Baxter seems to have believed that whilst those who are ultimately saved, are saved by the sovereign and gracious purpose of the Almighty--in other words, by Divine election--there is a provision made by the mediation of Christ, sufficient for the wants of all men, and of which all men, if they pleased, could avail themselves; and in this respect his views do not materially differ from those expressed by Dr. Edward Williams, in his treatise on _The Divine Equity and Sovereignty_; or from those taught by Andrew Fuller in several of his publications. A somewhat similar _via media_ was pursued by Amyraut, the French Divine. Yet it is, I believe, not an uncommon impression that Baxter went beyond this, and supposed that whilst some are elected to eternal life by a special Divine decree, others are saved through a general provision of Divine grace. I do not pretend to have read all Baxter’s works: but in those with which I am acquainted, I find no trace of such an opinion, neither does it appear in Orme’s careful summary of Baxter’s theological writings. It is a curious fact, however, that an idea of the kind attributed to the Puritan was expressed, at the Council of Trent, by a Papist, Ambrosius Catarinus, of Siena,[538] and that a similar idea is exhibited in the writings of Fowler, the Latitudinarian.[539] Baxter did not adopt the doctrine of imputation held by Thomas Goodwin and John Owen. He remarks:-- “Most of our ordinary Divines say, that Christ did as properly obey in our room or stead, as He did suffer in our stead, and that in God’s esteem, and in point of law, we were in Christ’s obeying and suffering, and so, in Him we did both perfectly fulfil the commands of the law by obedience, and the threatenings of it by bearing the penalty; and thus (say they) is Christ’s righteousness imputed to us (viz.)--His passive righteousness for the pardon of our sins and delivering us from the penalty, His active righteousness for the making of us righteous, and giving us a title to the Kingdom--and some say the habitual righteousness of His human nature, instead of our own habitual righteousness--yea, some add the righteousness of the Divine nature also. This opinion (in my judgment) containeth a great many of mistakes.”[540]