Chapter 9: The Immediate Effects of Christ's Death

IT is one of the greatest and noblest questions in our controverted divinity, What are the immediate effects of Christ's Death? He that can rightly answer this, is a divine indeed; and by help of this, may expedite most other controversies about redemption, and justification. In a word; the effects of redemption undertaken, could not be upon a subject not yet existent, and so no subject, though it might be for them. None but Adam and Eve were then existent: yet as soon as we do exist, we receive benefit from it. The suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the law, is the most observable immediate effect of the Death of Christ; which suspension is some kind of deliverance from it. Thus far Mr Baxter. Thessalonians 9. Explicat. pag. 67.

There are scarce more lines, than mistakes in this discourse: some of them may be touched on.

1 Effects are to be considered with respect to their causes. Causes are real, or moral. Real, or physical causes, produce their effects immediately, either Immediatione suppositi, or Virtutis: to them the subject must be existent. I speak not of creating power, where the act produceth its object.

Moral causes do never immediately acting their own effects, nor have any immediate influence into them: there is between such causes, and their effects, the intervention of some 3d thing, previous to them both, namely proportion, constitution, law, covenant, which takes in the cause, and lets out the effect: and this for all circumstances of where, how, when, suitable to the limitations in them expressed, or implyed: with the nature of the things themselves.

The Death of Christ is a moral cause, in respect of all its effects: whether those subjects on which it is to have its effects, be existent, or not existent, at the time of its performance, is nothing at all considerable. If it wrought physically, and efficiently, the existence of the subjects on which it were to work, were requisite. It is altogether in vain to enquire of the immediate effects of Christ's Death upon an existent subject: by the way: that Adam and Eve only were existent, when Christ undertook the work of redemption, to me is not clear: no, nor yet the following assertion, that as soon as we do exist, we receive benefit by it: taking benefit, for a benefit actually collated (as Mr Baxter does) not for a right to a benefit, or the purpose of bestowing one, which will operate in its due time: this is easily affirmed; and therefore Eadem Facilitate is denied.

I have no fancy to strive to carry the bell, and to be accounted a divine indeed, by attempting at this time, a right stating of, and answer to this question proposed: I am not altogether ignorant of the endeavour of others, even as to this particular, and have formerly spoken something that way myself.

Mr Baxter seems here to understand by this question, (namely, What is the immediate effect of the Death of Christ) what is the first benefit, which from the Death of Christ, accreweth to them for whom he died: not what is the first thing, that every particular person is actually in his own person, in his own time made partaker of: but a benefit generally established, and in being, upon the designment of the work of redemption, which every one for whom Christ died has a share of: and of this he positively affirms, that the suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the law, is the most observable, immediate effect of the Death of Christ: and so deserves the title of a divine indeed.

Now truly (though not to contend for the bell with Mr Baxter, whereof I confess myself utterly unworthy, and willingly for many commendable parts ascribe it to him) I cannot close with him, nor assent to that assertion: very gladly would I see Mr Baxter's arguments for this; but those, (as in most other controverted things in this book) he is pleased to conceal: and therefore though it might suffice me, to give in my dissent, and so wait for further proof; yet that it may be apparent, that I do not deny this merely because its said, not proved, (which in things not clear in themselves is a provocation so to do) I shall oppose one or two arguments to it.

All the effects of the Death of Christ are peculiar only to the elect, to some: the suspension of the rigorous execution of the law, is not so. Ergo.

The minor is apparent: the major proved by all the arguments against universal redemption used in my former treatise.

2 All the effects of the Death of Christ are spiritual, distinguishing, and saving, to the praise of God's free grace.

The suspending of the vigorous execution of the law, is not so. Ergo,

The assumption is manifest: 'tis only a not immediate casting into hell, which is not a spiritual distinguishing mercy: but in respect to many, tends to the manifestation of God's justice (Romans 9:22).

The proposition is evident. The promises made to Christ upon his undertaking this work, doubtless do hold out all that he effected by his Death. Of what nature they are, and what is the main tendance of them I have elsewhere discovered, from the first to the last, they are restrained to distinguishing mercies: see (Isaiah 49:6, 7, 8, 9, 10), (Chapter 53:10, 11, 12), (Isaiah 61:1, 2), and no less is positively affirmed (Ephesians 1:4), (Revelation 1:5, 6).

If Mr Baxter say, that his meaning in this is, that if Christ had not undertaken the work of redemption, and satisfaction, then the law must have had rigorous execution upon all, and therefore this being suspended upon his undertaking of it, is the first fruit of the Death of Christ.

Notwithstanding this, yet that suspension (which in respect of the different persons towards whom it is actually exercised, has different ends) is not a fruit, nor effect of the Death of Christ, but a free issue, of the same eternally wise providence, sovereignty, and grace, as the Death of Christ himself is: if then by the rigorous execution of the law, you intend the immediate execution of the law in all its rigour, and punishments, this if it had been effected, could in your own judgment have reached Adam, and Eve, and no more; and would have so reached them, as to cut off the generation of mankind in that root: if so, and this be the fruit of Christ's Death, why do you not reckon the procreation of humane race, among those fruits also? For had it not been for this suspension, that also had failed: which is as good a causative connection, as that between the Death of Christ, and this suspension: had not he undertaken the work of redemption, it had not been.

If by a rigorous execution, you intend the penalty of the law, inflicted in that way, which has pleased the will of the law-giver by several parts, and degrees, from conception through birth, life, death, to eternity; the curse of it being wholly incumbent in respect of desert, and making out itself, according to God's appointment, then the suspension thereof is not the immediate effect of the death of Christ; which (opposing the first arguments to the former acceptation) I further prove: If those for whom Christ died do lie under this rigorous execution of the law, that is the curse of it, until some other effect of Christ's death be wrought upon them, then that is not the first effect of the death of Christ: but that supposal is true (John 3:36; Ephesians 2:3); therefore so also the inference.

In a word: Take the suspending of the rigorous execution of the law, for the purpose of God, and his acting accordingly, not to leave his elect under the actual curse of it; so it is no fruit of the death of Christ, but an issue of the same grace; from where also the death of Christ proceeds.

Take it for an actual freeing of their persons from the breach of it, and its curse, and so it differs not from justification, and is not the immediate effect of Christ's death in Mr. Baxter's judgment.

Take it for the not immediately executing of the law upon the first offence, and I can as well say, Christ died because the law was suspended; as you, that the law was suspended because Christ died: had not either been, the other had not been.

Take it for the actual forbearance of God towards all the world, and so it falls under my two first arguments.

Take it thus, that God for the death of Christ, will deal with all men upon a new law, freeing all from the guilt of the first broken law, and covenant: So it is non Ens.

If you mean by it God's entering into a new way of salvation with those for whom Christ died: this on the part of God is antecedaneous to the consideration of the death of Christ, and of the same free grace with itself.

For the question itself (as I said before) I shall not here in terms take it up, the following discourse will give light into it: I have also spoken largely to it in another place; and that distinctly.

The sum is: I conceive that all the intermediate effects of the death of Christ, tending to its ultimate procurement of the glory of God, are all in respect of his death immediate; that is, with such an immediation as attends moral causes: Now these concerning them for whom he died, as they are not immediately bestowed on them (the ultimate attingency of the cause, and the first rise of the effect, lying in an intervening compact) so not simul, at once neither: though simul, and alike procured: the cause of this, being that relation, coherence, and causality, which the Lord has appointed between the several effects (or rather parts of the same effect) of the death of Christ, in reference to the main, and ultimate end to be thereby attained: as at large I have discussed (Lib. 2. Cap. 1. p. 52, 53, &c.). In one word, the first effect of the death of Christ in this sense, is the first fruit of election: For, for the procuring and purchasing of the fruits thereof, and them alone, did Christ die.

If I mistake not, Mr. Baxter himself is not settled fully in this persuasion, that the suspension of the rigorous execution of the law, is the most immediate effect of the death of Christ: for pag. 52. these words which he uses [God the Father does accept the sufferings and merits of his Son, as a full satisfaction to his violated law, and as a valuable consideration upon which he will wholly acquit and forgive the offenders themselves, and receive them again into favor, so that they will but receive his Son upon the terms expressed in the Gospel] seems to place the ultimate efficacy of the death of Christ in God's acceptation of it, as to our good, on the condition of faith, and obedience.

Which, first makes the suspension of the law to be so far from being the first effect of the death of Christ: that the last reaches not so far. And secondly, the fond absurdity of this conditional acceptation I have before declared.

Neither am I clear to which of those assertions, that of page 92, (where he affirms, that some benefit by Christ the condemned did receive) is most accommodate: neither can I easily receive what is here asserted; if by benefit you understand that which in respect of them is intentionally so.

For, first, condemned persons, as condemned persons surely receive no benefit by Christ, for they are condemned.

Secondly, the delay of the condemnation of reprobates, is no part of the purchase of Christ: the Scripture says, nor more, nor less of any such thing: but peculiarly assigns it to another cause (Romans 9).