Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	body_n	life_n	separation_n	4,198	5	9.8832	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79465	Anti-Socinianism, or, A brief explication of some places of holy Scripture, for the confutation of certain gross errours, and Socinian heresies, lately published by William Pynchion, Gent. in a dialogue of his, called, The meritorious price of our redemption, concerning 1. Christ's suffering the wrath of God due to the elect. 2. God's imputation of sin to Christ. 3. The nature of the true mediatorial obedience of Christ. 4. The justification of a sinner. Also a brief description of the lives, and a true relation of the death, of the authors, promoters, propagators, and chief disseminators of this Socinian heresie, how it sprung up, by what means it spread, and when and by whom it was first brought into England, that so we be not deceived by it. / By N. Chewney, M.A. and minister of God's Word.	Chewney, Nicholas, 1609 or 10-1685.	1656 (1656)	Wing C3804; Thomason E888_1; ESTC R207357	149,812	257

he was made a curse For the third in what nature he was made a curse We have this answer In his humane nature consisting of body and soul yea in soul rather then in body the soul of man being the principal seat and place of residence for sin For saith Christ himself z Mat. 15.19 out of the heart which in Scripture beareth usually the name and title of the soul proceedeth evill thoughts murthers adulteries c. Yet I say in both compleating and making up the humane nature sustained and supported by the Divine being in Union with it Here is something to be borne and meet it is a Bishop Andrews ser that every one should bear his own burthen the nature that had sinned bear his own sin Mans nature had sinned and therefore mans nature ought to suffer But that which mans nature should mans nature could not bear not the heavy and insupportable weight of Gods wrath due to sin but God could The one ought and could not The other could but ought not if he had not bin man he could not have suffered if he had not bin God he had sunk in his sufferings and had never bin able to have gone thorow with them God had no shoulders Man had but too weak God knows to sustain so great a weight So that as he was man he was lyable and as he was God he was able saith that learned Prelate b Pag. to bear the burthen in the heat of the day c Psal 16. To the last how far forth Christ was accursed We answer thus There is a two-fold death a first and a second death in the first death there are two degrees separation of body and soul and the putrifaction of the body separated The first Christ suffered but not the second For his body being deprived of life according to the dialect of the Psalmist c Psal 16. saw no corruption Again in the second there are two degrees the first is a separation from God in sense and feeling The second is an absolute separation from him for ever never to be admitted into favour any more Into this last degree of death Christ entred not for in the midst of his most grievous sufferings in the exaltation and height of all his sorrows he yet cryed out my God my God declaring his trust in and dependance upon God notwithstanding all his misery Neither could it be otherwise without a dissolution of the personal Union But into the first deg●ees of this second death we affirm and that upon plain Scripture grounds against all opposition that Christ did enter that is the sense and feeling of Gods wrath and indignation d Cum ira Dei sit voluntas puniendi rectè etiam di●ipotest Iratus illo quèm vice loco delinquentium punire vult essen due to the Elect in regard of their iniquities by which they had provoked him to be highly displeased with them Not to muster up any more * Instances witnesses we will only take a short survey of that place of the Apostle to the Hebrews cap. 5. vers 7. Who in the dayes of his flesh when he had offered up Prayers and Supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death and was heard in that he feared and so free it what we may from the violence done unto it by the Dialogue who notwithstanding his profession of reverence to those Authours who expound the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fear yea the fear of astonishment at the sense and feeling of Gods wrath for the guilt of our sins yet labours tooth and naile to overthrow their exposition and by one of his own to carry the meaning of the Text another way telling us that some translate it reverence others dignity a third sort piety to which because he himself adheres rather then to any other doth therefore conclude that it must be so taken here and must not cannot be otherwise But by the Dialogues good leave there is no such necessity for that as he would have us believe the proper signification of the word being fear together with the frequent use of it by all sorts of Greek Authours both holy d Heb. 12.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and humane e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Plut. in Camille declare the contrary as also the Proposition annexed f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which cannot be bribed or corrupted to comply with the sense and interpretation of the Dialogue It was not an ordinary fear arising from an ordinary cause g Metus vel solitudo c. that thus constrained our blessed Saviour to entreat and supplicate for he felt such pains saith Piscator h In animo pariter corpore tales sensit dolores quales damnati sensuri sunt in inferno ut ita satisfaceret pro peccatis nostris quae ut Sponsor in se susceperat c. In Heb. 5.7 as the Elect if they had bin damned in Hell should have felt that so he might make satisfaction to the Justice of God for their sins the guilt of which as a Pledge or surety he had freely and voluntarily taken upon him He offered up saith the Apostle prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears to him that was able to save him from death and was heard in that he feared If it had bin fear of bodily death only as the Dialogue would have it what need such cryes such strong cryes with tears Surely be would make him lesse then a man and more faint in a good cause then Malefactors are in a bad But the Text is plain he was heard in that he feared that is saved from the death he feared but he was not saved from the bodily death for he dyed and gave up the Ghost i Mat. 27.58 therefore it was not the bodily death but the great horrour of soul * Christus ut plenè pro nobis satisfaceret non tantum corporis sed etiam summos animi cruciatus sustinuit Vicit B●za in Mat. by reason of the wrath of God which he suffered that he so feared and from which he was in respect of the eternity there of delivered Nor was it Christs deliverance out of these sufferings much lesse from a bodily death only as the Dialogue but upon what grounds I know not doth most vainly to say no worse affirm but the glory of God his Father in the salvation of the Elect which was the Master-piece of all his prayers Well we have enough for our purpose He prayed that he might be delivered from death True but this death was the death of the crosse the principal part whereof was the curse that is the wrath of God due to the Elect for sin from which he was delivered in respect of duration but sustained it for a time for them that they might for ever be freed from the same And this we take to be the

the Dialogue professe he knows not what kind of imputation it is and yet doth he thus reproach it We may easily know then what Spirit he is of Iude 10. Speaking evill of those ●hings which he knoweth not And 't is a sign he knows it not indeed otherwise he would not so severely censure it yea condemne and blaspheme it as he doth which most darkens the necessary Doctrine of a sinners justification let the indifferent Reader judge If he desire to know what it is let him search the Scriptures for they do abundantly testify of it To the Law and to the Testimony * Legimus passim apud Paulum nos justos fieri justificari p●r Christum per Christi mortem sanguinem redemptionem obedientiam justitiam illam justitiam imputari nobis à Deo absque operibus Noster Amesius Bell. enerva 10.4 pag. 137. and they which speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them The very term Impute taken for judicial laying of that to the charge of a person which is not properly his but yet justly laid to him and put truly upon his account is ten times used by the Apostle Paul in the 4th to the Romanes In which sense we affirm that sin is imputed to Christ or else he could not have suffered This we take to be and shall stick by as an infallible truth No man dyes as death is a privation of the life of the body unlesse it be for his own sin or the sin of some others imputed to him The Scriptures that confirm this are divers Gen. 2.17 In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death Rom. 6.23 The wages of sin is death 1 Cor. 15.56 The sting of death is sin Rom. 5.12 As by one man sin entred into the World and death by sin and so death passed over all men for that all have sinned from whence we collect that every man that dyes dyes for sin that is either for his own or the sin of some other made his by imputation Death is not natural to man as man For that which is natural to him as he is man was engraffed into him and appointed unto him of God but death is not planted or engraffed into him by God neither was he by him made lyable to it e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Man before his fall was free from death as after the last judgment he shall be likewise Besides death is an enemy to humane nature threatning the ruine and destruction thereof will any man then say that that is natural to him which doth destroy him Is that agreeable to the nature of man which above all other he abborreth being accompanied with that which brings nothing but trouble anguish and vexation to him whence we see that death is not natural to man as man but to man only as a sinner Now that Christ dyed the Devils themselves have not impudence enough to deny being themselves instrumentally engaged for the effecting of his death But let the Dialogue or any man else for him answer me in good sadness was it for his own sin or for the sin of others None can none dare openly though these black mouth'd Socinians do secretly mutter so much affirm for his own therefore it must necessarily be for the sin of others Sin may be said to be anothers properly or improperly either truly or after a certain manner those sins are truly anothers of which in no sort thou hast bin partaker and for which by no Law thou art bound to suffer but for those whereof thou hast bin partaker no reason can be produced to the contrary but thou shouldst suffer Christ doth in a manner partake of our sins f Isa 53.6 the Lord hath laid on him or hath made to meet on him the iniquities of us all yea Peter in the 2. Chapter of his first Epistle and the 24. vers saith plainly that his own self bare our sins in his own body on the Tree c. and so cannot especially offering himself and becoming our surety undertaking for us the penalty due to us but be every way lyable to the same Christ was not subject to any necessity of dying being as God immortal as man holy and immaculate without the least tincture of sin therefore no necessity in him no necessity for him but in respect of us and as our pledge and surety This is a proposition of an undoubted truth that where there is no Original corruption there is no actual transgression Christ being free from the one must needs be acquit of any suspition of the other therefore not for his own sins but for ours the guilt whereof being laid upon him and imputed to him did he suffer that misery those torments and that death that accursed death of which we have already so fully spoken Here the Dialogue that he may the more closely and covertly beguile the over-credulous Reader which I perceive is his great endeavour doth ignorantly if not wilfully corrupt some texts of Scripture wresting and wringing them about to make them speak in his sense and to his purpose namely that Christ did not bear as we say by imputation but did bear away our sins and our iniquities from us Having therefore already freed those places quoted out of the Prophesie of Isaiah g Isa 53.7 c. expounded as he saith by that of Matt. 8.16 and from which he draweth this false consequence that Christ bore our sins as he bore our sicknesses whereas indeed there is great difference in the manner of bearing h Hos enim abstulit non pertulit illa non pertulit illa pertulit abstulit simul Sibran Lub lib. 2. cap. 4. these he did not bear but bear away those he bore and bore away together We shall now do the best we can by Gods assistance to clear this of St. Peter also and free it from the like corrupt handling In this 1 Pet. 2.24 the place before cited the Apostle saith expresly that Christ did peccata nostra sursum tulisse carry our sins up with him upon the crosse If the Spirit of God by the Apostle had intended herein a bearing away he might have used as learned Grotius well observes i De Satisfactione Christi cap. 1. and more apt for that purpose the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which barely signifies to take away But for the greater Emphasis and more cleer expressing of his meaning he useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is he took up which is so far from diminishing that it adds something to the signification thereof Now Socinus and his Ape the Dialogue that they may weaken if possible the strength of this place do tell us that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie abstulit he bare away but quite contrary to the nature and use of the word For neither the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will admit of

very drift and purpose of the Holy Ghost in this place of the Apostle Further more there are some and those of no small account in the Church of God who take that Article in the Creed of Christs descension into Hell to signify those Spiritual and internal passions which he suffered in his Soul out of the sense of Divine wrath hanging over him and inflicted upon him by reason of the guilt of our sins for which he was to satisfie Thus U●sinus k Catechism pag 236. and Spanhemius l Summos cruciatus angustias dolores quas Christus perpossus c. de exinatione Christi pag. 274. also our own Perkins m Perkins on the Creed upon the Creed expounding that part of Hannah's song 1 Sam. 2.6 The Lord killeth and the Lord maketh alive He bringeth down to Hell and raiseth up again saith thus The Lord maketh men feel wo and misery in their Souls yea even the pangs of Hell and afterwards restoreth comfort and refreshment to them But we passe this What ever uncertainty in this point the Dialogue would fasten on us and make the World believe there is among us shall so he may gain the more credit to himself and his Socinian opinion I leave to the judgment of the indifferent Reader in the mean season let all men know that in this we all agree and this constantly and un●nimously affirm that Christ Jesus suffered that death and those very Soul n Ipsam poenam infornalem re ipsa tulit c. Poliander 1. concertatione torments to which the Elect were subject by reason of the curse of the Law which lay upon them For the further confirmation whereof we here propound a three-fold question First in what manner Secondly in what measure Thirdly for what time Christ suffered this death and these torments Which being resolved will not be much unlike Solomons three-fold cord not easily broken First how and in what manner Christ suffered this death and these torments Answ Our sins and we by reason of our sins being accursed hatefull and abhominable in the sight of the most pure God not beholding us in our filthinesse but with indignation towards us It pleased Jesus Christ being himself most holy by the unspeakable mercy of the Father and his own free grace and goodness taking upon him our miserable and forlorne condition and undergoing both in body and soul those torments which we should everlastingly have suffered * Christus fit pro nobis maledictio in cruce luens poenam iis debitam qui voluerunt dificri Bez. in Luc. 23. to free us from the same This I say he did freely and of his own accord for though according to the Evangelist o Mat. 26.39 there may seem some reluctancy in him yet against the Monotholites we consider in Christ a double will the one Divine the other humane in respect of his humane will he may be said under condition to eschue death and desire to be delivered from it but his Divine will was that the will of his Father and not his humane will might be accomplished which being considered he did freely and voluntarily engage himself to suffer what ever his Father in Justice would even to his wrath and indignation to satisfy the same and free the Elect from it Secondly how much and in what measure Christ suffered Answ As much in full weight and measure if we may use the terms as did counter-vail all the sins of the Elect past present and to come and what was wanting in his bodily torments to make full satisfaction to Divine Justice was supplyed and made up in his soul sufferings * Christus cum Satana cum p●ccatis cum morte denique horren●a illa maledictione De●armatis potenter luctans c. Beza in Mar. cap. 13. the sense of which both before and in the time of suffering did so much molest and trouble him Thirdly what time and how long did he suffer Answ From the very time that he began to work out the Redemption of the Elect date it when they will untill upon the crosse he cryed out consummatum est it is finished To the Jews this may be a stumbling block to the Greeks foolishness to the Dialogue and the rest of the Socinian brood absurd and ridiculous but both to Jews and Greeks with all that believe it is the mighty power wisdome and goodness Object 1 of God to Salvation But here the Dialogue c. do scoffingly object what would God deal so hardly with his own Son as not to abate him any thing of the full price of that which sinfull man should have payed Answ To which the Apostle himself hath given an answer hear we him for we cannot mend it p Rom. 8.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non pepercit he spared not his own Son but gave him up to death and what death even the cursed death of the crosse for our redemption Object 2 It is further objected that this punishment and these sufferings and that death which our Savivour Christ endured cannot he said to be eternal because they lasted but a time which being expired they were likewise finished Answ For answer whereunto we affirm that a thing may be said to be eternal two wayes q Vel ratione quid dicatis vel ratione durationis L. V. de satisfactione either in respect of the substance or in respect of the circumstance the being or continual being of a thing in the former sense Christ suffered eternal death not in the latter he suffered the essential part of those torments r Ipsissimam maledictionem in lege minacum subierit Idem which all the Elect should have suffered unto all eternity though not the circumstantial in respect of duration Besides eternal death in the phrase and dialect of the Scriptures doth not signify the perpetual dissolution of body and soul as the Socinians do understand it for so the damned themselves do not suffer eternal death ſ Aliud est ceterum in morte manere aliud est aeternam mortem sustinere Illud durationem hoc virtutem mortis utrumque vel de animae corporis solutione vel de cruciatibus gehennae intelligitur Cal. de Satisf pag. 466. but either in the immeasurable greatness of infernal torments or the everlasting continuance thereof The first of which is essential the other but accidental That Christ suffered This he could not ought not to undergo Could not because he is eternal life it self God blessed for ever Amen Ought not because it was his office to free us from death by conquering the power and taking away the sting thereof Lastly Christ may be said to suffer eternal death potentially if we may borrow that expression to declare our intention though not actually that is a death alwayes enduring though not by him alwayes to be endured There is this proportion between that death which we should have suffered and that which Christ did

vain for they cannot shake us from our assured confidence herein being so strongly confirmed and maintained by the Scriptures as we find it is and that first partly by that which hath bin said already if Christ were not lyable to the Law in respect of himself which notwithstanding he truly fulfilled it is then most certain that he fulfilled the Law for others See what he spoke to Iohn the Baptist b Matt. 3.15 it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness So c Matt. 5.17 I am not come saith he to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Secondly also partly by the opinion of the Apostle d Rom. 8.3 for what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinfull flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh where the fulfilling of the Law is ascribed to the Son of God which was impossible to be performed by us that the righteousness of the Law should be fulfilled in us by faith that is in Christ Jesus Moreover we may peruse that of the Apostle e Rom. 5.18 and that to the Philipians cap. 3. vers 9. Thirdly from that Axiome of St. Paul to the Romanes Christ saith he is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth for what else is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the end of the Law but the complement and perfect fulfilling of the same But for whom hath he fulfilled the Law Not for himself but for us that believing in him who hath done this for us we might be justified Fourthly from the imputation of righteousness g Phil. 3 5. that I may be found in him saith the Apostle not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ * Quam quia non habemus in nobis Deus nobis gratuitò donat Calvin in Gal. 3.6 the righteousness which is of God by faith Hence we argue If the righteousness of Christ be truly imputed to us it is necessary also that it should be employed and improved yea performed for us that is in our steed But it is truly imputed to us h Rom. 5.18 Therefore it is necessary it should be imployed improved and performed for us Lastly from the very end of Christs being subject to the Law from whence also we conclude If Christ of his own accord subjected himself to the Law that he might redeem us from the Law and that we might obtain the adoption of Sons it were requisite that Christ should compleat and fulfill the Law for us But the former is true Therefore the latter Thus then we see not for himself did Christ fulfill the Law of God as Socinus and our Dialogue considering him only as a godly Jew would have it but for us * Christus pro nobis est in carnatus pro nobis obedivit patri pro nobis baptizatus passus mortuus resuscitatus glorificatus Symphonia Cathol and in our steed did he compleat the same though they never so much oppose it And so we come to our question again Christ was either doing or suffering suffering or doing i Christus in vita habuit actionem passivam aut passionem activam even during the whole course of his life his triumph was upon the crosse a little before his death when he had procured deliverance from Hell and right and interest to Heaven then was the perfect consummation of his obedience For saith the Apostle k Heb. 9.15 by the death of the Mediator not his bodily death only as the Dialogue falsly and fainedly would have it but his whole sufferings both in soul and body the close and conclusion whereof was death do we receive the promise of an everlasting inheritance and notwithstanding he was about it and all things in the way of obedience which he either did or suffered conduced to it yet with one l Heb. 10.14 oblation upon the crosse did he perfect them that are sanctified Nor can they possibly be perfected but by the perfect obedience of Christ imputed to them And so we passe unto the other two Questions which are yet to be handled Secondly how Christ could obey being God and Quest 2 satisfy for us being man Answ Answ Christ must not be considered in the transaction of this great and weighty business either meerly as God or meerly as man but as God-man or man-God junctae juvant both together will do well but either alone will not serve the turn It is a grosse absurdity to say no more of which the Dialogue is guilty in this particular conceiving him no other no better for thirty years together then any other common though Godly Jew notwithstanding he had then the work and office of a Mediator imposed on him The two distinct natures of Christ Hypostatically united must not cannot be separated or divided without wrong or in ury to the person of the Mediator and his high and holy undertaking herein That the truth of this sacred mistery which seems folly unto some may the more cleerly be manifested unto all who desire to be instructed in it we will lay down these few ensuing arguments The first of which is taken from the Names and Apellations which are usually ascribed and given unto Christ being not only God or Man or the Son of God or the Son of man but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God-man as m 2 Sam. 7.19 Homo qui Deus Dominus est So according to the Original The Man which is the Lord God also n Isa 9.6 the Prophet telleth us of a Child puer natus a Child is born and yet in the same verse he is called the mighty God the everlasting Father Likewise the Prophet Jeremiah o Jer. 23.5 6. calls him the Branch of David and yet the Lord our Righteousness The second from the Prophesies of the old Testament concerning the Messiah in which as true God he is set before us and proposed to us as also his coming in the flesh as true man is described to us for the working out of our redemption The Psalmist notes him as true God in these words p Psal 45.6 Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever and vers 7. as true man in these words Thou art annointed with the Oyle of gladness above thy fellows Also q Psal 68.18 where is described his Ascension according to his humanity who is said as God vers 7. to go forth in his divinity before the people In like manner the Prophet Isaiah bringeth him in r Isa 49.16 as Jehova in respect of his Divine and yet sent by the Holy Ghost in respect of his humane nature The third from the most plain and evident Testimonies of the new Testament in which also as God and Man he is delivered and descyphered out unto us So the Evangelist St. John ſ Joh. 1. vers 1. 2 3 4.

our Surety and in our steed The whole work whereof may be called if you will Mediatorial from the office of the Perso● obeying Legal from the Rule which was obeyed This obedience as we have said is but one which y●● is constituted of these two parts First the perfect fulfilling of the Law Secondly the suffering of that punishment which the breaking thereof deserved The fulfilling of the Law is the first part of Christ● obedience by which he performed throughout t●● whole course of his life perfect obedience to the Law of God for us The enduring the punishment for our sins is the other part of his obedience taking upon him in our room that which we had justly merited by reaso● of our transgressions that so satisfying the severity of Gods Justice for us we might be freed from that obligation and penalty which was upon us so that Ursinus joyning both together saith * Quicquid fecit aut passus est Christus ad quod ipse tanquam justus Dei filius non fuit obligatus est satisfactio ejus quam nobis praestitit justitia quae nobis credentibus adeo gratis imputatur ea enim satisfactio aequiposset vel impletioni Legis per obedientiam velaeternae paenae propter peccatum ad quorum alterutrum Legi obligamur pag. 394. Here the Dialogue takes an occasion to what purpose I know not to quarrel with the Lutherans for an errour of theirs on the one hand unlesse it be that he may the better and sooner prevail with his over-confident Reader and so carry him into an errour on the other cunningly casting out one Devil by another and yet the latter more dangerous if not more desperate then the former For neither one drop of bloud as he chargeth them nor all the bodily sufferings of Christ as we charge him to say but the perfect fulfilling of the Law for us and the satisfying Divine Justice incensed against us even the whole obedience of Christ is that by which we are redeemed from and discharged of that debt and penalty to which we were lyable and for which we stood accountable The Dialogue auribum lupum tenet finding it too hard a matter to prove what he had undertaken that is That Christs natural or bodily death only is the meritorious price of our redemption falls strangly off and betakes himself unto an other matter For not being able to confirm by argument he will perplex with amazement his lesse attentive Reader telling him that the Jews and Romanes did not put Christ to death but that he himself seperated his soul from his body shed his own bloud and did as he expresses it actuate his own death contrary to the very letter of the Scriptures y Act. 2.23 where Peter in his Sermon chargeth them home with the cruel killing of Christ the Lord saying him have yea taken and by wicked hands have crucifyed and slain Again z Act. 3.15 and have killed the Prince of life What our blessed Saviour speaks in Iohn a Joh. 10.17 18. that he laid down his life no man taking it away from him sheweth his willingness to yeeld himself up into their hands who by the determinate councel and foreknowledge of God were to be instruments of his death We know that in respect of humane power no man could take away his life till he was willing to lay it down which he did by submitting to them when his hour was come for that very purpose We say Christ dyed willingly we cannot dare not say wilfully which he must needs do if the Language of the Dialogue may passe for currant that he shed his own bloud and did actuate his own death Christ offered himself to God his Father yet did he not kill himself The Jews killed him yet did they not offer him for indeed they could not The Priest is more worthy then the sacrifice yet here is one who was Priest Sacrifice and Altar too He was a Priest but not in respect of his Divine nature alone as the Dialogue labours to perswade For whatsoever Christ did or suffered in a Mediatorial way was done and suffered by the two natures b In exequendo Mediatoris officio utraque natura operatur rum communione alterius Leo ad Flavianum cap. 4. in him Hypostatically united and not by either alone Whole Christ is our Mediator Redeemer Priest and Prophet in both natures according to his Deity and humanity What the Dialogue would force upon our belief from that place of Iohn c Joh. 6.63 namely that the humanity of Christ which he understands by the word flesh doth not profit us is in the first place a meer contradiction to himself having altogether pleaded for the bodily sufferings of Christ hitherto then we averre that it is not to be found in or gathered from the words for the best Expositors tell us that by flesh there is meant any natural food and not the flesh of Christ giving this reason for it wheresoever say they Christ speaketh of his own flesh there is the Pronoune My added to it or else he expresseth it thus the flesh of the Son of man but there is neither the one nor the other and therefore cannot be meant of the flesh of Christ They are exceedingly mistaken says Scharpius d Errant qui hoc loco percarnis vocem humanitatem Christi distinctè consideratam Spiritum Deitatè significari volunt Syphonia in the sense and meaning of our Saviours Words who by flesh would have his humanity by Spirit his Deity to be signified or understood But should we let this passe for granted which must not be that the humanity of Christ doth not profit us must it therefore follow that his obedience to the Law doth not profit us nor his fulfilling of the same for us Did ever any that pretended the least knowledge in the Rudiments of Art fetch a conclusion so far wide of the premisses But what shall we say to these Socinians whom no rules of Art are able to keep within compasse of sound Reason nor texts of Scripture within the bounds of true Religion but that they break through and run over all to beguile us in the one and betray us in the other Plutarch makes report of a certain Woman named Phea who rob'd all passengers that came by her Pallace These these Socinians the Dialogue and his fellows are like unto her For none can escape their hands They rob God of his Justice mercy and wisdome Christ of his merit and satisfaction man of all sound and solid means of Salvation leaving him in a worse condition then the thieves left that poor man that went down from Hierusalem to Iericho not half but stark dead without any help or hope of recovery I shall bestow upon the Dialogue and his high admirers with the rest of the Socinian Brethren but this one argument and so I will conclude this part also with a friendly advice to all Christian