respect as to them all, the highest and greatest that any one can conceive. For, in the first place, when one person lays down his life for many, nothing hinders that he might not possibly love one more vehemently than another as to the internal act: as if we should suppose that Jacob had suffered death to deliver all his sons from captivity, yet we should assert rightly that he did not love them all in the highest degree, but he loved Joseph and Benjamin more than the others. Therefore, the highest love as to intenseness cannot be inferred in respect of all to whom this greatest proof of love is exhibited. Secondly, Any one may give up his life for many promiscuously, and yet as to the greatness of the good willed, love some much more than others, and therefore not embrace all either with the highest or with equal love. For the greatness of love is not to be esteemed only by the precious thing which is given to the person loved by the lover, but by the benefits which are intended to be conferred upon the person loved by that gift. For example, if a king's son should suffer death for all who were guilty of treason, on this condition, that all should be absolved who were willing to humble themselves as suppliants before the king's throne, and faithfully promise obedience for the future; but he should design to obtain this in addition from his father for some of them, that on account of the merit of his death he would deign to persuade them to this submission and obedience, and having thus persuaded them, would not only absolve them, but also advance them to the highest honours: who does not perceive that death would have been endured for all, and yet that all were not loved in the highest and greatest degree? For since to love is to wish good things to any one, and to confer them, it follows that in a common benefit being granted to many, those are more loved to whom greater good things are designed and conferred from the aforesaid benefit. Lastly, Although men cannot exhibit to men a greater external testimony of love than that one should die for another, yet God the Father, Christ the Mediator, the God-man, and the Holy Spirit can exhibit a greater secret act and effect of their own love to

wards some of those for whom Christ died than towards others; as if they should determine to give to some not only remission of sins and eternal life through the merit of the death of Christ, provided they should believe in this their Redeemer; but also should choose some from eternity unto life effectually to participate in Christ the Redeemer, and should prepare for them and infallibly give all those things which should effect this infallible participation and application. From these things it appears that that inference is not tenable, Christ died for all; Therefore, he loved all with the highest and with equal love; because, this common benefit of his death being granted to all, yet he may love some more intensely than others, and decree, prepare, and give to some more and greater benefits from the merit of his death than to others. Which is evident in the elect themselves, for they all confess that Christ suffered for all of them, and yet no one would affirm that Christ embraced with equal love every one (if I may so speak) of the multitude of the elect, as he did the patriarchs, apostles, or his own most blessed mother, or enriches every one with equal gifts of grace and glory redounding from the merit of his death. But the other argument, in which it is inferred, If Christ suffered death for all, he would shew greater love to the non-elect than to the elect, because it argues greater love to endure death for any one to procure for him some little good than a great one, seems to me little agreeable to right reason. If different kinds of death were to be suffered for different persons, this objection might have some appearance of truth; but where one death is endured for all, there it is evident that he is more loved to whom he who dies intends more and greater benefits from this one death. For if to love is to wish good things to another, then to wish greater benefits is to love more. But in this manner the love of the dying Christ manifested itself towards the elect, and those who were not elected; for from one and the same death he willed that more and greater benefits should arise to the former than to the latter.

OBJECTION 15. Means wisely destined do not exceed their adequate end. But the adequate end of the death of Christ is the salvation of the elect. Therefore the death of Christ has no ordination to any persons whatever who are not elected. Therefore it is falsely stated to be applicable to all men by the ordination of God.

REPLY 15. I acknowledge that the infallible salvation of the elect is, in subserviency to the glory of God, a certain special and most excellent end, for the obtaining of which the death of Christ was destined; but I deny that it was the only or sole end. For God sent his Son into the world, and willed that he should die, not only that he might effectually save the elect, but also that remission of sins and eternal life might be brought to and also conferred upon mankind generally in the Gospel, if they should believe. But it is not understood that this general or conditional covenant is confirmed, unless the death of Christ is presupposed to be applicable to all men according to the ordination of God, and actually to be applied to any one as soon as he should have believed. This end the Scripture hath clearly indicated in many places; in John iii. 14, 15, As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. And John vi. 40, This is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life. And Acts x. 43, To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive re· mission of sins. I omit other passages. From these it will sufficiently appear, that although not all, but only the elect believe, God specially softening their hearts, yet that the death of Christ was so offered to God the Father by the Son, and is so indiscriminately offered by God the Father to mankind, and is so announced promiscuously to all by the ministers of the Gospel, that any one may collect from thence that there is a kind of firm and stedfast ordination of God, according to which the death of Christ may pertain to all men. This ordination the non-elect render use

less to themselves by their own unbelief; but they do not cause such an ordination to be made void, or that it should not be acknowledged to have been established by the death of Christ to these unbelievers. For if we admit

this, any unbeliever may pretend, Although I should believe the Gospel, I should not be delivered from my sins by the death of Christ, because the death of Christ had no ordination according to which I could be a partaker of it. Which, on the other hand, is opposed by the words of Christ himself, John iii. 17, 18, God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is what Prosper says (Ad Obj. Vinc.), The death of Christ has indeed in itself what may benefit all men, but if it is not received it will not heal. That which has in itself that it may profit all men, has it from the general ordination of God; but that it is not received by many through faith, this happens from the common unbelief of mankind; that it is received by some proceeds from the special compassion of God.

OBJECTION 16. It is absurd to declare that the death of Christ is a ransom applicable by the ordination of God to those to whom it is not applied, because in the very death of Christ there was the most sure application of death for all those for whom it is truly affirmed that he died and suffered: Therefore, the death of Christ is not a remedy ordained by God, except for certain individual persons elected and known to God only, to whom at length it becomes saving as to the event.

REPLY 16. We deny that there is any thing absurd in the aforesaid sentiment, which we have demonstrated to be true, and agreeable to Divine wisdom. But that which is objected, As to all for whom Christ died, in the death of Christ himself is included also the infallible application of his death, that does not seem to us to be conceded. For the oblation of Christ considered merely in itself, altogether obtains from God, that every individual who is willing to

believe in Christ shall be saved. This efficacy of the death of Christ the Gospel proclaims and promises to all the world; but that infallible purpose of applying this death to certain persons, the ministers of the Gospel cannot promise to any mortal by name. We say, therefore, that the death of Christ was ordained for all those to whom remission of sins may be announced through faith in his blood, which grace regards every partaker of human nature. But we confess that the death of Christ is infallibly to be applied to the elect alone, because the certainty of the application depends, as to the primary cause, on the secret and eternal act of God in predestinating, and not only on the act of Christ in offering up himself for men. Christ, therefore, in offering up himself had a general intention conformed to the ordination of the Father, namely, that he might deliver any persons whatsoever indiscriminately from the guilt of their sins, provided they should believe in him, and in this sense he is said to have offered up himself for all. He had also, as conscious of the Divine predestination, a special intention conformed to the secret and eternal good pleasure of the Father, namely, that he might obtain through the merit of his death for his sheep, who were given to him according to the decree of election, and might give them faith, salvation, and all things. And with this special intention it is said, that he laid down his life for his own peculiar people, that is, for certain individual persons. That which comes to certain persons from the death of Christ, by the special act of Divine predestination, ought not to overthrow that which is acquired by all through the very act of the oblation. The infallible application to one person rather than to another may be ascribed to predestination, but that which may be applicable to every individual through faith, may be assigned, from the tenor of the Divine covenant, to the oblation of Christ itself.

OBJECTION 17. The last objection is derived from those passages in which the death of Christ is expressly referred to certain persons; from which they infer, that they have no regard to others. The passages which are