13. Thirdly, This opinion is destitute of spiritual reason, yea, is
* 13, 1] PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST. 25
contrary unto it. The design of God to glorify himself in the crea- tion and the law or covenant of it, and his design of the same end in a way of grace, are distinct; yea, they are so distinct as, with re- ference unto the same persons and times, to be inconsistent. This our apostle manifests in the instance of justification and salvation by works and grace: “ If it be by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work,” Rom. xi. 6 It is impossible that the same man should be justified by works and grace too. Wherefore God, in infinite wisdom, brought the first design, and all the effects of it, into a subordination unto the later; and so he decreed to do from eternity. There being, by the entrance of _ sin, an aberration in the whole creation from that proper end where- unto it was suited at first, it pleased God to reduce the whole into a subserviency unto the design of his wisdom and holiness in a way of grace; for his purpose was to reconcile and gather all things into a new head in his Son, Jesus Christ, Eph. i 10; Heb. i 3, ii. 7, 8. Now, according to this opinion, the incarnation of the Son of God belonged originally unto the law of -creation, and the design of the glory of God therein. And if this were so, it must, with the whole old creation and all that belonged thereunto, be brought into a sub- ordination and subserviency unto the succedaneous design of the wisdom of God to glorify himself in a way of grace. But this is not So, seeing itself is the fundamental and principal part of that design. wn,” indeed, “ unto God are all his works from the beginning.” Therefore, this great projection of the incarnation of his Son lying in the counsel of his will from eternity, he did, in wisdom infinite and holy, order all the concernments of the creation so as they might be disposed into .an orderly subjection unto his Son incarnate. So that although I deny that any thing was then instituted as a type to represent him,—because his.coming into the world in our fiesh belonged not unto that estate,—yet I grant things to have been so ordered as that, in the retrieval of all into a new frame by Jesus Christ, there were many things in the works of God in the old crea- tion that were natural types, or things meet to represent much of this unto us. So Christ himself is called the “second Adam,” and to the “tree of life,” whereof we have discoursed in our on the first chapter.
<a pas, therefore, now consider the arguments or reasons in particular which they plead who maintain this assertion. The prin- cipal of them were invented and made use of by some of the ancient _schoolmen; and others have since given some improvement unto their conceptions, and added some of their own. Those of the first sort are collected by Thomas, 3 p. q. 1, a. 3, as traduced from the Pela-
26 THE ORIGIN OF THE [ EXERC. XXVL
gians. I shall examine them as by him proposed, omitting his answers, which I judge insufficient in many instances.
His first argument, the substance whereof I have lately heard pleaded with some vehemency, is as follows:—“ It belonged unto omnipotent power and infinite wisdom to make all his works per- fect, and to manifest himself by an infinite effect. But no mere creature can be said to be such infinite effect, because its essence is finite and limited. But in the work of the incarnation of the Son of God alone, an infinite effect of divine power seems to be mani- fested, as thereby things infinitely distant are conjoined, God being made man. And herein the universality of things seems to receive its perfection, inasmuch as the last creature, or man, is immediately conjoined unto the First Principle, or God.”
Answer. This argument hath little more in it than curiosity and sophistry; for,—
(1.) That God made all his works “ good,” that is, perfect in their kind, before the incarnation, we have his own testimony. He saw and pronounced of the whole that it was JN 2\0, “valde bonum,” —every way good and complete. It was so in itself, without the addition of that work which is fancied necessary unto its perfection.
(2.) It is merely swpposed that it was necessary that divine om- nipotency should be expressed unto the utmost of its perfection. Tt was enough that it was manifested and declared in the creation of all things out of nothing.
(3.) It is not possible that any effect in atself infinite should be produced by the power of God: for then would there be two infi- nites,—the producing and the produced ; and consequently two Gods, —the making God and the made: for that which is in itself absolutely infinite is Gott and what is produced is not infinite. Wherefore the work of the incarnation was nob of itself an infinite effect, although it was an effect of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; and so also was the work of the first creation. And although they are all in themselves finite and limited, yet are they the effects of, and do abundantly declare, the infinite power and wisdom whence they were educed, Rom. i. 19, 20.