Some Differences as to the Doctrine of the Covenants

44 SCOTTISH THEOLOGY .

( LECT. II. Perhaps no part of the old covenant theology is more remarkable, more precious, than the way in which you find pointed out the promises made to Christ Himself

as Mediator, and , in connection with these , the blessed doctrine of the administration of grace - blessings, in His hand . We hear it said ofttimes that our theology puts Christ in the background. It is not Jesus , but doctrine , with Scottish Presbyterians. I shall have to speak of this again . But if they who speak thus ignorantly would glance into Gillespie or Boston , no prejudice could keep them from seeing almost on any page how entire is their mistake. Why, Christ is everywhere with these old teachers. The Person of Christ circles like a life-pulse through every doctrine and aspect of doctrine . I may add, though I have not time to enter into the subject, that in the Scottish doctrine of the Covenants you note some differences. Dickson and Rutherford spoke of both the covenant of redemption , and the covenant of grace or recon ciliation : by the former, they meant the covenant be tween the Father and the Son ; by the latter, a distinct and subordinate covenant based on the former between God and His people , under which , in fact, the blessings of redemption are administered : the former, so far as man was concerned, absolute ; the latter having as its condition faith . Boston and Gib refused the distinc tion between the covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace , asserting that there is no such dis tinction in the Bible , the covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace in their view being only two names of the same thing, ' which in respect of Christ may be called a covenant of redemption , for He alone

LECT . II . ]

THE ATONEMENT.

45 engaged to pay the price ; while in respect of man , it is a covenant of grace , as all to us comes freely.' The later divines saw some tendency in the earlier doc trine to Neonomianism , or , as the covenant of recon ciliation was external in the visible church , even a sort of bar to immediate dealing with the Saviour, and entrance by an appropriating faith into living union with Him . It is perhaps a difference in the same line when the earlier theologians say : 6" The covenant was made with Christ, not as a public person representing many , but as an eminent chosen person , chosen out

from among His brethren ; ' and the later teachers : 6 * Jesus Christ, the party contracting on man's side in the covenant of grace , is to be considered as the last or second Adam , head and representative of a seed . ' The question is sufficiently intricate, and I do not

believe there is any real difference between the two ; only in the one case the vicarious was brought more distinctly out, in the other the representative.

But to return from this long digression, it was , as I have said , a real satisfaction to the justice of God , Christ offered as the substitute and representative of His people. He obeyed in their room and stead . He bore the curse in their room and stead . By His obedience unto death , He acquired for them , under His covenant with the Father, law -rights to eternal life ; so that, while in respect of themselves this life was all of grace , in respect of Christ it was due under the law

covenant to which He had bowed Himself. 6 As in Adam we sinned , it was said , so in Christ we satisfied .' Rutherford makes the believer say : ' I was condemned , I was judged, I was crucified for sin , when my surety

46 SCOTTISH THEOLOGY .

[ LECT . II . Christ was condemned,, judged , and crucified for my sins . I have paid all , because my Surety has paid

all.'

I may add that the old Scotch divines cling to the view that Christ not merely suffered, but bore the same sufferings in kind which were due to His people . While, in their view , it was the divine dignity of Christ's person that gave such infinite worth to His atoning work , they did not regard the nature or the measure of the sufferings as unimportant. Once and again they protest against the bold statement, that a drop of Christ's blood is enough to wash mountains of sins away . 6 There is a necessity to hold , ' says Brown , that6 Christ suffered the same in substance that the elect were liable to suffer ; the same curse and death , the same punishment in its essential ingredients . The matter is explained at large, and not irreverently. I confess for myself, that I think there is a a tendency in our day to slide away from these views, which is not true to the Christian experience of the past, and which may endanger the idea of proper expiation more seriously than we think .

III . But further, and more particularly, in regard to the EXTENT of Redemption , or the extent of the merits of Redemption .

It is implied in what has been already said , that Christ, in some altogether peculiar sense , was the Saviour of His people . But was there no sense in which , in some other improper sense , He might have been said to die also for others ? Well , the subject is largely discussed . It is discussed by Rutherford , and