Griffin:

Matthias Martinius, one of the delegates from Bremen, says, “There is in God a certain common love to man with which he regarded the whole lapsed human race, and seriously willed the salvation of all. The exercise of this love to man appears in the outward call to the elect and reprobate without distinction.—In this call are to be distinguished these things: the historical narrative concerning Christ, the command to believe, the interdiction of unbelief, the promise of eternal life made to believers, the threatening of damnation to the unbelieving. And if any one does not believe, the issue of this call is condemnation, and expressly for this reason, because he does not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3: 18.) But this issue in itself is not intended by God, but follows by accident through the fault of man. —Moreover, this outward call — necessarily requires antecedent to itself these things; the promise and mission of the Son (formerly future, now past), and redemption, that is, the payment of a price to atone for sins, and God rendered so placable as to require no other sacrifice for the sins of any man, content with this only most perfect one, and that for the reconciliation of men there be no need of any other satisfaction, any other merit for them, provided (what in remedies must be done) there be an application of this common and salutary medicine. If this redemption is not supposed to be a common blessing bestowed on all men, the indiscriminate and promiscuous preaching of the gospel, committed to the apostles to be exercised among all nations, will have no foundation in truth. But since we abhor to say this, it ought to be seen to how their assertions agree with the most known and lucid principles, who unqualifiedly deny that Christ died for all. Nor here will it be enough to assert such a sufficiency of redemption as could be enough; but it is altogether such as is enough, and such as God and Christ have considered enough. For otherwise the gospel command and promise are destroyed. For how from a benefit, sufficient indeed, but not designed for me by a sincere intention, can the necessity of believing that it belongs to me be deduced? What, then, shall we call this redemption? This redemption is in the new world what creation is in the old: to wit, as the creation of man is not the image of God, but is that foundation without which the image of God could not have place in him; so, also, redemption is no part of the image of God, but is that in which is founded the whole exercise of the prophetic and kingly offices of Christ, and his priestly intercession. But care must be taken not to carry this comparison too far. This redemption is the payment of a price due for us captives, not that we should go forth from captivity at all events, but that we should be able and be bound to go forth; and in fact we should go forth if we would believe in the Redeemer, acknowledge his benefit, and thoroughly become members of him as the Head. And, therefore, upon whatever man we fall, to him we are the messengers and publishers of this salutary grace (saving, however, to believers only), from the very office of piety and charity.” “The Lord even merited grace for all men; but not for all men that grace which depends on particular election. What then? That which is promised on condition of faith. For certainly to all men is promised remission of sins and eternal life if they believe. Here, therefore, it appears that a conditional remission of sins and salvation belong to all, but not a promise to give strength and excite the actions by which that condition is fulfilled. For these things men are bound by the power of a divine command to perform themselves; and they who are not able to do this, are not able through their own fault.” “Christ merited the favor of God for all, to be actually obtained if they believe. — This his favor God declares in common in the word of the gospel.” Christ died for all in regard to the merit and sufficiency of the ransom, for believers only in regard to the application and efficacy. In support of which very sentiment many testimonies of the fathers and schoolmen, and more recent doctors of the church, can be cited when there is need.” “He who despises the offering of Christ made on the cross loses all the right which he might have had in it, and thereby aggravates damnation to himself: — and the gospel, which in itself is a savor of life unto life, becomes to the unbelieving a savor of death unto death, by accident, through their own fault.” Among the propositions which Martinius pronounces false are the following: “Christ died in no sense for them that perish;” and, “The decree of particular election or reprobation of certain persons, cannot consist with the universality of Christ’s death.”* [footnote * Acts of Synod, Part II. p. 133-139.]

Henry Isselburg, another delegate from Bremen, says, “Such is the worth and virtue of the passion, death, and merit of Christ, that, by itself and in its own nature, it is abundantly sufficient to atone for and take away all the sins of all men, and to obtain and confer on all and each, without exception, reconciliation with God, grace, righteousness, and eternal life. And therefore the remedy of sin and death, our Lord Jesus Christ, is proposed and offered by the preaching of the gospel, not to certain persons only, or to those alone who are to be saved, but to the elect and reprobate indiscriminately; and all without distinction are invited to a participation or fruition of it, and to eternal life thereby; and all and each are sincerely and seriously commanded to believe in Christ, to live to him, and to come to the acknowledgment of the truth; and they who do not believe in the name of the Son of God are justly condemned. In this sense Christ is rightly said to have died sufficiently for all, as all who believe in him and seek his aid are able and bound to obtain reconciliation, remission of sins, and the inheritance of eternal life; as the sins of no mortal are so great that the sacrifice of Christ cannot suffice to atone for them; as not one of the human race is alien from him in the same sense and degree that Satan and the evil angels are. And this is the will and intention of God from eternity, that the death of Christ should be sufficient for all in such a sense and degree, that God can require no other sacrifice or satisfaction for the sins of men but that one alone, to atone for every evil (permanent impenitence and the sin against the Holy Ghost excepted); and on the other hand, that he may account and esteem it in the highest degree sufficient to merit every salutary good, and that there may be no need of any other merit for men. Wherefore no one of the reprobate can be condemned and perish for want of the death of Christ, or because there was not in him a sufficient remedy against destruction, but each one through his own fault entirely.”* [footnote * Acts of Synod, Part II. p. 141, 142.]

Ludovicus Crocius, the other delegate from Bremen, says, “So great is the worth, price, power, value, and sufficiency of the death of Christ, that it wants nothing at all to the purpose of meriting, acquiring, and obtaining reconciliation with God and remission of sins for all men and every man. It was the counsel, aim, and intention, not only of God the Father in delivering the Son to death, but of the Son also in dying, to acquire, obtain, and merit, by that most precious death and passion, for all and each of human sinners, that if they repent and believe in Christ when they become capable of instruction, they may be able to be reconciled to God and receive remission of sins. Christ having suffered and died according to his own and his Father’s counsel, did by his death and passion merit most sufficiently for all and each of human sinners, that if they only repent and believe, they may be able to be reconciled to God, or be restored to his favor and bosom. This doctrine, as being most true as being agreeable to the Scriptures, to the nature of the thing, to the confession of the church (and the church of Bremen expressly), to the better and more common sentiment of the fathers, and of the theologians both ancient and modern, is necessarily (as I believe) to be uncorruptly and sacredly retained and defended in the church of God, as well for the glory of God (which is so illustrated that his truth in calling, his equity in commanding, his justice in threatening, appear to all who seriously contemplate the Scriptures) as for the edification, growth, and consolation of the called in true faith and piety, and finally, for the salutary avoiding and refutation of divers heresies, which like rocks surround this doctrine.”* [footnote, *Acts of Synod, Part II. p. 150, 151.]

Edward D. Griffin, An Humble Attempt to Reconcile the Differences of Christians Respecting the Extent of the Atonement, (New York, Printed by Stephen Dodge, 1819), 362-367.

Credit to Tony for the find.

For confirmation of Griffin, see: Godfrey, W.R. Tensions Within International Calvinism: The Debate on the Atonement at the Synod of Dort, 1618-1619. Ph.D diss., Stanford University, 1974; and: Thomas, G.M.,The Extent of the Atonement: A Dilemma for Reformed Theology from Calvin to the Consensus, UK: Paternoster: 1997.

PRIMARY SOURCE:

Effectual Redemption:

A sum of the Treatise, concerning the Redemption of the Church by Christ, and the certainty of our Predestination and salvation, comprised in twenty nine positions.

5. And although there were more Israelites which were besieged of the enemies then Jews; yet not they but only these were delivered: so though there be much more Reprobate then Elect; yet the Deliverance made by Christ did not appertain to the Reprobate, but to the Elect only; so that the Prophet truly admiring spake thus, “I

6. For Christ, according to the purpose of his Father, for the Elect only, that is, for those who according to the eternal Election should believe in him, was born, suffered and died, and rose again, and makes intercession at the right hand of his Father. 335-336.

25. Christ according to the purpose, of both his Father’s and his own will, neither prayed nor suffered but for the Elect only: which is proved fully by many places of Scripture. Girolamo Zanchius, Speculum Christianum or A Christian Survey for the Conscience, (London: Printed by George Eld, 1614), 335-336, 344.

The Sum of the fourth Chapter of the Tractate touching Christ our Advocate contained in four propositions.

Christ is the Advocate of the elect only, & (that) of all which have been from the beginning of the world, and shall be to the end.

2. Christ also is the propitiation only for the sins of the elect of the whole word; therefore is he their advocate only. So the Church of Smyrna to all the parishes of Paul “saith, Christ did suffer for the salvation of all the World which are to be saved: but the Elect only are saved.” So Ambrose. To. 2. de fide ad Gratianum. lib. 4.c.1. If though does not believe, he descended not for thee, he suffered not for thee. Therefore he suffered only for the believers.

3 The (world) is sometimes taken for the whole World, and all men, as well as Elect as Reprobate; sometime for the more special part, to wit the Elect; sometime for the worse part of the World, that is, the Reprobate. The Author also of the book de vocatione Gentium. lib. 1.c.3. does declare by examples of many Scriptures often-times for a part of the Earth, the whole Earth, for a part of the World the whole World for a part of men all men to be nominated; and this as well touching the wicked as the godly. Therefore when he says, that “Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world,” we are not enforced by the name of (the whole World) to understand universally all men.

4. There is a difference between the work of our redemption, and the force (or fruit) of our redemption: for the first is once done; the other is eternal, extending itself as well to them which were from the beginning of the World, even before the work of our redemption was accomplished, as to them who after the work of redemption effected shall be to the end of the World. Hilasmos is properly the efficacy of redemption & propitiation; nothing therefore does let, but that Christ has been and is perpetually the Atonement for the sins even of them which were elected, even from the beginning of the world. Girolamo Zanchius, Speculum Christianum or A Christian Survey for the Conscience, (London: Printed by George Eld, 1614), 345-347.

Mankind redeemed:

1) I. The gospell, what it is.

Concerning the gospell therefore, according to the signification received and used in the church, we beleeve that it is nothing else but the heavenly doctrine concerning Christ, preached by Christ himselfe and the apostles, and contained in the bookes of the Newe testament, bringing the best and most gladsome tidings to the world, namely, that mankinde is redeemed by the death of Iesus Christ, the onely, begotten Sonne of God. So that there is prepared for al men, if they repent and beleeve in Iesus Christ, a free remission of al their sinns, salvation, and eternall life. Wherefore it is fitlie called of the Apostle: ‘The gospel of our salvation’. Source: Girolamo Zanchi De religione christiana Fides – Confession of Christian Religion, Edited by Luca Baschera and Christian Moser, (London: Brill, 2007), 253.

Conditional election:

1) VII. Everie one ought stedfastlie to beleeve he is elect in Christ, yet we may be more assured by the feeling of our faith in Christ.

Hence it is manifest, although no man in generall ought to exempt himself out of the number of the elect, sith the scripture doeth not so, but rather stedfastlie to trust that, when he is called to Christ, he is called according to the eternall decree and election of God. Yet, if any man will be more assured of his certaine election, he must run to his faith and the witnes of his conscience, whether he perceive that he truely beleeveth in Christ and whether he carrie a sincere love towards God and his neighbor. Yea, if he finde himself herein not altogether soundlie and thoroughlie setled, yet let him not desparre, but desire of God that he will helpe his unbeleefe, hoping that he may in time be better assured. Source: Girolamo Zanchi De religione christiana Fides – Confession of Christian Religion, Edited by Luca Baschera and Christian Moser, (London: Brill, 2007), 141-142.

CLASSIC SECONDARY SOURCE:

Hypothetical universalism and conditional election:

1) Thirdly therefore consider we the constant Doctrine of Divines, not that reprobates are bound to believe, but that all that hear the Gospel are bound to believe: but in what sense? Piscator says, as I remember, that the thing, which all such are bound to believe, is the Gospel; according to that Mar. 1. “Repent ye and believe the Gospel.” Now to believe the Gospel is one thing, the sum whereof is this, “That Jesus Christ came unto the world to save sinners;” but to believe in Christ is another thing, which yet this Author distinguishes not, though it appears by the course of his argumentation, that he draws to this meaning, and that in a particular sense, which is this, “to believe that Christ died for them;” as appears expressly in the latter end of this Section. And no marvel if this Author carry himself so confidently in this, being, as he is, armed with such confidence. But I am glad that in one place or other, he springs his meaning, that we may have the fairer flight at him, to pull down his pride, and sweep away his vain confidence: though we deal upon the most plausible argument of the Arminians, and which they think insoluble. My answer is; first, Look in what sense Arminius says Christ died for us, in the same sense we may be held to say (without prejudice to our Tenet) of absolute reprobation, that all who hear the Gospel are bound to believe that Christ died for them. For the meaning Arminius makes of Christ’s dying for us, is this, Christ died, for this end, that satisfaction being made for sin, the Lord now may pardon sin, upon what condition he will; which indeed is to die for obtaining a possibility of the redemption of all, but for the actual redemption of none at all.

Secondly, But I lift not to content myself and this; therefore, I farther answer, by distinction of the phrase dying for us, that we may not cheat ourselves by the confounding of things that differ. To die for us, or for all, is to die for our benefit, or for the benefit of all: Now these benefits are of a different nature, whereof some are bestowed upon man only conditionally (though for Christ’s sake) and they are the pardon of sin and Salvation of the Soul, and these God does confer only upon the condition of faith and repentance. Now I am ready to profess, and that, I suppose, as out of the mouth of all our Divines, that every one who hears the Gospel (without distinction between Elect and Reprobate) is bound to believe that Christ died for him, so far as to procure both the pardon of his sins, and the salvation of his soul, in case he believe and repent. But there are other benefits, which Christ by his obedience has merited for us, namely, the benefit of faith and repentance…

Now I demand from this Author can say truly, that tis the constant opinion of our Divines, that all who hear the Gospel, whether elect or Reprobate, are bound to believe that Christ died to procure them faith and repentance. Nay does any Arminian at this day believe this, or can he name any Arminian that does avouch this? Now does himself believe this? If he does not, if he cannot show any Arminian that does, with what face can he charge this opinion upon us, as if we should extend the obligation to believe, much farther then the Arminians doe, whereas usually they criminate us, for not extending it so far as we should…

And here first I observe, Zanchi is not charged to maintain, that every hearer of the Gospel, is bound to believe, that he is elect in Christ unto faith and repentance, but only to salvation: that puts me in good heart, that Zanchi & I shall shake hands of fellowship in the end, and part good friends. Secondly I distinguish between absolute-Election unto Salvation and election unto Salvation-absolute. The first only removes all cause on man’s part of election, the latter removes all cause on man’s part of salvation. By cause of salvation I mean only a disposing cause, such as faith, repentance, and good works are, as whereby (to express it in the Apostle’s phrase) we are “made partakers of the inheritance of the Saints of light.” Now albeit Zanchi maintains as we do, that all the elect are absolutely elected unto salvation, there being no cause on man’s part of his election, as we learned: yet neither Zanchi nor we maintain that God does elect any unto salvation absolute, that is to bring him to salvation, without any disposing of him thereunto by faith and repentance. Now to accommodate that opinion of Zanchi, I say it may have a good sense, to say that every hearer is bound to believe, both that Christ died to procure salvation for him, in the case he do believe, and that God ordained that he should be saved, in case he do believe; where belief is made the condition only of salvation, not of the Divine ordination; and the confusion of these by the Arminians, does usually make then confident and insolent, and in a word, Magnas Tragaedias excitare. But take away the confusion of things that differ, their combs are cut, their locks are shorn, and they are bit as another man. Now having showed in what sense every hearer is bound to believe that Christ died for him, and in what sense not, let us consider of what worth this Author’s arguments are, breathing nothing but smoke and fire, I will not say, like the great potan, but like fell dragon; but I nothing doubt we shall pair his nails, and make him calm enough ere we have done with him, so that a child shall be able enough to lead him.

1. The first is, because it is God’s will that they shall not believe, because “it is his peremptory will, that they shall have no power to believe.” I answer, it is indeed the will of God’s decree, that is, he has decreed not to give any Reprobate a justifying faith, but hence it follows not, that both Christ has merited, and God has ordained, that as many as do believe shall be saved. For this, as I take it, is not usually account by our Divines a justifying faith, but rather it comes within the compass of such a faith, as is commonly counted faith historical…

William Twisse, The Riches of God’s Love unto the Vessels of Mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the Vessels of Wrath (Oxford, 1653), 1:153-155.

Davenant: Each Man Bound to Believe he is Elect:

His second reason [Davenant’s opponnent] why absolute Reprobation is against God’s Justice, is, “Because it makes God to require faith in Christ of those to whom he has precisely in his absolute purpose denied both a power to believe, and a Christ to believe in.” And Zanchi says, “That every man is bound to believe that he is chosen in Christ to salvation,” &c. I hold it improper to say that God commands or binds any man to believe his own Predestination or Election, though some learned Divines spake in that manner. My reason is, because we are bound by way of command to believe that only which the Prophets and Apostles were bound to preach unto us: Now God’s ministers never had, neither now have, any commission to preach the Predestination of this or that singular person unto any man, though they are bound in the judgment of charity to exclude no singular person out of the number of the Elect. That which the Ministers of the Gospel require of us for the attaining of salvation is faith in Christ: and that which they command us concerning Predestination or Election, is not the immediate believing of it as an Article of faith which they have in commission to preach unto us, but the doing of those things from whence a posteriori, the Spirit of God bearing witness unto our spirit, we come to have a comfortable and lively persuasion or assurance of our Adoption and Predestination: So that this persuasion, assurance, or believing of a man’s singular Election,is rather Solatium then mandatum; a comfort which God by his Holy Spirit working on those who endeavor to live a sober, just and godly life, then a command which God by his Ministers enjoins this or that man particularly to believe. John Davenant, Animadversions Written By the Right Reverend Father in God, John, Lord Bishop of Sarisbury, upon a Treatise intitled “God’s love to Mankind,” (London: Printed for Iohn Partridge, 1641), 254-255. [Some spelling modernized.]

MODERN SECONDARY SOURCE:

G. Michael Thomas quoting Zanchi:

Zanchi on God’s Conditional Will:

1) It is granted that he seems to wish many things absolutely, others conditionally, in fact however, if it is spoken of properly, all things whatever God wills he wills absolutely and simply. Consequently all that he wills is done. For whatever he is said to will conditionally refers to the revelation of his will. For there is no conditional will of God.” “De Natura Dei-The Will of God,” [p., 93.]

Christ died only for the elect:

1) Christ according to the plan and will of the Father, neither prayed nor suffered except for the elect. [p., 96.]

2) The elect alone are saved… therefore God wills simply to save only them, and for them alone Christ died and for them alone he intercedes. [p., 96.]

3) regarding the plan and counsel of the Lord, and the eternal will of God, he died for the elect alone. “Commentary on Ephesians,” [p., 96.]

4) It cannot be said that it was properly and simply the will of God that Christ should die for the salvation of all… and… that Christ, according to the Father’s plan died for all… sufficiently. [p., 96.]

Christ died for all men:

1) It is not false that Christ died for all men, regarding the conditional will: namely, if they want to be partakers of his death by faith. For the passion of Christ is offered to all in the Gospel. No-one is excluded from it unless he excludes himself. [p., 96.]

2) We are ordered to believe the gospel, and the gospel both assumes that we have been redeemed through Christ and proclaims that we have been predestined in Christ, so we are commanded to believe simply that we have been predestined in Christ from eternity to obtain redemption. [p., 98.]

3) Those who, looking at the revealed will of God, teach that God both wills that all be saved, and that Christ died for the salvation of all, cannot be condemned. “Confessio,” [p., 102.]

Source: G. Michael Thomas, The Extent of the Atonement: A Dilemma for Reformed Theology from Calvin to the Consensus, (Paternoster: UK, 1997).

Rollock:

Special redemption (sample):

1) And wherefore died Christ; was it to redeem us from persecution, or crosses in this world? No, the Lord died that he might redeem us from sin with his precious blood; and Paul (to the Corinthians) maketh mention of that triumph that the Church shall have when the Lord Jesus shall come, ” O death where is thy sting?” Then she shall glory that she is redeemed from sin, and from offending of God. Robert Rollock, “The Thirteenth Sermon on Psalm 80,” in Selected Works, 1:481.

2) And, if thou wilt repent thee, I assure thee, though thou wert the greatest dinner that ever was, thou shalt have mercy; and, therefore, if thou hast gone long on in din, yet even for God’s cause at last take up thyself; and I promise thee exceeding mercy in that bloody sacrifice of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath died both for thee, and me, and all penitent sinners. To him, therefore, with the Father and Holy Spirit, be all honour and glory for evermore. Amen. Robert Rollock, “The Resurrection of Christ,” in Select Works, 2:427.

3) Think not that ever thy sins shall be forgiven thee, without the shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ. And either thou must die, or have part in the death of the Mediator. The end of his suffering was the perfect abolishing and undoing of the sins of the elect, ye may read in the ninth chapter to the Hebrews. Robert Rollock, “The Passion of Christ,” Selected Works, 2:221.

4) Now, Brethren, and if ye make again the words well, ye shall see a great difference betwixt the prayer that Christ made, and betwixt the Prayer of the faithful in the world: When we pray for others, our prayer is confused: we cannot separate the Reprobate from the Elect: we pray for all together, good and evil, because we know not who is chosen, and who is reprobate and cast away. Then, we pray for the Elect, and for the Kirk, our prayer is but confused and general: we cannot pray for every particular man, or every chosen one, because we know them not: but generally we recommend unto God the whole Kirk: this is the manner of our prayer. Bt it is far otherwise in this prayer which the Lord makes for his Disciples, and for the Chosen. The Lord prays for his Elect, but he prays not for the Reprobate: and particularly hereafter he excludes Judas; because the Lord knew who was elect, and who was reprobate. Then again, when he prays for the Elect, he prays not confusedly, as we do: but in his eye is set upon everyone of the chosen particularly. There was never one of the chosen, that was that time that Christ was in the world, or was since the beginning of the world, or shall be to the end of the world, but the LORD prayed for everyone of them particularly: he prayed for me, and he prayed for thee, and he saw everyone pf us before the beginning of the world, and now he recommends us to the Father. Think not, that the Lord Jesus prayed confusedly, and generally for all men: no, he prayed particularly for the Chosen: there is not one Chosen, but the eye of the Lord is upon them all. Why? The Lord knew who was chosen: No, there was not one little one, yea, the poorest upon the face of the earth, of the chosen number, but in that time he had his eye upon them, that the holy Spirit might flow to them out of his death. When the Lord died, ye must not think that he died for all: he died for some: he died not for any reprobate: he separated the Elect from the Reprobate, by virtue of his death. When he offered himself to the death, his eye was set upon every one of the Elect that was in the world: and when he was going to death, he said in his heart, I will die for this sinner, and this sinner, &c. His eye was upon every one of them. Paul to the Galatians, Chap. 2. vers 20. knew this well: The life I live now in the flesh (says the Apostle,) I live by faith in the Son of God, who has loved me, and given himself, not for the Chosen in general, but particularly for me. Well then, says Pul, this ways that he died for him particularly? And the Lord said before his death, I have a particular eye to Paul. And howbeit he was an enemy to Christ, at that time, persecuting him in his members, yet he says, I will die for Paul. Then every one of us should say, as Paul said, Not generally the Lord loved the world, the Lord gave himself for the Elect: but particularly the Lord loved me, and the Lord loved thee; and the Lord died for thee, and died for me; and the Lord had an eye to me in his death, and a respect to me in his prayer &c. This particular respect which the Lord had to me, furnished great comfort, when I consider it: for if the Prince had a respect to any particular person, he would be greatly comforted: and should not this particular respect of the LORD JESUS, King of all kings, comfort us? No, there is not one Chosen in this life, but the Son of God,i n his death, had a particular respect unto us, without regard who got it: No, he knew well to whom the last spark, or drop, of that blood should appertain. Robert Rollock, Five and Twentie Lectures Upon the Last Sermon and Conference of our Lord Jesus Christ, With his Disciples immediately before his Passion, (Edinburgh: Printed by Andro Hart, 1616), 214-215.

Sufficient ransom and redemption for the sins of the world:

1) No man’s death was ever so powerful as the death of the Lord Jesus. All the emperors in the world had no such power in their death as Christ had. It testifies of a power to purge the sins of man. What emperor’s blood ransomed sinful man, or could purge him from his sins? What water came there ever from an emperor’s heart, which washed away the corruption of thy nature? Now, to speak it in a word, this blood and this water testified of a power that flowed from the death of Christ to the remission of sins, and the washing of our foul nature; with the blood broke out remission of sins, and with the water burst out regeneration. Yet, to make this plainer; by the blood of Christ, (which is the blood of God, God and man in one,) we are ransomed from death and hell, the guiltiness of all our sins is taken away, the punishment with the guilt is taken away, hell is taken away, the justice of God, that required our blood, is satisfied by that blood of Christ, that wrath that would have sucked up thy blood, (it would not have left one drop of thy blood unsucked,) and that wrath which cannot be satiate without blood, is satiate by the only blood of Christ. Robert Rollock, “The Passion of Christ,” in Select Works, 2:282.

2) So, the ministers have these two things enjoined unto them, to preach the word, and to minister the sacraments. We hear nothing spoken here of offering of a sacrifice, either bloody or unbloody, or of a priesthood; and, no question, if there had been such a thing, or, at least, if it had been a matter of such importance, and so necessary, as the pope and his shavelings say, the Lord would 1 altogether have misknown it, and passed it over with silence, but he would have spoken something of it to his apostles; so, it is but a folly and vanity to think, that since Christ hath once offered himself a propitiatory sacrifice for the redemption of the world, that now there remains any propitiatory sacrifice in the church. The Lord hath put an end to them all by his death and sacrifice; there is no priesthood committed either to the apostles before, or to the ministers now, but that where, by the preaching of the word, they offer the souls of men and women in a sacrifice to the Lord. Away with that devilish sacrifice of the mass, whereby the pope and his clergy deceive the world, making men believe that daily they offer up Christ again, as a propitiatory sacrifice to the Father, for the sins of the quick and the dead. No; there is no propitiatory sacrifice now left to the kirk. That sacrifice which the Lord once offered upon the cross is sufficient and perfect enough to take away the sins of the world. Robert Rollock, “The Resurrection of Christ,” in Select Works, 2:661.

3) Only believe in that blood, and thou shalt be saved. Rom. 3. vers. 25. “God has set forth Christ to be a reconciliation through faith in his blood.” Away with merits paltry; fie on thee and thy merits both. Thou thinks thou can not be saved but by thy merits, as though the blood of Christ were not able to redeem thee without merits: away with such vanity. The blood of Christ is sufficeient to redeem ten thousand worlds; yea ten thousand millions of world. Robert Rollock, Lectures Upon the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians, (London: Imprinted by Felix Kyngston, dwelling in Pater-noster row, over against the sign of the checker, 1603), 62.

4) Then after to let us see the preciousness of this blood, and the necessity of this redemption by his blood, he fell out into a fair and high description of the son of God, setting him out in many points of his glory, partly as he is God, the son of God only; partly as he is both God and man the mediator, the Lord Jesus Christ. Of the which whole points of his glory, we concluded he blood of such a glorious personage, must be exceeding precious; and so it behooved that this blood should ransom us, and ransom the world. Yea, if we look to this preciousness of it, it is not only sufficient to ransom a world, but to ransom ten thousand worlds. Robert Rollock, Lectures Upon the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians, (London: Imprinted by Felix Kyngston, dwelling in Pater-noster row, over against the sign of the checker, 1603), 88.

Redemption of man:

1) Thou thinks it nothing but surely it is wonderful matter, if ye consider it rightly: so then there is a wide step, a strange step, that steps down from his glory, wherein he stood equal with his Father. Yet he goes another step downward, “being found in the habit of a man:” he to whom all other creatures gives obedience, of his own will becomes obedient to his father. Wherein stands this obedience? Not in doing only, but in dying, What death? The death of he Cross, and execrable death: the bitterest death that ever was: nay, never man died so bitter a death as Christ died. All the death of men and Angels is not comparable to that death of Jesus Christ, that he died to redeem sinful man: There is his humiliation. Robert Rollock, Lectures Upon the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians, (London: Imprinted by Felix Kyngston, dwelling in Pater-noster row, over against the sign of the checker, 1603),58-59.

2) But yet let us mark the words betters: I have glorified thee, Father: that is, I have put and end to that work thou gavest me, the fair work of the redemption of man, the fairest work that ever was: yea, fairer than the creation of the world. Robert Rollock, Five and Twentie Lectures Upon the Last Sermon and Conference of our Lord Jesus Christ, (Edinburgh, Printed by Andro Hart, 1619), 195.

Read the rest of this entry »

The following is an extract from a seminary term paper, A Brief History of Deviant Calvinism

Richard Baxter, unlike John Owen and the Protestant Scholastics, maintained that faith is not directly purchased by the blood of Christ for the elect. He says, “faith is a fruit of the death of Christ, (and so is all the good that which we do enjoy): But not directly as it is satisfaction to justice.”¹ For Baxter, faith, while it is a fruit of the redemption wrought by Christ, it is a “remote” gift, given by Christ as Lord, not as legislator simply considered.² And by way of counter-examples, he cites other gifts, such as the gift of gospel preaching, of miracles, of tongues, of apostles, of evangelists, and so forth. None of these is considered a direct or necessary purchase of the work of Christ. They are only more remotely gifts given on account of Christ.³ Here Baxter is on firmer ground, for the key proof-text adduced to show that faith has been directly purchased for the elect by Christ is Phil 1:29. The relationship between the grant to believe and Christ is not exactly stated. And given the syntax, if it can be affirmed that our suffering for Christ is not a direct purchase of the atonement, then neither is the grant to believe. Thus, one cannot say that faith was directly purchased for all those whom Christ redeemed. Rather, says Baxter, faith is a gift which is an added donum, yet still inseparable and grounded in the work of Christ. For Baxter the necessary connecting link between faith in Christ and the work of Christ is the decree of God.

_____________________

¹Richard Baxter, Universal Redemption of Mankind, Stated and Cleared by the Late Learned Mr Richard Baxter, (London: John Salsubury, 1694), 42, 425-6, and 430.

²Ibid., 426.

³Ibid.