1. Eff'ects are to be considered with respect to their causes. Causes are real or moral. Real or physical causes produce their eflrects immediately, either im- mediatione suppositi or virtutis. Unto them the subject must be existent. I speak not of creating power, where the act produceth its object.
Moral causes do never immediately actuate their own effects, nor have any im- mediate influence into them. There is between such causes and their eff'ects the intervention of some third thing previous to them both, — namely, proportion, con- stitution, law, covenant, — which takes in the cause and lets out the effect ; and this for all circumstances of where, how, when, suitable to the hmitations in them expressed or implied, with the nature of the things themselves.
The death of Christ is a moral cause in respect of all its effects. Whether those subjects on which it is to have its eff'ects be existent or not existent, at the time of its performance, is nothing at all considerable. If it wrought physically and efficiently, the existence of the subjects on which it were to work were re- quisite. It is altogether in vain to inquire of the immediate eff'ects of Christ's death upon an existent subject. By the way. That Adam and Eve only were ex- istent when Christ undertook the woi-k of redemption, to me is not clear ; no, nor yet the following assertion, That as soon as we do exist we receive benefit by it, — taking benefit for a benefit actually collated, as Mr Baxter doth not for a right
4 GO OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST.
to a benefit, or the purpose of bestowing one, which will operate in its due time. This is easily affirmed, and therefore eddem facilitate is denied.
I have no fai.cy to strive to carry the bell, and to be accounted " a divine indeed," by attempting at this time a right stating of and answer to this question proposed. I am not altogether ignorant of the endeavour of others even as to this particular, and have formerly spoken something that way myself.
Mr Byxter seems here to understand by this question, — namely, What is the immediate effect of the death of Christ? — What is the first benefit which, from the death of Christ, accrueth unto them for whom he died? not what is the first thing that every particular person is actually, in his own person, in his own time, made partaker of; but a benefit generally established and in being upon the de- signmeut of the work of redemption, which every one for whom Christ died hath a share of. And of this he positively affirms that the suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the law is the most observable immediate effect of the death of Christ; and so deserves the title of " a divine indeed."
Now, truly, though not to contend for the bell with ]\Ir Baxter, — whereof I con- fess myself utterly unworthy, and willingly, for many commendable parts, ascribe it unto him, — I cannot close with him, nor assent unto that assertion. Very gladly would I see INIr Baxter's arguQients for this; but those, as in most other controverted things in this book, he is pleased to conceal; and, therefore, though it might suffice me to give in my dissent, and so wait for farther proof, yet, that it may be apparent that I do not deny this merely because it is said, not proved (which, in things not clear in themselves, is a provocation so to do), I shall oppose one or two argu- ments unto it: —
1. All the effects of the death of Christ are peculiar only to the elect ; to some, the suspension of the rigorous execution of the law is not so : ergo, etc.
The minor is apparent, the jnwjor proved by all the arguments against universal redemption vised in my former treatise.
2. All the effects of the death of Christ are spiritual, distinguishing, and saving, to the praise of God's free grace; the suspending of the rigorous execution of the law is not so : ergo, etc.
The assumption is manifest. It is only a not immediate casting into hell, which is not a spiritual, distinguishing mercy, but, in respect to many, tends to the mani- festation of God's justice, Rom. ix. 22.
The proposition is evident. The jjromises made unto Christ upon his under- taking this work doubtless do hold out all that he effected by his death. Of what nature they are, and what is the main tendcnce of them, I have elsewhere discovered. From the first to the last, they are restrained to distinguishing mercies. See Isa. xlix. 6-12, Hii, 10-12, Lxi. 1-3; and no less is positively affirmed, Eph. i. 4; Rev. i. 5, 6.
If Mr Baxter say that the meaning in this is, that if Christ had not under- taken the work of redemption and satisfaction, then the law nuist have had rigor- ous execution upon all, and therefore, this being suspended upon his undertaking of it, is the first fruit of the death of Christ, I answer, —
Notwithstanding this, yet that suspension, which in respect of the diffci'ent per- sons towards whom it is actually exorcised hath different ends, is not a fruit nor effect of the death of Christ, but a free issue of the same eternally wise provi- dence, sovereignty, and grace, as the death of Christ himself is. If, then, by the rigorous execution of the law, you intend the immediate execution of the law in all its rig(jur and punishment, this, if it had been effected, could, in your own judgment, have reached Adam and Eve, and no more; and would have so reached them as to cut off the generation of mankind in that root. If so, and this be the fruit of Christ's death, why do you not reckon the procreation of tlie human ract^ among those fruits also? for had it not been for this suspension, that also had