11. (8.) It is denied that sin and misery do constitute the proper object of mercy. It is required that every thing contrary to the nature of God in sin and the sinner be taken out of the way, or there is no proper object for mercy. Such is the guilt of sin unsatisfied for. And moreover, faith and repentance are required to the same purpose. Soeinus himself acknowledgeth that it is contrary to the nature of God to pardon impenitent sinners. These [faith and repentance] none can have but on the account of an antecedent reconciliation, as is evident in the fallen angels. And on these suppositions even mercy itself will be justly exercised, nor can it be otherwise.
These things are premised to give a right understanding of the
108 NECESSITY OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST [EXERC. XXIX.
truth which we assert and contend for. It remains that we briefly represent what is the opinion which the Socinians advance in oppo- sition unto this foundation of the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ; for they are awake unto their concernments herein, and there is none of them but in one place or other attempts an opposition unto ~ this justice of God, and the necessity of its exercise upon the sup- position of sin, though the defence of it hath been unhappily and causelessly by some deserted. The judgment of these men is ex- pressed by Socinus, Praelec. Theol. cap. xvi. lib. i, de Jesu Christo Servator., lib. ili. cap. i; Catech. Racov., cap. viii. quest. 19; Ostorod. Institut. cap. xxxi.; Volk. de Ver. Relig. lib. v. cap xxi.; Crellius, Lib. de Deo, cap. xxviii.; Vindic. Socin. ad Grot. cap. i; de Causis Mortis Christi, cap. xvi.; Smalcius adv. Franzium, Disputat. Quarta; Gitichius ad Lucium. Woolzogen.; Compend. Relig. Christiane, sect. 48. The sum of what they all plead is, that there is no such thing as justice in God, requiring that sin be punished; that the cause and fountain of punishment in God is anger, wrath, or fury; that these denote free acts of the will of God, which he may exer- cise or omit at his pleasure. If he punish sin, he doth nothing against justice, nor if he omit so to do. In all these things he is absolutely free. Such a governor of his creatures do they fancy him to be! Hence it follows that there was no necessity, no just or cogent reason, why the punishment of our sin or the chastisement of our peace should be laid on Christ; for there was neither need nor possibility that any satisfaction should be made to the justice of God. Only he hath freely determined to punish impenitent sinners, and as freely determined to pardon them that repent and believe the gospel. For this hath he sent the Lord Christ to testify and declare unto us; with respect whereunto he is called and to be es- teemed our Saviour. The words of Socinus are express to this purpose, De Christo Servatore, lib. i. cap. ii, ‘ Queerente aliquo, qui fiat, ut mortem zternam meriti, nihilominus ad vitam eternam per- veniamus, non est germanum responsum, quia Christum Servatorem habemus: sed quia supplicium mortis seterne a Deo, eujus libera voluntate atque decreto id meriti fueramus, nobis pro ineffabili ipsius bonitate condonatum fuit; atque ejus loco datum vite eternze premium; dummodo resipiscamus, et abnegata omni impietate vite innocentiz ac sanctimonize deinceps studeamus. Quod si, qua ra- tione istud nobis innotuerit, queeratur, cum neque Deum videamus unquam, neque audiamus loquentem, quisve nobis tantee divine liberalitatis non dubiam fidem fecerit, respondendum est, Jesum Christum id nobis enarrasse, et multis modis confirmasse.” This is the substance of the persuasion of these men in this matter; which how contradictory it is unto the whole mystery and design of
SECT. 12, 18.] ON THE SUPPOSITION OF SIN AND GRACE. 109
the gospel, and contains a complete renunciation of the mediation of Christ, will in our ensuing discourse be made to appear.
12. That, therefore, which we are engaged in the confirmation of may be reduced unto two heads:—First, That the justice of God, whereby he governeth the world and ruleth over all, is an essential property of the divine nature, whence God is denominated “ just” or “righteous;’ and that on the account hereof it is necessary that sin should be punished, or not be absolutely pardoned without respect unto satisfaction given unto that justice of God. Secondly, That hence it became necessary, that in the designation of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, unto his office of priesthood, he should make his soul an offering for sin, to make an atonement thereby for it; without which there could have been no remission, because without it there could be no satisfaction given or reconciliation made.
_ 13. Our first. argument is taken from the consideration of the nature of God and his holiness. Whatever is spoken of the purity and holiness of God, with his hatred of and ayersation from sin and sinners on the account thereof, confirmeth our assertion; for we in- tend no more thereby but that God, the great ruler of the world, is of so holy a nature as that he cannot but hate and punish sin, and that so to do belongs unto his absolute perfection; for the purity and holiness of God is nothing but the universal perfection of his nature, which is accompanied with a displicency in and a hatred of sin, whence he will punish it according to its desert. So is it ex- pressed, Hab. i. 13, “ Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity.” Not to be able to look on or behold iniquity, expresseth the most inconceivable detestation of it. God is 5°) 1i9D; which expresseth the infinite holiness of his nature, with what respect therein he hath, and cannot but have, towards that which is perverse and evil. So when the prophet had made his inference from hence, namely, that he was holy, 37 ni879, that any look or aspect unsuitable thereunto towards sin or evil is not to be expected from him, he adds expressly, § PDynbss bran o2n ; and he cannot (that is, because of the holiness of his na- ture, which such an action would be contrary unto) “look on,” that is; pass by, spare, or connive at, “iniquity.” For that is the rule of what God can do or cannot do. He can do every thing that is not contrary to himself; that is, to the essential properties of his nature. He can do nothing that is contrary unto or inconsistent with his truth, holiness, or righteousness. Wherefore, whereas not to look on sin, not to behold it, do include in them, and by the negation of contrary acts express, the punishing of sin,—that is, all sin, or sin as sin,—and these are resolved into the nature of God, or his essential holiness, this.testimony declares that the punish-