Christ's Suretyship: Part II
Robert Riccaltoun
But
that which I would, in a particular manner, remark upon this state of matters
between God and man, is, how impossible it was for these two parties to have
any further dealings one with another, in a way of friendship, unless there was
a mediator found, to stand between both, with whom both parties might, with
honor and safety, transact, and by him with one another. That there could be no
other transactions between God and man, upon this state of things, than such as
is between a just judge and avenger, and an offending criminal, I presume, will
not need much illustration to such, as have accustomed themselves to reflect
upon the abominable nature of sin, and the unspotted purity and holiness of
God; the infinite majesty and excellency of God, with the internal demerit of
sin, and his exact, and every way perfect, justice, with the rigor of that law
which he has laid as the measure and rule of it. God cannot look upon the
sinner without detestation and abhorrence, and breaking out upon him as a
consuming fire; neither can man approach God in this condition without, not to
say the most dismal terrors and amazing horrors, but even imminent and most
certain destruction: From which and such considerations, the necessity of a
mediator between God and man, is held forth unto us with such evidence, that I
know not how any man should have got himself so far divested of reason, as to
be able to avoid the impressions these must have upon every thinking man. And
indeed they are such, as have engaged even these, who are the most eagerly set
against any satisfaction or sacrifice for sin, to own the necessity of one, to
manage this covenant between God and man, and to carry the mind of one party to
the other, in order to an accommodation, which is the very lowest sense can be
affixed to the word mediator.
But, if we consider it, even in this, however low, notion of that name, and the
office designed by it; this great truth will follow, that the covenant of grace
is primarily and originally concerted and agreed between God and the mediator,
before it come to be published and declared unto us, for our approbation or
consent unto it; and which directs us accordingly unto two very different views
of this covenant, as it stands between God and the mediator, and as it is
proposed unto us, in the gospel, between God and us. As these different views
are plainly pointed out to us in our Confession;(1) so the grounds of them will
further appear, I hope, ere we have done; and the mistaking of these for two
different covenants, I am apprehensive, have no small tendency toward
perplexing of the doctrine of the covenant of grace. As the mediator then is
the third party in this covenant, we must also, if we would come to a right
view of this matter, know something of the character he bears there, and what
it is he undertakes and performs, in order to the completing of this covenant,
and the salvation of elect sinners therein.
And here, let us, for their sakes who would have it so, suppose for once, that
Christ entered upon this office, merely, as a messenger between the two parties
principally concerned; as the demands must, of necessity, have been too high on
one side, for the other ever to come up to; such difficulties must have arisen
upon it, as should have made the whole negotiation entirely fruitless. The law,
tis evident, insists upon perfect obedience, and knows no other satisfaction,
but that of bearing the penalty; all God's perfections concur with these, as
the demands of perfect justice, and the only fit means for securing the honor
and authority of the lawgiver. And this we find in fact was, what God stood so
much upon, that notwithstanding these bowels of compassion, which, speaking to us
in our own language, he tells us, rolled within him; and that unexpressible,
yea, unconceivable love, which was so strong, as to engage him to give his own
only begotten Son to them, and for them; yet not so much as one drop of it
could fall upon them, until he had first made provision for his honor, by
laying this foundation for communion and fellowship with them. This same law,
with the consequences of it already mentioned, I mean, the rigorous connection
of it, which is the only thing which binds man under sin, must be removed,
before one sinner can be brought to life; and this must be one great part of
the mediator's work.
This is so certain, and withal so obvious, that I find it agreed upon in a
manner by all; but how this is done, there is a vast difference in men's
opinions. I will not take any further notice of these, who think, this might be
done without any satisfaction at all, as grossly injurious to the honor of God,
and his righteous law; the great question, among sober men, is, whether the mediator,
as an undertaking surety, entered upon, and fulfilled that same law, which man
had broken, and which he lay bound under? Or, whether God was satisfied with
this, that he should fulfill a particular law of his own, which, therefore,
they who think so, call the law of the mediator? It is the same question with
that, whether Christ satisfied the law, or only the lawgiver? And upon which
depends the resolution of that other, whether he paid the idem
or tantundem? And which we know has made abundance of noise in the world.
However small these questions may seem, yet upon these, and such as these, the
weightiest of all take their decision; and it is here, if I mistake not, that
the foundation and ground-work is laid, of all the different schemes of the gospel,
which have hitherto made their appearance in the church.
That the Son of God was under no original obligation to undertake for the
salvation of sinners, and therefore had nothing to do with their law, is so
true, that I do not know, if ever it was called in question by any sober
person: And therefore, whatever obligations of this kind he may be supposed to
come under, do not arise upon any necessity of his nature, but his own
voluntary undertaking in that eternal agreement between the Father and him, which
indeed is no other, than the eternal divine decree, concerning the salvation of
sinners; though represented, in a suitableness unto our imperfect conceptions,
under the form of a covenant; and where, tis easy to apprehend, the plan and
platform of man's salvation must be laid down, and adjusted with everything
belonging unto it, and what was necessary thereunto; particularly, what was to
be done by the Son, in order to the execution of what he had undertaken as
their surety, and what he was to expect upon it. If anybody pleases to call
this the law of the mediator, thus complexly taken, and in the gross, I should
not be at pains to contend with him about it: However, it is certain, that here
were many things lying upon him, so peculiar to the mediator, that man was
never under any obligation, much less in a capacity of performing them. Such
are his laying aside his glory, assuming man's nature, his threefold office,
with the particulars peculiarly belonging unto these. It is certain also, that
however, supposing him man, he must of necessity, so far come under the
obligation of the moral law, yet there was none for his entering upon it, as
the covenant of works; since the life, which that covenant promises only upon
condition of perfect obedience, was his natural due and right, and what it was
utterly impossible he could fall from; and that by virtue of the close union
between the divine and human natures. But, after all, the question is not,
Whether he was previously obliged to this before his undertaking? Or, whether
he did not undertake other things besides this? But, whether he did not
undertake this among others, to present himself surety for sinners, in order to
the fulfilling of that law, which they had broken, and to bear that curse,
which was thereby become their due?
I know no one truth the Spirit of God is more express in, than the affirmative
of this question. I cannot stand to draw out these arguments at full length; to
reflect upon what has been already hinted from man's natural state and condition,
nor how unlike it is the divine nature, to relax his law without fulfillment;
what else can be meant by all these strong expressions, where the mediator is
said to be made under the law, to take upon him the form of a
servant, to be made sin, to be made a curse, etc.?
These are so strong and evident, that the most learned advocates for this
notion, find themselves obliged to fly to another shift, that, viz. it is true,
Christ did fulfill the law, and bear the curse; but it was in his own name as
mediator, and not in the room or stead of any particular persons, elect or
others, that he did so; and therefore, though he indeed satisfied the lawgiver,
yet since the law required obedience in one's own person, he could not be said
to satisfy that; neither is it, say they, the same obedience which the law
enjoined, nor the same punishment which it threatened, but the equivalent of
both. And thus they lay the foundation of their universal redemption, their new
law, with the other notions that follow upon them.
Were no more designed by all this, than, that Christ and the elect are not the
same physical persons; that it was he who obeyed and suffered, and not they;
and that therefore it is he, and not they, who is judged by God to have done
so, this would be indeed very true, and what, I believe, no man in his wits
ever thought of refusing or denying; but, as the design is, plainly, to cut off
any relation to the elect in this undertaking, I think nothing can be weaker
than these distinctions, and the reasonings brought to support them.
Let us suppose then for once, that Christ fulfilled the law only in his own
name; but after all, may one ask, What was this name? What was his character?
Did he this merely, as the Son of God clothed with our nature? no, certainly;
but as mediator between God and man. This is a general name, and which, as it
takes in many things under it, may benefit a person of ordinary apprehension.
Let us see then further, what is a mediator, in the case now before us? It is
true, he is a middle person, and therefore, neither the one nor the other
party; but this will not hinder him in his mediatorial offices to represent
both, according as he has occasionally the one or the other to deal with. That
he actually represents God in his dealings with us, so, as what he does, the
Father is interpreted to do by him, is beyond question with all, who allow him
any room at all in our communion with God, or understand anything of his
prophetical and kingly offices, that in many instances he represents his people
in the same manner, so as that they shall be constructed to do what he does in
their name, is every whit as undeniable; and, what then should hinder him, in
the case now before us, to act as a surety-undertaker for his elect, and to put
himself into that very law-place which they held, without any prejudice to his
character, as a middle person? Nay, is it not one main part of his mediatory
office to do so? That what is done in his own name, being done as an
undertaking surety, is therefore really done in theirs, for whom he undertakes.
But to come yet nearer, it is very certain, that our Lord came actually under
the law, that he both fulfilled the precept, and bare the curse; and therefore,
his obedience and sufferings must have been materially the same, with what the
elect ought to have done and suffered. Now, what I would gladly learn is this,
by virtue of what law he came into these circumstances? That it was the same
law with that, which fallen man lay under, the apostle is as express as can be desired;
and therefore, it must needs be this same law by which he is bound: Whatever
then he undertook to do, or the Father required of him, being another law,
especially, if it required another thing, cannot be that law which man was to
be delivered from, he having never been under it. Now the question is, what he
had to do with man's law, unless he condescended to come into their place, and
thereby to stand in that very same relation to the law which they did? Which,
if he really did, and that, by virtue of his office as mediator, it follows
clearly, that then he must have done what he did, in that capacity, in their
room and stead; and indeed the law acts to all intents and purposes, as, if the
sinners themselves had been under it, except that it falls upon the surety, and
therefore not upon them.
That this is really the case, might easily be made appear, with as much
evidence as can be, from the expressions the Spirit of God makes use of to this
purpose; the proper substitution that appears in the old law sacrifices, and
even the very nature of the thing. Nor is it of any moment, what I see so much
stood upon by some, that the law required obedience in one's own person, which
would seem to exclude a surety; and which would indeed do so, were the law rigorously
insisted on. But, as I reckon it needless to insist upon what has been so often
cleared, the difference between dispensing with a law, and a favorable
interpretation of it; since this last will answer all the difficulty, it is
needless to run ourselves upon greater ones, by having recourse to the former.
It was observed upon the constitution of that covenant, that there were several
things there which were not founded upon any necessity of his nature, in
adjusting and regulating of which, a favorable interpretation may take place,
providing respect be still had unto the end and design of the law. And, if we
look through that covenant, there are only two things, which seem to militate
against admitting a surety, viz. the connection between obedience and life, and
that between disobedience and death.
The first, it is evident, says no more than this, If you obey
perfectly in your own person, you shall have life; but not one word to exclude a
surety. The penalty indeed in annexed to disobedience, and accordingly it takes
place upon the sinner himself; but still there is nothing here to hinder the
same power, which laid him under it to release him. Especially, if it be
considered, how the end and design of that sanction was no other, than to
secure the goodness and condescension of God from being trampled upon, and to
maintain his honor in that case; whence it easily follows, that when he has
fallen upon another method of securing that, this may, without any prejudice,
be set aside. And thus, in this dispensation, the faithfulness of God is at
once maintained, in inflicting the threatened punishment, and room made for
showing forth the glory of his mercy, without any prejudice to any of his other
perfections, or setting aside his righteous law.
I was saying before, that there were several other things besides this, which
our Lord undertook, as mediator of the covenant; but withal, that the strength
and abilities of all the supporters of sin, and even sin itself, depends so
much upon this one, that I know not whether it will not be at least as proper,
to reckon up his victory over all these, and the destruction of sin, Satan, and
the world, as some of the consequences of this. And certain it is, that, in
fulfilling the law, he gave these their death's wounds, depriving them thereby
of the only right they had to retain man under bondage: And, it was upon the
cross that he triumphed over principalities and powers, finished sin, and made
an end of transgression.