is and bring as a proof of this that Text of Isai 53. Who shall declare his generation But then upon second thoughts least the People should laugh at their Inconstancy they themselves revoke this second Creed and strive to get in all the Copies of it and procure an Edict from the Emperour which threatens all those that shall detain them Now indeed we may see here a very foolish inconstancy in these Hereticks and that they had a very ill hand at making Creeds to oblige all the World under the pain of an Anathema to believe such a thing at one time and the next day to disbelieve it themselves but this is nothing to the Orthodox Faith which stood always firm and unchangeable After the Authour has been spitting his Venom against the union of the three Persons he now begins to do the same against the union of Christ's Divinity with his humanity For he would have that upon supposition there are three persons in the same Individual nature that either the Nestorian or the Eutychian Doctrine was the true For says he there are but two ways imaginable in reason either Christ must be two Persons because he has two such different natures or he must have but one nature because he is but one Person But for all our Authours hast why can't we imagine a third way that he should be two Natures and but one Person This is as easy to imagine and I am sure as reasonable too For first It does not follow that because he has two Natures he must be two Persons for Nature and Personality are not reciprocal terms for there may be two or three or more Natures where there is but one Person The Athanasian Creed most excellently expresses this As the reasonable Soul and flesh is one Man so God and Man is one Christ There is the sensitive nature in Man as well as the rational there is the rational Soul one distinct substance united to the Body another distinct substance and yet these two so distinct Natures are but one Person Now what more contradiction does it imply that there should be a Personal Union between Divinity and Humanity than there does between Rationality and Sensibility If there be any more difficulty in one than the other it is this That in the former the union of the Divinity with the Humanity there is an union of two reasonable Natures which are distinct Persons of themselves as all rational Individuals are and therefore they must be as distinct Persons after the union as before But why so If they are united they are not distinct for all union is a negation of distinction or division Two single pieces or pounds of Gold are two distinct Substances or Bodies but if these be united by melting down into one they are still two pounds but yet they are but one Individual Body And so it is in the Union of all other Bodies Well but what is this to the Union of Spirits or rational Beings Yet it is something for if Spirits be united they must follow the Laws of Union as well as other Beings If they be united they must be one in something for to be one in nothing is no Union at all Now in the Union of the Divinity with the humanity wherein possibly can their Oneness consist but only in their personality Their Natures are most certainly distinct for Gods is one Nature and Mans is another and therefore if they be one in any thing it must be in their Personality Upon this Union they acquire an Oneness which they had not before and as the two distinct pounds of Gold upon their melting become one Individual piece which is the Oneness they gain so the Divinity and Humanity upon their Union gain one Individual Personality which is the Oneness they acquire Well but here are two rational Natures united which must have two Reasons and two Wills and therefore must be two Persons It does not therefore follow that because there are two Reasons and two Wills there must therefore be two Persons any more than it follows that a Man is three living Creatures from the Union of the Vegetative the Sensitive and the Rational Soul in his nature For as the Subordination of these Souls one to another make him but one Vivens so the Subordination of these rational Natures one to the other make them but one Person or rational Suppositum The Divine Nature is indeed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or governing Principle in the Union of the Godhead with the Humanity as the rational Soul is in the Union with the two other Souls and therefore though there are two Reasons and two Wills yet those of the Inferiour Nature are subordinate to the Superiour and therefore are determined by the operations of that Nor Secondly is it necessary that if he be one Person he should be but one Nature because Nature and Person are not reciprocal terms and because as we have already shewn that more Natures may be united into one Person for 't was the Person of the Godhead that took upon him the Humanity so that he has no other Personality than what he had from all eternity but yet he has another Nature than what he had from all eternity because he likewise took upon him our Nature which he had not from eternity but took it upon him at that time when he was conceived in the Womb of the Blessed Virgin Though he still continued one Person yet he had two Natures the Nature of God which he had from all eternity and the Nature of Man which he assumed at that particular time and this without any change but only in the manner of his subsisting which was before in the pure Glory of the Son of God and afterwards in the habit of our Flesh All the Properties of each Nature are as distinguishable now as before the Properties of the Humanity are incommunicable to the Divinity and those of the Divinity to the Humanity 'T is proper only to the Divinity to be the cause of all things to be immense eternal omnipresent c. and 't is proper only to the Humanity to have a beginning to be circumscribed in place to be passible c. If therefore they have these distinct and incommunicable Propertie they must have distinct Natures from which these Properties flow though they be united into one Person And thus I think I have answered every thing that is material in this Chapter and I could very willingly have done with it but only because it may be expected I should say something to those invidious Remarks he makes upon some of the first holy Councils for the Determinations they made in matters of Faith and the condemnation of Hereticks As to what he says about the Heresie of Nestorius 't is not worth considering but he has a little too grosly represented the matter of Eutyches which I must not pass over without a little Reflection He would insinuate that Eutyches was first
he does one thing with as great ease as another because the greatest thing he does is as far from setting his Omnipotent Power as the smallest his Power to act is infinitely greater than any Power to resist and though one thing may seem more difficult than another to us because we find their resistibility to be so much greater or less than our limited Power of acting yet God's Power is infinitely greater than the most difficult of them and therefore can do one as easily as the other It seems to us indeed that have a finite narrow understanding that can attend to and discern only a few things that are just before us very difficult to find out so many scatter'd Atoms that lie it may be in so many Millions of different places because we cannot discern different things lying in different places and therefore all such disorder confounds our understandings but God who is Omniscient and knows exactly all things every where nothing can lie disorderly to him he knows where every such Atom lies as well as when it possessed its place in the Organized Body and can with as great ease make them return to their former station as to make the new separated Soul go back to the Body that lies yet entire Nay 't is not so great an act of God's Power to range all this scattered matter together as to create another Body for the Soul to be united to for 't is possible that all this matter might be gathered together from never so many different places by a finite Power only and 't is not improbable to think God may do this by the Ministry of his holy Angels but 't is God alone that can create another Body and therefore this would be rather in our Authour's phrase to make God unaccountably exercise his Omnipotency because it would put God to the expence of a new Creation to make a Body to be united to the Soul when the old one would do as well His fourth Argument is against those that make it some advancement of the joys at the Resurrection that we shall be united to our old Bodies which will be like the joyful meeting and embracing of old Friends which he says will not be of old Friends but of old Enemies because of the War between the Flesh and the Spirit Rom. 7. and therefore the Soul cannot rejoice at her being united to her former Body 'T is true indeed that several Ancient and Modern Writers have made use of this as a Rhetorical Argument to set forth in some part the joy of that happy day and truly I think not without some reason For we find the Soul has a great love to the Body both by reason of its being so loth to part with it and because it is found to hanker after the Body after its separation which is the account which some give of Spectrums But besides we find in Men a secret love and esteem for every thing that has any relation to themselves they love their Relations as being born of the same stock they have an esteem for every thing belonging to their native Country they have an extraordinary kindness for their nutriculi Lares the House in which they were born and bred and this Love seems always greater after a considerable time of absence from them Now when a Mans Body is the most nighly related to him as being an essential part of himself he cannot but be more joyed to be united again to that which is so near to him than to see his native Country or the House he was born in after a long time of absence from him As for the enmity between the Flesh and the Spirit he mentions that is only an Enmity Metaphorically so called because all proper Enmity is between two rational beings which are endowed with free wills which the Soul and the Body are not nay that reluctancy of the sensual nature to the dictates of the understanding which is Metaphorically expressed by War or Enmity between the Flesh and Spirit that is very well appeased in the regenerate Man so that he has no reason to hate his Body for that especially now he has master'd it for these inward strugglings of the Flesh have made his Vertue greater to overcome them and therefore he may reasonably expect for this a greater Reward in proportion to his Vertue ENQUIRY II. What Changes or Additions latter Ages have made in Matters of Faith OUR Authour has been hitherto giving us a Hodge-podge of Arianism and Socinianism and some Heresie of his own which wants a Name and this he calls giving us an account What was the Gospel our Lord and his Apostles preached as necessary to Salvation which was the first Enquiry And now when he enters upon his second What Additions latter Ages have made in Matters of Faith one would expect that according to the Tenour of his Book he should give an account how the Doctrine of the Trinity came into the World what Platonick Notions gave rise to the Opinion of our Saviour's Divinity that Plato's Doctrine of the Logos came from the Greeks to the Hellenistical Jews and so from them to the Christians one would I say have expected something of this matter which is used to fill up the Books of the late Socinians and Atheists when they have a mind to blaspheme the ever Blessed Trinity But our Authour I find either wants Courage or Reading or something else to set upon this Enterprize and therefore contents himself only with a little nibbling at this Doctrine but turns the whole Current of his Argument against the Papists and their Innovations Indeed his Charge of Innovations seems to lie against the Orthodox in general but when he comes to make good his Challenge he shams us off with an Instance or two against the Popish Errours But let us consider what these Innovations are he so boldly charges us with 1. He says We extend the Empire of Faith as far as possible and this he proves very strenuously by that vast Army of new Doctrines of Faith which the School-men have got by the Bishop of Rome's setting up for an Oracle to declare that Matter of Faith which was before Matter of Curiosity by implicit Faith in the Church c. But what does all this stuff signifie to us of the Church of England or who else does he mean by this We If he means We Papists and so reckons himself one of that number his Brethren will give him little thanks for thus exclaiming against their Corruptions If he means We Protestants or Church of England here is not one Tittle of Proof of the Charge against us we abhorr all these Romish Corruptions as much as the Authour possibly can do We extend Faith no farther than the Holy Scripture does what that tells us we ought to believe that we readily do believe but do not take into our Belief anything but what the Scripture does expresly assert or but what may by manifest
the Center of a World from this consideration he cannot imagine that our great Creatour should be so greedy of a little of our corrupt breath as to purchase it with a fall from Heaven This would be to disgrace our Lord from the dignity of a Benefactor to the vileness of an unskilful Tradesman who buys vile ware and pays for it infinitely more than it is worth Indeed I have hardly patience to answer this abominable Blasphemy to see a foolish Philosopher thus horridly to affront his Creatour and in this witless Buffoonry to ridicule the infinite satisfaction of his blessed Redeemer because he cannot make it agree with his system of Physicks But pray let him consider that we do not think the dignity of our nature or the beauty of our World inclined God who has no respect of persons to work our Redemption this was only the effect of his infinite mercy which we can never enough admire and praise And besides what signifies the largeness and gloriousness of the Heavenly Bodies in comparison with Mens Immortal Souls The Sun is the most glorious Body we see and yet a Fly is a more noble Creature than that The sensitive Soul that this is endowed with advances its excellence far above any the most glorious inanimate being that can be imagined But the immortal Soul of one Man is of more dignity than all the Corporeal Creation and if there had been no other way to redeem Mens Souls that were lost but by the destruction of all the other Creation 't would not have been unbecoming the divine Wisdom to have destroyed all them to have redeemed these because these are of infinitely more value than they But it may be that the Authour thinks there are an infinite number of Worlds all stocked with rational Creatures of it may be much more dignity than we so that it was not worth God's while to take care of such insignificant Creatures as we are Now we know nothing of these great Bodies and for what use Providence designed them besides for the benefits we receive from them and therefore Men talk at random when they ascribe any other to them But supposing there were rational Creatures in ten Millions of Earths that were moving round their respective Suns must God less take care of our World because he has a great many more to take care of This is to attribute a foolish weakness to the Deity and to think it is with him as it is with some Parents who when they have a great number of Children do not love any particular Child so well as if they had but that alone or but fewer Certainly God bears a Fatherly Love to all his Creatures and will provide whatsoever is necessary for them 't is not his providing for innumerable other Creatures that can hinder him from providing for us his Omniscience cannot be distracted by innumerable Operations and his infinite Power and Love can and will do all things that are necessary for us So that if it be requisite to repair the forfeited Souls of Mankind that a Person of the Godhead should make an infinite satisfaction for sins against an infinite Majesty and which do deserve an infinite punishment 't is not the gloriousness of the other Worlds which should hinder him from doing it for his Fatherly compassion reaches to us as well as them and he would not stick to use these means for our Redemption if no other could effect it But the Authour says that then Christ has paid infinitely more than the ware was worth like an unskilful Tradesman as he calls him I shall not now dispute whether God could have pardoned the sins of the World any other way than by the blood of God 't is enough for us to know that God has done it only by these means and to be sufficiently thankful to him for it And when the Authour or any of his Party shall think fit to engage upon a dispute of satisfaction the Pens of those excellent Defenders of our Religion of late against Popery will not be silent in this dispute if they shall think fit to begin it though all the Tribe down from Servet to this Authour will not be able to shake any part of the Treatises on this subject by the most Excellent Grotius and the Bishop of Worcester But because the Authour here offers nothing but his bare assertion and because I have in part answered this objection already in the fifth Chapter I shall proceed to his next Argument which is That it is not supposable that our Lord should require a belief in his Divinity because it was not required of some of the first Embracers of Christianity such as Philip's Eunuch and the like who were baptized into the Christian Faith he says without any knowledge of his Divinity It is very certain we do not find in Scripture any set Form to be recited by all Persons to be baptized that declares an express belief in our Saviour's Divinity but such a Declaration has been the Custom of the Church in the most early times and therefore though the Scripture do not assert any such Declaration yet such a silence especially considering the compendious way of writing in the Authours of these Books cannot conclude that there was no such form used by them or that all that were to be baptized did not give an express assent to and belief in the Doctrine of the Trinity It is most certain they were baptized with a form of words which does imply that Doctrine viz. In the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost So that unless we will suppose that they were baptized into names which they did not understand which we cannot suppose any reasonable Men should they must understand the meaning and purport of these names and so have a belief in the person as well as in the Doctrine of our Saviour For how can we suppose but that when any new Converts to Christianity should see others baptized before them into these three names of Father Son and Holy Ghost they should never trouble themselves to know who they were If they were Jews they would by this be afraid of running into the Gentile Polytheism and would be sure to be well instructed in this matter for fear of Idolatry If they were Gentile Converts to hear this form without any farther Instruction they would be apt to think this was but to keep in their own Religion still and only to retrench the number of their Gods from 300 to 3 which would be still as much contradiction to the Principles of their Conversion as their former Tenets So that we must needs think that the Apostles did explain this form of Baptism to all that were baptized how suddenly soever and did inform them what these three Persons into whose names they were baptized were and how they were consistent with the unity of the Deity which would give them the full notion of the Doctrine of the
Nebuchadnezzar or Daniel who relates this matter understood by the Son of God was an Angel who from their nigh Conversation with God from the great Portion of Happiness and Glory he communicates to them and their so resembling him by their Purity and the Spiritualness of their Nature and from their living in Heaven with him like Children under the wing of their Parent from these and the like circumstances they were and not improperly called the Sons of God as we find in many places of Scripture as Psal 82. I said ye were Angels or the Children of the Most High So Job 1. 6. There was a day when the Sons of God or Angels presented themselves before the Lord. And the LXX translate this very place in Daniel by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the form of the Fourth was like the Angel of God So that we must grant That the Son of God here mentioned was an Angel of God But our Blessed Saviour was the Son of God in another manner than his for his Sonship is not founded upon any such Analogy as theirs is but upon the eternal generation of the Father for he being made so much better than the Angels as he hath by Inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they Heb. 1. 4. In short 't is impossible that our Saviour's Sonship should be such a Sonship as that of the Angels because the Apostle spends this whole Chapter to prove him a Person distinct from and above the nature of Angels and does besides set the Son of God in direct opposition to the Angels of God And of the Angels he saith c. v. 7. But unto the Son he saith c. v 8. When he bringeth in his first begotten into the world he saith Let all the Angels of God worship him v. 6. So that Christ's Sonship must be of another kind than that of the Angels or else there would be no ground for their contradistinction unless he was in a peculiar manner the Son of God in a supereminent extraordinary way not at all common to them The Authour having made these Remarks upon this Title of our Saviour The Son of God he proceeds to reckon up some others as the Messias or Christ Onely begotten Son of God which Characters he allows to speak a Person of unmeasurable Greatness a Person like his Emblem the Light so glorious that by our most intent view we cannot discover any thing of it but this That we cannot discover Now for all our Authour's haste one would imagine that something was discoverable in our Saviour by these Eulogies that God did design to manifest or discover something to us of him by these Revelations and not to make Revelations of things that were not revealable 'T is not to be expected indeed that by the help of Revelation we should dive into the Nature of our Saviour's eternal Essence for we are so far from a possibility of doing that that we are ignorant of the Essential Constitutions of the most inconsiderable Being we are conversant with But though we are ignorant of this yet we can tell when 't is revealed to us by God what kind of Nature our Saviour's is whether finite or infinite whether divine or humane The Gloriousness of his Nature does not so dazzle our Eyes as to make us confound distinct and express Idea's I have a certain though not an adequate Idea or Notion of God as a Being infinite incorporeal c. And when I am informed by Revelation tâ—at such a Person is that infinite incorporeal Being or that he has in such Revelation those Characters ascribed to him as are inseparable from the Divine Nature I must conclude That such a one is a Person of the Divine Nature such an infinite incorporeal c. Being which is my Notion of God Indeed the gloriousness of this Being keeps Men from discovering its Essence and from prying into its Nature but yet we may observe such Marks and Properties in it so as to have a distinct Conception of it from all other Beings in the World The Sun is a glorious Body and the more we strive to pry into its Constitution by gazing on it the more we are blinded and what then don 't we know the Sun when we see it for all this because our Eyes are so weak that we cannot stare into the Furnace of the Sun must we therefore take it for a Candle The Person of our Saviour is glorious and if it were a thousand times less glorious than it is I might not understand its Nature but when I am told that this Person is God that he is one of the Persons of the Divine Nature my Understanding tells me very clearly That all the marks and properties I have in my Mind of the Divine Nature must be attributed to this Person and though I understand nothing of his Essence or the precise modus of his Hypostasis yet I am sure he is that Being which I have a certain Idea of and which I call God So that 't is a great Fallacy in the Authour to say we don't know what our Saviour is because we cannot dive into his Essence for our discriminative Knowledge of one thing from another is not by discovering the Essences or internal Constitutions of them but by regarding their outward marks and properties and these every one has a Knowledge of for a Child knows a Rose from a Stone as well as a Philosopher though it knows not the Qualities and internal Constitutions of either Therefore when I am infallibly informed that such a Person is God I am infallibly assured he is that kind of Being I have the fore-mentioned Idea of though I am infinitely short of understanding its Nature II. Our Authour now comes to shew what is meant by believing in his Person which he branches into Two Parts First Believing in him with respect to his word Second In respect to his Person The First of which onely he speaks to in this Chapter and says that Christ is to his Followers as the Sun to Travellers 'T is no matter what they think of its magnitude or whether they think it be no bigger than a Bushel it guides them all alike and thus it is he says with the Sun of Righteousness 't is no matter what we believe him to be if we have but a Practical Faith which is all our Saviour he says requires And this he attempts to prove out of Joh. 10. a place than which one would have thought he should rather have chosen any Text in the New Testament besides How long dost thou make us to doubt if thou be the Christ tell us plainly Jesus said I told you by calling God my Father and ye believe me not Joh. 10. 24 25. And presently after he tell them I and my Father are one v. 30. at which they took up stones to stone him saying thou being a man makest thy self God Now what can the Authour draw from this Why he says our