Chapter III

Before we explain those things which may be objected on the other side, it should be premised, that we do not undertake the cause of those who declare that Christ by his death obtained remission of sins, reconciliation with God, and a state of salvation for each and every man. Thus Borreus¹ seems to think with Arminiust (Reply of Armin. to Artie. 13, 14), who, leaning on this foundation, asserts, that all infants of all nations dying without actual sins, are saved, because God hath taken the whole human race into the grace of reconciliation. He thinks therefore that by the sacrifice of the death of Christ the whole human race was placed in a state of salvation, from which if they should not fall, they will undoubtedly obtain salvation. Many persons ascribe the same error to Huberus and Puccius. But our defence is, not indeed that by this death of Christ salvation is actually obtained for all mankind, or that by its benefit each and every man is received into favour, and placed in such a state as, if he should continue in it, he would possess eternal life: But that this death of Christ is, according to the determination of the Divine will, a remedy applicable for salvation to the whole human race, or to every individual of the human race, although in procuring and effecting its application, God in an especial manner has compassion on some, and not on others. You have heard this sentiment in some measure confirmed by arguments. We will now vindicate it from the objections which may be brought against it on the other side.²

Objection l. First, therefore, it may be objected, That at the time when Christ suffered death, many had been adjudged to hell, and tormented there, but there is no redemption from hell: How then can we contend that the death of Christ was ever applicable in any way to these condemned persons? Some, influenced by this argument, have concluded that the innumerable multitude of the wicked, who lived from the beginning of the world until the coming of Christ, and who, on account of their impiety, were cast into hell, had no more right in the benefit of redemption, before the sacrifice of Christ was offered up on the cross, than the devils themselves. Thus the Leyden Fathers speak in a writing which is extant in Vol. 9. Biblioth. Patrum, As the Lord Jesus Christ is by no means said to have suffered for the wicked and condemned angels, so it is not to be believed that he suffered all things for those impious and condemned men.

REPLY 1. But [ answer, When we affirm the death of Christ according to the ordination of God, and the nature of the thing, to be a remedy applicable to every man, we consider not merely the outward passion of Christ endured at the appointed moment of time, but the eternal virtue of the death of Christ, bringing salvation to mankind in every age. For Christ, as to the intention of God, was a Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, and the efficacy of this propitiatory sacrifice could extend itself as much to those who lived before Christ suffered, as to us who live after his passion. If therefore they only mean, that those could not be relieved by the death of Christ in time, who before his death were by an irrevocable decree adjudged to infernal punishment, we confess the same ; because they had then ceased to be living in this world, and therefore were not capable of repentance and faith; but if they mean to contend further, that the eternal virtue of the death of Christ was not applicable to such persons while they were alive in this world, because the passion of Christ did not regard them any more than the wicked and condemned angels, that we deny. For it may be truly said of Cain, Esau, or any man who died before Christ suffered, that he might have been absolved from his sins, and saved through the virtue of the sacrifice to be offered up by the Messiah, if he had believed in him; which cannot be said of the condemned angels: because the universal covenant of salvation under the condition of faith, embraces the whole human race, but does not embrace the fallen angels. It is therefore worthy of observation, that God would not that the death of his Christ should either be applied or applicable under any condition to any of the fallen angels: to all these, therefore, God conducted himself alike and equally. But not equally to mankind; for as to these, although he determined and declared that the death of his Son was applicable to any one under the condition of faith, yet he did not determine to cause it by the benefit of his special mercy to be applied equally to every one. We do not deny therefore what is evident, namely, that the differeuce between devils and men consists in this, that from the ordination of God, the death of Christ is a thing ordained for and applicable to mankind ; but neither ordained for, nor applicable to devils; although after this life, to men placed in hell there is no further possibility of application remaining. Therefore this consequence is faulty; viz. T’he death of Christ was not applicable to the damned after their condemnation ; Therefore it was never and in no way applicable to them.

OBJECTION 2. Those who say that the death of Christ is applicable, from the ordination of God, to every individual, at the same time affirm, that God has provided for many persons a remedy, which he foresaw would never profit them. For God knew that none of the reprobate would be healed by the medicine of the blood of Christ, and delivered from eternal death. To what purpose therefore would he ordain so precious a remedy to be applicable even to those to whom it was most certain that it would never be applied ?

REPLY 2. You cannot on that account infer, that it rightly follows from our opinion, that this remedy, even by the ordination and appointment of God himself, is applicable to innumerable persons to whom it will never be actually applied. I deny, therefore, that any thing false or inconvenient can be deduced from thence, although this be granted. Yea, it is evident, that many benefits have been provided by God for angels and men, I may also add, and conferred sometimes, and duly ordained to a certain end, which God at the same time knew would never profit them, nor avail to produce such an end. Those excellent gifts, which were conferred upon the apostate angels in their first creation, were duly ordained by God to produce in them firm and constant obedience, and to secure their blessedness; yet God knew that they would be rebellious, and would never use those gifts to the obtaining of that good for which they were destined. The same may be said of Adam in his state of uprightness, whom God endued with knowledge and holiness, and guarded with admonitions abundantly sufficient to preserve him in his duty ; knowing at the same time that all these things, which were applicable to the promotion of his obedience and felicity, would never be applied. It is not therefore foreign to Divine wisdom to appoint and ordain means applicable to a certain end, although he may understand that the application would be hindered by some intervening obstacle, which he had not determined to remove. Here may be adduced that question of Aquinas on predestination, where he makes a difference between providence commonly taken, and predestination, which is a special part of providence. Providence, he says, respects only an order to an end: predestination respects the end or event of an order. Those things which are ordained to an end by that more common providence, do not always obtain the end; but those things which are ordained by an individual predestination always obtain it. As therefore God, by that more extensive providence, is understood to have provided many bodily remedies applicable to the removing of certain bodily diseases from any persons, which nevertheless he hath not determined to be infallibly applied to any particular individuals; so also we affirm that God of his love to man, and that more common providence, hath provided and ordained the blood of his Son as a remedy applicable to the expiation of the sins of mankind in general, although he hath not determined from his individual predestination to have it applied to all men individually. But for what purpose is that ordained as applicable to all men, which is not intended to be infallibly applied to all? I answer, that from hence the good-will, mercy, and justice of God may appear more conspicuous, whilst that remedy which, from the ordination of God, is applicable to every one for salvation, is applied nevertheless only to certain persons, to whom God shews his compassion in a special manner; it is not applied to others, although God promises it and sets it before them, through their own wickedness.

OBJECTION 3. If the death of Christ, by the ordination of God, is a remedy applicable to all for salvation, then God would take care that this death of Christ should be announced to all, lest any one might pretend that he perished only through ignorance of so efficacious a remedy. But experience teaches, that this remedy was not revealed, for some ages, not only to many individuals, but also to many nations: Therefore that was not appointed by God to be a remedy applicable to all men individually, which was concealed from so many, God himself so ordering it.

REPLY 3. We willingly concede what relates to the minor proposition; which also the sacred Scriptures testify, and the Fathers acknowledge to be most true. In Acts xiv. 16, Paul shews, that in times past God suffered all nations to walk in their own ways, without any knowledge of Christ. And on this account, in Colossians i. 26, 27, he calls the Gospel of Christ, the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints, to whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles. Hence Prosper says On free-will; Jt ?s not removed from common observation in how many ages what an innumerable multitude of men have died in their errors and impieties, without any knowledge of the true God. And, On the calling of the Gentiles (lib. i. cap 7), In the extreme parts of the world there are some nations, on whom the grace of the Saviour hath not, yet shone. The minor proposition, therefore, being granted, we say that the consequence of the major is invalid. For God is not bound to procure the application of his remedy to any individual to whom he hath willed that it should be applicable ; which is evident as well in corporeal as in spiritual remedies. Although, therefore, the death of Christ is, from the ordination of God, and the nature of the thing, a remedy of that kind, that it may be both announced and applied to every individual of the human race for the remission of sins, yet God is not bound by any promise to procure that it should be announced and actually applied to every individual. God willed that the death of his Son should be a treasure as it were deposited in his own hands, from whence he might dispense to the whole human race whatsoever regards the obtaining either of pardon, or grace, or glory : but he willed also that the actual communication of this treasure should remain in his own most free power, and from thence he should bestow it upon inen according to the good pleasure of his own’ will. Js it not lawful for me to do what 1 will with mine own? Matt. xx. l9. We say, therefore, that the death and merit of Christ is, according to the revealed will of God, applicable to all men; and in this sense, that Christ died for all men, but not for the apostate angels. But this being assumed, we affirm nevertheless that God, who has absolute authority over his own gift, is not bound to make known, nor to apply this medicine to all mankind. So Augustine says, Whom he will not relieve, he does not relieve ; of whom in his predestination, he hath otherwise determined, secretly indeed, but justly. For there is no iniquity with God, but his judgments are inscrutable. Nor yet (as it was objected) will any one perish through ignorance alone of the remedy. For in all that perish there will be found causes why they perish, arising from their own demerits, their aforesaid ignorance accompanying only, not causing, their perdition. Thou hast destroyed thyself, &c.

OBJECTION 4. If the death of Christ is to be considered as a remedy or ransom applicable to every man, from the ordination of God, then also the resurrection, intercession, and mediation of Christ will have respect to all men in the same manner. But Christ was not raised up for all men, does not intercede for all, is not the mediator of all: Therefore, neither is his death to be extended to all. That these are never to be separated is proved from Romans viii. 34, where they are all joined together. It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. And Romans iv. 25, the Apostle teaches, that those for whose offences Christ died, for their justification he was raised again. But he was not raised again for all men; Therefore, neither did he die for all.

REPLY 4. If the ground of our defence be rightly weighed, it will easily appear that all these things are no detriment to our cause. For we do not contend that the death of Christ was, from the ordination of God, so applicable to each and every man, that on account of this propitiatory sacrifice, all men are at once placed in a state of grace and salvation; nor do we defend this, that from the special decree of God and of predestination, this death of Christ is infallibly to be applied to each and every man; but that this death of Christ, God so ordaining it and rerevealing it in his word, is that ransom by which the sins of any man may be expiated who performs the conditions : required in the Gospel. And hence it is that the preacher of the Gospel may confidently announce to every man in every part of the world, that salvation is procurable for him in the death of the Son of God, if he should believe. This cannot be promised to any of the fallen angels. Whence it is clear, that this conditional promise of salvation in the death of Christ, which may be announced to every man is founded on some ordination of the will of God, which regards men universally and individually, and does not regard angels. But let the opponents say what this ordination is, if it is not that which we assert concerning the death of Christ being applicable to the human : race under the conditions of the Gospel. These things being so determined, we come nearer to the solution of the aforesaid objection, that the death of Christ pertains to all men individually, as to his death itself, or the oblation made on the cross. For as we can truly announce to every man that his sins are expiable by the death of Christ according to the ordination of God, and will be expiated, if only he should believe in Christ; so also we can truly declare, that the same Christ was raised again, that he might justify him through faith, and was exalted at the right hand of God, that, by his mediation and merits, he might preserve him through faith in the favour of God, and at length might lead him to glory. Therefore we do not put asunder those things which God hath joined together ; but we teach, that the death, resurrection; and intercession of Christ are joined together in indissoluble union, but in a different way. If we consider the whole human race, that is, each and every man, then we say, not only that the death, but the resurrection and intercession of Christ regards them, as to the possibility of their enjoying these benefits, the condition of faith being pre-supposed. If we consider the elect, we affirm that all these things regard them as to the infallibility of enjoying them, because of this condition of faith being destined for, and in time bostowed upon them. Although, therefore, in some special way, the death and resurrection of Christ, with the great treasure of his merits, may be restricted to the elect alone (of which we shall discourse afterwards), yet it is not to be denied that the death and merits of Christ, who took the one nature of all, and undertook the one cause of all, are of that kind, that they may be announced, offered, and by faith applied to every individual partaker of human nature. This Christ himself hath indicated in a manner sufficiently clear, in those words, John iii. 17, 18, God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved ; he that believeth on him is not condemned ; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Those, therefore, who never believe, nor will believe, would nevertheless have had life procurable through the death and merits of Christ, according to the ordination of God, if they had believed.

OBJECTION 5. If the death of Christ be a benefit from the ordination of God, applicable to each and every man, then it may be said, that Christ made satisfaction for the sins of the whole human race. But this cannot be defended, without at the same time overthrowing the justice of God, since the idea of justice does not admit that the same sin should be punished twice. Suppose, then, that the death of Christ is a ransom, by which satisfaction was made to God for the sins of the human race, how can so many persons be called to account for the same by the justice of God, and be tormented with eternal punishment?

REPLY 5. As to the major proposition, we think its consequence may be safely conceded. For the orthodox Fathers boldly assert that Christ made satisfaction for the sins of the human race or of all mankind. Thus Eusebius, (Evang. Demonstr. lib. x. in the preface) 77 was needful that . the Lamb of God should be offered as a sacrifice for the other lambs whose nature he assumed, even for the whole human race. Thus Nazianzen (Orat. 2. in Pasch.) The sacrifice of Christ is an imperishable expiation of the whole world. Thus, finally (omitting others), Cyril (Catech. 13.), He redeemed the whole world of mankind. The same form of speaking is every where made use of in the Articles of religion of our Church of England, (Art. 2, 15, 31, &c.) Thus also those speak who endeavour to limit to the utmost this death of Christ. We adduced before the testimony of the Reverend Heidelberg Divine Pareus, who freely confesses in his judgment exhibited at the Synod of Dort, The cause and matter of the passion of Christ was a feeling or sustaining of the wrath of God, incensed by the sin, not of some men, but of the whole human race. A little afterwards, The whole of sin and of the wrath of God against it, is affirmed to have been borne by Christ. Nor ought this to appear unsound, since this universal redemption, satisfaction, or expiation performed by the death of Christ, brings nothing more than àn universal cause of salvation to be confirmed and granted to the human race by the Divine ordination; the benefit of which every individual may enjoy through the faith required by the Gospel. We therefore call Christ the Redeemer of the world, and teach that he made satisfaction for the sins not of some, but of the whole world, not because that on account of the payment of this price for the sins of the human race, all mankind individually are to be immediately delivered from captivity and death, but because by virtue of the payment of this price, all men individually may and ought to be delivered from death, and, in fact, are to be delivered according to the tenor of the evangelical covenant, that is, if they repent and believe in this Redeemer. To what is further urged, That it is contrary to justice to receive satisfaction or a ransom for the sins of the whole human race, and yet not to deliver them all from the punishment of their sins, but, notwithstanding this satisfaction, to adjudge many to eternal torments ; I answer, That this would indeed be most unjust, if we of ourselves had paid this price to God, or if our Surety, Jesus Christ, had so offered.to God his blood as a satisfactory price, that without any other intervening condition, all men should be immediately absolved through the offering of the oblation made by him; or, finally, if God himself had covenanted with Christ when he died, that he would give faith to every individual, and all those other things which regard the infallible application of this sacrifice which was offered up for the human race. But since God himself of his own accord provided that this price should be paid to himself, it was in his own power to annex conditions, which being performed, this death should be advantageous to any man, not being performed it should not profit any man. Therefore no injustice is done to those persons who are punished by God after the ransom was accepted for the sins of the human race, because they offered nothing to God as a satisfaction for their sins, nor performed that condition, without the performance of which God willed not that this satisfactory price should benefit any individual. Nor, moreover, ought this to be thought an injustice to Christ the Mediator. For he so was willing to die for all, and to pay to the Father the price of redemption for all, that at the same time he willed not that every individual in any way whatsoever, but that all, as soon as they believed in him, should be absolved from the guilt of their sins. — Lastly, Christ, in offering himself in sacrifice to God the Father in order to expiate the sins of the world, nevertheless subinitted to the good pleasure of the Father the free distribution and application of his merits, neither was any agreement entered into between the Father and the Son, by which God is bound to effect that this death of Christ, which, from the ordination of God, is applicable to all under the condition of faith, should become applied to all by the gift of faith. We ought not, therefore, to deny that the offering of Christ once made is a perfect satisfaction for the sins, not of some men only, but of all; yet so that he who is simply said to have died for all, promises remission of sin through his death and salvation conditionally, and will perform it to those alone who believe. We will illustrate all these things by a similitude ; Suppose that a number of men were cast into prison by a certain King on account of a great debt, or that they were condemned to suffer death for high treason; but that the King himself procured that his own Son should discharge this debt to the last farthing ; or should substitute himself as guilty in the room of those traitors, and should suffer the punishment due to them all, this condition being at the same time promulgated both by the King and his Son, That none should be absolved or liberated except those only who should acknowledge the King’s Son for their Lord and serve him: These things being so determined, I enquire, if those who persist in disobedience and rebellion against the King’s Son should not be delivered, would any charge of injustice be incurred, because after this ransom had been paid, their own debts should be exacted from many, or after the punishment endured by the Son, these rebels should nevertheless be punished? By no means; because the payment of the just price, and the enduring of the punishment was ordained to procure remission for every one under the condition of obedience, and not otherwise. I shall add no more; it will be easy to accommodate all these thines to our present purpose.

OBJECTION 6. No medium can be found or thought of between the sufficiency of the price, and its real application; those, therefore, who deny that the real application of the death of Christ is made to all, ought not to proceed further than to assert the sufficiency of this price for all; beyond which they are necessarily compelled to concede its real application to all. But those who declare this death of Christ to be, according to the ordination of God, applicable to all for salvation, seem to introduce some medium between the sufficient value and the actual efficacy of it. But of what kind will it be, or where will it be found? It cannot be any efficiency indifferently regarding all men individually, and caused in them by the death of Christ, because such an effect cannot be assigned. Nor can we by virtue of the death of Christ, place in God himself either any obtaining of remission of sins extended to all, or any intention of its application. It remains, therefore, that we assert, that beyond the sufficiency of the price, nothing redounds to the death of Christ which has regard to all men.

REPLY 6. To meet this objection, we should observe, in the first place, what kind of sufficiency they mean who reason thus, and at the same time retain the distinction of the Schoolmen, that Christ died for all men sufficiently, for the elect effectually. Therefore, that Christ died for all men sufficiently, they understand thus: The death of Christ is sufficient to redeem all men, but he would not die for all: The death of Christ is in itself, and in its intrinsic value, a sufficient ransom for all, but it was not paid for all. But it never occurred to the Schoolmen to defend this sufficiency only, and to deny absolutely that Christ died for all. Nor can it easily be explained how, without evident contradiction, it can be affirmed, that Christ died or was offered up sufficiently for all, and at the same time be altogether denied that he was unwilling to die or be offered up for many. As to those, therefore, who admit such an oblation and sufficiency in the death of Christ as is merely hypothetical, if it is referred to all, I answer, That a medium can and ought to be assigned between that mere sufficiency of price and its real application. For the ordination of God manifested in the Gospel, according to which this death of Christ is proposed to be received by every one that repents and believes, proves that this sufficiency and actual application is appointed as a kind of medium. For in this ordination of God, according to which the death of Christ is appointed and proposed as a cause of salvation to every living person, applicable by faith, there is contained less than in the real application, but there is contained something more than in the mere and bare sufficiency of the thing considered in itself, this conditional ordination being excluded, which regards every partaker of human nature. This, therefore, is that very medium which the adversaries deny can be assigned, but still urge and enquire, what that medium is, and where it is to be found, which goes beyond the bare sufficiency, and yet does not attain to the real application. I answer, That there is not any act, caused by the death of Christ, indifferently regarding every individual; but there is a title to eternal life, founded on the death of Christ, indifferently regarding every individual under the condition of faith : That there is not in God an obtaining of remission, and a design of application extended to all men individually according to the infallible order of predestination ; but there is in God a certain obligation to remission, and a will of remitting sins and conferring life extended to all men individually, according to the tenor of the promise of the Gospel. But I say no more on this subject at present, because when we come to our next proposition, we shall designedly discourse of this same point more copiously.

OBJECTION 7. The will of the Father, the oblation of the Son, the saving operation of the Holy Spirit, equally extend to and respect the same persons: But it is the will of the Father to save the elect alone: and the Spirit, by giving faith and perseverance, actually saves the elect alone: Therefore the death or oblation of Christ is not to be extended except to the elect alone; and therefore it. ought not to be considered as a remedy from the ordination of God applicable to each and every man.

REPLY 7. If the major proposition is understood concerning the will of God in predestinating, which is always joined with the infallibility of the event; and concerning that special operation of the sanctifying Spirit, which is subservient to the execution of this decree; I say that it is not absolutely true: for the death or oblation of Christ regards in some way certain persons whom predestination does not embrace. Predestination is the secret decree of God by which he determined with himself from eternity to whom he would infallibly give efficacious grace and eternal life through the infinite merit of the death of Christ: But the oblation of Christ on the cross is a common benefit granted to the human race, by virtue of which any one who only embraces it with a true faith, may claim for himself eternal life according to the will of God revealed in the Gospel. So Christ himself speaks, John iii. 14, 15, As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. Although, therefore, the predestination of God, and effectual vocation, which depends upon it, embraces no one not elected, yet, as the offering of Christ in the Gospel, so also the oblation of Christ on the cross, is of wider extent, and is as far applicable as it is announceable, and will bring salvation to every one provided he believes it. At the same time we leave to God his own secret will, according to which he hath mercifully determined to work effectually in some that they may believe, and to leave others to their inherent obduracy, and not to work effectually in them that they may believe. I add further, That there was in Christ himself a will according to which he willed that his death should regard all men individually; and there was also a will according to which he willed that it should pertain to the elect alone. He willed that it should regard all the posterity of Adam who should be saved, and that it should actually save them all, provided they should embrace it with a true faith. He willed that it should so pertain to the elect alone, that by the merit of it all things which relate to the obtaining of salvation, should be infallibly given to them. And in this sense we confess that the oblation of Christ is of the same extent as the predestination of God. Of which more will be said hereafter.

OBJECTION 8. If the death of Christ is determined to be applicable to each and every man according to the ordination of God, then all discrimination between the elect and non-elect is removed, and the doctrine of predestination is altogether overturned: For if Christ may be said in any sense whatever to have died for all, what hinders us from declaring in the same sense that all men individually are elected by God ?

REPLY 8. These objections proceed from ignorance of the true reason of election or predestination. For it is not any kind of ordination to salvation, through whatever means, which places man in the number of the elect or predestinated, but an ordination through such means as God both knew and decreed would infallibly produce the effect of salvation in the elect person. Hence is that definition of predestination by Augustine (on Perseverance, cap. 14) It is a foreknowledge and preparation of the benefits of God, by which those who are delivered are most certainly delivered, Hence also that apostolical chain, Romans viii. 29, 30, in which predestination is united in an inseparable bond with glorification, Whom he did predestinate, them he also glorified. Therefore, although we confess that the death of Christ was in some way ordained by God for a common remedy of the human race, and would benefit all under this Evangelical condition—if they should believe it, yet it does not follow hence that all men individually are promiscuously elected ; because God hath not determined to give to all men individually that grace whereby they may believe, and, by believing, may infallibly derive life from this death of Christ. And it may further be added, that although we should grant not only that Christ died for all men, but also that on account of this death of Christ sufficient grace was prepared and given by God to every individual (which we do not hold), yet no one from these concessions could rightly infer that all men are promiscuously elected, or that there is no difference between the elect and those who are passed by. The reason is evident; Because there is no sufficient ordination of means to procure the salvation of man, were he predestinated, unless it should be added, that there is an infallible order of special providence appointing and directing the ordained means to a most certain attainment of the end, which nothing can prevent. This may be illustrated by the example of angels and men considered in a state of upright nature. All the angels individually when formed were furnished with sufficient grace, and thence sufficiently endowed to obtain blessedness. But this does not prove either that there was no election among the angels, or that they were all indiscriminately elected. Thus Adam himself, at his creation, and in him all his posterity, are understood to have been supplied with sufficient grace and duly furnished to obtain eternallife: but neither will it follow from thence that all men were elected, or that there was no predestination. For not every ordination to the obtaining of eternal life either at once makes a man elected, or denies that he is not elected, but only (as was before said) infallible ordination. That we may return therefore to our argument: From the death of Christ, ordained to be a propitiatory sacrifice for all men individually, and applicable through faith for the obtaining of remission and salvation, it does not follow that election and preterition is taken away ; because this common ordination which is revealed in the Gospel being granted, there is also a certain secret ordination, according to which the aforesaid death of Christ is decreed to be infallibly applied to some persons, to whom God will manifest his special compassion ; it is not decreed to be so applied to others, upon whom God will not have compassion in the same manner. And this is abundantly sufficient to defend the doctrine of predestination and reprobation, although we extend the death of Christ to all men in the aforesaid sense.

OBJECTION 9. Some dispute, by means of an argument deduced, as they think, from similar circumstances, in this manner: It is as foreign from truth that Christ died according to the ordination of God, for some who are not saved, as that some are saved for whom, according to the ordination of God, he did not die: But this it would be absurd to assert : so likewise the former.

REPLY 9. I deny that the reasoning is similar on both sides. For (as it is a received maxim in Divinity) Good arises only from pure sources, evil from any kind of defect : The salvation of mankind therefore, which is the greatest good, is not produced without a full concurrence of all causes; but the loss of salvation, which is an evil, may happen from the defect of any one cause ordained for the salvation of mankind. Although it is impossible that any persons can be saved for whom Christ did not die, because the death of Christ is one of those ordained causes which operate to the salvation of mankind; yet it is not impossible to cut off some from salvation for whom he did die, because it was not appointed by God that the death of Christ alone, by the act of his oblation, should render God propitious to all, and should save all, but that it should be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, (Romans iii. 25), and it is unto all and upon all them that believe; for there is no difference, as it is said in the 22d verse. But if any one should still urge, Why is the death of Christ declared to be given for a remedy to all men, but faith is not said to be given or prepared for all? I answer, Because the Scriptures clearly teach, that Christ by dying obtained for each and every man this grace, that, under the condition of faith, they might now hope for and obtain remission of sins and salvation: but this conditional grace could not be offered to all, nor could regard all in every way, unless this death of Christ should pertain to all men from the ordination of God himself. Now, on the other hand, we do not maintain that faith is destined for or given to all, because the same holy Scripture, which proposes the death of Christ as a benefit vouchsafed to all and applicable to every one through faith, does not make this faith a benefit promised or given to all, but derived from the peculiar decree of election. In addition to these’ things, the Mediator himself, who offered himself for a sacrifice to God to expiate the sins of the world, (Acts iii. 19 et seq.) obtained from God that all those individuals who should believe in him, should be absolved from their sins, and so far was willing to pay this ransom for all: but he did not apply to all the merit of his death, nor obtained from God that all should infallibly partake of faith and salvation. And here the secret of election discovers itself, which ought not to overturn or weaken the universality of the oblation, or the truth of the promise of the Gospel.

OBJECTION 10. If the death of Christ were to be conceived by us as a remedy applicable to all men, then the holy Scriptures would not restrain the actual giving of the Son to those only who believe; but they apply to the faithful alone not only the benefit or real application, but also the very gift of the Son, John iii. 15, God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. That which is given to mankind conditionally, is understood to be given to no one, if the condition be set aside. Since, therefore, this condition of believing is fulfilled by the elect alone, the consequence is, that we should say, that Christ was offered for them alone. And therefore this oblation or death of Christ is not a remedy or ransom applicable, according to the ordination of God, to each and every man.

REPLY 10. We may consider the giving or oblation of Christ in a twofold point of view. The first is that in which he is understood to have been given or offered to God the Father on the altar of the cross, to take away the sins of the world: of which the Apostle says, 1 Timothy ii. 5, 6, There is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus ; who gave himself a ransom for all, namely, to God the Father, as it is more clearly expressed Ephes. v. 2, Christ hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour. This oblation is the foundation of every future offering, by which he is offered to men in the Gospel, that, being apprehended by faith, he may bestow upon them eternal life through the merit of this sacrifice. Of this oblation the same Apostle speaks, Romans iii. 24, 25, We are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, &c. If we regard the former oblation, I deny that Christ offered himself a sacrifice, or gave himself a ransom to God the Father to expiate the sins of the world, under the condition of human faith, as it were in this form, J offer myself to Thee as a sacrifice for the sins of the human race, provided they believe in me. For he offered himself simply, not conditionally, to God the Father; which is proved from hence, that the Father, according to whose will the Son offered himself a sacrifice, did not determine with himself to give a Redeemer to the world under this hypothesis, If the world should believe ; but God gave his Son to the world, and the Son gave himself to the Father a ransom to take away the sins of the world, gratuitously and absolutely. A condition indeed is annexed in the preaching of the Gospel, not to the giving, but to the eternal life which is to follow from the beneficial application of the thing given. Therefore, as to what regards the latter oblation, by which Christ, who was offered up to God for men, is now offered to men in the Gospel, I deny also that this hypothetical and conditional oblation or giving of Christ, is even to be thought of from this preaching of the Gospel. For the Saviour in the place above-mentioned did not say, So God loved the world, that he would give his Son for it if it should believe: but after that he had declared that he was given absolutely to all from the love of God to man, he shews nevertheless that it would not profit all to eternal life absolutely and simply, but conditionally, even all if they should believe, or all who should believe. We also, if at any time we should preach the Gospel to unbelievers, as to the Indians or Americans, should not begin to inform them, Christ the Son of God died for some of you who shall believe in him, and not for others, but we should say, Christ died to take away the sins of the whole world, and gave him- : self a ransom to God the Father, but in such a manner, that neither Christ who offered up himself as the price of redemption for all, nor God the Father to whom he was offered, wills that any of you should be delivered from their sins, before you believe in God and in Jesus Christ whom he hath sent. To that, therefore, which is urged in the last place, That what is understood to be given or promised under the condition of faith, is supposed not to be given or promised to any one, without the performance of this condition ; and therefore Christ is truly af- Jirmed to be given only for the elect, who perform the condition, I answer, We no where read in the Scriptures, that Christ, or the death or sacrifice of Christ, was given or promised conditionally to the human race, although salvation or eternal life is every where promised to be given under the condition of faith. Wherefore it may also be added, That even a thing which is promised conditionally, has respect in some way to those who never fulfil the condition, namely, as to the right of claiming the promised benefit, if they should fulfil it ; which Christ himself seems to imply, John iii. 18, where he teaches that unbelievers are condemned, because they did not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God. Therefore even those who believed not had the death of the Son of God applicable to themselves, although they had it not applied, because they believed not. And on this account the elect alone find life in the death of Christ, because they alone believe in God, who has compassion upon them.

OpsectTion 1]. The death of Christ is not applicable to those for whom he did not die, or was not offered up. But there are numberless persons for whom he did not die, or was not offered up, namely, all those who were not written in the book of life of the elect, before the foundation of the world. From thence they endeavour to confirm the minor, that the Apostle broadly asserts that God would freely give all things to those for whom the Son died, Romans viii. 32, He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give usallthings? Buthe does not freely give all things to all men: Therefore Christ did not die for all: Therefore his death is not applicable to all.

REPLY 11. I willingly grant that the death of Christ can in no true sense be said to be applicable to those for whom God did in no wise will that he should die. For the death of Christ is not a remedy applicable to expiate the sins of any one, except according to the ordination and acceptation of God. And for this reason, although the ransom paid by Christ to God the Father is in itself of sufficient and superabundant value to take away the sins, not only of men, but of fallen angels, yet, on account of the want of its ordination and acceptation as to angels, we deny that Christ ought to be said to have died for them in any way. The same thing might also be declared respecting men, if there were any alienated and excluded from all possibility of the aforesaid redemption on account of the same want of Divine ordination and acceptation. But as it was said, the major being granted, let us proceed to the minor. I answer therefore, That there is no one who is a partaker of the same human nature which the Redeemer deigned to assume, for whom Christ did not deliver up himself as a price of redemption, applicable according to. the ordination and acceptation of God, for remission of sins, to be obtained by faith in his blood. Nor does the Apostle contradict us, whose whole discourse in Romans vill. is not designed to console any description of persons in any-condition, but the elect; nor the elect merely as such, but the elect now called, justified, sanctified, that is, as he says Coloss. i. 13, now delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of his dear Son. Nor does he simply and universally affirm that God freely gives all things to all men for whom Christ died, but to all of us to whom the present discourse relates, that is, to all the predestinated who are believing in Christ, for whom not only Christ died, but to whom moreover Christ is now given in an especial manner, that is, is united and communicated with the infinite treasure of his merits. Therefore this consolatory argument of the Apostle derived from the death of Christ is efficacious; but only if it is accommodated to those persons to whom it was accommodated by the Apostle, and only so far as it was accommodated by him, namely, in this manner, Thou, who from thy effectual calling, justification, and sanctification, canst now know and perceive that thou art predestinated, and that for thy special and effectual redemption, God willed not only that his Son should be offered up to himself, but also communicated to thee ; why canst thou not trust him with the rest, that he will freely give thee all other things necessary to accomplish thy salvation ? But if any one desires to apply the aforesaid reasoning to any persons whatsoever setting aside the consideration of predestination, calling, and justification, in this manner, Christ died for you, or Christ gave himself a ransom or sacrifice to God to expiate your sins, and therefore God will freely give you all things, I say, that he extends this argument beyond its limits, contrary to the mind of the Apostle, who confined it to certain persons, namely, the predestinated, and to them as placed in a certain condition, namely, of justification and adoption.

OBJECTION 12, Christ was ordained to be the Redeemer not from love to mankind in general, but from that special good will with which God embraced his own elect

SION. DN peculiarly to eternal life: Therefore, the death of Christ is not a ransom applicable from the ordination of God to the redemption of all men, but is destined for the elect alone.

REPLY 12. I deny the antecedent, and affirm that God in sending the Redeemer was willing to manifest to the world both these kinds of love; namely, that common love of the human race, which we call philanthropy, and that special and secret love, which we call good pleasure. The argument of common love is, that he would so far regard the human race, that is, all men individually, that they should have a Redeemer through whose satisfaction, apprehended by faith, they might obtain remission of sins. This love he did not exhibit to the fallen angels (whom, nevertheless, he preserves as his creatures), since Christ was in no wise ordained to be a Redeemer of them, nor is remission of sins through the satisfaction of a Redeemer either to be announced or applicable to them under any condition, From hence we clearly collect, that in the very appointment or ordination of a Redeemer, God had some regard of common love towards men, which he had not towards devils. Which will appear further if we rightly consider what this redemption is. It is, then, a payment of the just price due for us captives, not that we should be actually delivered on the payment of the price, but that we should be delivered as soon as we believe in the Redeemer. This is that ordination of the death of Christ, or of a satisfactory price, which flowed from the common love of God to all mankind, and therefore, it is rightly declared to be extended, under this condition, from us to all men individually. And to this we think that celebrated passage refers, John i. 16, God so loved the world, &c. But now as to what relates to that secret and more special love, with which God embraces the elect, far be it from us to deny that the death and merit of Christ is a special gift to be effectually and infallibly applied in a special way to the elect, who are to be redeemed and saved through his special love. Therefore we attribute to that common love, with which God waits upon the human race, that he was willing to appoint such a Redeemer, through whose death and satisfaction any one, provided he should believe in him, might be absolved from his sins, Acts xiii. 38. But we think that it is to be attributed to his special good pleasure, with which he embraces the elect alone, that from the death and merit of this appointed and ordained Redeemer, he should determine to give to certain individual persons effectually and infallibly, faith, remission of sins, and eternal life. And we think that the Saviour referred to this special intention, John x. 15, where he says, that he laid down his life for his sheep, that is, that he so offered himself up as a sacrifice for the elect, that through his death not only they might be saved, if they should believe, but that they might actually believe and be saved. We ought not, therefore, so to urge the special good pleasure of God towards the elect, that we should deny that the ransom of Christ was ordained by God to reconcile and deliver all mankind individually, and to be applied, provided they embrace it with a true faith; leaving at the same time to God his own secret judgments, and full liberty in dispensing or not dispensing that special grace, by means of which faith is infallibly produced in the hearts of men, and an effectual application is secured, and eternal life is infallibly obtained according to the covenant of the Gospel.

OBJECTION 13. If the death of Christ is, according to the ordination of God, applicable to all men for salvation, then the salvation of all would be effected by this death of Christ. For God always effects and follows up that end which he designs. If, therefore, he had ordained the death of Christ to procure the salvation of the human race, he would also have saved the whole human race by means of this death of Christ. Those, therefore, who assert that the death of Christ is, through the ordination of God himself, appointed to be a remedy applicable to all men for salvation, seem to impugn the wisdom of God, For he has very little wisdom who designs a thing which he does not accomplish. They seem also to impugn the omnipotence of God. For it is the act of a weak person to ordain a benefit or remedy applicable to every individual, which, nevertheless, on account of the wickedness or unbelief of men, he cannot apply to many of them.

REPLY 13. In order to remove these scruples it should be attentively noticed, that we defend this proposition only, That there is some kind of ordination or good pleasure of the Divine will, according to which the death of Christ is a satisfactory ransom in such a manner applicable for all men to the. obtaining of remission, that if they should submit themselves to this ordination and good pleasure, it would be actually applied to each and every man. But we do not assert or maintain the proposition, That there is any ordination, good pleasure, or decree of the Divine will, according to which he should absolutely intend or appoint to make this death of Christ to be effectually and infallibly applied to each and every man. The former ordination considered in itself is sufficient for the purpose, that the death of Christ may be truly said to be applicable to all men individually ; since the want of such an ordination is the reason why we cannot say that Christ died for the apostate angels, or that the death of Christ is not applicable to them in any degree. These things being premised, I affirm that the consequence of the major is invalid. For although the death of Christ, according to the ordination and will of God himself, is a remedy of such a kind that it may be applied to any individual of the human race for salvation, and the mode of its application is clearly laid down in the holy Scripture, namely, through the performance of the condition of faith; yet it cannot be inferred from thence, either that faith or salvation is infallibly to be conferred on all and each one; because it is a very different thing to ordain the death of Christ as a remedy applicable for salvation to all men, and to prescribe faith as the mode or condition by which it is applied ; and to appoint and absolutely to decree effectually to produce faith and salvation in certain persons. This latter, therefore, cannot be rightly deduced from the former. For as if God should create any herb endued with such a virtue that it might heal any one who labours under any disease whatever, and moreover should promise, that any one who should use it should undoubtedly recover his former health, any one would rightly conclude from thence, that this herb was a remedy for any disease, applicable, by the ordination of God, to all sick persons individually; but would not rightly infer that every individual would be infallibly cured by means of this remedy, because it would not be given to some that they should find this remedy, and others perhaps would not be willing to make use of it when it was found: So, because God sent the Redeemer into the world, and furnished him with so much virtue and grace that he might confer remission of sins and eternal life upon any man who labours under damnable guilt, and moreover promised in the Gospel, that any one who should believe in this Redeemer should be absolved from all his sins, any one may rightly conclude from this, that this Redeemer and his death are applicable to all sinners; but not rightly, that all sinners will be saved by his death, because to many this saving death of the Redeemer is not revealed, to many it is not given that they should believe in him, although he is made known to them. But that which is brought forward on the opposite side, That God always accomplishes the end which he designs, admits of an easy solution. For we do not contend that God by his absolute will (which not only predetermines the ordination of means to an end, but also the infallible production of the end) intended actually to procure the salvation of each and every man through the death of Christ; but that he appointed, willed, and ordained that the death of his Son should be, and should be esteemed, a ransom of such a kind that it might be offered and applied to all men individually. And this God evidently accomplished. For all acknowledge, or ought to acknowledge, that Christ so suffered, and died, and was offered up for the sins of all men, that all together, without exception, might, through his death, by believing, obtain remission of sins and salvation. Nor is it contrary to the Divine wisdom to appoint and sometimes to confer upon men ineans ordained and applicable to a certain end, and at the same time to permit many men to fail of attaining that end. For by this means God attains a higher end, even the illustration of his glory, by the demonstration of his justice towards those who abuse the means ordained to procure the salvation of mankind, and by the demonstration of his mercy towards those who, by the benefit of his special grace, use the aforesaid means to their salvation ; and, lastly, by the demonstration of his supreme dominion, and free liberty towards those to whom he did not think fit even to reveal the means, which were supplied by himself for the salvation of mankind, and which were applicable by his own ordination to any persons whatever. Respecting the omnipotence of God also we reply, That it is not weakened in any degree by the admission of our opinion. For we do not say, that through the wickedness of some men God cannot apply the death of Christ for salvation to all, which he appointed and ordained to be applicable to all; but that God who hath mercy upon whom he will, and whom he will he leaves hardened, would not heal this wickedness in all men by the remedy of special grace, would not make the death of Christ to be applied to all, which he made applicable to all. And here, of him who is delivered through the death of Christ, which is applied to him by the assistance of special grace, God would rightly say, Thus I will : Of him who, notwithstanding this applicable remedy, is condemned, no application having been made, he would also say, Take that thine is and go thy way; I will give to this man what is not due to him, I will not give it to thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own? Here if any one should murmur, he would deservedly hear, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?

OBJECTION 14. If we assert that Christ died for all, it will follow, First, That Christ had loved all men with the highest and greatest love. John xv. 13, Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends, And 1 John iii. 16, Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us. Which does not appear, because he does not lead all to life by this his death. Secondly, it would also follow, that Christ equally loved Peter and Judas, the elect and the non-elect. For he exhibited to all an infallible proof of the highest love; but there are no different degrees in that which is the highest. Lastly, if Christ so died for all that by his death he procured for those who were not elected only the possibility of salvation under the condition of faith, or a remedy only applicable, which he knew would not be applied, but for the elect the application itself and salvation; he may seem to have loved those more who were not elected than the elect, because it shews greater love to suffer death for any one in order to acquire for him a small than a great good ; as he would shew a more ardent love for any one who should expose himself to death lest another should be hurt only a very little, than if he should do it lest he should be capitally punished.

REPLY 14. The object of both these passages of Scripture is the same; namely, to kindle in Christians a mutual and most tender love from the example of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who so far loved us as to endure death for us. But the sense of the words is this. To endure death or to give up life for another, is the greatest external effect and most evident proof of love; which, since Christ exhibited it towards us by laying down his life for us, we ought also, where there is need, to lay down our lives for the brethren, as it is in the aforesaid place, 1 John iii. 16. Therefore, it is not enough that we should be ready to expend gold and silver, to undergo difficult labours or dangers for the brethren, because there is a much greater love, that is, a greater, more certain, and clearer proof of our love, namely, that we should lay down our life for them. And because there is nothing dearer to any one than himself, therefore there is no greater testimony of love than this, that any one should give himself up for his friend. Now I come nearer to the solution and say, Although we confess that no one has greater love, that is, can manifest on his own part a greater external effect of his love, than in laying down his life, because no one has any thing more precious than his life; yet, we deny that it can be rightly deduced from hence, that the love of a person in dying for some others, is absolutely, simply, and in every respect as to them all, the highest and greatest that any one can conceive. For, in the first place, when one person lays down his life for many, nothing hinders that he might not possibly love one more vehemently than another as to the internal act: as if we should suppose that Jacob had suffered death to deliver all his sons from captivity, yet we should assert rightly that he did not love them all in the highest degree, but he loved Joseph and Benjamin more than the others. “Therefore, the highest love as to intenseness cannot be inferred in respect of all to whom this greatest proof of love is exhibited. Secondly, Any one may give up his life for many promiscuously, and yet as to the greatness of the good willed, love some much more than others, and therefore not embrace all either with the highest or with equal love. For the greatness of love is not to be esteemed only by the precious thing which is given to the person loved by the lover, but by the benefits which are intended to be conferred upon the person loved by that gift. For example, if a king’s son should suffer death for all who were guilty of treason, on this condition, that all should be absolved who were willing to humble themselves as suppliants before the king’s throne, and faithfully promise obedience for the future; but he should design to obtain this in addition from his father for some of them, that on account of the merit of his death he would deign to persuade them to this submission and obedience, and having thus persuaded them, would not only absolve them, but also advance them to the highest honours: who does not perceive that death would have been endured for all, and yet that all were not loved in the highest and greatest degree? For since £o love is to wish good things to any one, and to confer them, it follows that in a common benefit being granted to many, those are more loved to whom greater good things are designed and conferred from the aforesaid benefit. Lastly, Although men cannot exhibit to men a greater external testimony of love than that one should die for another, yet God the Father, Christ the Mediator, the God-man, and the Holy Spirit can exhibit a greater secret act and effect of their own love to- Chap. ui. ANSWERS TO OBJECTIONS. 395 wards some of those for whom Christ died than towards others ; as if they should determine to give to some not only remission of sins and eternal life through the merit of the death of Christ, provided they should believe in this their Redeemer ; but also should choose some from eternity unto life effectually to participate in Christ the Redeemer, and should prepare for them and infallibly give all those things which should effect this infallible participation and application. From these things it appears that that inference is not tenable, Christ died for all; Therefore, he loved all with the highest and with equal love; because, this common benefit of his death being granted to all, yet he may love some more intensely than others, and decree, prepare, and give to some more and greater benefits from the merit of his death than to others. Which is evident: in the elect themselves, for they all confess that Christ suffered for all of them, and yet no one would affirm that Christ embraced with equal love every one (if I may so speak) of the multitude of the elect, as he did the patriarchs, apostles, or his own most blessed mother, or enriches every one with equal gifts of grace and glory redounding from the merit of his death. But the other argument, in which it is inferred, If Christ suffered death for all, he would shew greater love to the non-elect than to the elect, because it argues greater love to endure death for any one to procure for him some little good than a great one, seems to me little agreeable to right reason. If different kinds of death were to be suffered for different persons, this objection might have some appearance of truth; but where one death is endured for all, there it is evident that he is more loved to whom he who dies intends more and greater benefits from this one death. — For if /o love is to wish good things to another, then to wish greater benefits is to love more. But in this manner the love of the dying Christ manifested itself towards the elect, and those who were not elected ; for from one and the same death he willed that more and greater benefits should arise to the former than to the latter.

OBJECTION 15. Means wisely destined do not exceed their adequate end. But the adequate end of the death of Christ is the salvation of the elect. Therefore the death of Christ has no ordination to any persons whatever who are not elected. Therefore it is falsely stated to be applicable to all men by the ordination of God.

REPLY 15. IT acknowledge that the infallible salvation of the elect is, in subserviency to the glory of God, a certain special and most excellent end, for the obtaining of which the death of Christ was destined ; but I deny that it was the only or sole end. For God sent his Son into the world, and willed that he should die, not only that he might effectually save the elect, but also that remission of sins and eternal life might be brought to and also conferred upon mankind generally in the Gospel, if they should believe. But it is not understood that this general or conditional covenant is confirmed, unless the death of Christ is presupposed to be applicable to all men according to the ordination of God, and actually to be applied to any one as soon as he should have believed. This end the Scripture hath clearly indicated in many places; in John iii. 14, 15, As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. And John vi. 40, This is the will of. him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life. And Acts x. 43, To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. I omit other passages. From these it will sufficiently appear, that although not all, but only the elect believe, God specially softening their hearts, yet that the death of Christ was so offered to God the Father by the Son, and is so indiscriminately offered by God the Father to mankind, and is so announced promiscuously to all by the ministers of the Gospel, that any one may collect from thence that there is a. kind of firm and stedfast ordination of God, according to which the death of Christ may pertain to all men. This ordination the non-elect render useless to themselves by their own unbelief; but they do not cause such an ordination to be made void, or that it should not be acknowledged to have been established by the death of Christ to these unbelievers. For if we admit this, any unbeliever may pretend, Although I should believe the Gospel, I should not be delivered from my sins by the death of Christ, because the death of Christ had no ordination according to which I could be a partaker of it. Which, on the other hand, is opposed by the words of Christ himself, John iii. 17, 18, God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is what Prosper says (Ad Obj. Vine), The death of Christ : has indeed in itself what may benefit all men, but if it is not received it will not heal. That which has in itself that it may profit all men, has it from the general ordination of God ; but that it is not received by many through faith, this happens from the common unbelief of mankind ; that it is received by some proceeds from the special compassion of God.

OBJECTION 16. It is absurd to declare that the death of Christ is a ransom applicable by the ordination of God to those to whom it is not applied, because in the very death of Christ there was the most sure application of death for all those for whom it is truly affirmed that he died and suffered: Therefore, the death of Christ is not a remedy ordained by God, except for certain individual persons elected and known to God only, to whom at length it becomes saving as to the event.

REPLY 16. We deny that there is any thing absurd in the aforesaid sentiment, which we have demonstrated to be true, and agreeable to Divine wisdom. But that which is objected, As to all for whom Christ died, in the death of Christ himself is included also the infallible application of his death, that does not seem to us to be conceded. For the oblation of Christ considered merely in itself, altogether obtains from God, that every individual who is willing to believe in Christ shall be saved. This efficacy of the death of Christ the Gospel proclaims and promises to all the world; but that infallible purpose of applying this death to certain persons, the ministers of the Gospel cannot promise to any mortal by name. We say, therefore, that the death of Christ was ordained for all those to whom remission of sins may be announced through faith in his blood, which grace regards every partaker of human nature. But we confess that the death of Christ is infallibly to be applied to the elect alone, because the certainty of the application depends, as to the primary cause, on the secret and eternal act of God in predestinating, and not only on the act of Christ in offering up himself for men. Christ, therefore, in offering up himself had a general intention conformed to the ordination of the Father, namely, that he might deliver any persons whatsoever indiscriminately from the guilt of their sins, provided they should believe in him, and in this sense he is said to have offered up himself for all. He had also, as conscious of the Divine predestination, a special intention conformed to the secret and eternal good pleasure of the Father, namely, that he might obtain through the merit of his death for his sheep, who were given to him according to the decree of election, and might give them faith, salvation, and all things. And with this special intention it is said, that he laid down his life for his own peculiar people, that is, for certain individual persons. That which comes to certain persons from the death of Christ, by the special act of Divine predestination, ought not to overthrow that which is acquired by all through the very act of the oblation. The infallible application to one person rather than to another may be ascribed to predestination, but that. which may be applicable to every individual through faith, may be assigned, from the tenor of the Divine covenant, to the oblation of Christ itself.

OBJECTION 17. The last objection is derived from those passages in which the death of Christ is expressly referred to certain. persons; from which they infer, that they have no regard to others. The passages which are Chap. tii. ANSWERS TO OBJECTIONS. 399 relied on are these, Matt. i. 21, Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins. John x. 15, I lay down my life for my sheep. John xi. 5, Jesus died, that he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad ; and such like.

REPLY 17, From the aforesaid testimonies, and others which are similar, it is well concluded that the death of Christ, according to the will of God in sending his Son, and of the Son in offering himself, pertains in a special manner to the peculiar people who are known only to God, that is, to the elect. But that special mode is of this kind, that he cannot be said to have died for these alone, but he died for these only with the certain, eternal, gratuitous purpose of infallibly saving them, through the free gift of his special mercy flowing from some special provi-‘ dence, which we call predestination. But from testimonies of this kind, which refer to certain persons, the death of Christ, not considered simply, but complicated with the decree of secret predestination, it is wrongly inferred, that this death does not pertain to all men in some general way. But the general mode is of this kind, that we should acknowledge that Christ died for the whole human race, with an evangelical covenant, and that a most sure one, concerning expiating sins and conferring eternal life on each and every man, provided they should embrace this Redeemer of the world with a true faith. And hence it is, that although some passages occur in the holy Scriptures, in which Christ is said to have died for the elect, or for his own peculiar people, yet none occur in which it is denied that he died for any persons, many occur in which it is asserted that he died for all. For the Spirit of God was willing to shew to those that believed in the death of Christ the special privilege of the elect, but he was unwilling to overwhelm in silence the common privilege of the human race in the same death of Christ. It is our part, therefore, to leave to God the decree of his secret predestination, according to which he determined how far, and to whom, he will effectually apply this death of Christ by the gift of his special grace; and in the mean time, to acknowledge with grateful minds the sum of his revealed Gospel, which promulgates That one died for all, that whosoever should believe in him may have eternal life. On this subject Ambrose says (In Luc. lib. vi. cap. 7), Although Christ suffered for all, yet he suffered especially for us, because he suffered for his Church. And so far we have laid before you our first proposition, explained, confirmed, and vindicated from objections to the contrary. We have been the longer in treating of it, because (as it was observed) it contains the chief part of the matter, and opens the way to resolve the rest, in the discussion of which we shall be much shorter. Let us, therefore, proceed to the second proposition.

---