of his actual sin is imputed unto them, as if it had been committed by every one of them. But yet his particular personal sin, neither ever did, nor ever could become the personal sin of any one of them, any otherwise than by the imputation of its guilt unto them. Wherefore our sins neither are, nor can be so imputed unto Christ, as that they should become subjectively his, as they are a transgression of the preceptive part of the law. A physical translation or transfusion of sin is in this case naturally and spiritually impossible: yet on a supposition thereof alone, do the horrid consequences mentioned depend. But the guilt of sin is an external respect of it, with regard unto the sanction of the law only. This is separable from sin, and if it were not so no one sinner could either be pardoned or saved. It may therefore be made another's by imputation, and yet that other not rendered formally a sinner thereby. This was that which was imputed unto Christ, whereby he was rendered obnoxious unto the curse of the law. For it was impossible that the law should pronounce any accursed but the guilty; nor would do so, Deut. xxvii. 26.

2. There is a great difference between the imputation of the righteousness of Christ unto us, and the imputation of our sins unto Christ; so as that he cannot in the same manner be said to be made a sinner by the one, as we are made righteous by the other. For our sin was imputed unto Christ only, as he was our surety for a time, to this end, that he might take it away, destroy it and abolish it. It was never imputed unto him, so as to make any alteration absolutely in his personal state and condition. But his righteousness is imputed unto us, to abide with us, to be ours always, and to make a total change in our state and condition as unto our relation unto God. Our sin was imputed unto him, only for a season, not absolutely, but as he was a surety, and unto the special end of destroying it; and taken on him, on this condition that his righteousness should be made ours for ever. All things are otherwise in the imputation of bis righteousness unto us, which respects us absolutely, and not under a temporary capa

city, abides with us for ever, changeth our state and relation unto God, and is an effect of super-abounding grace.

The heads of some few of those arguments wherewith the truth we have asserted is confirmed, shall close this dis

course.

1. Unless the guilt of sin was imputed unto Christ, sin was not imputed unto him in any sense; for the punishment of sin is not sin; nor can those who are otherwise minded, declare what it is of sin, that is imputed. But the Scripture is plain, that God laid on him the iniquity of us all, and made him to be sin for us, which could not otherwise be but by imputation.

2. There can be no punishment but with respect unto the guilt of sin personally contracted, or imputed. It is guilt alone that gives what is materially evil and afflictive, the formal nature of punishment and nothing else, And therefore those who understand full well the harmony of things and opinions, and are free to express their minds, do constantly declare, that if one of these be denied, the other must be also; and if one be admitted they must both be so, If guilt was not imputed unto Christ, he could not undergo the punishment of sin; much he might do and suffer on the occasion of sin, but undergo the punishment due unto sin he could not. And if it should be granted that the guilt of sin was imputed unto him, they will not deny but that he underwent the punishment of it; and if he underwent the punishment of it, they will not deny but that the guilt of it was imputed unto him; for these things are inseparably related,

3. Christ was made a curse for us, the curse of the law; as is expresly declared, Gal. iii. 13, 14. But the curse of the law respects the guilt of sin only; so as that where that is not, it cannot take place in any sense, and where that is, it doth inseparably attend it, Deut. xxvii. 26.

4. The express testimonies of the Scripture unto this purpose cannot be evaded, without an open wresting of their words and sense, So God is said to make all our iniquities

to meet upon him; and he bare them on him as his burden, for so the word signifies, Isa. liii. 6. God hath laid on him, the iniquity, that is, the guilt of us all, ver. 11. and their sin or guilt shall he bear. For that is the intendment, of iniquity, where joined with any other word that denotes sin as it is in those places, Psal. xxxii. 5. "thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin" that is, the guilt of it, which is that alone that is taken away by pardon. That his soul was made an offering for the guilt of sin, that he was made sin, that sin was condemned in his flesh, &c.

5. This was represented in all the sacrifices of old, especially the great anniversary, on the day of expiation, with the ordinances of the Scape Goat, as hath been before declared,

6. Without a supposition hereof it cannot be understood, how the Lord Christ should suffer in our stead, unless we will admit the exposition of Mr, Ho. a late writer, who reckoning up how many things the Lord Christ did in our stead, adds as the sense thereof, that is to bestead us; than which if he can invent any thing more fond and senseless, he hath a singular faculty in such an employment.

U

CHAPTER, IX.

The formal cause of Justification; or, the righteousness an the account whereof believers are justified before God. Objections answered.

THE

HE principal differences about the doctrine of justification are reducible unto three heads. (1.) The nature of it; namely, whether it consist in an internal change of the person justified by the infusion of an habit of inherent grace or righteousness; or whether it be a forensick act, in the judging, esteeming, declaring, and pronouncing such a person to be righteous, thereon absolving him from all his sins, giving unto him right and title unto life. Herein we have to do only with those of the church of Rome, all others, both Protestants and Socinians being agreed on the forensick sense of the word, and the nature of the thing signified thereby. And this I have already spoken unto, so far as our present design doth require, and that I hope with such evidence of truth, as cannot well be gainsayed. Nor may it be supposed that we have too long insisted thereon, as an opinion which is obsolete, and long since sufficiently confuted. I think much otherwise, and that those who avoid the Romanists in these controversies, will give a greater appearance of fear, than of contempt. For when all is done, if free justification through the blood of Christ and the imputation of his

righteousness, be not able to preserve its station, in the minds of men, the Popish doctrine of justification must and will return upon the world, with all the concomitants and consequences of it. Whilst any knowledge of the law or gospel is continued amongst us, the consciences of men will at one time or other, living or dying, be really affected with a sense of sin, as unto its guilt and danger. Hence that trouble and those disquietments of mind will ensue, as will force men, be they never so unwilling, to seek after some relief and satisfaction. And what will not men attempt, who are reduced to the condition expressed, Micah, 6, 7, 8. Wherefore in this case, if the true and only relief of distressed consciences, of sinners who are weary and heavy laden be hid from their eyes; if they have no apprehension of, nor trust in that which alone they may oppose unto the sentence of the law, and interpose between God's justice and their souls, wherein they may take shelter from the storms of that wrath which abideth on them that believe not; they will betake themselves unto any thing which confidently tenders them present ease and relief. As for the new schemes of justification which some at present would supply us withal, they are no way suited, nor able to give relief or satisfaction unto a conscience really troubled for sin, and seriously inquiring how it may have rest and peace with God. I shall take the boldness therefore to say, whoever be offended at it; that if we lose the ancient doctrine of justification through faith in the blood of Christ, and the imputation of his righteousness unto us, public profession of religion, will issue in Popery, or Atheism.

The second principal controversy is about the formal cause of justification, as it is expressed and stated by those of the Roman church. And under these terms some Protestant Divines have consented to debate the matter in difference. Some of ours say the righteousness of Christ imputed; some, the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, is the formal cause of our justification; some, that there is no formal cause of justification, but this is that which supplies the place and