CHAPTER IX: Christ's satisfaction not only a diminishing of his glory, but despoiling him of it
And ere we go any further, do but think with yourselves that if a person, such as in the first head hath been described, who is equal with God in glory, will, to glorify God and exalt him, not only condescend to lessen himself, and that so much as to have it said, the second person is made a creature; but will further, at the command of his Father, lay aside even that glory which is still due to him when thus made man, yea, even empty himself wholly of all that glory personally due to him, and take on him the form of a servant instead thereof; and yet further, will actually become obedient in the performance of all such actions, not only which it was meet so great a person glorified in heaven should employ himself in, and shew his own, and his Father's glory jointly in, but such as men on earth shew their subjection in, both as mere creatures and as sinners; yea, and not only so, but will be obedient to the utmost of sufferings, even to death, and to the most shameful and ignominious death, the death of the cross; and will perform all this voluntarily, with an intention of mind and will, directing all to this sole end, so to make God alone glorious by and through his own utter debasement and obscurement, falling down thus low to exalt and set God up thus high, by his having so great a person, and in himself so glorious, thus obedient to him, and lowered for his glory's sake; I appeal even to the justice that is in all men's hearts, if it doth not both equalise the dishonour done to God by sin, and also bring in a greater overplus of glory than was taken from God by it, and so make a full amends.
CHAPTER IX
The principal matter of Christ's satisfaction was not only in a diminishing of his glory, but despoiling him of it.—And that he did this willingly, he humbled himself.—And that his person was the subject of this debasement and humiliation.
But to speak yet more distinctly, the matter of his satisfaction lies in these three things principally, all which are in the text.
I. That it was not only a lessening of his glory, but a despoiling and emptying him of it, or a making him of no reputation.
II. That this was voluntary in him; he humbled, actively; it is not said he was humbled, passively.
III. That the subject of this humbling was himself, considered both as the subject-author of all this obedience, and also as the subjectmatter involved in this obedience and debasement: 'he humbled himself.'
I. It was an emptying himself of glory to glorify God; which, in the strictest way that justice can require, becometh properly and truly satisfaction in point of glory debased. To clear this, let us consider the difference between giving honour simply, and giving satisfaction for honour. We give mutual honour to one another without debasing ourselves, as inferiors to superiors, and superiors to inferiors, by mutual uncovering of the head each unto other. But if satisfaction in point of honour be strictly stood upon, then some acts of humbling are exacted from the party that is to satisfy, even a taking down of the glory of the one, to restore it to the other; examples whereof we often see, by the sentence of such courts as deal in point of honour and the restitution of it. Now to make use of this in the point in hand.
A mere creature indeed cannot give the simple tribute of glory that is due unto God, but by humbling itself some way, either in obedience or worship; all the acts of which have a humbling of the creature in them. Thus the angels cover their faces, and cry, 'Holy, holy, holy,'
&c., and the elders cast down themselves and their crowns, and cry, 'Worthy art thou to receive honour and glory.' And the reason is, because of the transcendent distance and disproportion between God and mere creatures; his glory being so high and sovereign, that they cannot shew forth the greatness of it, but by veiling their own glory before him. Thus the distance between kings and ordinary men, being in the institution of it so high and sovereign, the greatness of their majesty and glory cannot be held forth but by their subjects debasing of themselves, and falling down before them. And in this
respect, the creature's debasement could never have satisfied for God's honour lost and impaired; because all its debasements are but suitable ways to give and shew forth that glory of God which is simply due from them although they had never sinned. But Christ, though he were lessened indeed (as became God-man), yet still, this man being one person with God, and so God as well as man, and so being by right of inheritance in joint commission with his Father, and set up in such a kind of equality, as hath been shewn, hence, as two kings in joint commission for the government of a kingdom, and by a like right, though they give glory each to other, yet not by debasement of their glory; so nor was Christ to have done, as now in heaven he doth not, where, though he intercedes for us, yet more regio, as a king, 'sitting' (not kneeling, as on earth) 'at God's right hand;' and stilo regio, in the language of a king—'Father, I will,' as John 17:24. It is not performed in a way of a humbling debasement, though in a way that argues a lessening of him. And thus he might have kept his state and majesty, as now in heaven he doth, and have given glory to God for ever, upon such terms, and by such ways, as should withal have held forth his own glory jointly and as directly as his Father's. Thus, at the latter day, when he comes to judge the world, he will come in his fullest glory, and 'every knee shall bow to him, to the glory of God the Father;' this being his due, that he should be honoured together with his Father: 'That all should honour the Son' (says Christ, speaking of that judgment committed to himself), 'even as they honour the Father,' John 5:22, 23. Thus indeed he might (as now he doth) have glorified God. But then all this in him would not have been satisfaction for the impairing and diminution of God's glory by sin. This is no way to be effected (no, not by Christ), but by a humbling, a lowering, a debasement, an emptying himself of glory, to restore it to his Father. For look, as in point of goods restitution is not made but by a parting with some of that man's goods that is to satisfy, to be added to his who is to be satisfied, so in point of honour, if satisfaction for dishonour (which is a taking away of honour, or reflecting disparagement on him who is dishonoured) be to be performed, there must in like manner be a taking away of, or a parting with, honour and glory in the satisfier,
done for the injured person's sake, to give again unto the dishonoured, so as his glory shall be made up, or shewed forth by the other's debasement. For else it ariseth not to a proportion, which is the rule of justice in such cases. Therefore, nothing but a debasement can make a full amends for a debasement; but when so, then a proportion is observed; and honour can never be repaired but out of another's honour impaired, for it must be paid in its own coin; and in this case, you cannot repair a loss to the one, but you must impair it to the other. And this is the true reason why Christ, now he is glorified in heaven, though he be as full of action and employment as ever, and all to the glory of his Father, as much as those actions were which he performed here below; yet all that now he doth in heaven hath not a meritoriousness in it, nor is it accounted of as being satisfactory for sin, as what he did here below was; yet all those actions have an infinite worth in them, in respect of the person performing them, considered merely as an agent and efficient cause of them; and they are infinitely acceptable to God (as glorifying him) to other ends; but still, they arise not to answer the proportion that in justice satisfaction requires. For though they are the actions of Christ considered as an inferior, and one made less, and that in order to the glorifying of God, yet so as he still having a right to be glorified with God in all jointly, and as directly as God himself is to be glorified, and accordingly, all these actions, as immediately holding forth his own glory as his Father's; therefore, though God reckons and accounts of them as a glorifying of himself, yet not as a satisfaction to himself for his glory impaired, because Christ is not humbled in any of them, so as by a debasement in them to give glory unto God, but does now share with God in the tribute of glory that comes in, as being his due. But here on earth he abated of, and hid his glory; he was emptied of it, to the end that thereby what was lost to him might accrue unto God; which debasement does truly and properly become fit matter for satisfaction.
II. That which gives worth and acceptation to this debasement of his, to make it satisfactory, is, that himself, or his person (so great a person), is included in it: 'He humbled himself and became
obedient;' and so, this obedience of his, being in such a way of debasement, does draw and take into it all his fore-named personal perfections, to contribute an infinite dignity, worth, and satisfactoriness unto all he did or suffered; and this, from the consideration of himself as being included therein, and so in a double respect and relation giving a double gift unto his obedience, as I may so speak.
1. If his person be considered as the worker and efficient cause of all he did or suffered, and withal, as the root from whence it sprung, and as the subject author of all those graces and self-denials, this gives a worth to his obedience and sufferings.
2. As his person and all his excellencies are yet further involved as the materiale, the subject matter itself of this his obedience, as that which he offered up in all that he either did or suffered, so the honour of his person not only gives an influence of worth into his works of obedience, as he is the efficient of them, but further, in that his honour was reflected upon in them all, and he debased himself therein. And thus his person is doubly enwrapped in all he did; and therefore, in the text, it is said, 'He humbled himself and became obedient;' that is, in his actions of obedience himself was humbled and made subject. There is a reduplication, he and himself, noting that they came from his person, and that they again reflected upon his person, and were not only proceeding from persona infinita, in an infinite person, but are circa personam infinitam, concerned about him.
1. Now for the first; Consider him but as the subject author of them; and yet even so, all his graces and actions, in his person thus humbled, receive an infinite value and worth from him. Therefore the efficacy of his righteousness is put upon this, that it was the righteousness of God and our Saviour, that is, our Saviour who was
God. So 2 Peter 1:1, 'Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us, through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.' And
though this relation of his actions unto his person simply and alone considered in Christ as glorified, God accounts not satisfaction, yet they coming from Christ as humbled, he accepts of all his graces and actions, not only as having an infinite worth in them, but also as part of satisfaction. And to that end he considers this in them, that they are all from a person so infinite, and in that respect they add a distinct worth to that satisfaction, which thus humbled he performs, from this other that follows; which is, 2dly, That his person is further to be considered as the materiale, the matter of all his obedience, namely, in this respect, that his person was debased in all that obedience of his, so that it came to pass, that this his obedience was not only accepted because the offerer of it, the sacrificer, was a person of that worth, but also in that himself and his glory became the sacrifice and offering itself. He not only gave honour to God by his actions, and with his graces; but did also therein give away his own honour, the honour of his person. I will make this plain to you by a place of Scripture, namely, Heb. 9, where that that gives weight and efficacy to his blood to 'purge our consciences' (which all the sacrifices in the world could never have done, as the apostle says, verses 13, 14), is made to be this, that 'through the eternal Spirit he offered up himself,' as the 14th verse concludes. Whence observe, that he, viz., his person with his
Godhead, was considered not only as the offerer (which those words import, 'through the eternal Spirit'), or as the author of that action of sacrificing, as the priests were of those sacrifices of the law (which is the first consideration mentioned in the former part of this distinction), but besides, himself was the thing offered, as those words shew, 'offered up himself.' So that that action had a double respect to his person, both as the subject author and as the matter, both as the sacrificer and as the sacrifice. The priests, they offered indeed, but it was the gifts which people brought, so as therein the priest was one thing, and the sacrifice another; but here Christ was both offerer and offering; there the giver was one thing, and the gift another; but here Christ was both the giver and gift: Eph. 5:2, 'Who hath loved us, and given himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to
God.' And this is that which the Scripture mentions to have given a further infinite over-balancing weight of merit and satisfaction, and distinct from the former, unto all that Christ did, namely, that in all he still gave away himself. They were not mere actions from him and in him, but such as included himself as given, and humbled in them.
This, as the places above mentioned, so that in Heb. 1:3 does plainly shew, 'having by himself purged our sins;' mark it, not by actions merely from him, but by himself humbled in these actions and sufferings. And therefore the same author to the Hebrews puts the main value upon himself considered as the person offered, and not only on himself considered as the offerer; and indeed he distinctly mentions both. For throughout the 7th chapter he shews that it was necessary he should be the priest, the offerer, that should sacrifice, and so appease God's wrath, shewing oppositely, the insufficiency of the Levitical priests, although their sacrifices had had no defect, and so concludes, that 'such an high priest became us,' &c., ver. 26; and yet because all the merit lay not in the bare person of the priest as an offerer, had not the sacrifice itself been answerable, therefore he further shews in the 9th and 10th chapters, the worth of that sacrifice also which by this our high priest was offered, which was no other than himself. And this the apostle shews as considered apart by itself from the former consideration; and therefore in like manner he oppositely shews the weakness and unworthiness that was in all the Levitical sacrifices and things offered, as he had formerly done of those offerers, chap. 7, still mentioning the worth of that one sacrifice of himself; shewing that he was also the person offered, and that that was it which gave that super-eminent worth to his offering, to take sins away. And it is plain that the apostle considers both these, for he argues the perfection of his satisfaction from both.
Now to clear this distinction by comparing an instance or two together; when Christ wrought a miracle, turning water into wine, this was an action from him merely as the author of it, and wherein he humbled not himself, which therefore made up no part of satisfaction. It was from him, but it reflected not thus upon, nor included his person thus in it. But when he was circumcised, and
became obedient to his parents and to the law, all these actions, as they were from his person, so also they included in them the humiliation of himself, and had therefore the whole worth of the person who did or suffered them communicated unto them, as being included in them, and as reflecting upon the whole honour of his person in a way of debasement; for his glory is himself. Therefore in all his obedience, doing, and suffering, his glory being reflected upon, or debased, his person is said to be involved in the matter of it, as a king's honour is, when he doth an action that debaseth himself.
Or if you will yet more accurately consider how many ways himself or his person was included in this, then in a word to sum up all.
1. His obedience was from an infinite person as the cause thereof.
And, 2, performed likewise in himself as the immediate subject thereof; the difference between which two is evident; for the Holy
Ghost, who is God, when he prays in us, and helpeth our infirmities, and makes intercession for us, though he be the efficient of the prayers made, yet these are not wrought in himself, but in us as the subject of them, and therefore are called our prayers. And hence these actions of his in us have not this great worth in them, though he be the author of them. But Christ's satisfaction and intercession were not only effected by him, but further, were performed in himself as the subject in whom the action doth reside, and to whom it appertains for ever.
3. It was not only performed by him, and in him, but himself was the matter of the obedience; 'he gave himself.' And so near an alliance of his obedience unto his person, must needs every way add an infinite worth unto it. Thus much for the second requisite to the matter of satisfaction.
III. Now, in the third place, add this other also, that all his obedience and humiliation was voluntary and arbitrary.