though some would fain draw them to be of ano∣ther Opinion, then which nothing more false): 'tis not to be de∣ny'd but that they very often did call it a Sacrifice; yea, sometimes they speak of‖ 1.209 unbloody Sacrifices; but did they thereby mean any real, propitiatory, unbloody Sacrifice in the POPISH sense? no, they explain themselves by the* 1.210 commemorating of Christ's Sa∣crifice, by the offering up of praises, thanksgivings, penitential tears to God (& the like); in which respects only they did so speak of it.

To this also we may add, the Lord's Supper is not only a me∣morial of but a* 1.211 Feast upon Christ's Sacrifice; the believing Soul doth therein by Faith feed and feast it self upon a crucify'd Savi∣our. Antiently Sacrifices were attended with† 1.212 Feasts, nullum Sa∣crificium sine epulo; as soon as the Sacrifice was over men used to have a Feast, to eat and drink together: and this custom pre∣vail'd both amongst‖ 1.213 Jews and Gentiles. Gen. 13.54. Then Jacob offered Sacrifice upon the Mount, and called his brethren to eat bread &c. Exod. 18.12. And Jethro, Moses father-in-law, took burnt offerings and Sacrifices for God: and Aaron came and all the Elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses father-in-law before God: (See also Exod. 34.15. Numb. 25.2. 1 Cor. 10.18. &c.) Now parallel to this, after Christ's Sacrifice there's the Sacramental Feast, wherein the Communicant doth spiritually feed upon the body and blood of the Lord Jesus, eats and drinks of the bread and water of Life: here is not oblatio but participatio Sacrificii. The Apostle having spoken to the Sacrifice, Christ our Passeover is sacri∣ficed for us, he presently subjoyns the Feast which was to go along with that Sacrifice, Therefore let us keep the Feast, not with old lea∣ven &c. 1 Cor. 5.7, 8. At the Sacrament there is not only a commemoraion of Christ's death, but there is the Christians fetch∣ing out of the sweet and comfort thereof for inward strength and nourishment.

Yet further, the Lord's Supper is a Seal of all those blessings which Christ by his Death and Sacrifice did purchase for his; (but this I must pass over). I have been very long upon this Fourth Inferenee, but no longer than what the Nature of the thing and our present state did make to be necessary: 'tis highly requisite that we should all have right apprehensions concerning the blessed Sacrament; therefore to help you therein, and to obviate all PO∣PISH delusions, I have been thus large upon this Head.

* 1.2145. Fifthly, I infer the happiness of such who live under the Gospel above those who liv'd under the Law. 'Tis none of the least of our mercies that we are cast under the Evangelical, rather than under the Legal administration: Old-Testament believers were the elder brethren, but the younger (those who live under the New-Testa∣ment) are the best provided for. For the making out of this, I shall not insist upon the comparing of Sacraments and Sacraments, Priesthood and Priesthood, Priviledges and Priviledges, but only touch upon the matter of Sacrifices. In reference to which we have the advantage in sundry respects: for they (in a manner) had

but the shell, 'tis that we have the kernel; they had but the shadow, 'tis we that have the substance: they had but the type, 'tis we that have the antitype. All their Sacrifices were but darker adumbrati∣ons of that great Sacrifice which is now fully revealed to us and actually exhibited for us: they had variety and multiplicity of them, we have all in one; theirs were costly and burdensom, ours costs us nothing but thankful application; theirs (of themselves) could only cleanse from ritual and civil guilt, ours from all guilt whatsoever; they had the blood of Beasts, we the blood of God's own Son. One of the* 1.215 great differences 'twixt the Covenant of Grace as then and as now dispensed, lies in the difference of the Sacrifices: to them, it was testified and ratified by the blood of or∣dinary Creatures; to us, 'tis so by the blood of Christ; (compare Exod. 24.8. with Matth. 26.28.). Surely we have the advan∣tage over them, God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect, (as 'tis Heb. 11.40.): O what degree of thankfulness can be high enough for that know∣ledge of, interest in, benefit by Christ's Sacrifice which we now have under the Gospel, above what they had who liv'd under the Jewish Sacrifice!

And if our state be better than theirs, how much more is it bet∣ter than the state of the poor Gentiles! As to Jews and Christi∣ans 'tis happiness and happiness compar'd together, but as to Gen∣tiles and Christians 'tis happiness and misery: the Jews had their Sacrifices from God himself, to whom they were offered, and by whom they were owned; but in the Pagan Sacrifices there were none of these; they were neither instituted by God, nor directed to him, therefore it could not be expected that ever they should be blessed by him. And besides this, there was nothing of Christ in their Sa∣crifices; Men-Sacrifices they had, but as to the Sacrifice of Christ God-Man that they knew nothing of: without which, what could all their Sacrifices signifie for the purging away of guilt? They had great variety of them, some blind notions of expiation, purgation, atonement by them, but (alas!) not being offered to the true God, nor back'd with the true and only propitiatory Sa∣crifice of Christ, they were all in vain. They us'd to twit Chri∣stians with their want of* 1.216 Temples, Altars, Sacrifices &c. but we can easily answer them, we have all in Christ; whose one Sa∣crifice upon the Cross was more than all their Hecatombs and Sacri∣fices whatsoever: we may be the objects of their derision, but surely they should be the objects of our compassion; and whilst we

pity them let us be highly* 1.217 thankful for our selves, that ever this one, only, perfect Sacrifice was made known to us as well as offered for us.

* 1.2186. Sixthly, we may from hence take notice of the excellency of Christ's Priesthood and Sacrifice: (I put them together, because they do mutually prove the excellency each of the other; his Priesthood must needs be excellent because he offered up such an excellent Sacrifice, and his Sacrifice must needs be excellent be∣cause it was offered by such an excellent Priest). The setting forth of the excellency of both, is the main scope and business of the Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrews (that full and most E∣vangelical Commentary upon the Levitical Sacrifices); but he re∣duces the latter under the former, proving the glory and excellency of the Priesthood of Christ from the excellency of his Sacrifice. In∣deed in the making out of that, he makes use of several other Mediums or Arguments: as

• (1.) the greatness and dignity of Christ's Person, Heb. 4.14;
• (2.) the extraordinariness of his Call, Heb. 5.4, 5.
• (3.) the preheminence of the Order (according to which he was Priest) above the Aaronical order, (he being Priest after the order of MELCHISEDECH) Heb. 5.6.10.—Chap. 6.20.
• (4.) his oneness and singleness in this office, Heb. 7 23, 24.
• (5.) his solemn inauguration into it, Heb. 7.20, 21.
• (6.) its perpetuity and everlastingness, Heb. 5.6. Heb. 7.16, 24.
• (7.) the excellency of the Sanctuary where 'tis discharg'd, Heb. 8.1. &c. Heb. 9.11, 12, 24.
• (8.) the betterness of the Covenant to which it refers, Heb. 8.6. &c.

All these Heads the Apostle doth distinctly insist upon; but that Medium or Argument which he is most large upon to prove the excellency of Christ's Priesthood, is the excellency of his Sacrifice above all the Law-Sacrifices: and that he makes out

• (1.) from the matter of it. The Priests under the Law offered such and such things only, not themselves: but Christ offered him∣self; they the blood of Creatures, he his own blood; Heb. 9.12. Neither by the blood of Goats and Calves, but by his own blood he en∣tred in once into the holy place &c.—Vers. 14.—How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered him∣self &c.—Vers. 23. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these (i.e. the blood of beasts), but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these: Heb. 1.3. When he had by himself purged our sins: so Heb.

• 7.27.—9.26.
• (2.) From the virtue and efficacy of it: The Law-Sacrifices were weak and unprofitable, could make nothing perfect, Heb. 7.18, 19. could not make him that did the service per∣fect, as pertaining to the Conscience; they only sanctified as to the pu∣rifying of the flesh, Heb. 9.9, 13. It is not possible that the blood of Bulls and of Goats should take away sins, Heb. 10.4. But Christ by his Sacrifice hath obtained eternal redemption Heb. 9.12. that reaches the Conscience to purge it from dead works &c. Heb. 9.14.—
• (3.) Those Sacrifices being thus weak were many, and often to be repeated; but this of Christ having such an efficacy in it was but one, and but once offered, never any more to be repeated: Heb. 7.27. Who needeth not daily as those high Priests to offer up Sacrifice, for this he did once when he offered up himself: Heb. 9.12. by his own blood he entred in once into the holy place—25. &c. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high Priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others: For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself: Heb. 10.1. &c. The Law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those Sacrifices, which they offered year by year continually, make the comers there∣unto perfect: For then would they not have ceased to be offered? be∣cause that the worshippers once purged, should have had no more Con∣science of sins &c. to these now the Apostle opposes Christ's Sa∣crifice Vers. 5, 6, &c. and of that he saith, Vers. 10. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all: Vers. 11, 12. And every Priest standeth daily ministring, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices which can never take away sins: But this man after he had offered one Sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God: Vers. 14. For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. The HEATHENS had their Sacrifices which they call'd* 1.219 Hostiae succedaneae, which they offered up to their GODS in case those which they had offer∣ed before did not succeed: the Lord Jesus by his one Sacrifice did so effectually do what he designed and the Sinner needed, as that there is no room for or need of any hostia succedanea.—
• (4.) The Apostle makes it out from the sanctity of Christ's Person and the per∣fection of his Sacrifice. The Law-Priests offered first for their own sins and then for the sins of the people Heb. 7.27. they ought, as for the people, so also for themselves, to offer for sins Heb. 5.3. the High Priest went once every year into the second Tabernacle, not without

• ...blood, which he offered for* 1.220 himself, and for the errors of the people, Heb. 9.7. But now as to Christ he was holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, Heb. 7.26. he had no sin (of his own) to ex∣piate by his Sacrifice; he was made sin, but yet he knew no sin 2 Cor. 5.21. Under the Law both Priest and Sacrifice were to be perfect, (i. e.) without any open and external blemish: as to the first, reade Levit. 21.17. (to the end); as to the second, God gave several precepts about it; the Paschal Lamb was to be with∣out blemish Exod. 12.5. the oblation for Vows and for Free-will-offerings, the Sacrifice of Peace-offerings were to be without blemish, perfect, otherwise they should not be accepted, Levit. 22.18. to 25. so the red Heifer was to be without spot, and wherein there was no blemish, Numb. 19.2; so the Firstlings of the Cattle, Deut. 15.21; and all Sacrifices whatsoever, Deut 17.1. (And this the* 1.221 HEATHENS themselves made conscience of in their Sacrifices). In correspondency to all this, in a moral and spiritual sense our Lord's Sacrifice was perfect, without the least blemish; he offered himself without spot to God Heb. 9.14. he was a Lamb without blemish and without spot 1 Pet. 1.19.—
• (5.) The excellency of Christ's Sacrifice appears from the great effects of it;—he put a∣way sin by the sacrifice of himself Heb. 9.26. so that there is no more offering for sin Heb. 10.18. being made perfect, he became the au∣thor of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him Heb. 5.9. by this Sacrifice sin was condemned, abolished, expiated; God appeased; the Law satisfied;† 1.222 eternal redemption obtained; O what an excellent Sacrifice was Christ's Sacrifice! and consequently what an excel∣lent Priesthood was Christ's Priesthood!

* 1.2237. Seventhly, was Christ a Sacrifice for sin in order to the con∣demning of it? and could it be condemn'd by nothing short of that? hence we are informed that Sin is a very evil thing and of a very heinous nature. Had it not been a notorious and capital Offen∣der, would God have condemn'd, and thus condemn'd it? would he so severely have punished it in the flesh of his own Son? must even this Son be offered up upon the Cross as a Sacrifice for the expiation of it? O what a cursed heinous thing is sin! that had made such a breach between God and his Creatures, that Christ must die or else no reconciliation; that had so highly struck at the Honour of the great God, that nothing below the sharpest sufferings of his dearest Son could make Satisfaction for it; its poison and venom was such, that there was no cure for the Sinner (into whom that poyson had got) but only the precious blood of Christ himself: God had

such an hatred and abhorring of it, as that for the* 1.224 testifying there∣of, even he (whom he lov'd from all eternity) must be made a† 1.225 Curse; what a demonstration was this of the transcendency of the evil of Sin! Would you take a full view thereof? pray look up∣on it in and through this glass; a sacrific'd Christ gives the clearest, the fullest representation of sins hainousness. True, we may see much of that in Sins own Nature (as 'tis the transgression of God's most holy and most excellent Law); as also in the threatnings which are denounc'd against it; and further in the dreadful Effects of it, both here and hereafter, (the loss of God's image, and favour, and eternal damnation); is it not a very evil thing? What a mis∣chievous thing hath this sin been! it cast the falling Angels out of Heaven into Hell and turn'd them into Devils; it thrust Adam out of Paradise, made God to be an enemy to him who but now was his favourite, cut off the entail of happiness, and instead thereof entail'd misery and a curse upon all his posterity; it made God at once to drown a whole world, it laid Sodom in ashes, levell'd Jeru∣salem it-self to the ground, caused God to forsake his own people the Jews &c. ('twould be endless to enumerate all the sad mis∣chiefs of Sin).

Now (I say) in these things we may see much of the evil of it, but not so much as what we see in the Death and Sufferings of the Lord Christ; there, there is the highest discovery and fullest representation of it: He to be* 1.226 a man of sorrows and ac∣quainted with grief? he to be bruised and broken, yea and his Fa∣ther to be† 1.227 pleased in the bruising of him? he in his own person to undergo the Laws penalty? to tread the‖ 1.228 winepress of the wrath of God? he to be* 1.229 obedient to death, even the death of the Cross? he to cry out My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? he to be kill'd, and slain, and† 1.230 hang'd upon a tree? and all this for sin? O what an excess of evil doth this hold forth to be in it! Indeed that the poor Creatures should be so destroy'd in the Law-Sacrifices, that so many millions of them (they in themselves being harmless and innocent) should die and be sacrific'd for mans sin, this repre∣sents very much of its cursed nature; but yet that comes infinitely short of that representation thereof which we have in a dying, crucify'd, sacrific'd Christ: the death of all those Sacrifices was nothing to the death of this one Sacrifice; whereby Sin eminently appears in its own colours. What a sad thing is it that men gene∣rally make so little a thing of it (as though there was not much evil either in it or by it)! but in so doing how do their thoughts

differ from God's thoughts! for surely if he had not judg'd it to be very heinous, he had never carried it towards his Son as he did. I would desire Sinners to take their prospect of it through this me∣dium, of Christ's being a Sacrifice for it; if any thing in the world will bring them to the sight of its malignity, this will do it. It pleases God to look upon believers through a dying Christ, and so he loves them; but could we but look upon Sin (a thing never to be lov'd) through a dying Christ, how should we hate it!

* 1.2318. Eightly, this demonstrates also the severity, impartiality, ter∣ribleness of God's Justice. By Christ's death and Sacrifice we have not only a declaration of the Justice of God in it-self, (in that he would not remit sin without blood for satisfaction Rom. 3.25.), but a declaration also of the adjuncts and properties of his Justice, (viz.) that 'tis very severe, impartial, and terrible. He was in∣flexibly set upon the punishment of sin; such was his hatred of it and his respect to the honour of his Law, that Sin shall not by any means escape his punishing hand: and every punishment too shall not suffice, but if shall be such as may fully answer the heinousness of the offence; I and if his own Son shall interpose in the Sinners stead, and take his guilt upon him, and become his Surety, even he (be he never so dear to God) must undergo the utmost punish∣ment (that ever he was capable of) both for matter and degree; God will fall upon him and* 1.232 not spare him, no not in the least; O how severe and impartial is his Justice! Never was there such an instance or demonstration of these, as in the sufferings of the Lord Jesus: For (pray consider) what it was that he suffered; besides all the sufferings of his Life, at last he suffered death; and that not a common or ordinary death, but the very worst of deaths; a death that had all ingredients into it to make it bitter, wherein was all that bitterness which either the wrath of man or (which was much worfe) of God himself could sqeeze into it: And though Christ (foreseeing what this death was) pray'd again and again that he might be* 1.233 saved from it, that this† 1.234 cup might pass from him, yet his Father was inexorable and would not hear him; but die he must, and so die too; surely here was divine Justice under the highest se∣verity and impartiality, (yet without the least mixture of injustice). And when the thoughts and sense of this were upon Christ, they made his‖ 1.235 Soul exceeding sorrowful, cast him into most bitter ago∣nies, insomuch that* 1.236 he sweat as it were great drops of blood falling to the ground; how dreadful and terrible is punitive Justice!

what a* 1.237 fearful thing is it to fall into the hands of the living God! this we see and know in our Saviours case, O that we may never know and feel it in our own experience!

I might further infer from the premises (9.) the unsearchable Wisdom of God. (10.) also his unconceiveable Love and Grave: (11.) the preciousness of Souls: (12.) the costliness of Salvation. (13.) the great dignity of Christ's person, from which his Sacrifice deriv'd all its vir••ue & efficacy: (but I must not speak to all that this vast Sub∣ject would lead me to). So much for the Inferences drawn from the main Point.

2. The next Ʋse shall be Exhortation,* 1.238 in which I would press some of those Duties which do best suit with the Truth before us: hitherto I have chiefly been upon the informing of the judgment, I now come to matters of practice.

* 1.2391. And first, as Christ's Sonship and Incarnation (of which be∣fore) so his being a Sacrifice, and thereby condemning sin, should be very much the object of your study and meditation. This you are to study that you may know more of it; to meditate upon, that you may draw out and improve what you already know about it, (for so I would at present distinguish betwixt these two, supposing the one to be like the filling of the vessel, the other like the drawing out of that vessel). As to the first, I would be earnest with you to be much in studying a sacrific'd, crucify'd Christ; if the knowledge of him as taking flesh is to be laboured after (as you have heard it is), surely the knowledge of him as dying in flesh, and as con∣demning sin in his flesh, is also to be laboured after. In this Sacrifice of Christ you have the very mirror of the Grace of God, the master∣piece and highest elevation of his Love, the glorious product of his infinite Wisdom, the great basis and foundation of mans happiness; should it not therefore with the greatest diligence be look'd into? Our excellent Apostle determin'd to know nothing save Jesus Christ, and him crucified 1 Cor. 2.2. the preaching of this was the great mat∣ter of his Ministry, 1 Cor. 1.23. We preach Christ crucified—; and he makes the Gospel in its revelation mainly to point to this, which therefore he calls 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the word of the Cross 1 Cor. 1.18. it being so, how should the consideration hereof heighten our endeavours after a full and distinct knowledge of it! God's own Son to be offered up as a Sacrifice for the sin of man? O ad∣mirable and wonderful dispensation! what a mystery is this! how should all be prying into it! Here we have Christ at his worst; now the knowledge of him as at the worst is the best knowledge for

Christians; for they having their best by his worst, the knowledge of him (under that notion) must needs be the best knowledge for them. If Christ, as a Sacrifice, in the full import thereof, was but better understood by Sinners, O what benefit and advantage would thereby accrue to them! how steddily would they believe, how ardently would they love, how patiently would they suffer, how thankfully would they adore, how chearfully would they walk! should not these be prevailing inducements to such to labour after a fuller knowledge of him (as so considered)? But in the enforcing of this duty let me not be mistaken; 'tis not a notional, historical knowledge only of Christ as sacrific'd that I would have you to pursue after, but I would state it as practical, as operative and powerful; this, this is that knowledge which is to be desired. When Paul had spoken so high of the knowledge of Christ,* 1.240 Yea doubtless and I count all things but loss, for the excellency of the know∣ledge of Christ Jesus my Lord; see how he opens that knowledge of him which he look'd upon as so excellent; Vers. 10. That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death. 'Tis a poor thing to have light about this in the head, if that light be not attended with power and efficacy upon the heart and life; the clearest notions concerning Christ's death without suitable impressions within, and that which in the Sinner himself may bear some analogie and con∣formity thereunto, do not profit: O therefore so study a crucified Saviour as to be* 1.241 crucified with him,† 1.242 dead with him; so as to feel the energie of his death in the heavenliness of your affections, and holiness of your conversations; this is the knowledge which we should study and pray for and aspire after.

For the Second, Christ as a Sacrifice is also much to be meditated upon: O how frequent, how serious and fixed should our thoughts be upon this! how should we be often reviving this upon our minds, never suffering it to decay or wither in our memories! This is so great and necessary a duty, that we have an Ordinance in∣stituted by Christ on purpose and for this very end, often to inminde us of his dying (as our Sacrifice) and to keep it fresh upon our memories for ever:* 1.243 Do this in remembrance of me; As oft as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. But 'tis not enough to think of this just before or at the Sacrament, but we should live in daily, frequent meditation upon it: I say we should do so, but (alas!) 'tis to be feared we do not so; O how little is a dying, crucified Christ thought of! the dying Friend or

Relation is remembred, but the dying Saviour is forgotten: this pro∣claims to the world that we have but a low sense of his great love, that we see but little in his oblation; for surely if we did, we should think oftner of it, and after another manner, than now we do. Christians! pray be sensible of former neglects, and let it be better for the future; let not a day pass over you wherein some time shall not be spent in remembring and considering what Christ your Sacrifice upon the Cross suffered for you. Upon this also you would reap great advantages; for certainly was Christ's death but duly thought of and improved, Oh 'twould highly imbitter sin, effectually wean from the world and the sensual delights thereof, mightily encourage and strengthen Hope and Faith, strongly engage the Soul to Obedience &c. therefore pray be persuaded to think less of other things and more of this! And do not barely think of it but think what there's in it; yea labour to go to the very bottom of it, and by serious meditation to press out all that juyce and sweetness which is in it: the believer should be alwayes sitting up∣on this flower and sucking comfort from it. What's the full breast to the child that doth not draw it? Christ as a Sacrifice for sin is a full breast, but yet if Sinners by Faith, Prayer and Meditation, do not draw from this breast, they will be little the better for it. He was indeed but once offered, but that one oblation is often to be re∣membred and continually to be improved (with respect both to Duty and Comfort): how that is to be done the following particu∣lars will shew.

* 1.2442. This should have a very powerful influence upon you to break your hearts for sin and from sin. First for sin: was Christ indeed made a Sacrifice? as such was his body broken and his precious blood poured forth? did he undergo such sufferings in his life, and then compleat all in his dying on the Cross? and all for sin? how can this be thought of (with any seriousness) and the heart not be kindly and thoroughly broken! what will cause the hard heart to melt and thaw into godly sorrow for sin, if the consideration of Christ's Sacrifice and death will not do it! Oh me thinks his blood (as shed for Sinners) should soften the most Adamantine heart that is. Did we but consider our Saviours passion in the matter and quality of it, in its bitter ingredients and heightning circumstances; and then also consider that our sins were the meritorious cause of it, that they brought him to the Cross and laid the foundation of all his sorrows; did we (I say) but consider this, certainly we should be more deeply afflicted for Sin than now we are.

What? that I should be accessary to the death of the Son of God? that I should bring the nails and spears which should pierce him? that I should be the occasion of all his sufferings in Soul and Bo∣dy what a cutting, heart-breaking consideration is this! Zech. 12. 10.—they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, (what fol∣lows?) and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only Son; and shall be in bitterness for him as one that is in bitterness for his first-born: the true penitent cannot look upon a crucified Savi∣our (especially when he considers what he hath done to further his Saviours crucifixion,) without the highest degree of holy grief. But especially this heart-brokenness should be in us when we are at the Sacrament, where we have such a sensible and lively representa∣tion of Christ's Death and Sacrifice: Oh shall we there see his broken body, and yet our hearts be unbroken? shall we view him there shedding his blood, and we shed no penitential tears? shall we there behold what he endured and felt for Sin, and we yet have no pain, no contrition for it? how unsuitable is such a frame to such an object, under such a representation! What was the temper think you of the Women who were* 1.245 spectators of Christ when he was hanging upon the Cross? unquestionably they were filled with inex∣pressible sorrow: why (Sirs!) when you are at the Lord's Table, in a spiritual way you see him also as dying upon the Cross, he is there before your eyes evidently set forth and crucified among you (Gal. 3.1.); Oh how should your* 1.246 eye affect your heart, even to fill you with Evangelical sorrow!

* 1.247But this is not enough, therefore (2.) there must be brokenness from sin as well as for sin: surely after such a thing as Christ's death Sin must be lov'd and liv'd no more; the heart must eternally be broken off from it. Pray look into the Text and see what pressing motives there are in it for this:

• (1.) Here's Christ dying as a Sa∣crifice, making his Soul an offering for sin. Now (Sinners!) shall that live in you or will you live in that which made your Saviour to die? shall he die for sin and will you yet live in sin? shall his death (as to you) be in* 1.248 vain? will you continue sin upon the Throne when Christ was upon the Cross? do you desire to have him there again, crucified afresh (as the Apostle speaks Heb. 6.6.)? would you renew his wounds and cause them to bleed again? was it not enough for such a person to be once sacrific'd? can you made even through his precious blood to the gratifying of your base lusts? O dreadful! I remember that passage of DAVID 2 Sam. 23.15. &c. where you find him longing for the waters of Bethlehem,

• Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the Well of Bethlehem which is by the gate: upon this his earnest desire, three of his mighty men brake through the Host of the Philistines and brought him some of this water; but (saith the story) he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord: why so? O (saith he) be it far from me that I should do this; is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? So here; sometimes your desires and inclinations are strongly carried out to such and such sins, but pray consider there's blood in the case; those sins cost Jesus Christ his blood, he did not only jeopard but actually lose his life; will you then meddle with them (be they never so sweet or pleasing to the flesh)? I hope you will not, I'm sure you should not. To strengthen this further, pray consider what Christ's end (or ends) were in his being thus a Sacrifice: they refer either to God or to you; to God, as he design'd to satisfie his Justice, appease his Wrath, vin∣dicate his Honour &c. to you, as he design'd your Sanctification, Holiness, the abolition of Sins power &c. (I say, the abolition of sins power; for though the primary end and the most immediate effect of Christ's Sacrifice was the expiation of its guilt, yet in sub∣ordination to this (however in conjunction with it), the breaking of its power and freedom from its evil acts were by him also aimed at therein: Gal. 1.4. Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God, and our Father. Tit. 2.14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purifie unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. 1 Pet. 2.24. Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we being dead to sin, should live unto righteousness, by whose stripes ye were healed. Now was this one of Christ's great Ends in his sacrificing of himself, and shall he not have it? hath he accomplished his ends with respect to God and shall he not accomplish his ends with respect to you? would you divide and compound with him to let him have half of what he design'd and purchas'd, but no more? would you separate between Justification and Sanctification? (that will not be allowed). How smartly doth the Apostle argue for the death of sin from the death of Christ! Rom. 6.3. to the 11. Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resur∣rection:

• Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For be that is dead, is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: knowing that Christ being raised from the dead, dieth no more, death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin o••e: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Sirs! was Christ sacrific'd for sin? I'le tell you what we should now do, let us sacrifice our sins for Christ; there's a great difference in the sense of the one and of the other, yet (take but that aright) and both are true; Christ was a blessed Person and he was sacrific'd out of love, but Sin is a cursed thing which therefore must be sacrific'd out of hatred; 'twas pity that Christ should die, 'tis pity that sin should live: He was sacrific'd for our sin that he might take that away which was injurious to us, we must sacrifice our sins for him that we may take that away which is so injurious and offensive to him. But to go on in the Text!
• (2.) God condemned sin: there's very much in this also to set us against sin (in whatever notion the word condemning be ta∣ken); did God condemn it, and shall we approve of it? hath he pass'd a sentence of death upon it, and shall we yet be for the life of it (as if we would reverse or contradict his sentence or hinder the execution of it)? did he look upon it as a traitor, rebel, capital offender, and shall we look upon it as an harmless and innocent thing? hath he in the death of his Son given out such a declaration of his hatred of it, and shall we yet love it, and like it, and live in it? Yea
• (3.) God condemned sin in the flesh of Christ: now shall it be judged, punished, abolished in Christ's Flesh, and yet* 1.249 reign in ours? shall he in his flesh suffer for it, and we in ours commit it? what an absurd incongruous thing would this be! Upon the whole matter therefore, how do we all stand engaged by the strongest obligations that are possible, to be holy and not to sin! let it be condemned in our flesh as (in a different respect) it was con∣demn'd in Christ's; as God hath condemn'd it (so as that we shall not die for it), so let us condemn it (so as not to live in it). And (in special) whenever it shall come to tempt you to what is evil, pray remember that Christ was made a Sacrifice for it; and let it appear by your holy and circumspect walking that you have a due sense, thereof, and that you do not from thence fetch any encouragement to sin against God, (which was one of* 1.250 PORPHYRY's Ob∣jections

• against Sacrifices in general, viz. they would encourage men to be wicked).

* 1.2513. Thirdly, I would excite you to labour after, and to make sure of a personal interest in this great Sacrifice, and in the benefits resulting from it. For 'tis a thing to be resented with the greatest sadness imaginable, that where ••ere is such a Sacrifice (so at first offered up to God, and now so revealed to men,) that yet so many millions of Souls should perish, and (as to their spiritual and eternal state) be little the better for it; because they regard not (as to themselves) either the thing or the good that flows from it. My Brethren! I beseech you (if you have any love for your Souls) let it not be so with you; but let it be your greatest care to secure an interest in this Sacrifice, and to partake of the blessings procured by it: be of∣ten considering and questioning with your selves, here's a Sacrifice for expiation and atonement, but what's this to us? here's a dying Christ, but did he die for us? shall we be ever the better for his death? if this propitiatory oblation be not ours what will become of us? Under the Law the Gentile-strangers were to offer Sacri∣fices as well as the born-Jews, (see Numb. 15.14, 15. Lev. 17.8.); and amongst the Jews the poor as well as the rich; with respect to which difference in mens outward condition, God accordingly ap∣pointed different Sacrifices (Lev. 14.21.); but yet something or other both were to Sacrifice: and in their offerings for the ransome of their Souls all were to give alike; Exod. 30.15. The rich shall not give more, the poor shall not give less than half a Shekel: Now all this was to shadow out two things about Christ's Sacrifice;

• (1.) its equal extent to all men, notwithstanding all national or civil differences; be they Jews or Gentiles, rich or poor, 'tis the same Christ to all (if they believe), for there is no difference Rom. 3.22.—
• (2.) the equal obligation lying upon all men to look after, make sure of, and rest in this one and the same all-sufficient Sacrifice; none (in order to remission, justification, atonement, eternal life) need to carry more to God (by Faith and Prayers), and none must carry less.

Sirs! let us all put in for a share in Christ's offering, and in the benefits purchased thereby; for if we should come short of that, we are lost eternally. Are not reconciliation with God, the expiation of sin, eternal redemption &c. things most necessary and most desireable? if so, where can we hope to have them but in a sacrific'd Redeemer? but in the imputation of the merit of his death and Sacrifice? And I add, do not only make sure of the thing (objectively considered), but labour also after the subjective

assurance of it: Oh when a Christian can say Christ dy'd for me,* 1.252 gave himself for me, his body was broken and his blood shed for me, he took my guilt and bare my punishment; how is he filled with† 1.253 joy unspeakable, with| 1.254 peace that passes all understanding! what a full-tyde of comfort is there in his Soul! This is the re∣ceiving of the atonement (as some open it), and that is very sweet; Rom. 5.11. And not only so, but we also joy in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

* 1.2554. In the actings of Faith eye Christ as a Sacrifice for sin, and there let all your hope and confidence be bottom'd. I say, in the actings of Faith eye Christ as a Sacrifice; for indeed this grace hath to do with him mainly and principally as dying and sacrific'd: the Apostle speaks of Faith in his blood Rom. 3.25. 'tis a bleeding, crucified Saviour that is the great and most proper object of Faith: true it takes in a whole Christ, all of Christ, his Nativity, holy Life, Re∣surrection, Ascension, Intercession &c. but that which it primarily and chiefly fixes upon is his death and passion. When a Soul is brought into Christ to close with him in the way of believing, what of him is first in its eye in that act? is it a Christ as ascending, as sitting at the right hand of God, as interceding? no, (thus it beholds him for the after-encouragement and support of Faith); but that which it first considers is a Christ as dying upon the Cross, and so it layes hold upon him. And no wonder that 'tis so, since all the great blessings of the Gospel do mainly flow from Christ's death; they are assur'd and apply'd by his Resurrection, Ascension and Intercession, but they were procur'd and purchas'd by his death (as the Scriptures abundantly shew, Rom. 5.9, 10. Eph. 1.7. et passim): now tnat which hath the most causal and most immediate influence upon these, that deserves to be first and most eyed by Faith. Here's the difference 'twixt Faith and Love; this chiefly looks to the excellencies of Christ's Person, but that to the merit and efficacy of his Sacrifice. When the Apostle Gal. 2.20. had spoken so high of his Faith in the Son of God, he tells you in what notion he did therein consider him, by adding who loved me and gave him∣self for me. The stung Israelite was to look upon the brazen Ser∣pent as lifted up, and so he was healed; do you desire to find healing, redemption, salvation by Christ? O look upon him as lifted up upon the Cross, so all good shall come to you.

Further I say, let all your hope and confidence be bottom'd here: this is that firm rock which you must only build upon for pardon, peace with God, salvation, for all. Oh take heed of relying upon

any thing besides this Sacrifice; Gal. 6.14. God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ: he that glory's or trusts in any thing besides that, his glorying is vain. The for∣lorn undone Sinner should be alwayes clasping and clinging about this Cross, resting upon the merit of Christ thereon, and upon that only; for all that hope will be but dying hope which is not solely bottom'd upon a dying Saviour. The* 1.256 Heathens could not be∣lieve that ever the death of Sacrifices should do the guilty person good, they look'd upon it as folly to hope for life by anothers death: but (blessed be God) we see that which they did not! we firmly be∣lieve and steadily hope for expiation and Salvation by Christ's one offering of himself, and lay the sole stress of our Faith and happi∣ness upon that which they counted folly. But let us be sure we do not mistake here, I mean let us indeed place our whole confidence in Christ's meritorious death, for if we rely partly upon that, and part∣ly upon something else, we spoyl all.

* 1.2575. Fifthly, you must so confide and relie upon Christ's one, most perfect, and all-sufficient Sacrifice, as yet withal to be careful that you (on your part) do perform those Gospel-conditions which God enjoyns and requires of you, in order to remission, justification, glorification: (this word of advice is so necessary that 'tis by no means to be passed over). Christians! 'tis a thing of very high importance for you rightly to understand your selves in this matter; therefore take it thus: All your trust and relyance is solely to be bottomed upon the Death and Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus; but yet you can∣••ot regularly and warrantably act this trust and relyance upon this ••nly ground or foundation, unless in your own persons you perform those conditions which God prescribes in his Word. The whole business of merit and satisfaction lies upon Christ, that is wholly out of your hands and only in his; but as to believing and repenting (the two grand Gospel-conditions) they lie upon your selves, (I speak with respect to the act, not to the power,) and must be done by your selves: yea, and the doing of these is as necessary on your part under the notion of Conditions, as suffering and dying was on Christ's part under the notion of merit. And 'tis most certain that the latter without the former will not profit you, because Christ never design'd to impute or make over his merit to any, further than as they should make good these Conditions of Faith and Repen∣tance. We have here two dangerous rocks before us (and it must be our care and skill to shun both of them); the one is the setting of inherent grace or duty too high, as when we make it to share

with Christ in merit and trust; the other is the setting of inhe∣rent grace or duty too low, as when upon the pretence of Christ's alone merit and full satisfaction, we quite throw it off and are alto∣gether careless about it, as supposing it now to be a thing wholly unnecessary: Now we are exceedingly prone to dash upon the one or the other of these rocks; either we run our selves upon PO∣PERY (in the former), or upon ANTINOMISM and LIBER∣TINISM (in the latter); O what need have all to beg the guidance of the unerring Spirit, that thereby they may eavenly steere betwixt both and avoid each extreams! which they shall most happily do, if Christ and his Sacrifice be only eyed by them in the way of re∣lyance, and yet Holiness, Obedience, Faith, Repentance have also that respect which is due to them as means and conditions. Much hath been said concerning the perfection and sufficiency of Christ's Sacri∣fice, that he hath thereby put away all sin, fully expiated its guilt, perfected for ever them that are sanctified &c. shall any now from hence infer that all is done by Christ, that the Creature hath no∣thing to do but only to receive the benefits prepared and purchased? God forbid! True, Christ's Sacrifice was perfect in suo genere but not in omni genere; 'twas perfect as to what was meritorious and satisfactory, so as to exclude all other Sacrifices and supplements whatsoever upon that account; but not so as to exclude all Condi∣tions which God will have the Creature to perform: which though they can add nothing to the perfecting of the believers great Sacrifice, yet they do prepare and fit Sinners for the partici∣pation of the benefits merited thereby.

To instance in all these Conditions, or to enlarge upon any one of them, would be a long work; briefly therefore, as ever you de∣sire to be the better for a dying Saviour, to share in the great and blessed effects of his Sacrifice, look to it that you repent and believe. O if you be found at last in the number of the impenitent and un∣believing, all that Christ hath done or suffered will be a very no∣thing to you; notwithstanding all that you will eternally perish. Here is indeed an expiatory Sacrifice, I but yet (as to you) no re∣pentance, no expiation; here is Sin condemned by Christ's oblation of himself, I but yet if the Sinner doth not penitentially condemn ••n in himself and himself for sin, for all this hee'l be judicially con∣demned at the great day. The Scripture every where makes re∣pentance the way to and condition of remission of sin, Acts 2.38. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins & Acts 5.31. Him hath God exalted with

his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins: (with very many other places to this purpose). The Apostle having said 1 Joh. 1.7. The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin; presently subjoyns Vers. 9. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness: great is the efficacy of Christ's blood, but 'tis upon condition of the Sinners Repentance, if we confess our sins &c. At the JEWISH anniversary Expiation all the sins of the people were by the Sacrifices done away, yet God would have them then to afflict their Souls Levit. 16.29. and the High Priest was (in their stead) to confess their iniquities and all their transgressions in all their sins (Vers. 21.): we under the Gospel have our great expiation by the death of Christ, but this also must be attended with penitential abasement and humilation. So likewise as to Faith: this too is a grace or condition indispensa∣bly necessary to the partaking of the benefits of Christ's propitiato∣ry Sacrifice. Therefore the Apostle (speaking of propitiation) brings in our Faith as well as Christ's blood, it having an instru∣mental as well as that a meritorious influence thereupon; Rom. 3.25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood &c. To the blessings of the new Covenant as the blood of Christ was necessary, that thereby there might be* 1.258 impetration; so Faith also is necessary, that thereby there may be application. Our Lord's Sacrifice is every way sufficient for atonement, yet he that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on him, Joh. 3.36; so also 'tis sufficient for expiation, yet 'tis only whosoever believeth on him shall receive remission of sins, Acts 10.43. Under the Law the blood of the Sacrifice was to be so and so* 1.259 sprinkled with a bunch of hyssope, (to which custom David alludes Psal. 51.7. Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean): now answerably to this, Paul speaks of the blood of sprinkling Heb. 12.24. 'twas not enough for Christ only to shed his blood, but that must be sprinkled upon the Sinner, how? why by Faith (which under the Gospel answers to the hyssop under the Law). Well! after our Savi∣ours being an offering for sin as we have nothing further to do but only (through Grace enabling of us)* 1.260 to perform these Evan∣gelical conditions; so nothing less than that will serve our turn for a share and interest in the great effects and fruits thereof.

* 1.2616. Sixthly, you are not to rest in some one, single application of your selves, or in the first application of your selves at your first be∣lieving to this great Sacrifice, for expiation and remission; but you

are to repeat and renew it daily. For though ('tis true) all the guilt of believers is removed thereby, yet that is done in this me∣thod, 'tis removed as 'tis contracted, and as the benefit of it is ac∣cordingly drawn forth by the fresh applications of it. O do not rest in what you did at your first Conversion, but be you every day ap∣plying your selves to a sacrific'd Christ! new guilt must have new pardons, and daily sins call for daily expiations. 'Tis observable, that Christ is set forth not only by the yearly expiatory Sacrifices, or by those that were but seldom offered; but also by the daily Sacri∣fices; Joh. 1.29. Behold the Lamb of God &c. We should not lie down in our beds at night, before we have applyed our selves to a dying Christ, for the cleansing of our persons from the guilt of the sins of the day past. Yea, we should never go to God in du∣ty but we should revive upon our thoughts and make use of this Sacrifice: Under the Law the blood was to be sprinkled even upon the Mercy-seat, Levit. 16.14. God sits upon a Throne of Mercy, but even that requires the blood of Christ; no mercy from him, no acceptance with him can be expected, but upon the intervention of this Sacrifice.

* 1.2627. Seventhly, Upon this Sacrifice and what followed thereupon God and Christ are highly to be admired and adored by you. This holy admiration hath been already again & again press'd upon you, under the foregoing gracious acts mention'd in the Text; but surely that (which is now before us) doth as much deserve and call for it as they or any other whatsoever: Is God to be admired because he sent his own Son? because he sent this Son in flesh? yea in the likeness of sinful flesh? and is he not to be admired also for his making of him to be a Sacrifice for sin? and for the condemning of sin in his flesh? doubtless he is! What? Christ a Sacrifice? a Sa∣crifice for such as we? such great things brought about thereby? O what matter is here to draw out admiration! what so great, so wonderful as this! how much are the highest thoughts, the most raised affections below the greatness of this mystery! It hath (my Brethren) been largely set before you, now I would ask How are your hearts affected with it? 'tis very sad, if we can hear of such stupendious mercy and yet be but little wrought upon under the hearing of it. Pray fancy to your selves what the Angels thought of this, what frame they were in when they saw the Son of God hanging and dying upon the Cross (as an expiatory Sacrifice); Oh you may well suppose that it fill'd them with astonishment, they were even amaz'd at this strange and wonderful spectacle; never

such wondring in Heaven as when the Lord Jesus was thus suffering on earth: now shall that be little to you which was so great to them? shall they thus admire, and will you (who were most con∣cern'd in the thing and the greatest gainers by it) be stupid and unaffected? In Christ's being a Sacrifice God (on his part) hath display'd and advanc'd all his Attributes, yea, they by this have re∣ceived their utmost advancement; infinite Wisdom, Justice, Holiness, Mercy, could go no higher than a Christ crucifi'd: and (on your part) by this your work is done, your happiness being every way secur'd and your misery fully prevented; by this you are reconcil'd to God and God to you, condemning-sin is condemn'd it-self, all its guilt expiated, the righteousness of the Law fulfill'd &c. by a strange and unthought-of method God hath fetch'd the greatest good out of the greatest evil, by Christ's dying you live: all which being con∣sidered, is there not sufficient ground why you (and all) should admire and adore God? And (amongst other things) pray in special admire his love, his transcendent, superlative, matchless love: what manner of love was this that God should give his Son to be a sacrifice for you! 1 Joh. 4.10. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Rom. 5.8. But God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Had not Christ been a person infinitely dear to God, the thing had not been so much; but that he should devote him to be sacrific'd whom he so dearly lov'd, there's the incomprehensibleness of his love. 'Tis re∣ported of the PHOENICIANS that in their Sacrifices they did not use to Sacrifice an enemy or a stranger, but* 1.263 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 some one that they had a special love for: this I'm sure was done by God in his giving of the Son of his love to be a Sacrifice for us; therefore what admiration can be high enough for him! When* 1.264 Abrahaham had the knife in his hand and was just going to offer his Son Isaac, God stop'd his hand, and provided a cheaper Sacrifice for him: this was more than what he did for his own Son, him he would have to be offered up, and would admit of no other Sacrifice; and when the hand of Justice was lifted up, ready to destroy us, then God (to secure us) interpos'd and found out a Sacrifice of propitiation, not a Ram but his only begotten Son: O the heights, bredths, lengths, depths of his love!

And must not Christ be admired also? surely yes! was not his love too admirable as well as the Fathers? Oh well might the A∣postle say Gal. 2.20. Who loved me, and gave himself for me:

Eph. 5.2. And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour: Vers. 25.—as Christ also loved the Church and gave himself for it. Rev. 1.5. Ʋnto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood: this was loving indeed! When the* 1.265 JEWS saw Jesus weeping over LAZARƲS, they said, Be∣hold how he loved him! but (alas!) what was Christs weeping o∣ver him to his dying for us! what was the shedding of a few tears to the shedding of his blood! how may we come with a more emphati∣cal Behold, behold how he loved us! He that* 1.266 knew no sin was wil∣ling to be made sin,† 1.267 to bear our sins in his own body vpon the tree, to put himself in our stead, yea to die in our stead, for our sakes to be‖ 1.268 obedient to death even the death of the Cross, to let out his precious blood for the expiation of sin (when nothing else would do it), and when all Mosaical Sacrifices were weak he (by a far higher Sacrifice) undertook the work,* 1.269 Lo, I come to do thy will, O God: was not here love? even love† 1.270 passing knowledge? such high affection on his part should draw out high admiration on our part.

Let me here add, we should so admire God and Christ as to love them and to be thankful: Have they‖ 1.271 so loved us and shall not we return love for love? what monsters and prodigies shall we be, if af∣ter such a manifestation of their love to us there be not reciprocati∣on of our love to them! God design'd and prepar'd the Sacrifice, therefore he must have our love; Christ was the Sacrifice, there∣fore he must have our love too: both deserve it, both must have it. Joh. 10.17. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life—; now doth the Father love him for this, and shall not we much more? did we but think of this Sacrifice and hold our hearts close to it in holy meditation, surely it would cause them to love Christ!

Then (I say) be thankful; yea, let your whole Soul upon this go out in thankfulness; be ever praising, magnifying God for his unspeakable mercy in Christ your Sacrifice, your Redeemer, your Saviour: often call upon your sluggish hearts and say, Bless the Lord, O my Soul, and all that is within me bless his holy name. Did God* 1.272 set forth Christ to be a propitiation? did he† 1.273 lay upon him the iniquities of you all? was the chastisement of your peace upon him, and by his stripes are you healed? that guilt and wrath which would have ruin'd you for ever, are they now both done away, so as that they shall never hurt you? did Christ

die* 1.274 that you might not die, but live for ever? did you sin and he suffer? was the † innocent person punished that the guilty might be acquitted? was sin condemned for you who deserv'd to be condemn'd for it? what praise and admiration can be high enough for such things as these! The JEWS in the day of atonement were to make the trumpet sound throughout their land, Lev. 25.9. So we, having received the atonement by Christ's Sacrifice should evermore be sounding forth the praises of the most high. You reade of the Elders Rev. 5.8. &c. they fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of Saints: And they sang a new son, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood &c.* 1.275 Christians! why are not your harps alwayes in your hands? why are not your Souls alwayes full of holy affections (as the golden Vials full of odours), in the remembrance of him who was slain and sacrific'd for you?

* 1.2768. Lastly, Do you offer to God the Sacrifices proper to you as Christ offered to God the Sacrifice proper to him. For expiatory Sacrifices, as you need them not (Christ's one Sacrifice being every way suf∣ficient for that end), so you are not able to come up to them (for you can present nothing to God properly and formally expiatory); yet there are other Sacrifices which you may offer up to him: And though the external and fleshly Sacrifices of the Law are out of date, yet there are the internal and spiritual Sacrifices of the Gospel, which you now are as much oblig'd to observe and offer as ever the JEWS were the former. What are they? why, you are to pre∣sent your selves, your bodies, Souls, the whole man, a living Sa∣crifice, holy, and acceptable to God, Rom. 12.1. you are to dedicate your persons to Christ, so as to live to him who dy'd for you 2 Cor. 5.15. yea, so as to be ready to be offered in sacrifice, by dying for him, (to allude to that Phil. 2.17.). You are as an holy Priesthood, to offer up spiritual Sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. 2.5. (which spiritual Sacrifices are spiritual Dutys and Evan∣gelical Worship, prophesy'd of Mal. 1.11.—in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering): Here

come in* 1.277 Prayer and Praise, those two eminent Sacrifices under the Gospel; Psal. 141.2. Let my Prayer be set forth before thee as Incense: and the lifting up of my hands as the evening Sacrifice: Psal. 116.17. I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving: and will call upon the name of the Lord: (so Psal. 107.22. Psal. 54.6.) Heb. 13.15. By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name: this is set forth as here by the fruit of the lips so elsewhere by the free-will-offerings of the mouth Psal. 119.108. by rendring the calves of our lips Hos. 14.2. And for the pleasingness of this to God a∣bove all the Levitical Sacrifices, see Psal. 50.13, 14. Psal. 69.30, 31. O this is a Sacrifice which we should often be offering up to God through Christ Jesus. Another Evangelical Sacrifice is a broken Spirit; than which (next to a broken Christ) nothing more ac∣ceptable to God: Psal. 51.16, 17. For thou desirest not sacrifice, else would I give it, thou delightest not in burnt-offering: The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. So also bounty to the poor distressed Saints, this is an odour of sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well pleasing to God, Phil. 4.18. But to do good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleas'd, Heb. 13.16. And (to summe up all) holiness of heart and life that's an excellent Sacrifice, excelling all the old Law Sacrifices whatsoever; 1 Sam. 15.22. Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt-offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey, is better than sacrifice; and to hearken, than the fat of rams. Micah. 6.6, 7, 8. Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow my self before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of Rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oyl? shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body, for the sin of my soul. He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good: and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? The* 1.278 HEATHENS themselves, upon the light of Nature, look'd upon moral goodness as the best and most acceptable Sacrifice; I'me sure Evangelical Holiness is so. The wickedness of the Jews made God even to

abhorre and slight the Sacrifices which were instituted by himself; (as we find Isa. 1.11. &c. Isa. 66.3. Jer. 6.20.—7.21. &c. Amos 5.21, 22.): if we live in sin, we may offer this and that to God but 'tis all nothing, nay that makes all our Sacrifices an a∣bomination to him, Prov. 15.8.—Oh live the holy life, keep the heart pure, mortifie whatever is evil, do good, shun all excesses, be heavenly in your affections, in all things act in complyance with God's Nature and Will, &c. this will please him more than the most costly oblations which you can bring to him. These are the Sacrifices which now under the Gospel we are to offer; and surely we should offer them with all readiness and faithfulness: our Lord having submitted to the bloody Sacrifice of himself on the Cross, and left us none but these easie and delightful Sacrifices, how rea∣readily should we close with them! (But so much for this Ʋse.)

A third shall put an end to this Subject, and that is of Comfort. Was Christ a Sacrifice for sin?* 1.279 did he thereby condemn sin? what doth this Truth drop but honey and sweetness to them who are in Christ! (I say, to them who are in Christ; for they are the per∣sons only who can lay hold upon the grace contain'd in it: as the non-condemnation of the person in the first verse, so the condemnati∣on of sin in this belongs only to such). You that are in the num∣ber of these to you I bring glad tydings, matter of great joy: out of the bitter comes sweet; for Christ to do die as a Sacrifice this was bitter to him but 'tis sweet to you: his death, passion, and whole humilation speak nothing to you but consolation. Oh did Be∣lievers (especially such as are under a troubled spirit) but better understand and better improve this sin-condemning Sacrifice, they would certainly have more of inward peace and comfort than now they have. I must not in fist upon the particular and full draw∣ing out of that consolatory matter which it affords; therefore shall conclude with a brief review only of what the Text offers.

And so 1. here's a Sacrifice for sin. All men in ADAM having sinned wilfully, after that they had receiv'd the knowledge of the truth, there might have been no Sacrifice for their sin (to allude to that Heb. 10.26.); but the gracious God notwithstanding all this was pleas'd to admit of a Sacrifice; yea, himself to find out and ordain that Sacrifice; here's matter of comfort.

2. Christ himself was this Sacrifice. And if so, how pleasing must it needs be to God! Eph. 5.2.—and hath given himself for us, an offering and a Sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour: I tell you, there was infinitely more in this one Sacrifice to please God

than there is in all your sins (put them all together) to displease God. If Christ be the Sacrifice, there must be an infinite efficacy and merit in it; from the dignity of his person an infiniteness of merit must needs result: if he will die and shed his blood what can be too high for you? surely too there's more in his Offering to save you than there is in Sin to damn you. If he be the Sacrifice, no question but the Father did accept of it: and indeed of this he hath given sufficient evidence to the world; not only by his carriage towards the Saints, but also (and chiefly) by his carriage to∣wards Christ himself: for whereas of old he was wont to testifie his acceptation of the Sacrifices, by consuming them by fire from hea∣ven. (Gen. 15.17. Levit. 9.24. Judg. 6.21. 2 Chron. 7.1.); here (with respect to Christ's Sacrifice) he testify'd his acceptance in an higher way, viz. by raising him from the dead, taking him up to heaven, re-admiting him into his presence, and setting him at his Son, had he not been well-pleased with his person and oblation? Oh there's a convincing evidence of this in his going to the Father, Joh. 16.8, 10. By this Sacrifice (thus accepted) you are made perfect, (as you have often heard out of Heb. 10.14, 18.); there's nothing now to be done by Christ or by you, but only to apply and improve what he hath already done: is not this ground of strong consolation? And know further (for your comfort), that the vertue of Christ's Offering is as great now as it was at the first; his blood is as effectual with God for your good now as it was when it was just running warm from his veins, and* 1.280 so it shall be to the end of the world. And that he may make the best of it he is entred into the holy place, where 'tis his business to present and plead the merit thereof; he back's his oblation on earth with his intercession in heaven: and what can be spoken higher for your support & comfort! he that was the Sacrifice here is the Advocate there.

3. By this Sacrifice Sin was condemn'd. Sin condemn'd? what a word is that! that which would have condemned you, and which only can condemn you, that is by Christ condemn'd it-self; con∣demning sin is condemn'd by a condemned Saviour: And shall it be condemn'd and you too? shall Christ suffer the penalty due to it and you too? O no! as God was just to punish it once so he is gracious (and just too) not to punish it twice. What this con∣demning of sin is you have heard: if you follow the word the com∣fort lies thus, a condemnatory Sentence is by God upon Christ's ac∣count pass'd upon it, he hath adjudg'd it to die for all the mis∣chiefes

done by it, both against himself and against you too; this cursed Tyrant, this heinous Malefactor is under a sentence to be cut off, that it may no longer either dishonour God or hurt you: and should not you rejoyce in this? who fears a condemn'd person? what do the accusations of a condemn'd man signifie? sin is a condemned thing, fear it not. If you leave the Word and come to the main import of it, then the comfort lies thus; the guilt of all your sins is fully done away and expiated by Christ's Sacrifice; this Lamb of God (as offered) hath taken it all away; his blood hath cleansed you from all sin; your Scape-goat hath carried all your iniquities into the land of forgetfulness. Oh your guilt was charg'd upon Christ, and it shall not be charg'd upon you too; you are to mourn over it, but yet know he hath fully satisfied for it: what would you have more? You have in the former Verse the power of sin abolish'd by the Law of the Spirit, in this, the guilt of sin abolished by the Sacri∣fice of Christ; O how compleat is your redemption! the plaister is every way as large as the sore. What holy triumphs may you now make over all which may seem to endanger you! Rom. 8.34. Who is he that condemneth? it is Christ that* 1.281 died &c.

4. Observe 'tis Sin that was condemn'd: The Apostle speaks of it in the lump and mass, and so (he saith) 'tis expiated. Our Lord's Sacrifice did not take off the guilt of this or that particular sin, but of all sin; his expiation was totall and universal: Under the Law-Sacrifices the blood was to be sprinkled* 1.282 seven times, thereby to prefigure the thoroughness and perfection of the expiation of sin by Christ's Sacrifice.

5. This is brought in as God's act: God sent his own Son and for sin condemned sin. He that was the persona laesa, the injur'd person, the just Judge, against whom sin was committed, and who there∣fore was to punish it, he who is the supream and authoritative A∣gent in and about the great concerns of Souls; he appointed Christ to be a Sacrifice, owned and accepted his sacrifice, and upon that acquits Sinners from all guilt; Oh there's much in this to en∣courage the drooping Christian. Rom. 8.33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? it is God that justifieth. The Fa∣ther cannot but be well-pleased with Christ's propitiatory Sacrifice, since this was of himself; Rom. 3.25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation &c.

6. This was done too in Christ's Flesh, (which also hath great sweetness in it). 'Tis added (saith* 1.283 One) for our further as∣surance, to the end that we may not doubt of the forgiveness of our sins,

which are destroy'd in our proper Nature which the Son of God took up∣on him: Had Christ done and suffered what he did in the Nature of Angels, we might have question'd whether any good would thereby have accrued to us; but all being done in* 1.284 our Nature surely he did it for us, and we shall reap the benefit thereof.

7. To all this let me add one thing further (and 'tis a great one), namely That by this Sacrifice of Christ you have not only the bare condemnation or expiation of sin, but with that you also have a right and title unto, and collation of all Gospel-blessings and privi∣ledges whatsoever. Was it only the taking off of guilt, and the ap∣peasing of divine wrath, that would be very much; but over and beyond these there is (Christ's active fulfilling the Law being ta∣ken in) a positive righteousness made over to you, an interest in God's fatherly love, the purchase of Heaven; (and in this sense we are for a redundancy of Christ's merit). The benefits of Christ's Sacrifice to Believers are not only those which are privative (such wherein they are freed from all evil), but there are also those which are positive, such wherein they are intitled to and instated in the possession of all good; yea, even of the heavenly blessedness it self: Heb. 5.9. And being made perfect, he became the Author of e∣ternal salvation unto all them that obey him. Heb. 9.12.—having obtained eternal redemption for us; (it comes in as the effect of Christ's blood and Sacrifice). In his great undertaking to redeem and save Sinners, we may suppose him to have two things in his eye; the one was that he should have a people in the world; the other was that through him this people should partake of all blessings requi∣site to their happiness: now both of these were effected and secured by his Sacrifice. As to the first that was made sure by this, according to that promise or prediction Isa. 53.10, 11.—When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, &c. He shall see of the travel of his soul, and shall be satisfied: in relyance upon which he himself said, And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me, Joh. 12.32. and that upon his death and Sacrifice he had a people, and a numerous people too, the Evangeli∣cal History doth abundantly testifie. Then as to the second that al∣so was promoted and secured by his Sacrifice, inasmuch as thereby the Covenant of Grace (the summary of all blessings) was ratify'd and confirmed. 'Twas an* 1.285 ancient custom used amongst men at

the sanction and ratification of their Covenants to make use of Sa∣crifices, (as we find Gen. 21.22, 23, 24, &c. Jer. 34.18. Exod. 34.7, 8. in allusion to which custom 'tis said Psal. 50.5 Gather my Saints together unto me, those that have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice: Answerably now to this Christ by his Sacrifice con∣firm'd and ratify'd the Covenant of Grace 'twixt God and Believers; wherefore he said, This cup is the new Testament in my blood (i.e. the seal and ratification of the new-Covenant) Matth. 26.28. 1 Cor. 11.25. and the Apostle doth in special insist upon this in Heb. 9.15, 16, &c. Well then, by Christ's Sacrifice (the blood of the Co∣venant as 'tis called Zech. 9.11.) all blessings whatsoever are in∣sured and made over to God's people: and if so, is not that a sufficient ground of comfort to such? What shall I say? if the atoning of an angry God, the washing away of all sin, the fulfilling of a righteous Law, the satisfying of infinite Justice, the ratifica∣tion of the Covenant of Grace, the purchase of Heaven; if there be any thing in all these things (as surely there is) to promote spiri∣tual joy, you have them all by this great Sacrifice: therefore re∣joyce, and again I say rejoyce. So much for this Head! which I very well know I might have dispatch'd with much more brevity, but it containing that matter in it which is not commonly so fully opened, and which is of so high concern to us, therefore I have been thus large upon it.

Notes

• * 1.1

  A Fifth Head, viz. the End of God in sending his Son &c. or the Effects thereof.
• * 1.2

  The Wisdom of God secur'd by the proportio∣ning of his End to the me∣dium which he pitch'd upon.
• * 1.3

  Of the pla••ing of the Words [for Sin].
• * 1.4

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pertinet ad Participium 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Beza. Omnino refe∣rendum puto 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ad Participium 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Justin. So Cyril. reads them in Joh. l. 9. c. 47.
• † 1.5

  Appositam siquidem intel∣ligimus Con∣junctionem, ad significandam sequelam alte∣rius beneficii; ut scil. note∣mus, Deum non tantum misisse Filium suum in similitudine carnis peccati, sed & de peccato damnasse peccatum in carne. Cajetan.
• * 1.6

  The Words a little descan∣ted upon.
• * 1.7

  The Explica∣tion of the Words.
• * 1.8

  What is meant by the condem∣ning of Sin? epened more generally.
• * 1.9

  More particu∣larly in three things. In the aboliti∣of its power.
• * 1.10

  Secundum Phrasin He∣braicam posi∣tum est dam∣navit pro abo∣levit, extinxit, sustulit Deus. Perer.
• * 1.11

  —〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Chrys. Dam∣navit pecca∣tum, i.e. do∣minio suo mulctavit ne regnaret in carne. Staplet.—Ut ejus dominium & robur auferret. Tolet. Damnavit, interfecit; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 est interficere sicut 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pro morte, quia dam∣nati interfici solent. Interfecit vero i.e. interficiendi vires nobis praestitit. Interficere est effi∣cientiam adimere. Grot. See Melanch. Bucer. P. Mart. De dieu Deodat.—
• † 1.12

  Who renders it by exauctoravit, extinxit, abolevit &c. De Servat, part 2. cap. 23.
• * 1.13

  In the aboliti∣on of Sins guilt.
• * 1.14

  Damnatio peccati nos in juslitiam asse∣ruit, quia de∣leto reatu absolvimur, uti nos Deus justos reputet. Calvin. (with many Others). Beza dissents, Non mihi facilè persuaserim de peccatorum expiatione hic agi, est enim pars illa jam pridem ab Apostolo explicata, adeo ut à v. 12. c. 5. aliud Argumentum sit exorsus.
• * 1.15

  This proved in Essenius de Satisf. Christi c. 8. p. 422. Turretin. de Sat. &c. part 6. p. 202 Dr. O. against B. P. 574.
• * 1.16

  In the punish∣ing of it in Christ's person.
• * 1.17

  See Pareus in loc. & in Dub. 3. p. 779. Condemnare perpetuò sig∣nificat Aposto∣lo poenas pec∣cati irrogare. Damnare pec catum est illud dignum poenà judicare, pae∣nas{que} pro eo exigere. Con∣tzen. his sense of the Word justified by Calov. Socin. profl. p. 433.
• † 1.18

  Isa. 53.6.
• ‖ 1.19

  See of God's relaxing his Law and the threatning thereof Mr. Baxter Aphor. p. 36. &c. Mr. Burgesse of. Justif. p. 84.
• * 1.20

  How Sin is said to be con∣dem'd for Sin.
• * 1.21

  Contra duas Pelagian. Ep. l. 3. c. 6.
• * 1.22

  The double Reading of Sin and for Sin, both opened.
• * 1.23

  Rom. 7.13.
• (a) 1.24

  Damnavit peccatum i. e. Satanam de peccato, quòd nempe Chri∣stum innocen∣tem in Cruce interfeciset. Ambros. So al∣so Hilarius in Psal. 67.
• (b) 1.25

  Vide Chrysost. in loc. (very largely insisting upon this).
• (c) 1.26

  —&c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Oecum.
• (d) 1.27

  —〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Theodoret.
• (e) 1.28

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Chrysost.
• (f) 1.29

  Haec Chrysostomi Expositio convenientissima & inter omnes accommodatissima videtur. Tolet. Haec Graecorum Expositio ita placet ut eam cae∣teris antepon••ndam cum Toleto censeam. Estius. Vid. Alap. Catharin. &c.
• (g) 1.30

  Haec Ex∣positio nihil a∣liud est quam subtilis argu∣tia. Beza.
• (h) 1.31

  In loco prius citato.
• * 1.32

  Propter pec∣catum. V. Syr. Propter ipso••n peccatum. Tre∣mell.
• * 1.33

  Phrasi Ho∣braeâ peccatum vocat Sacrifici∣um pro pec∣cato. Franz. Schola Sacrif. disp. 7. th. 56.
• * 1.34

  Levit. 4.3.29.33.—5.6, 7.9.11.—9.22.—12.6, 8.—14.13.—16.16.
• * 1.35

  Sicut hostias quae pro pecca∣to offerebant in Lege, peccati nomine vocabant cum ipsae delicta nescirent, sic & Christi caro, quae pro peccati nostris oblata est, peccati nomen accepit. Hieron. See Grotius de Sat. Christi. c. 1. p. 16.
• * 1.36

  Per hostiam carnis suae quam obtulit pro peccante damnavit pec∣catum in carne suâ. Orig. Ho∣stiâ pro pecca∣to damnavit peccatum in Carne. Melanch. Per hostiam pro peccato Christum; Deus abolevit peccatum in hominibus. Vatabl. Sed quid fi, mittens filium &c. vult dicere, & quidem hostiam pro pecca∣to, five ut esset hostia pro peccato. Drus. Ego adduci nequeo ut nomen Peccati alio sensu hic positum esse existimem, quam pro expiatrice victima quae 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dicitur Hebraeis, ficuti Graeci 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vocunt Sacrificium cui maledictio injungitur. Calv. For Sin, that he might be a Sa∣crifice for Sin. Dr. Ham. To be a propitiatory Sacrifice for Sin. Deod. To the same purpose P. Martyr, Heming. Piscat. Vorst. Lud. de Dieu &c. (whom I need not cite); yet Beza will not admit of this exposition; Praepositio 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nullâ ratione potest hanc interpretationem admittere; ne{que} nunc Apostolus agit de Christi morte & nostrorum peccatorum expiatione, sed de Christi incarnatione & naturae nostrae corruptione per eam sublata. Beza.
• * 1.37

  What is meant by in the flesh?
• * 1.38

  Augustinus exponit de no∣stra Carne in quâ peccatum tyrannidem possidet extra Christum. Muscal. Sed melius est ur dicamus, debi∣litavit fomitem peccati in car∣ne nostrâ. A∣quin.
• † 1.39

  Sacerdos no∣ster à nobis ac∣cepit quod pro nobis offerret, accepit enim a nobis carnem, in ipsa Carne victima factus est. August. in Psal. 129.
• * 1.40

  Quamvis de Christo ut est Filius Dei pos∣set verè dici eum expiare authoritativè & judicialitèr, quatenus ipse cum Patre po∣testatem habet remittendi pec∣cata, quia tamen hic consideratur non ut Deus sed ut Mediator, ut Sacerdos & victima—non potest aliter expiatio fieri quam per poenae lationem succedaneam & vicariam mortem explicari. Turret. de Sat. Christi. pars 6. p. 204.
• * 1.41

  Hoc factum est per carnem i. e. per mor∣tem quam in carne & juxta humanam Na∣turam passus est. Zwingl. In Carne, i. e. per Carnem Filii sui suspen∣sam & mor∣tificatam in Cruce. Estius.
• * 1.42

  The Observati∣on raised.
• * 1.43

  Of Christ's be∣ing à Sacrifies for Sin.
• * 1.44

  Cloppenh. Schola Sacrif. p. 3. Franzius Disp. 13. thes. 2, 3.
• * 1.45

  Of Christ's be∣ing the emi∣nent Sacrifice, and the refe∣rence of all the old Sacrifices to him.
• * 1.46

  Propter hoc etiam omnia Sacrificia Veteris Testamenti leguntur, ut hoc unum Sacrificium designarent: per quod vera est reinissio peccatorum & mundatio animae in eternum. Ambros. in Ep. ad Heb. c. 9.—Fuit apud Veteres oblatio Holocausti Concio quaedam de morte Christi, quâ nes à peccatis per fidem purgati sumus. Quia omnia Sacrificia Legis in unum Christum respiciunt, at{que} unicum ejus Sacrificium adumbrant. Munster. in Lev. 1.1.
• † 1.47

  Socin. de Servat. p. 2. c. 9. Against him in this, see Grotius de Sat. Christi. p. 126, 127. Turretin. de Satis. p. 216. Franz. Disp. 6. thes. 34 &c. Essen. Tri. Crucis. p. 226. Hoornb. Socin. conf. 597, 599.
• * 1.48

  For this vide Suarez. in 3. part. Sum. A∣quin. Quest. 83. Art. 1. Disp. 71. Rivet. in Gen. Exerc. 42. p. 170. &c. & p. 222. Franz. de Sa∣crif. Disp. 2. thes. 76. Disp. 3 Disp. 76. Disp. 16 thes. 33. Cloppenb. Scho. Sacrif probl. 2. p. 51. &c. Dr. O. de Theologiâ Adamica. l. 2. c. 1. p. 133, 134.
• † 1.49

  The Papists generally. B••ll••rm. de Missâ l. 1. c. 20. Valentia de Missae Sacrificio. l. 1. c. 4. Others are of this Opinion also: The Author of Eccles. Policy. p. 100. &c. Defence &c. p. 421. &c. who yet grants expiatory Sacrifices to be of divine Institution, p. 427. &c.
• * 1.50

  Theodoret for this, Vol. 4. de curandis Graec. affectibus c. 7. p. 584.
• † 1.51

  Fagius in Levit. 1.2. gives two reasons of them. Ut po∣pulus in Idolo∣latriam pronus ab idolis aver∣teretur & in cultu Dei retineretur. Deinde ut typos haberet populus Dei Sacrificii Christi, quem oportebat aliquando in crucem agi pro peccatis suorum. Rivet. in Gen. p. 222. Praecipuè quia voluit adumbrari Sacrificiis passionem futuram Mediatoris & &c.
• * 1.52

  Hujus Sacri∣ficii à Christo peragendi Sa∣crificia caetera typi erant; quia ut pecus moriebatur pro homine Levit. 17.11. ita & Jesus Christus esset sanguinem suum effusurus pro nobis. Utra{que} igitur auferebant reatum: hoc tamen discrimine, quod Sacrificium Christi id praestabat virtute suâ, illa vero legalia proprie & directè solum tollebant reatum ratione poenae temporalis: in figurâ tantum promitterent piis effectum Spiritualem & aeternum, puta ablationem reatus aeterni five poenae infernalis. Vossius de Idolol. l. 1. p. 297.
• * 1.53

  See Dr. Stil∣lingfleete in his Discourse con∣cerning the True Reason of Christ's Suffer∣ings. p. 423. &c.
• * 1.54

  This made good by Ja∣cob▪ ad Portum contra Ostorod. p. 468. Tur∣retin. de Sat. Christi. p. 237.
• * 1.55

  Cum pro misso Messiâ ince perunt Sa∣crificia, cum Messiâ defun∣cto defuncta sunt &c. Fran∣zius Disp. 10. thes. 98. See him also Disp. 21. p. 757.
• † 1.56

  The full story in Socrates. l. 3. c. 20. Sozom. l. 5. c. 22.
• ‖ 1.57

  Vide Cyprian. adversus Judae∣os. l. 1. c. 16. Tertull. contra Marcion. l. 2.
• * 1.58

  Reade Plu∣tarch. de Ora∣culorum defe∣ctu. p. 409.
• † 1.59

  Vorstius ex Jalcutt ad fi∣nem Ezrae &c. Sic consenti∣unt in aboli∣tionem Sacri∣ficiorum. Al∣ting. Shiloh. p. 423.
• ‖ 1.60

  Buxtorf. Sy∣nag. Judaica. c. 20. p. 357.
• * 1.61

  Omnia haec suo modo in typo facta per∣fectissimè in Christo praestita sunt in veri∣tate & reipsa &c. utpote qui mortis suae Sacrificio peccata nostra delevit, ab irâ Dei nobis est umbraculum, & Sacrificio suo apud Deum nos reconciliavit. Zar∣nov. de Sat. Christi. p. 38.
• * 1.62

  Six things in the Old Sacri∣fices all of which are to be found in Christs Sacrifice.
• * 1.63

  See Dr. Stil∣lingfl. against Crellius. ch. 5. p. 451.
• * 1.64

  Heb. 10.5.
• * 1.65

  Grot. de Sat. Christi. c. 10. p. 121.
• * 1.66

  Ut quoniam quatuor considerantur in omni Sacrificio, cui offeratur, à quo offeratur, quid offeratur, pro quibus offe∣ratur: idem ipse unus verús{que} Mediator, per Sacrificium pacis reconcilians nos, unum cum illo maneret cui offerebatur, unum in se faceret pro quibus offerebatur, unus ipse esset qui offerebat & quod offe∣rebat. August. de Trinit. Utrum Christus simul f••erit Sacerdos & Hostia? Aquin. in 3. p. Qu. 22. Art. 2.
• * 1.67

  What a kind of Sacrifice Jesus Christ was? Ans. An expia∣tory Sacrifice.
• * 1.68

  A short ac∣count of the difference and distinction of the Jewish Sa∣crifices. Of which (in par∣ticular) see Philo. Jud. de Victimis. Jo∣seph. Antiq. Jud. l. 3. c. 10. Sigon. de Re∣pub. Hebr. l. 3. c. 2. (with very many Others). Dr. Owen on the Hebr. in Proleg. Exercit. 24. Dr. Stillingfl. Answer to Crellius p. 473.
• * 1.69

  Vide L'Em∣pereur de Leg. Hebr. p. 264.
• * 1.70

  Philo Jud. de Vict. p. 648. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• † 1.71

  Joseph. Ant. l. 3. c. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c.—
• * 1.72

  Four things propounded for the opening & proving of Christ's being an Expiatory Socrifice.
• * 1.73

  Of the First; whatever befel the Expiatory Sacrifices was for the Peoples Sin, and so it was with Christ in his Sufferings.
• * 1.74

  De Servat. p. 3. c. 7. & p. 3. c. 7.
• * 1.75

  Ubi est 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cum Accusativo: quae a∣pud Graecae Linguae Authores Sacros & Profanos usitatissima est nota Causae impulsivae. Ut cum dicitur 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 propter haec venit ira Dei in filios con∣tumaciae; Eph. 5.6. Grot. de Sat. Chri∣sti. c. 1. (in Rom. 4.25.).
• * 1.76

  Of the Second: the Sacrifices were substi∣tuted in the place of the Offenders; so it was with Christ.
• * 1.77

  Nequaquam Sacra Scriptu∣ra admittit a∣lium finem Sa∣crificiorum quam hunc ip∣sum, quod ni∣mirum vice hominum sunt passa pecora Sacrificialia. Franzius in Praefat. ad Schol. Sacrif. Patriarch.
• * 1.78

  So 'tis ren∣dred in several Versions of the Words, set down in Franz. p. 446. See this Text improv'd and vindicated in Dr. Stillingst. against Crell. p. 429. &c.
• * 1.79

  Hoc ritu quil offerebat, sig∣nificabat se scelera sua conjicere in caput bovis qui propterea mactabatur. Drusius in Levit. 1.4.
• * 1.80

  That Obje∣ction answered in Grotius de Sat. c. 10. p. 123. Esseni∣us. Tri. Crucis. p. 218. Turre∣tin. de Sat. p. 246.
• * 1.81

  De Servat. p. 2. c. 4. (& passim). In Praelect. c. 18. with him con∣cur Crellius, Smalcius &c. and all of that party.
• * 1.82

  Of this and the other Pre∣positions, Grot. de Sat. c. 10. p. 3. &c. 9. p. 115. Hoor∣neb. p. 566, 567, 568. Calor. p. 421. &c. et p. 453.
• * 1.83

  1 Joh. 2.18.
• † 1.84

  Rom. 12.17. Matth. 5.38. 1 Pet. 3.9. Luk. 11.11.
• * 1.85

  This is done by very many Anti-Soci∣nian Writers: Particularly see Grot. de Sat. p. 11. &c. (O that he had not after∣wards spoil'd in his Commentaries upon Isa. 53. what he had before in this excel∣lent Treatise so nervously and orthe dox∣ly asserted! but there he is as weak as here he is strong). Dr. Owen against B. p. 499. &c. his vindication of the true sense of it against Grotius. p. 521. &c.
• * 1.86

  So the word Nagas is ta∣ken 2 King. 23.35. Zech. 9.8. Significat. a∣igere ad solu∣tionem debiti. Forer.—op∣primi & ad solvendum ad∣igi ab exa∣ctore. Morus in loc.
• * 1.87

  Two Queries propounded & answered.
• * 1.88

  Whether Christ underwent the same punish∣ment that was due to the Sin∣ner, or onely something e∣quivalent thereunto?
• * 1.89

  Mr. A. Burg. of Justif. p. 73, 74. Turret. de Sat. p. 9. p. 281.
• * 1.90

  Non quidem idem Deo solutum quod debebatur ab iisdem, nos etenim debeba∣mus aeternas poenas exolvere, verum pe∣pendit aequivalens Christus &c. Hoornb. Socin. Conf. p. 253.—V. Stegm. Photin. p. 260.—Mr. Baxter's Aphor. p. 26. Life of Faith. p. 325.—Also the Au∣thor of the Great Propitiation. p. 71. &c.
• * 1.91

  Dr. Stillingst. against Crellius p. 441.
• * 1.92

  Whether Christ took the guilt of our Sin upon himself, or only submitted to the punish∣ment?
• * 1.93

  Suscipiendo paenam & non suscipiendo culpam, & culpam delevit & paenam. August. de Serm. Dom. in Luc. Serm. 37.
• * 1.94

  The Third Head, the ex∣piatory Sacri∣fices to be con∣sum'd and slain &c.
• * 1.95

  Levit. 16.21. &c.
• * 1.96

  Dr. Stillingfl. against Crell: p. 516 &c.
• * 1.97

  The Fourth Head; of the Ends & Effects of the old ex∣piatory Sacri∣fices, and how they are appli∣cable to Christ.
• * 1.98

  This sense of the word justify'd by all Anti-Socinian Writers. Franz. Disp. 15. th. 38. Turretin. de Satisf. p. 208. Grot. de Sat. p. 39. Hoorneb. Socin. Confut. p. 607. Dr. Stillingfl. p. 509. &c.
• † 1.99

  Psal. 32.1.
• ‖ 1.100

  Psal. 49.7, 8.
• * 1.101

  Heb. 9.22.
• * 1.102

  Vide Essen. Tri. Crucis. l. 1. sect. 4. c. 8. p. 6.
• * 1.103

  Causa cur noluerit Deus alteri Sacrifi∣cari quam sibi, ea potissimum videtur quod Sacrificia im∣primis fierent ad expiandâ peccata, solus verò Deus jus habeat ea condonandi. Vossius de. Idol. l. 1. p. 977.
• * 1.104

  Four things laid down con∣cerning Atone∣ment and Ex∣piation by Sa∣crifices.
• * 1.105

  Of atonement and reconcili∣ation by Christs Sacrifice.
• * 1.106

  Non statui∣mus Deum irato propriè factum esse propitium, sed Christi Satis∣factione causas irae divinae ob∣literatas esse, ut salvâ justi∣stiâ suâ possit gratiam exhi∣bere. Essenïus. p. 253.
• * 1.107

  Socin. de Serv•• p. 1. c. 8.
• * 1.108

  Baxters Life of Faith. p. 189.
• * 1.109

  De Satisf. p. 93.
• * 1.110

  Of the Expia∣tion of Sin by Christ's Sacri∣fice.
• * 1.111

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• † 1.112

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• ‖ 1.113

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.114

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• † 1.115

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.116

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• † 1.117

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• ‖ 1.118

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.119

  Stuck. de Sa∣crif. fol. 148. Grot. de Sat. p. 128, 129. (with many Others).
• * 1.120

  Socin. de Serv. p. 2. c. 11.13, 14, 16, 17. Crellius contra Grot. cap. 10. sect. 2.
• * 1.121

  Grot. de Sat. p. 136. Hoorneb. p. 581. &c. Franz. p. 207. & 450. Dr. Stillingst. against Crell. c. 6. p. 507. &c. Turret. p. 202. &c. Jacob. ad Portum. p. 464. &c.
• * 1.122

  Of the concur∣rence of the Heathens in these notions of Sacrifices.
• * 1.123

  See River. in Gen. Exerc. 42. Dr. Owen Theol. Nat. 1. c. 8. p. 89.
• * 1.124

  Prima victi∣marum Genti∣lium origo est ex divinâ insti∣tutione Patri∣archis factâ urgente in∣super Consci∣entiâ. Essen. p. 237.
• * 1.125

  Gal. 4.8.
• (a) 1.126

  Which therefore they call'd Hostiae succedancae. Men' piaculum oportet fieri propter stulti∣tiam tuam, ut meum tergum stultitiae tuae subdas succe∣daneum? Plant.
• (b) 1.127

  As the Decii amongst the Romans, Codrus amongst the Athenians, Menecaus a∣mongst the Thebans &c.—Hanc tibi Eryx melio∣rem animam pro morte Da∣retis Persolvo. Virgil.
• (c) 1.128

  In allusion to whom (some think) the Apostle uses these words 1 Cor. 4.13. Suidas in V. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Dr. Hammond in loc.—In the lustration or purgation of their Cities they us'd to put to death some malefactor, and at the execution of him to say 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, be thou a Victime in our stead.
• (d) 1.129

  See Dr. Stillingst. against Crellius. p. 444.
• (e) 1.130

  —Et culpam hanc miserorum morte piabunt. Virg.—Date gaudia Thebis Quae pepigi, & toto quae san∣guine prodigus emi. Statius: Upon this Porphyry wrote much against those Sacrifices—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. l. 2. p. 59.
• (f) 1.131

  V. Stuekium de Sacrif. fol. 146. Gyrald. Synt. 17. p. 491. Placuit ad averruncundam: Deorum iram victimus coedi. Liv. lib. 8. Mactatâ venlet mitior hostiâ Horat.
• (g) 1.132

  —Et so∣lida imponit taurorum vis∣cera flammis. Virgil. See Grot. on Levit. 1.9.—Soepe Deos aliquis peccando fecit iniquos, & pro delictis hostia blanda fuit. Ovid. Annua quae differre nefas celebra∣te faventes Nobiscum. Virgil. They call'd these Sa∣crifices 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from their pur∣ging and puri∣fying from guilt. See in∣stances in Grot. de Sat. p. 124.—te{que} piàcula nulla resolvent. Horat.
• (h) 1.133

  Pro vitâ hominum nisi vita hominis reddatur, non posse Deorum immortalium Numen placari arbitran∣tur, Caesar de Bel. Gallico. Sanguine quaerendi reditus animâ{que} litandum Argolicâ. Virg. Sanguine placastis ventos & virgine caesa. Idem. Omnis & humanis lustrata cruoribus arbor. Lucan. This 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 prevail'd so much, that the Senate of Rome was fain to make a De∣cree against it. Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 3 c. 1. See of it Euseb. de Praepar. Evang. l. 4. c. 16. Tertull. Apol. c. 9. Theodoret. vol. 4. p. 589. Porphyr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l. 2. sect. 27. Saubertus de Sacrif. c. 21. p. 517. Stuck. fol. 41. Grot. de Sat. p. 132. Cloppenb. Spicileg. p. 212.
• * 1.134

  Of the Second Enquiry, when and where Christ was this expiatory Sa∣crifice?
• * 1.135

  Socin. de Serv. p. 2. c. 12, 15. Smale. de Divin. Christi. c. 23. Gatech. Racov. de Mun. Christi. Sacerd. Quaest. 2.
• * 1.136

  Heb. 7.25.
• * 1.137

  Joh. 19.30.
• * 1.138

  Heb. 10.8.
• * 1.139

  Of the Effect of Christ's Sa∣crifice, viz. the condem∣ning of sin, (the Second thing propoun∣ded to be spoken unto).
• * 1.140

  Of the nature of the expiati∣on of Sin by Christ.
• * 1.141

  Of the extent of this act with respect to the Subject and Object.
• * 1.142

  All Sins what∣soever expiated by Christ's Sa∣crifice.
• * 1.143

  Whether the Jewish Sacri∣fices did expi∣ate all Sins?
• * 1.144

  Socin. de Ser∣vat. p. 2. c. 11, 12, 18.
• * 1.145

  Vid. Calov. Socin. proflig. p. 625. Lub∣bert. contra Socin Hoorneb. Socin. confut. p. 602. Tur∣retin. de Sat. Christi p. 226. Stegm. Photin. p. 282. O. a∣gainst B. p. 474. & p 469.
• * 1.146

  Of the difference of these two (Chataath and Asham) much is written. Fagius makes the one to refer to sins of Omission, the other to sins of Commission. In Levit. 4 2—Others make the Asham to point to sins particularly enumerated, Chataath to sins in the general. See Dr. O. Exerc. 24. on the Heb. p. 317. Dr. Stillingst. a∣gainst Crellius. p. 474.—But the most distinguish them, as one was for Sins of Ignorance, the other for Sins knowingly and willingly committed. Vid. Petit. Var. Lect. l. 2. c. 8. Saubert. de Sacrif. c. 3. p. 65.
• * 1.147

  Acts 3.17.—13.27. 1 Tim. 1 13. 2 Pet. 2.12.
• † 1.148

  1 Sam. 26.21 Job 6.24. Psal. 119.21. See Franz. Schol. Sacrif. Disp. 6. th. 60.
• * 1.149

  See Grotius de Sat. Christi. p. 122.
• * 1.150

  Heb. 7.25.
• * 1.151

  Application.
• * 1.152

  Ʋse 1. Of In∣formation.
• * 1.153

  1. Of the truth of Christ's Sa∣tisfaction.
• * 1.154

  Socin. de Ser∣vat. p. 2. c. 9.
• ‖ 1.155

  Ibid. c. 12.
• * 1.156

  De Servat. p. 3. c. 6. Ego quidem etiamsi non semel, sed saepe id in sacris monumentis Scriptum ex∣taret, non id∣circo tamen ita rem pror∣sus se habere crederem, ut vos opinamini.
• * 1.157

  Psal. 145.9.
• † 1.158

  Heb. 9.22.
• * 1.159

  Si non fuisset peccatum non necesse fuerat Filium Dei agnum fieri, nec••opus fuerat ••um in carne positum jugulari, sed mansisset hoc quod erat in principio, Deus Verbum. Verum quoniam introiit pecatum in mundum, peccati autem ne∣cessitas propitiationem requirit, & pro∣pitiatio non fit nisi per hostiam, necessa∣rium suit provideri hostiam pro peccato. Orig. in Numb. Hom. 4.
• * 1.160

  Vid. Hulsium in Theol. Jud. p. 473. Grot. de Sat. c. 2.
• * 1.161

  The true Na∣ture and. Ends of Christ's Death.
• * 1.162

  2 Sam. 3.33.
• * 1.163

  Socin. de Serv. p. 1. c. 3. &c. et de Offi∣cio Christi. Crellius de Caus. Mortis Christi (with all the rest). Against them see Grot. de Sat. p. 26. &c. Franz, de Sacrif. p. 400. &c. et 606 &c. Hoornb. Socin. conf. l. 3. p. 492. &c. Portus contra Ostorod. p. 447. &c. Turret. p. 7. p. 247. &c. Dr. Stillingst. discourse concerning the true Reasons of the Sufferings of Christ. (with many Others).
• * 1.164

  Matth. 5.47.
• * 1.165

  1 Cor. 1.13.
• * 1.166

  Matth. 26.39, 42, 44.
• * 1.167

  Matth. 26.38.
• † 1.168

  Luk. 22.44.
• * 1.169

  Gal. 3.13.
• † 1.170

  Phil. 3.8.
• * 1.171

  The vanity & falshood of hu∣mane Satisfa∣ctions.
• * 1.172

  Eccles. 2.12.
• * 1.173

  See the 31 Article of our Church.
• * 1.174

  Lev. 6.5.
• † 1.175

  Dominus qui exactissimè omnes expian∣di ritus per Mosem exequi∣tur, nuspiam tamen hanc aut illam Sa∣tisfaciendi ra∣tionem consti∣tuit, sed totam in Sacrificiis compensatio∣nem requirit. Turret. de Sat. p. 329.
• * 1.176

  Sess. 4. c 8. can. 13.
• * 1.177

  Exempto rea∣tu eximitur & poena. Tert. de Bapt. c. 5.
• † 1.178

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Chrys. Hom. 8. ad•• Rom.
• * 1.179

  —ad demon∣strationem de∣bitae miseriae, vel ad emenda∣tion em labilis vitae, vel ad exercitationem necessariae pa∣ticutiae, tem∣poraliter ho∣minem detinet poena, etiam quem jam ad damnationem sempiternam reum non detinet culpa. Aug. tr. postr. in Joh. Poenae ante remissionem peccatorum sunt sup∣plicia peccatorum, post remissionem suut certamina, exercitationés{que} justorum. Id. L. 2. de peccat. Mer. & rem. c. 34. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Chrysost. Hom. 41. in Matth.
• * 1.180

  Non patitur justitia Dei ut duas exigat Sa∣tisfactiones propter unum debitum, cùm unâ ei abun∣dantiss••ne est satisfactum. Thes. Sedan. Vol. 2. p. 357.
• * 1.181

  De Purgat. l. 1. c. 10. Si Christus satis∣fecit pro omni culpâ & poenâ, cur adhuc tam multa mala patimur?
• * 1.182

  Luk. 17.10.
• † 1.183

  Os 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Ba∣sil. in Psa. 48.
• ‖ 1.184

  Bellarm. de Poen. l. 4. c. 15.
• * 1.185

  Amonst o∣thers see Vas∣quez in 3 part. Thom. Qu. 94. Art. 2. & 3.
• * 1.186

  Dallzus de Poenis & Sat. Sudeel adver∣sus humanas Satisfactiones. River. Sum. Còntrov. Tract. 3. Qu. 12. &. 13. Thes. Salmur. p. 2. p. 61. &c. Thes. Sedan. Vol. 1. p. 594. &c. Chamier. t. 3. l. 23. Chemnit. Exam. l. 2. sess. 4. c. 8. Calvin. Inst. l. 3. c. 4. Turretin. de Satisf. Disp. 11. p. 305. &c.
• * 1.187

  Of the true Nature and Ends of the Lord's Supper.
• * 1.188

  Concil. Tri∣dent. Sess. 22. c. 1. &c.
• † 1.189

  Of this Con∣troversie see Phil. Mornaus de Euch. l. 3 c. 1. &c. Ho∣spin. Hist. Sa∣cram. l. 5. c. 13. p. 548. &c. Camer. Opusc. Misc. p. 522. (in 4to.) Ma∣sonus de Min. Anglic. l. 5. c. 1. Forb. Instr. Historico-Theol. l. 11. c. 20.
• * 1.190

  Sunt propriè Sacrificia po∣puli ad Deum, ut Sacramenta Dei ad popu∣lum. Morn. de Euch. l. 1. c. 1.
• * 1.191

  Exod. 12.13.
• † 1.192

  See this pro∣ved in Clop∣penb. Scho. Sa∣crif. p. 142. &c.
• * 1.193

  Gen. 22.7.
• * 1.194

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.195

  De Missâ. l. 1. c. 2.
• † 1.196

  —De Missacirc;. l. 1. c. 27.
• * 1.197

  Heb. 9.22.
• * 1.198

  Heb. 6.20. Psal. 110.4.
• * 1.199

  Antiq. Jud. l. 1. c. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c.
• * 1.200

  Ineptum est interpretari verbum facere sensu sacrifica∣torio, ubi nul∣la in totâ reli∣quâ narratione fit Sacrificii aut oblationis mentio. Forbes. Instruct. Hi∣storico-Theol. p. 616.
• † 1.201

  Cum faciam vitulâ &c. Vir∣gil.
• ‖ 1.202

  Numb. 6.16. Psal. 66.15.
• * 1.203

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Casaub. in Athen. l. 15. c. 23.
• * 1.204

  Luk. 22.19.
• † 1.205

  1 Cor. 11.24.
• ‖ 1.206

  Luk. 22.20. Matth. 26.28.
• * 1.207

  See Vines on the Sacrament. p. 143, 144.
• † 1.208

  This prov'd by Morn. de Euch. l. 3. c. 4, & 5. (with di∣vers others).
• ‖ 1.209

  Euseb. De∣monstr. Evang. l. 1. c. ult.
• * 1.210

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Chrysost. Hom. 17. in Ep. ad Heb. Quid ergo nos? nonne per singulos dies offerimus? offerimus quidem, sed recordationem facientes mortis ejus. Ambros. in Ep. ad Heb. c. 10. Illud quod ab hominibus appellatur Sacrificium signum est veri Sacrificii, in quo caro Christi post ascensionem per Sacramentum memoriae celebratur. August. de Civit. Dei l. 10. c. 15. Vide etiam contra Faustum Manichaeum l. 20. c. 21 Theodoret. in c. 8. Ep. ad Heb.—Sacrifi∣cium quod quotidiè in Ecclesiâ offertur, non est aliud à Sacrificio quod ipse Christus obtulit, sed ejus commemoratio. Aquin. in 3. p. Qu. 22. Art. 3. resp. ad 2. Illud quod offertur & conse∣cratur, vocatur Sacrificium & oblatio, quia memoria est & repraesentatio veri Sacrificii & sanctae immolationis factae in arâ crucis &c. Lombard. L. 4. Dist. 12.
• * 1.211

  See Dr. Cud∣worths true Notion of the Lord's Supper. chap. 5.
• † 1.212

  Stuckius de Sacrif. p. 145. Rosin. Antiq. Rom. l. 3. c. 33. Ubi quod Diis tributum erat conslagrasient, ad epulas ipsi & convivia vertebantur, &c.
• ‖ 1.213

  Dr. C. chap. 2.
• * 1.214

  The happiness of Believers under the Go∣spel above that of them who liv'd under the Law.
• * 1.215

  Vide Alting. Shiloh l. 5. c. 17. In hoc Sacrifi∣cio vertitur omnis ratio & variatio faede∣ris &c.
• * 1.216

  Origen. con∣tra Ceisum. l. 8.
• * 1.217

  See the Grounds of this fully set forth by Stuckius de Sacrif. f. 154. &c.—in his Antithesis Ethnicismi & Christianismi.
• * 1.218

  Of the excellen∣cy of Christ's Priesthood and Sacrifice.
• * 1.219

  Succidaneae dictae, si per∣mis hostiis li∣tatum non erat aliae post eas∣dem ductae ho∣stiae caedeban∣tur, quae quasi prioribus jam caesis luendi piaculi gratia subdebantur & succedebant. Gyrald. Synt. 17. p. 465. Saubert. de Sa∣crif. c. 19. p. 477.
• * 1.220

  Levit. 16.11.
• * 1.221

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Athen. Deipn. l. 15. c. 5.—&c. quas cum im∣molabant, nisi purae integrae{que} fuissent, minus proficere puta∣bant. Gyrald. p. 491.
• † 1.222

  Heb. 9.12.
• * 1.223

  Of the Evil of Sin.
• * 1.224

  Grot. de Sat. Christi. p. 67.
• † 1.225

  Gal. 3.13.
• * 1.226

  Isa. 53.3.
• † 1.227

  Isa. 53.10.
• ‖ 1.228

  Isa. 63.3.
• * 1.229

  Phil. 2.8.
• † 1.230

  Acts 5.30.
• * 1.231

  Of the severity of God's Ju∣stice.
• * 1.232

  Rom. 8.32.
• * 1.233

  Joh. 12.27.
• † 1.234

  Mat. 26.39, 42, 44.
• ‖ 1.235

  Mat. 26.38.
• * 1.236

  Luk. 22.44.
• * 1.237

  Heb. 10.31.
• * 1.238

  Ʋse 2. Of Ex∣hortation.
• * 1.239

  Christ as a Sa∣crifice to be much studied and meditated upon.
• * 1.240

  Phil. 3.8.
• * 1.241

  Gal. 2.20.
• † 1.242

  Rom. 6.8.
• * 1.243

  1 Cor. 11.24, 26.
• * 1.244

  The Heart (in the sense of this) to be broken for sin and from sin.
• * 1.245

  Mat. 27.55.
• * 1.246

  Lam. 3.51.
• * 1.247

  Three things in the Text to set men against Sin.
• * 1.248

  Ergo & tu dignum te gere tali pretio, ne veniat Chri∣stus qui te mundavit, qui te redemit, & si te in peccato invenerit dicat tibi, Quae uti∣litas in san∣guine meo? quid profeci ti∣bi dum descer∣do in corrupti∣onem &c. Am∣bros. de Virgi.
• * 1.249

  Rom. 6.12.
• * 1.250

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l. 2. p. 97.
• * 1.251

  All to labour after an inte∣rest in Christ's Sacrifice, and in the benefits thereby procu∣red.
• * 1.252

  Gal. 2.20!
• † 1.253

  1 Pet. 1.8.
• | 1.254

  Phil. 4.7.
• * 1.255

  This is to be ey'd and only rely'd upon.
• * 1.256

  Quum sis ipse nocens moritur cur vi∣ctima pro te? Stultitia est morte alterius sperare salu∣tem.
• * 1.257

  Gospel-Conditi∣ons to be per formed on the Sinners part, notwithstand∣ing Christ's Sacrifice.
• * 1.258

  Grotius de Sat. p. 141.
• * 1.259

  Exod. 12.22. Heb. 9.19.
• * 1.260

  Vid. Cameron. Misc. p. 529.
• * 1.261

  Frequent ap∣plication to be made to this Sacrifice.
• * 1.262

  God and Christ to be admired and adored up∣on this.
• * 1.263

  Porphyr. do Abstin. l. 2.
• * 1.264

  Gen. 22.10. &c.
• * 1.265

  Joh. 11.36.
• * 1.266

  2 Cor. 5.21.
• † 1.267

  1 Pet. 2.24.
• ‖ 1.268

  Phil. 2.8.
• * 1.269

  Heb. 10.7.
• † 1.270

  Eph. 3.19.
• ‖ 1.271

  Joh. 3.16.
• * 1.272

  Rom. 3.25.
• † 1.273

  Isa. 53.5, 6.
• * 1.274

  Mediator noster puniri pro seipso non debuit, quia nullum culpae contagium per∣petravit: Sed si ipse indebi∣tam mortem non susciperet, nunquam nos à debitâ morte liberaret. Gre∣gor. l. 3. moral. c. 13.
• * 1.275

  Peccat ini∣quus & puni∣tur justus; de∣linquit reus & vapulat inno∣cens; offendit impius & damnatur pius; quod meretur malus patitur bonus, &c. Quò Nate Dei, quò tua descendit humilitas? quo tua flagravit charitas? &c. Ego iniquè egi, tu poenâ mulctaris; ego facinus admisi, tu ultione plecteris &c.—Me ad illicitam concupiscentiam rapuit arbor, te per∣fecta charitas duxit ad crucem; ego praesumsi vetitum, tu subiisti aculeum, &c. August. in Quest. in V. & N. Testam. Qu. 55.
• * 1.276

  Christ having offered his Sa∣crifice, we are to offer ours.
• * 1.277

  Oratio purè directa de cor∣de fideli, tan∣quam de arâ Sanctâ surgit incensum. Au∣gust. in Psal 141.
• * 1.278

  Vis Deos propitiare? bonus esto. Sa∣tis illos coluit quisquis imita∣tus est. Senec. Ep. 9.5. Non immolationibus & sanguine multo colendus est Deus; sed mente purâ, bono honestó{que} proposito. Idem. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Porphyr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. l. 2. p. 62. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Arist. Rhet. l. 3. (with many more in Stuck. de Sacrif. p. 153. col. 2. Saubert. de Sac. c. 1. p. 4.).
• * 1.279

  Ʋse 3. For Comfort to Be∣lievers.
• * 1.280

  Adeò mag∣num est hoc Sacrificium, ut quamvis u∣num sit & se∣mel oblatum, sufficiat ad aeternitatem, Anselm.
• * 1.281

  Mortuum Caesarem quis metuat? sed morte Christi quid efficaci∣us? Cyprian. de dupl. Mar∣tyrio.
• * 1.282

  Levit. 16.19.
• * 1.283

  Deodat. inloc.
• * 1.284

  Addit Paulus in came, quo certior sit no∣stra fiducia, dum videmus peccatum in ipsâ Naturâ nostrâ fuisse devictum & abolitum; sic enim sequitur, naturam nostram vere fieri participem ejus victoriae. Calvin.
• * 1.285

  —Et caesâ jungebant foe∣dera portâ. Virgil. See Mr. Medo on Mal. 1.11.