2. Others say, Christ did merit this glory for himself. The oil of
being made a curse for us; and therefore is said to be given to us, Isa.
9:6, or for our sakes, not to himself or for his own sake; so he acquired nothing for himself by his death but what he had possession of before, quoad divinitatem and quoad humanitatem; for all power both in heaven and earth was conferred upon him before his death,
Mat. 11:27. All glory,* say they, would have flowed down upon his humanity at the instant of his conception, as the glory of the husband is conferred upon the spouse at the first moment of marriage; but God, by a special dispensation, detained it till he had accomplished his work in the lowest degree of his humiliation; God suspended his concourse, as he did to the fire, which hindered it from exercising its proper quality of burning upon the three children; but this work being performed, and the suspension taken off, his glory could not but naturally fill his humanity, as the quality of fire would return to its natural course upon removing the stops; and therefore, to assert any merit for himself, is a disparagement of, and an impeachment to, his glorious union; and for those places which are alleged for his merit of it, as Philip. 2:8, 9, Heb. 1:9, and also the text, they shew the order of conferring it, rather than the merit of it, that his glory followed his passion, not that his passion merited his glory; † his glory rather seemed to be a necessary consequent of God's acceptation of his death, and a testimony of heaven's approbation of it. As the occasion of his death was the fall of man, so the moving cause of his death was the redemption of man, not the exaltation of the name of Christ primarily and immediately. For our sakes he slid down from heaven into our nature; for our sakes he bore that burden the law and wrath of God had cast upon him; it was for us that he combated with death, and forced our enemies out of their fortresses.
And so by this voluntary submission and humiliation, he came to his former dignity; for if he came to an higher dignity than he had before, it had been evident that he was obedient for himself, not for others.
2. Others say, Christ did merit this glory for himself. The oil of gladness was poured upon his humanity, wherein he had fellows, because he had loved righteousness, Heb. 1:9. Therefore is a causal
particle, not only of the final cause, but the moral, efficient, or meritorious cause. He did by this merit an exaltation at the right hand of God, above all the choirs of angels. It was indeed due upon his suffering, yet called grace, ‡ because the whole design of redemption, in the pitching upon Christ, and the sending him, was an act of free grace in God to us; as it was grace to accept his interposition for us, so it was grace to promise him this glory, and set this joy before him for his encouragement in his sufferings;§ and as it was free grace to unite the flesh to the person of the Son of God, so it was of grace that there was a continuation of demonstrating the glory of the Deity in the same flesh. Yet, after his sufferings, the glory of Christ may be said to be a merited reward, because his glory was not improportionable to his sufferings; he merited the dispossession of the devil, and merited therefore the transferring that power upon himself, to manage for the honour of God, which the devil had usurped over man in rebellion against God. A man may have a double title to an inheritance, by birth and by some signal services done, whereby what was due to him by birth may be due to him by merit; as when a province flies into rebellion against the lawful prince, he sends his eldest son with an army to quell those tumults; his arms prove successful, and the rebels are reduced to obedience.
Doth he not merit a title to that inheritance by his sword, which was due to him by his birth? Indeed, Christ did not merit his first mission, no more than the prince's son merited his being sent for the reduction of the rebels; nor did he merit his first unction and habitual grace. This belonged to the perfection of the soul of Christ, and fitted him for his mediatory work in our nature; he could not have wanted this without prejudice to the work of redemption, and to our salvation, which was the end of it, though this was necessarily consequent upon an admission of Christ's mediation, and a necessary article in the covenant of redemption, yet it was the act of God's free grace. Nor must we think that this glory was the motive to Christ to engage him first in this undertaking, but pure grace to us; for what attractives could there be in our nature to make this divine person assume it? Or what glory could be conferred upon the humanity, that could allure the Deity to embody itself in it? Could