Dei voluntate proveniunt supra omne debitum creatura, nobis innotescere non possunt, nisi quatenus in sacra Scriptura traduntur, per quam divina voluntas innotescit. Unde cum in sacra Scriptura ubique Incarnationis Ratio ex peccato primi hominis assignetur, convenientius dicitur Incarnationis opus ordinatum esse a Deo in commodum contra peccatum, quod peccato non existente incarnatio non fuis

set.

17. There is yet another argument mentioned by Aquinas, and much urged by the modern Scotists; it is insisted on also by some divines of our own; which deserves somewhat a fuller consideration. And this is taken from the predestination of the Man Christ Jesus. This the schoolmen consider on that of our apostle, Rom. i. 4. concerning Jesus Christ,' RODENTOS VIE DEN SV Juvaus, which the Vulgate renders, Qui predestinatus est Filius Dei in virtute: Predestinated the Son of God with power,' as our Rhemists. But givros there, is no more than modistos, manifested, declared, as it is well rendered by our's. Nor can expositors fix any tolerable sense to their predestinated in this place. But the thing itself is true. The Lord Christ was predestinated or pre-ordained before the world was. We were redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, προεγνωσμένα προ καταβολης κοσμου, 1 Pet. i, 20. Fore-ordained, predestinated before the foundation of the world.' Now it is pleaded, that this predestination of Christ to the grace of union and glory, was the first of God's purposes and decrees, in order of nature, and antecedent to the predestination of the elect, at least as it should comprise in it a purpose of deliverance from the fall. For God first designed to glorify himself in the assumption of human nature, before he decreed to save the elect by that nature so assumed. For we are said to be chosen in him, that is, as our head, Ephes. i. 4. whence it necessarily ensues that he was chosen before us; and so without respect unto us. So in all things was he to have the preeminence, Col. i. 19. And thence it is that we are predestinated to be conformed to his image, Rom. viii. 29. This pre-ordination therefore of the Lord Christ, which was unto grace and glory, was antecedent to the permission of the fall of man, so that he should have been incarnate, though the fall had never taken place.

These things have been explained at large by other writers on the subject; but this is the sum of what is pleaded in the pursuit of this argument, which shall be examined as briefly as the nature of the matter itself will permit.

1. In treating of the divine decrees, many authors have considered at large their priority one to another, in order of nature and reason. In using the phrase priority in order of nature, it is not of the decrees themselves that we speak, for these are all absolutely free and irrespective; but it is of the things decreed, which are arranged in such an order, that one should serve ano

ther. There are not a few, however, who suppose those discourses on all hands, to have more of nicety and curious subtilty, than of solid truth for edification. And because this is a matter on which the Scripture is utterly silent, though one opinion may be more agreeable to sound reason than another, yet none is built upon such certain foundations, as to become a matter of faith, or the principle of any thing that is so. That which explains this order most conveniently, and suitably to divine wisdom, will, and sovereignty; which best answers the common apprehensions of rational natures, and the rules of their actings; is to be preferred before any opinion, that includes what is opposite to, or alien from, any of those things to which that order hath respect. From any such order in the decrees of God, no support can be drawn to the opinion which is under consideration; but if men may be allowed to suppose what they will, they may easily infer from it what they please. Let us therefore take a view of the several series of divine decrees, which have been confirmed by the suffrage of a considerable number of learned men, setting aside particular conjectures, which were never received by any except their authors. And these may be reduced unto three. All agree, that the glory of God is the utmost and supreme end that he intendeth in all his decrees. Although they are free acts of his will and wisdom, yet on the supposition of the existence of these decrees, it is absolutely necessary from the perfection of his being, that he himself or his glory be their utmost end. His absolute all-sufficiency, will not allow that in them he should have any other end. Accordingly, in pursuit of them," He makes all for himself," Prov. xvi. 4. And they serve to declare and make known the perfection of his nature, Psal. xix. 1. Rom. i. 19, 20. And it is his glory in the way of justice and mercy, which he ultimately intends in his decrees concerning the salvation of man by Jesus Christ. Whereas many things are ordered by him in a subserviency hereunto, the decrees of God concerning them, are conceived of by some in that order which answers the order of this accomplishment. As, first, they say God decreed to make the world, and man therein upright in his image. Secondly, to permit the fall, and the consequences thereof, man being to that end left to the liberty of his will. Thirdly, he designed to send his Son to be incarnate for the work of their redemption. Fourthly, he decreed to give eternal life to as many as should believe on him and obey him. And lastly, he determined to bestow effectual grace on some persons in particular, to work faith and obedience in them infallibly, and thereby to bring them to glory, to the praise of his grace and mercy. According to this order of God's decrees, it is plain that in the order of nature, the perdestination of Christ is antecedent unto the election of other particular or individual persons; but withal that it is consequential to the de

cree concerning the permission of the fall of Adam; and accordingly his incarnation doth suppose it; which is inconsistent with the opinion under examination.

Others take a contrary course, and by a misapplication of a common rule, that what is first in intention must be last in execution, they suppose that the order of God's decrees (which are his intentions and purposes), may be best conceived in a direct retrogradation to the order of their execution. Supposing therefore, that God determines to glorify himself in the way before mentioned; they judge that his first decree in order of nature, is for the eternal salvation and glory of some certain persons, who are at last actually brought to glory. For this being the last thing executed, must be first intended. Secondly, in subserviency to this, he purposeth to give them grace, and faith, and obedience thereby, as the way to bring them to the possession of glory. Thirdly, To those purposes of God, they make the decrees concerning the creation, and the permission of the fall of man, with the incarnation and mediation of Christ, to be subservient, some in one method, some in another. But it is evident, that all their thoughts respecting a decree predestinating the incarnation of Christ, prior to any decree with respect to sin and grace, must be inconsistent.

As both these ways are exposed to insuperable objections, some have fixed on another method for the right" conception of the order of God's eternal decrees in these things. This method is

consistent in itself, and may be fairly vindicated from all opposition, which is the utmost that with sobriety can be aimed at in these things. The supporters of this scheme, set out with observing, that nothing should be ascribed to God which is in the least unsuited to the infinite perfections of his nature, nor any thing proposed to the minds of men which is inconsistent with the general principles and rules of reason. They also lay down. the general rule before mentioned; namely, that what is first in intention is last in execution. But secondly, they say withal, that this rule concerns only such things, as in their own nature and in the will of him that designs them, have to one another the relation of end and means. For this rule has no place among such things as are not capable of that relation. Moreover it is requir ed that this end be ultimate and supreme, and not subordinate, for a subordinate end is also of the nature of means. The meaning of the rule then is no more than this, that in all rational purposes, there are two things considered: First the end aimed at, and then the means of its accomplishment. And that in the order of nature, the end, which is the last thing effected, is first designed, and then the means for it; which things are true and obvious to the understanding of all men. According to this rule, they ascribe to God only two decrees that have any order of

priority between them. The first is concerning his end which is first intended, and last executed. The other is concerning all those means, which though second in order, being intended for the production of the end, are first accomplished and wrought. The first of these decrees respects the supreme end of all the dispensations of God, towards the things that are outward of him; this supreme end is his own glory, or the declaration of himself in a way of justice and mercy, mixed with infinite wisdom and goodness, as he is the first Being, Sovereign Lord and Ruler over all. The second decree respects things subordinate and subservient to the former, and consists in an intention concerning all intermediate acts of divine wisdom, power and goodness, which tend to the production of this ultimate end. Such are the creation, the permission of the fall, the pre-ordination of Christ, and others in him to grace and glory, by the way and means thereunto appointed. Now although these things are evidently subordinate, and subservient to one another, and although separate decrees concerning them may be conceived of, yet, because none of them do lie in the order of means and ultimate end, there is no priority of one decree before another to be allowed therein. Only a decree is supposed, for arranging them in their execution; or for disposing of the things to be executed, into that order both in nature and time, which may constitute them all one suitable means of attaining the supreme end intended. Now it is evident that according to this order, there cannot be a priority in the pre-ordination of Christ, to the decree of the permission of the fall and entrance of sin.

It is true indeed, Christ was pre-ordained, or the Son of God was pre-ordained, to be incarnate before the foundation of the world, 1 Pet. i. 20. But how? Even as he was manifested in the last times." As he was pre-ordained to be incarnate, so he was to be born of the blessed virgin: and this neither was nor could be, but with respect unto the redemption of mankind; for he took flesh of her, in answer to the first promise concerning. the seed of the woman, which respected our recovery from sin. As he was born or made of her, he was the Lamb of God that was to take away the sin of the world. Besides, he was not ordained to the grace of union, before and without the consideration of glory and exaltation. But this included a supposition of his suffering for sin: for he was "first to suffer, and then to enter into his glory," Luke xxiv. 26. Accordingly he ordered his own prayer, John xvii. 4, 5. «I have glorified thee on the earth, I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do, and now, O Father, glorify me with thine own self." Neither Scrip ture nor reason, will allow us to suppose a pre-ordination of the Son of God to become incarnate without reference to the previous entrance of sin, or without reference to his being born of

the blessed virgin, or without considering him as the Lamb of God, or without considering him as one to be exalted after suffering. It is said indeed that we are " predestinated to be conformed to the image of Christ," Rom. viii. 29. which seems to imply an antecedency in his predestination unto our's. But the "image of Christ" there intended, includes his sufferings, holiness, and exaltation to glory after his obedience, all which have respect to sin and redemption. And moreover the predestination here intended, is subordinate to our election to glory, being our designation to the assured and infallible means thereof, Eph. i. 4, It is true it was the design of God, that he in all things should have the pre-eminence, Col. i. 18.; and as this denotes excellency, worth, use, dignity, supremacy, nearness to God for the receiving, and to us for the communicating of all good; so it can have no respect to such a pre-ordination, as would imply his incarnation without an intention of glorifying God in the redemption of sinners; which alone we have undertaken to disprove.

5.

§ 18. The arguments of Osiander in this case have been discussed by others*. I shall notice these arguments, only so far as is necessary to our present design, and that in those instances in which they have no coincidence with what hath been already discussed. And some few things may be premised, which will take away the suppositions on which all his reasonings are founded. As,

1. The Son was the essential and eternal image of the Father, antecedent to all consideration of his incarnation. He is in his divine person the " image of the invisible God," Col. i. 15. "The brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person," Heb. i. 3. For having his essence and subsistence from the Father by eternal generation, or the communication of the whole divine nature, and of all its infinite perfections, he is the perfect and essential representation of him.

2. The order of operation in the blessed Trinity as to outward works, answers to and follows the order of their subsistence. Hence the Son is considered as the next and immediate operator of them. Thus, as he is said to have made all things, John i. 3. Col. i. 16. so the Father is said to make all things by him, Eph. iii. 9. not as an inferior, subordinate, instrumental cause; but as acting his wisdom and power in him to whom they were communicated by eternal generation. Hence the immediate relation of all things so made, is to the Son, and by and in his person, is God, even the Father, immediately represented to them, as he is his image, and as the brightness of his glory shines forth in him. Hereon follows his "rejoicing in the creation, and his delights in the sons of men," Prov. viii. 30, 31. because of their immediate relation to him.

* Calvin Institut. Lib. 2. Cap. 12. Sect. 4. &c. Wigandus de Osiandrismo, p. 23. Tarnovius, in cap. 3. in Evangel. S. Johan.