nocent

Rep. Why, but that the Innocent should fuf- The fer, and the nocent go free, this may seem to going free. be harsh.

Ans. And was it not so in those two, last named instances? The Innocent childe and the Innocent people fuffer, whilest guilty David goeth free. True, he suffered in their fufferings, otherwise his person not touched.

Repl. But it may be said in those examples, there was some Relation and Conjunction betwixt the perfon offending and suffering, which drew the guilt of the one upon the other

Beleever; na

Anf. And is it not so here ? Betwixt Answ. - Chrift and his Elect people all true beleevers? A 3. fold Rethere is a neare Relation and Conjunction. A lation betwixt threefold Relation. The first Naturall; the Chrift and the second Mysticall; the third Voluntary. A urall, myftical, naturall Relation; they are of the same fleso voluntary. and Blood, Heb. 2. 14. Chritt is their kinsman, Chriftus nobis their Brother. A mysticall Relation; He is conjuntissimus, their Head, they his members, Ephef. 5. 23. vadimonio. natura, Regno, and 30. He is their King, they his Subjects. Grotius de fa A voluntary Relation; he is their Surety un-tist. Cap.4. dertaking for them. Now upon this three fold Account we find one man fuffering for with another. Sometimes upon the account of a naturall Relation; Thus Achans sonnes and daughters suffered with him, John 7. And Davids childe for him. Thus the Disciples conceived, when they saw the man that was born blind, that it might be for his parents fin,

12

or

:

:

fin, John 9.3. Sometimes upon the account of a mysticall Relation: Thus in a Politick Body, (Even as it is in the naturall Body, where one member sometimes suffers for another; the Back or the Head suffers for what the hand hath acted), the Subjects sometimes suffer for their Prince, Delirant Reges, plectuntur Achivi. So it was betwixt David and the people.

And fometimes Princes suffer for their Subjects: [If ye shall still do wickedly, ye shall be consumed, both ye and your King. I Sam. 12. last. And thus in the Church; God sometimes removes the Candlestick because the people play with the light, Rev.2.5.Ezekiel must be struck dumb, because the house of Ifrael is a rebellious house, Ezek. 3.26. and 27. And thus in the family; As children somtimes suffer for their Parents (as in the cafes aforesaid,) so sometimes Parents fuffer for their Children. Elies sonnes were a break-neck to their father, 1 Sam.cap.3 and 4. Sometimes upon the account of a vo

luntary relation; Thus Sureties suffer for their

Upon that Principals.

threefold ac- And upon the like threefold account Chrift count Christ may be conceived to suffer for us: 1 Upon the fuffered for us. account of a naturall Relation: Being our kinfגאלpinquus, man he is also our Redeemer. So it was under Redi. the Law, the next of kin was to redeem the in mens. heritance, Lev. 25.25.whence it was that one & Montanus, the same word(Goel)signifieth both, a kinsman Numb.58. & and a Redeemer. Thus is Christ our (Goel) Ifa. Ruth.3.9. 59.20. Being our kinsman, he is also our Redee

mer.2. Upon the account of a mystical Relation: Thus as our head he fuffers for his members. As our King he fuffers for his Subjects. As a Husband he is responsall for the debts of his Wife. 3. Upon the account of a voluntary Relation. Thus as a Surety he suffers for those for whom he hath ingaged.

To let passe the other two, It is the third and last of these that I shall take hold of. Which we shal find sufficient to free this Act from all imputation of injustice. What Chrift herein did, or fuffered, he did it freely and voluntarily, as our Surety, undertaking this fatisfaction for our fakes. Now we say, volenti non fit injuria. Where the person is willing withall, there is no wrong done. Amongst men, what more ordinary then for the Surety to make satisfaction for that debt which he hath voluntarily ingaged for? And who is there that chargeth that with injustice ?

one

his life for a

Alleg. True it, may be said, In pecunia- Whether rie, Mony-matters, as Debts and Fines, it may may lay down be fo. But not so in Corporall punisoment. nother. Especially for one to fuffer death for another.

Ans. To this it is answered: that even in these cases it is no unusuall thing for fome kind of Sureties, (as those whom they call Αντιψυχοὶ Such as ingage Body for Body, life for life, ) to fuffer death for others. Instances thereof amongst all, Nations are rife. That of Valerius de ADamon and Pithias is obious. The one of micitia: Ci

cero de offic.

them being condemned to death by the Ty- lib. 3.

I3

rant Dionyfius, and desirous to visit his friends before he dyed: the other ingageth for him to dy in his room in cafe he returned not by the day appointed. Which sheweth that such ingagements in those times were not unusuall. So much is not obscurely infinuated in that of the Apostle Rom. 5.7. Peradventure for a good man some would even dare to dye.] This some have done; and Heathens never made any scruple about the lawfulnesse, the Justice ofit. And furely were it so that men were Lords of their lives, as well as of their estates, that they might as freely dispose of the one as of the other (as Heathens apprehended they might,) then could there nothing be faid aGrotius de fa- gainst it. This it is (as Grotius well notes) tisfact.cap.4. which maketh the difference betwixt these

over his own life.

two, the laying down ones Money and his life for another. The one a man hath a more abfolute power and dominion over then the other: over his money, then over his life. And upon that account he may ingage and alienate the one, where he may not the other. Were it so that a man had as much power over his life as over his money, there could be no more question about laying down the one, then the other.

Now this is it in the cafe we have now in Chrift a Lord hand, This was Christ's priviledg: He being an absolute Lord, "he had also power over himself, over his own life; so as he might lay it down at his pleasure, which others may not

do. This we may take from his own mouth. Jobn

John 10. 18. I have power to lay down my life] Power, not only δύναμιν, ability; ber αξοσίαν Authority, Right. This he had by conceffion and grant from God his Father, who had given him power over all flesh, John 17.2. And this he had in and from himselfe. Being God he had power over himself as Man to difpofe of his Manhood as pleased him. Now the cafe being so, that which is questiona ble in others, is out of question jin him. He might do what he did, ingage and lay down his life for others, as a Surety in their

stead.

not

ment not of

2. To this add (what is very con siderable,) that this engagement of his was. His ingagenot for one, or, yet a few, but for ma- private, but ny, [He gave his life a Ransome for many, publick con Matthew 20. 28. Now however such a pri cernment. vate engagement, for one to lay down his life for another in an ordinary way, may be looked upon as not warrantable, allowable; Yet in a case of publick con - cernment, to do it for a mans Country, this hath ever been looked upon, not onely as lawfull but laudable. And fo in the case of Hostages given in war, where some particular persons ingage their lives for per formances of promises and conditions agreed upon by the party which they ingage for. This in all ages hath been, and still is an or dinary practice; and who ever questioned the lawfulnesse of it? And Such a Sure ty was our Mediatour; not in a private, but in

: