A89732:879
A discussion of that great point in divinity, the sufferings of Christ; and the…
A discussion of that great point in divinity, the sufferings of Christ; and the question about his righteousness active, passive : and the imputation thereof. Being an answer to a dialogue entitled The meritorious price of redemption, justification, &c. / By John Norton teacher of the church at Ipswich in New-England. Who was appointed to draw up this answer by the general court.A discussion of that great point in divinity, the sufferings of Christ; and the question about his righteousnesse active, passive : and the imputation thereof. Being an answer to a dialogue intituled The meritorious price of redemption, justification, &c. / By John Norton teacher of the church at Ipswich in New-England. Who was appointed to draw up this answer by the generall court.
London: printed by A.M. for Geo. Calvert, 1653
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
CHAP. III. Of the Dialogues distinction between Legal and Mediatorial Obedience.
CHAP. III. Of the Dialogues distinction between Legal and Mediatoriall Obedience.
Dialogu. IT is a necessary thing to observe a right difference between Christs Legal and Mediatorial obedience, which we have in part distinguished already, but for your further satisfaction I will again distinguish between them.
I grant that God required the Mediator to fulfil all righteousness, but yet his obedience to the Law of works, and his obedience to the Law of Mediatorship must be considered as done for several ends and uses.
I grant that God required the Mediator to fulfil all righteousnesse, but yet his obedience to the Law of works, and his obedience to the Law of Mediatorship must be considered as done for severall ends and uses.
Answ. The scope of this distinction is to take away merit from the Legal obedience of Christ, because the value of his obedience rising from the eminency of the person, and its acceptation from office, in denying it to be performed by Christ as God-man, or as Mediator: it is deprived both of value and acceptation, which are two of the three ingredients often fore-mentioned of meritorious obedience. Meritorious obedience which is always to be kept in mind requires the concurrence of three things, viz. the dignity of the person, such a kind of obedience, and Gods acceptation.