Lastly, The end of a covenant is the disposal of the things about which the covenant is made to the mutual content and satisfaction of all persons concerned. Hence was the ancient form, “Quod felix faustumque sit huic et illi populo.” If either party be absolutely and finally detrimented by it, it is no absolute, free, or voluntary covenant, but an agreement of a mixed nature, where the consent of one party is given only for the avoiding of a greater inconvenience. And these things we shall find of use in our progress.
8. As all these things concur in every equal compact, so there is an especial kind of covenant, depending solely on the personal under- takings and services of one party in order unto the common ends of the covenant, or the mutual satisfaction of the covenanters. So it is in all agreements where any thing is distinctly and peculiarly re- quired of one party. And such covenants have three things in them: —(1.) A proposal of service; (2.) A promise of reward; (3.) An acceptance of the proposal, with a restipulation of obedience out of respect unto the reward. And this indispensably introduceth an inequality and subordination in the covenanters as to the common ends of the covenant, however on other accounts they may be equal ; for he who prescribes the duties which are required in the covenant, and giveth the promises of either assistance in them or a reward upon them, is therein and so far superior unto hin, or greater than he who observeth his prescriptions and trusteth unto his promises.
84 FEDERAL TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN [EXERC. XXVIII.
Of this nature is that divine transaction that was between the Father and Son about the redemption of mankind. There was in it a pre- scription of personal services, with a promise of reward; and all the other conditions, also, of a complete covenant before laid down are observed therein. And this we must inquire into, as that wherein doth lie the foundation and original of the priesthood of Christ.
9. First, Unto a proper covenant it is required that it be made between distinct persons. Such have I elsewhere proved the Father and Son to be, and in this discourse I do take that fundamental prin- ciple of our profession as granted. That there were eternal transac- tions in general between those distinct persons, with respect unto the salvation of mankind, hath been evinced in the foregoing Exercita- tion. That these were federal, or had in them the nature of a cove- nant, is now further to be manifested. And in general this is that which the Scripture intends, where God, that is the Father, is called by the Son his God, and where he says that he will be unto him a God and a Father; for this expression of being a God unto any one is declarative of a covenant, and is the word whereby God constantly declares his relation unto any in a way of covenant, Jer, xxxi. 33, xxx. 38; Hos. i. 23.
For God, declaring that he will be a God unto any, phat himself unto the exercise of his holy properties, which belong unto him as God, in their behalf and for their good; and this is not with- out an engagement of obedience from them. Now, this declaration the Scripture abounds in: Ps. xvi. 2, “Thou hast said unto the Lorp, Thou art my Lord.” These are the words of the Son unto the Father, as is evident from verses 9-11. Ps. xxii. 1, “ My God, my God.” Ps. xl. 8, “I delight to do thy will, O my God.” Ps. xlv. 7, “God, thy God, hath anointed thee.” Micah v. 4, “ He shall stand and feed in the strength of the Lorp, in the majesty of the name of the Lorp his God.” John xx. 17, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” Rey. iii. 12, “I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God; ..... and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God.” All which expressions argue both a covenant and a subordination therein,
And on this account it is that our Saviour says his Father is greater than he, John xiv. 28. This place, I confess, the ancients expound unanimously of the human nature only, to obviate the Arians, who ascribed unto him a divine nature, but made, and abso- lutely in itself inferior to the nature of God. But the inferiority of the human nature unto God or the Father is a thing so unquestion- able as needed no declaration or solemn attestation, and the mention of it is no way suited unto the design of the place. But our Saviour speaks with respect unto the covenant engagement that was between
SECT. 9, 10.] THE FATHER AND THE SON. 85
the Father and himself as to the work which he had to do: for therein, as we shall further manifest, the Father was the prescriber, the promiser, and lawgiver; and the Son was the undertaker upon his prescription, law, and promises. He is, indeed, in respect of his divine ‘personality, said to be “God of God.” No more is intended hereby but that the person of the Son, as to his personality, was of the person of the Father, who communicated his nature and life unto him by eternal generation. But the Father on that account is not said to be his God, or to be a God unto him, which includes the acting of divine properties on his behalf, and a dependence on the other side on him who is soa God unto him. And this hath its sole foundation on that covenant and the execution of it which we are in the consideration of.