God Of the first the Apostle Saint Paule saieth VVee are predestinated into the adoption of the sonnes of God and therefore to a heauenlie inheritance of the other that it was done for the praise of the glory of his grace 6 The saluation therefore of the elect in Iesus Christ is certaine and necessarie the foundation whereof is the ternall free and vnchaungable purpose of the will of God 7 Who so haue beene chosen from the beginning in Christ vnto life euerlasting and to the meanes thereunto all they and onely they in the time appointed of the father ver 7 which is called the fulnesse of time were in verie deede through Christ and in Christ redeemed from their sinnes and so from the euill which followeth sinnes the Apostle saying in Iesus Christ vvee haue redemption euen remission of sinnes 8 Neither were we redeemed Tit. 3. v. 5 ver 7. according to the merits works of righteousnes which we haue done but according to the mercies of God and according to the riches of his grace by the blood of Christ Iesus both which are manifestly confirmed by the Apostle 9 And albeit the eternall father redeemed saued vs by his sonne by whome he also created vs yet the â—onne is he which by an especiall respect the church of God vseth to call the redeemer of mankinde and our Sauiour 10 For the Sonne alone Lev. 25. ver 48.49 was and is God and man and he alone had the right of proprietie as they call it or of kindred to redeeme vs hee alone shedd his blood whereby as by a ransome we were redeemed Lastlie he it is alone in whose person our redemption is made perfect and accomplished 11 By the name of this ransome which wee are said to haue in Christ â— Cor. 1. v. 30 wee meane that full and accomplished redemption in as much as it containeth not onely remission of sinnes in this life but also in the life to come after this a perfect deliuerance from all ill and from the bondage of all corruption so that there is no ransome which we haue not in Christ our most perfect redeemer who as he is made vnto vs by God our wisedome righteousnes sanctification so also our redemption Of the resurrection of Christ Iesus from the dead his ascension into heauen and sitting at Gods right hand out of the first of Paule to the Ephesians yeare 1581. 1 GOd did effectually shewe the greatnes of his power in Christ Eph. 1. â—â— by raising him from the dead therefore onely God by his infinite power is the efficient cause of the resurrection of Christ and all the dead 2 Yea but Christ also by his power raised him selfe from death as he said destroy this temple Ioh. 2.19 and in three dayes I will build it vp but hee spake of the temple of his bodie and that Ioh. 10.17 I lay downe my life that I may take it againe Christ therefore is no lesse God then the father neither is hee God of lesser might 3 But one and the same cannot be truely the raiser and the raised from the dead vnlesse he consist of diuers natures of the diuine according to which he doth raise and the humane according to which he is raised Therefore the same Christ as he is true God coessentiall with the father so hee is true man coessentiall with his mother and his brethren 4 Neither can any bee truely said to be raised and to rise from the dead vnlesse the same bee truely said to be dead and to haue died But death consisteth in a true separation of the soule froÌ„ the bodie whereby the body which dieth may presently bee rightly called a dead carkasse Christ then if he truely rose from the dead it can by no meanes be denied but that he also truely died his soule being truely separated from his bodie 5 If then sith he truely died neither his soule for that time of his death was in his bodie neither sith he was truely buried his bodie while it honge vppon the crosse was in the graue or while it lay in the graue hong vppon the crosse neither sith God truely raised him from the dead either his soule recalled his body or his body recalled himselfe from death to life therefore the humane nature in Christ was neither omnipotent nor euery where present in it owne substance 6 For as this consequence is not good Christ Iesus himselfe was dead and buried and rose againe from the dead therefore he was dead and buried and rose againe according to both his natures So neither is this behold I am vvith you euen to the ende of the vvorlde therefore not onely in his deitie but also in the substance of his humanitie hee is really present with vs on the earth 7 But as this consequence is good Christ being God suffered therefore he suffered not according to his deitie but according to his humanitie so is this other Christ Iesus being man is euerie where and simply omnipotent therefore he is euery where and omnipotent not according to his humanitie but according to his deitie seing the diuine nature is no lesse vnited to the humane then the humane is to the diuine in the same person of Christ Iesus 8 If God himselfe and so the diuine nature in Christ raised his body from the dead not by the same bodie but by it selfe namely by the diuine nature then it is false that the diuine nature in Christ did all things and doeth not onely in and with but also by the humane nature 9 For the soule of Christ Iesus doth not work all thinges by the bodie as neither doe our mindes vnderstand or will thinges by the bodies and that for this cause that as the philosophers also taught our minde dependeth not on the bodie Much lesse then doth the deitie of Christ worke all thinges by the flesh which it tooke 10 For doth the deitie vnderstand by the humane vnderstanding or doeth it will by the humane will or doth it keepe or sustaien the humane nature in the person of the word by the verie same humane nature or doth it beare all thinges by the humane flesh or rather by the word of it owne vertue Lastlie if the forme of God doe nothing but by the forme of a seruant how can that saying of Leo be true each fo rme doth the propertie of it selfe vvith communion of the other 11 Like as therefore the forme of God is one and the forme of a seruant another so the actions and proprieties of the one and of the other be diuers though manie times both the one the other haue one and the same worke and operacion 12 Wherefore this is no coÌ„sequence to whomsoeuer Christ commeth with the father according to the forme of God to him he also commeth and abideth in him in his owne substaÌ„ce according to the forme of a seruant much lesse that he is so euery where 13 Further
was a disobediēce Gen. 2.17 3.6 Rom. 5.19 which was shewed not so much in the outvvard deede as in the purposed consent of his minde vvherin he vvould not be obedient vnto god III. What and how manifold a death followed Adams sinne So vve confesse that man being then destitute of the fauour of god by his ovvne faulte did loose that life vvherein he liued holily vnto God his minde being darkened his vvill depraued and all integritie of nature vtterlie lost Ioh. 8.34 Eph. 2.1 Rom. 5.12 name lie in those things vvhich pertaine to god and to a life acceptable to God and so vvas made the seruant of sinne the slaue of sathan and quite dead vnto god Moreouer he incurred both the death of the bodie vvhich is novv come vnto all men with al the calamities of the bodie and also the eternall that is the most miserable grieuous and most vnhappie life of the vvhole man more intollerable vvithout comparison then anie death vvith the deuill in euerlasting torments vvhence he could not be deliuered but by Christ 1. Cor. 15.22 IIII. That in Adam all men sinned But for as much as al mankinde which was by naturall generation to issue from Adam was then in his loines whereby the commandement vvith the curse annexed pertained not onelie to the person of Adam but to all mankinde likewise The Rom. 5.19 efore with the Apostle do vve beleeue and confesse that in Adam sinning all men sinned so that that disobedience was not onelie proper to Adam himselfe but also made common to all mankinde sith his guiltines enwrapped all men who were then and are yet dailie carnallie to be begotten of his seede Euen as the Apostle to the Romaines plainly teacheth yea and most strongly prooueth by an Antithesis or contraposition of the disobedience of Adam and the obediēce of Christ For if the obedience of Christ be no lesse ours by imputation then his owne by his proper action because wee are regenerate of his incorruptible seede and of his spirite it followeth that the disobedience likewise of Adam must be imputed vnto vs and we touched with his guiltines because we are borne of the seed of his flesh being father of al men V. The corruption of mans whole nature followed vpon Adams disobedience in all men But like as the corruption of our vvhole nature Rom. 7.7 Aug. tom 7 con Iul. Pela li. 5. c. 3 immediatlie by gods iust iudgement tooke holde on the person of Adam for that actuall disobedience called of the Apostle Concupiscence which is both a punishment of the former sinne a sinne and a cause of other sinnes euen so being taught by the holy scriptures we beleeue and with the whole church confesse that all men which by naturall propagation are conceiued of his seed ar borne infected with the contagion of his corrupt nature For all men sinned in Adam and by the guiltinesse of his disobedience wee are all kept bound VI. What we properlie call originall sinne Wherefore we doe so saie that this haereditarie fault and contagion of nature is sinne in all men and so we vse to cal it originall sinne that we do not separate it from the guiltines and imputation of the first disobedience Euen as likewise on the other side we doubt not but the righteousnes of christians doth consist not so much in the regeneration of nature which is made by the spirit of Christ which is vsuallie called by the name of inherēt righteousnesse as in the imputation of the perfect obedience and righteousnes of Christ whose members we are VII That contagion of nature is verie sinne And although that contagion was inflicted not onelie vppon Adam alone but also on his whole posteritie for a punishment of that first transgression of Gods commaundement yet wee hold this as certainelie out of the holy scriptures as whatsoeuer is most certaine Rom. 7.7 that the same is not onely the punishment of sin and the cause of all other follovving sinnes but also a verie sinne it selfe euen so great as were sufficient to condemne vs. VIII That concupiscence of it owne proper nature is a sinne in the verie regenerate Yea so farre doe we learne that concupiscence of it owne nature is a sinne fighting against the lavve of God and making all men subiect to condemnation vnlesse they bee deliuered by Christ yea that in the regenerate themselues though the guiltines being taken away by faith in Christ it be not imputed vnto them anie more yet we doubt not 1. Ioh. 3.4 Rom. 7.7 but it is a sinne yea and that worthy of eternall death sith it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of the lawe and is by gods lawe condemned as the Apostle teacheth IX From concupiscence ingrafted in vs the riuers of sinne doe continually flowe Futrhermore we beleeue that this our naturall deformitie is such a fountaine of al sin and that euer so abounding that from it doe continuallie spring most corrupt waters of e-euill affections of vngodlie thoughts vvicked desires which vnlesse they be by the spirit of Christ restrained they breake out at length into manifest sinnes offences some worse thē others so that there is not any man so holie which beareth not about him this puddle of vices yea and feeleth not the filthie vapors breathing from it and is not often sprinckled and bespotted with that noisome contagion Euerie man is tempted of his ovvne concupiscence saieth Iames vvhen he is drawne avvaye by his ovvne concupiscence Iam. 1.14.15 and is entised then vvhen lust hath conceiued it bringeth forth sinne and sinne whē it is finished bringeth forth death X. That God is not the author of sinne Now all these things beeing thus wee are confirmed in that beleefe wherein wee hold that god is not the author of sinne sith he neither created Adam euill or prone vnto euil but iust and righteous neither did hee intice or mooue him to il but he of his own accord and by his free-will sinned 1. Io. 2.16 neither yet vvas this naturall peruersnesse from god but of it selfe it followed that disobedience of Adam being depriued of his righteousnes god most iustly so permitting and punishing mans trāsgression by that worthie punishment XI Errors We condemne therefore with Ireneus and the whole church all those which make god the author of sinne likewise all Pelagians as wel new as old which denie that all men sinned in Adam and are holden in the guilte of the first offence or doe labour to prooue that this ingrafted concupiscence is onelie a disease and a punishment of sinne but not indeede a sinne it selfe or at least in the regenerate will not haue it to bee worthie the name of a sinne Wee condemne also those which haue taught that originall sinne is a substance because this opinion either makes god the author of sinne or else denies that god is the maker of euerie substance and confirmes the doctrine
a garment For this manner of speach although it doe not perfectlie declare the personall vnion Hypostatica yet it sheweth a manifest difference beetweene the person of the sonne of god taking and our nature taken For this same cause we embrace those kindes of speaches of the Fathers as mans nature was borne of the sonne of god to subsist in the person of the sonne of God and such like separating the person of the sonne of god taking from the nature taken and teaching that the person of the sonne of God by the comming of mans nature was made neither other nor more perfect VII A confirmation of the former opinion with an exposition of the place of Athanasius Surelie we confesse with Athanasius that as the reasonable soule and flesh is one man so God and man is one Christ that is Christ is onelie one person although there bee in him two natures yet not that the person of Christ if we will speake properlie is constituted or made of both these natures as of the parts as to the perfect cōstitution of man no lesse the bodie as an essential part then the soule must ioyne together seeing the person of Christ was alreadie 1. Cor. 10.9 1. Pet. 3.19 and that whole and most perfect before it was shewed in the fleshe but the person of man as of Adam was none at all vntill the foule was coupled with the bodie and sith that nether the soule doth assume vnto it selfe a body or the body a soule as the sonne of God assumed vnto himselfe the seed of Abraham into vnitie of the same person And further sith the bodie and the soule are two existences as it is manifest in the creatiō of Adam but mans nature did neuer subsist by it selfe but onelie in the person of the sonne of God so that verie vniustlie doe some abuse this godlie saying of the holie man for proofe of their owne dreames For he which did shew himselfe and he is the person of the Sonne of god must needs differ frō the flesh wherein he did shewe himselfe and that not onelie before but also after his resurrection and sitting at the right hand of his father which as saith Augustine added a glorie to the flesh but took not away the nature VIII How Christ is one onely person and that eternall and vnchangeable but there are in the same two natures and how it is said to consist of them We therefore acknowledge and confesse against Nestorius that in Christ is onelie one person and that eternall most simple most perfect and the same shall remaine for euer namelie the person of the euerlasting sonne of God Further that vnto this eternall person there came in time not another person but another nature namelie mans nature and the same not as a parte of that person of whome it was taken but a thing farre different from it and yet takē vnto it into vnitie of the same And therefore we thirdly confesse that in one the selfe same person of Christ there is now two natures the diuine and the humaine in which we doubt not that the same doth subsist doth liue and doth worke for which cause also we feare not to speake thus Christ consisteth now of his diuine nature his humaine being taken into the vnitie of person that he is after a sort compounded of them both IX Hovve the tvvo natures are vnited into one person without alteracion or confusion the properties and actions of either of them remaining whole and distinct But we beleeue and confesse that these two natures are truelie and inseparablie ioyned and vnited into one person of Christ that yet we doubt not but each of them remaineth whole and perfect and the one truely distinct from the other yea and that they do hold the essentiall properties and operations of each of them distinct without all manner of confusion so that as the diuine nature holding the properties remaineth vncreated infinite immeasurable simplie omnipotent and simply wise euen so the humaine nature holding hirs remaineth created comprehensible determined with certen limitts And as the diuine nature hath will and power whereby Christ willeth worketh as god such things as are of God so hath the humaine nature will and power whereby Christ as mā willeth worketh those thinges which are of man so farre forth as Christ in that he is God hee willeth not nor worketh by humaine will or power so neither as he is man willeth he or worketh he by diuine wil or power as it hath bin learnedly determined by the fathers both against Eutyches and against Macarius We therefore did alwaies like wel of that saying of Leo the first Epi. 10. c. 4 writing vnto Flauianus about the same thing where he saith He which is true God the same is also true man and in this vnitie there is no vntrueth whereas there meet together the basenesse of manhood and the excellencie of the godhead For as God is not chaunged by the partaking so man that is mans nature in Christ is not consumed by the dignitie for each forme vvorketh with communion of the other their ovvne propertie namelie the vvord vvorketh that which is proper to the vvord and the flesh performeth that vvhich is proper to the flesh Thus farre Leo that learned man which hee afterwards fetteth out by examples whereby it is plainelie shewed that as the natures are truelie vnited in Christ yet remaine distinct and not confounded so also were and are the actions for thinges which were proper to the word the flesh did not performe but the word that which was proper to the flesh the word performed not but the flesh To raise againe Lazarus from death was proper to the word but to crie Lazarus come forth was proper to the flesh yet both those actions were vnited to the raising vp of Lazarus because they were both one and in one Christ tend both to one purpose and yet they were distinct Likewise to forgiue sinnes was a proper actiō to the diuine nature but to say thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee was proper to the humaine nature To restore his sight that was born blinde was an action of his diuine nature but to put clay vppon his eies and to say goe and wash was of the humaine nature Therefore this personall vnion as it did not confound the natures so neither did it the actions but kept them distinct neither yet did it confound the properties of the natures For there be in one the same person of Christ these three things Natures the proprieties and faculties of the natures and the actions of them and these proprieties of natures in Christ are after the verie same manner that the natures and actions are Therefore as it is cleere that one nature passeth not into another nor one action is confounded with another so is it apparent that their proprieties are after the same sorte X. That it cannot bee prooued by the vnion
Eutychians which on the contrary side as Christ is but one onelie person so they leaue him but one nature onelie namelie the diuine teaching that the humaine nature which he assumed either is wholy turned into the diuine or els so mingled and confounded with the diuine that they make no difference at al in him between the proprieties and actions of his diuine and humaine natures Wee condemne also those which haue proceeded from the former as Macarius with his followers which make but one onelie will in Christ namelie the diuine and therefore admit no proper action at al of the humane wil in Christ We condemne likewise the Cerdonians also in this pointe that they said Christ did not truelie suffer nor was truelie dead but that he fained a suffring or as some heritiks say he suffred and died putatiuelie and therefore with these we also cōdēne all which taught or teach the like things as namelie that Christ rose not againe truelie in the same flesh wherein he died but in another of a diuerse nature or else that if he rose in the same yet that he did not truelie ascend into heauen and carrie the same into heauen and chaunge the place of it Wee also also with Hierome Cyrill and other of the fathers condemne the Originists and their like who taught that Christ rose againe with a bodie like vnto a spirite most subtill and in it owne nature inuisible and not subiect to the senses all those likewise as Iewes and Turkes which denie that the worlde is redeemed by the benefite of Christes death Also all those lastlie which goe about to proue our saluation to be grounded vppon any other thing either in parte or altogether then onelie in Christ and blasphemouslie doe auouch that sinnes may bee expiate or remitted by anie other sacrifices then that one sacrifice of Christ onelie For wee acknowledge one onelie redeemer Iesus Christ without whome as there is no true God so no true saluation and one onely sacrifice the oblation or offring wherof being once made not onelie all the sinnes of the elect were once washed awaie in the person of Christ but also beeing yet continuallie washed away euen vnto the ende of the world are remitted to them that beleeue CHAP. XII Of the true dispensation of the Redemption the saluation life which is laid vp in Christ alone and therefore of the necessarie vniting and participation vvith Christ I. Saluation and eternall lise is laid in Christ that from him it may bee communicated to be WE beleeue that euen as the sinne of Adam and death which followed the same remained not in Adam alone but from him as from the head of all mankinde it did and doth flow into all men which by a common generation haue bin and are borne of him so likewise that the righteousnesse of Christ and the eternall life due vnto him is not holden in Christ alone but is deriued into all those who by the regeneration of the holie spirite are made one with him and as true members are ioyned vnto him as head of the whole church and that to this ende and purpose Christ came in the flesh and that all our saluation and life consisteth in him as in our head that it may indeed be bestowed and communicated vppon all the elect of God which are vnited vnto him II. The grace of redemption and saluation is offred vnto all men but indeed is not communicated but to the elect who are made one vvith Christ For we beleeue Mar. 16.15 16 that although the grace of redemption saluation and eternall life which God bestoweth be earnestly propounded and offered vnto all men by the preaching of the gospell for that very manie are not made partakers of the same it is through their owne fault yet is it not indeed communicated but vnto those who beeing from the beginning chosen and predestinate vnto it in Christ as in the head of all the elect that they should bee his members and so made partakers of saluation were afterwards in their time called by the gospell indued with faith and so grafted into Christ and made one with him III. To the true participation of eternall life howe necessarie this true vnion or communion is with Christ For euen as the braunch can draw no liuelie sapp from the vine Ioh. 15.1.2.3.4.5.6.7 nor the bough from the tree nor the members anie motion sence or life from the head vnlesse they be ioyned to the vine tree and these to the head euen so cannot men receiue anie saluation or life from Christ in whome onelie it consisteth vnlesse they be grafted into him coupled in a true and reall vnion and being coupled doe abide in him IV. That we cannot be vnited vnto Christ vnlesse he first vnite himselfe to vs. Sith therefore the whole participation of true righteousnes saluation and life hangeth and dependeth vppon this most necessary cōmunion with Christ and vnto the same is referred both the preaching of the gospell and administration of both the Sacraments yea the whole Ecclesiasticall ministrie Therefore what our faith cōcerning the same is we purpose to declare witnes to the whole church as brieflie and plainelie as may be in certaine assertiōs or positions which after follow Of the communitie with Christ 1. Ioh. 4.10 And first we beleeue that as we therefore loue Christ as Iohn saith because he first loued vs. we come vnto him by our spirite because he came first vnto vs by his and therefore wee imbrace him by faith because he first by vertue of his spirite imbracing vs stirreth vs vp to faith so we also can by no meanes cleaue and bee vnited vnto him vnlesse he first doe ioyne and vnite himselfe vnto vs. For the one is the cause of the other the first of the latter Wherefore we must pray vnto him Ioh. 14.23 that he will come vnto vs and make his abode with vs. V. How many fold is the vnion of Christ with vs and of vs with Christ and how they are ordered in themselues We acknowledge furthermore this coniunction of Christ with vs and likewise of vs with Christ to bee threefold one which was once made in our nature another which is dailie made in the persons of the elect which yet goe astraie from the Lord and the last which shall be likewise with the Lord in our persons when they shall be present with him namelie when God shall be all in vs all And the first is referred to the second the second to the third euē as nature is ordained to grace and grace to glory For the first is also made by assuming of our nature into the vnitie of the person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the word The second is made by assuming of our persons into grace and into one misticall bodie with him and as Peter speaketh into participation of his diuine nature The third shall likewise bee made by assuming of vs
in the bread reallie and properly For in sacraments the thinges whereof they bee sacraments are not really included although they borrowe their names of the things as in baptisme the matter is apparent and out of all question in which no man saith that the blood of Christ by which we are washed from sinne or the verie regeneration it selfe is included as also in the worde of the gospell the thinges are not therein really included which by it be declared Nowe sacraments be visible words And Christ said not my bodie is in this that is in the bread but in a farre other manner of speach as This that is this bread is my bodie Now if any wil say that this is all one in sense it will follow if the bodie of Christ bee really in the bread then the bread is really properly and substantially the bodie of Christ And if this be impious to bee spoken neither do wee thinke that the other can godlily be affirmed Yet we denie not but it is in it sacramentally in that sense that wee say remission of sinnes and saluation and life is in the worde of the gospell which it declareth and offereth But sith the common sorte haue vsed to drawe such manner of speaches to superstition wee iudge that those speaches are altogether to bee foreborne and auoided and the simple plaine phrases of the scriptures to be vsed VII In the supper are giuen not onely the signes but also the things signified by them Now this is setled in vs without all controuersie that although the bodie and blood of the Lord are not that is do not existe in their owne substance and in verie deede and properly in the bread and wine but are in heauē yet notwithstanding with the verie distribution or giuing of the bread and wine there is truely offered vnto all men the true flesh of Christ to be eaten and his blood to be drunk not simplie but in as much as his flesh was betraied vnto death for vs his blood shedd for the remission of our sinnes For the words are manifest which Christ speaketh in Iohn of the eating his flesh Ioh. 6.53 and drinking his blood if any man will haue life in him and that which the Apostle saieth euē iumping with the words of Christ He which eateth the bread and drinketh the Lords cupp vnworthilie he is made guiltie of the true bodie and blood of the Lord. Neither doubt we but Christ as he plainely commaunded the bread to bee eaten so also by adding immediatly This is my bodie he closely commaunded tha to bee eaten aswell as the bread but yet each of them in a diuerse manneri VIII None but the faithfull doe truely eate Christs true flesh But albeit the flesh of Christ be offred vnto all in the supper to be eaten yet we beleeue that it is truely eaten of the faithfull only both because they alone haue communion with Christ and with his flesh and blood and others haue not neither by receiuing the bread are made partakers of him and also because they alone haue the spirite of Christ by vertue of whom onely the flesh of Christ is truely communicated yea and also because they alone doe bring true faith without which the same cannot bee truely receiued and eaten For Christ giueth not his true bodie to bee truely and indeed eaten but only to them which do aswell beleeue that the same was betraied for them vnto death and his blood shedd for remission of their sinnes as those wordes to bee true This is my bodie IX That hypocrites eate Christs bodie sacramentallie By the way we denie not but hypocrits also lacking the true and iustifying faith in receiuing and eating the breade as a sacrament of the Lords bodie may be said to eate the very true bodie of Christ also namely sacramentally not truely and indeed Euen as the Apostle saith al the Corinthians 1. Cor. 6.11 which were baptized with water were sanctified iustified namely sacramentally as is aboue said though not all of them were truely made such X. There bee three kinds of men that eate and therefore diuerse sorts of eating Thence also we learne that there are three kindes of men which may be called into question whether they eate the flesh of Christ or eate it not The first is of such as receiue the bread as common meate and not as a sacrament They eate not the true bodie of Christ in any respect and are the true Capernaites their eating is meere carnall And others of the contrarie side receiue not the bread yet not vpon contempt but onely beleeue in the gospell and their eating is meere spirituall Lastly there are others who not contenting themselues onely with faith in the gospell do also receiue the bread not simplie as the first sorte as bare bread but as a sacrament of the Lords bodie Whereuppon it comes to passe that they are said to take and eate sacramentally But sith this may bee done aswell of the the godly and faithfull as also of vngodly hypocrites yet in a diuerse manner of the one sort by faith of the other without true faith therefore we also say that the vngodly hypocrites do eate it onely sacramentally but the faithful do eate it both sacramētally truely and spiritually and therefore to saluation XI The true body of Christ is eaten onely by faith Seing then wee say that the true bodie of Christ is reccaued onely of the faithfull both sacramentally and also truely we meane that it is eaten not with the mouth of the body but the mouth of the minde and with a heart indued with faith that by meanes of the holie ghost which worketh in vs and applieth whole Christ vnto vs. For it is the meate of the minde saith Cyprian not of the bellie And Ser. de caen 1. Cor. 12.13 The flesh profiteth nothing as Christ saith and Augustine expoundeth but it is the spirit which quickneth And the Apostle teacheth Ioh. 6.63 By one spirit we are all baptized into one bodie and haue bin all made to drinke into one spirite And if that all true coniūction with Christ be through the holy ghost though he with his bodie do remaine in heauen and we vpon the earth it followeth that this eating must bee after the same sorte For what else is it to eate then to receiue vnite vnto thee meate for the nourishment of that part to which it is ordained after a due sort But the flesh of Christ as hath beene said is food of the minde not of the bellie Neither vndoubtedly is the flesh of Christ otherwise eaten then in respect that it was killed for vs and made bloodlesse as the words do sound and the breaking of the bread doth represent and that truely also euen as the passeouer and all the sacrifices were eaten But now his body liueth and can not bee without blood as at the first supper it was neither without blood nor dead And
iustly denie Tho. 3. p. q. 2. ar 4 For what proportion can there bee betweene that which is finite and the infinite betweene the creature and creator But by the way confessing with the auncient fathers that it maye be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compounded in that sense as the scripture saieth the word was made flesh and that he which was in the shape of God was now made in the likenesse of man And this is nothing else but that this eternall Hypostasis doth now subsist in two natures so as Christ is no lesse true man then true God Hereunto tendeth it which before we said of the similitude of the soule body for of these two as true and essentiall partes consisteth the person of man how the same doeth not agree fitly euerie way and yet we allow of the same similitude in that sense which Athanasius and other fathers vsed it to shew the true and substantiall vnion of the two diuerse natures although it do not fully agree in all things to this great misterie as Iustinus in his exposition of faith and other fahters haue freely cōfessed The similitude of the garment is much vsed of the auncient fathers especially of Athanasius and it is agreeable to the scriptures For the flesh of Christ wherewith his deitie was couered the Apostle calleth a vaile Heb. 10. ve 20. And most excellently by this similitude of the garment that opinion of the reall imparting and communication of the diuine proprieties with the humaine nature is quite ouerthrowne which some doe much labour to prooue by the similitudes of a fire-hoatiron and of a bodie with life in it which they can neuer doe The seuenth aphorisme We haue said that the bodie and the soule are two existenees which is manifestly prooued in Adam whose bodie did first subsist by it selfe then the soule being also a substance subsisting by it selfe was ioyned vnto it The same is also prooued by the separation of the soule from the body whereof each doeth remaine subsisting by it selfe But seing they are the essentiall partes of a man each of them indeed seuerally are existences but yet vnperfect and being ioyned they make a perfect existence that is the person of man But thus standeth not the case in Christ touching the diuine and humaine natures for his humaine nature neuer subsisted by it selfe any waies before he took it on him nor subsisteth yet after the taking but onely in the word which word was euer by it selfe a most perfect existence The 10. aphorisme The similitude of the sunne doth not altogether so fittly agree as that similitude of the glorie which our bodies shal receiue because that glorie shal cleane take away al the shame and reproch of our flesh but the sunne doeth onely dimme the light of a candle and not cleane put it out yet notwithstanding this similitude of the sunne doth plainly shew what we meane namely that by the reall communication of the sunne with the ayre the light of the candell is made altogether vnprofitable and so as it were put out and to be no light at all yet that the essentiall proprieties of the flesh are neuer quite taken away or so weakened by the personall vnion that they serue to no vse it is manifest And yet this indeede could by no meanes be auoyded if the humaine nature should really participate with the diuine omnipotencie so that it could doe whatsoeuer God could doe For the word the sonne of God neuer tooke vnto him held or holdeth any thing in vaine Therefore by this similitude of the sunne is strongly confirmed that which is prooued by the similitude of the glorie which shall take awaye all ignominie from our bodies The 11. aphorisme That same whole Christ c. Here in the first part to the name of Christ is added the sonne of man in the other parte the sonne of God God that we might shewe how that diuine attributes are spokē of Christ the man and humaine of Christ God seing the very person of Christ is ment in either part For the same Christ one and the same person is whole God whole man though not wholy as Damascene speaketh for in two distinct natures he subsisteth one and the very same This doth Damascene thus declare lib. 3. cap. 7. The whole Christ is perfect God but the vvhole subsistance of Christ is not onely God for it is not onely God but also man And the vvhole Christ is perfect man but the whole subsistance of Christ is not onely man for it is not onely man but also God For the whole subsistance doth represent the nature but whole Christ the person But whereas we spake of his actions done by him either according to his humane nature or according to his diuine that yet one and the same and whole Christ performeth the same it depēdeth vpon this that the actions were as the schools say of supposite natures But the diuersitie of the actions proceedeth from the diuersnesse of the natures or formes by which they were done Sith therefore there is in Christ two natures and but one person thereon it comes that there is but onely one worker namely whole Christ two natures that can worke and two kinde of actions Now these actions are called the actions of God and man not so much for that they proceede from one agent which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and man as that not onely the deitie but also the humanitie meet together for this worke of our saluation each ioyning his actions with the others actions And this is the first and principal force of this hypostaticall or personall vnion namely that by it the two natures and their properties actions are so vnited in one and the same person that he who by the forme of God wherin he hath frō the beginning subsisted is God and by the forme of a seruant wherein he now subsisteth is man and the same being whole God is whole man and being whole man is whole God and consequently is wholy omnipotent and euerie where present whole inomnipotent and existing in a certen place and the same whole died and whole by dying destroyed death And thus it finally followeth that to the obtaining communicating applying of our saluation not onely his diuine nature worketh but also the humaine worketh with it The secōd force followeth of the first namely that the humaine nature was made the deities instrument vnited personally thereunto and therefore a most forcible and effectuall instrument to bestow all benefites vpon vs. The third that by this vnion this masse or lumpe of humaine nature is lifte vpp to such dignitie that we neither can nor ought to bēd our actions of adoration faith prayer loue to the onely deitie of Christ as is declared in the confession For we are cōmaunded to worship the sonne himself that is the person Heb. 1. and to beleeue in him The fourth force is that because this humaine nature is
this signe of the new couenant consecrated vnto Christ in the sight of the congregation sealed for to hold fast the faith in him and to performe obedience to his commaundements and to bee ingrafted into the bodie of his church and receiued into the communion of Saintes and to a perpetuall amendment of life and to a continuance of faith in Iesus Christ to their liues end For the whole church and euery of the faithful are baptized into the death of Christ and buried with him whereof the signe is the very dipping into the water that thereby we may learne that throughout our whole life we must die vnto sinne and liue vnto righteousnesse which is to be truely baptized into the name of Christ who died and was buried for vs. The fourth aphorisme The substance also of the law yea the canonicall law is perpetual and for euer to be holden For Christ came not to destroy the law or the Prophets touching the substance of doctrine And it belongeth to the substance of the law of circumcision that they which are the couenant should be sealed vnto god with the signe of the couenant But now the signe of the couenant is baptisme which succeeded circumcision Coll. 2. Add the place of Peter out of the Acts. 2. ver 38. Repent ye and be baptized euerie one of you in the name of Iesus Christ for remission of sinnes and yee shall receiue the gift of the holte ghost For the promise is made vnto you and to your children to all that are a farre of euen as many as the Lord our God shall call To whomsoeuer therefore the promise of saluation by Christ belongeth to them also belongeth baptisme But Peter teacheth that the promise belongeth to the yong children of the faithfull therefore yong children are to be baptized Aphorisme 6. Whereas wee saide that Paule baptized againe those of whome it is spoken in the 19. of the acts as being not rightly baptized we said it without preiudice to any learned interpretor for we condemne none Onely we desire the reader to conster fauourably of that word rebaptize For we meant not that they which were rightly baptized were afterwards baptized againe but they which were not baptized with true baptisme where the true doctrine of God the father the sonne and the holie ghost went before it they after Paule had taught them the true and sound doctrine of Christ then they tooke true baptisme and after baptisme by the laying on of handes receiued the holy ghost and the gifts thereof this to speake properly was indeed not to be rebaptized but to be truely baptized Now why I thought so and do yet thinke I was induced by the authoritie both of the fathers and especially Ambrose and Hierome so expounding that place and also by a reason drawne from the text it selfe Touching the authoritie first neuer any of the fathers did teach that these words and when they heard it they vvere baptized were the words of Paule spoken of them which heard Iohn Baptist but expoūded them as the words of Luke spoken of them which heard Paule So Chrysostome Tom. 3. in act hom 40. So Occum in act ca. 19. So Augustine Tom. 7. cont Petil. ca. 7. So Gregory Tom. 1. in euang hom 20. So Bede in act ca. 19. So all the rest Moreouer most of them do in plaine tearms write that these twelue disciples were baptized by Paule or at least by Paules commandement as hauing not bin rightly baptized before because they heard not the doctrine of the holie ghost nor were baptized into his name Ambrosius Tom. 2. de spi san ad Theo. imp ca. 3. Lastly they themselues also which said wee haue not so much as heard whether there be an holy ghost were afterwards baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ And this abounded vnto grace because they then by Paules preaching knew the holy ghost neither must it be thought a contrarietie because although afterwardes no mention is made of the holy ghost yet it is beleeued and that which is omitted in wordes is expressed in faith For when it is saide in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ by the vnity of the name is fullfilled the whole misterie neither is the holy ghost separated from the baptisme of Christ because Iohn baptized to repentance Christ in the holy ghost Thus farre Ambrose Hierome Tom. 6. in Ioel. ca. 2. pa. 66. Therefore saith he the sauing health of God cānot bee seene except the holy ghost bee powred downe and who so saith that he beleeueth in Christ and beleeueth not in the holy ghost he hath not the eyes of perfect faith Whereon also in the Actes of the Apostles they which were baptized by Iohns baptisme into him that was to come that is in the name of the Lord Iesus because when Paule asked them they aunswered wee know not whether there be an holy ghost they were baptized againe yea they receiued true baptisme because without the holie ghost and the misterie of the trinitie whatsoeuer is receiued in the name of the one or the other person is vnperfect c. Augustine cont Petil. cap. 7. coll 498. saieth Paule baptized those twelue either because they had not receiued Iohns baptisme but lyed or else if they had receiued it yet they had not receiued Christs baptisme For he thought with Cyprian and Tertullian and other fathers that Iohns baptisme and Christs did differ of which matter more hereafter Of our owne writers also that learned man Wolff Musculus about the place of the Act. 19. thinketh as Ambrose doth in his cōmon place the place of baptisme whose words because he hādleth that place very largely we wil not repeat and before Musculus Bucer both on the third of Matth. and on the fourth of the epist to the Ephes vpon Math. he hath these words To those Ephesians which had beene baptized with Iohns baptisme not knowing what it was because as then they knewe not the holy gnost wherewith Paule had preached that Christ should baptize them wee reade that he said Act. 19. Iohn baptized indeed with the baptisme of repentance saying vnto the people that they should beleeue in him which should come after him that is in Christ Iesus Nowe what do we else or ought we to do in baptizing For ours is also the baptisme of repentance so long as those whome we baptize we also burie into the death of Christ that is we ascribe them into that nūber which throughout all there life must die vnto sinne and liue vnto righteousnesse and yet shall not receiue that neither but by the gift of Christ Therefore of such as be of years of discretion whom we baptize we require their faith in Christ the infants we commit vnto the church to be brought vp to the same faith Therefore Paule would neuer haue rebaptized those Ephesiās if they had beene baptized with Iohns baptisme that is with that baptisme wherewith he vsed to baptize into
in the same manner that he was to the Apostles namely visibly seeing he saide not I will be but I am neither is there any necessity to alter the sense of those wordes 46 Adde this that if he speake of the same reall presence of his body and that this promise pertained not to the Apostles onely but also to all the faithfull which were then in the world Christ had not spoken a trueth For he was not before his death or after his Resurrection present in a visible presence with all the faithfull which were then in the world and which were gathered together in his name 47 VVherefore the doctrine of the reall and substantiall yet invisible presence of the body of Christ Iesus on the earth and euerie where is not agreeable with the holy scriptures but seemeth to come neere to the Maniches who as Augustine sheweth against Faustus saie that Christs bodie doth invisiblie hang on euerie tree 48 If Christ also satte not at Gods right hand in his bodie before his resurrection and ascension into heauen as the wholle Church confesseth then their doctrine is impious and hereticall which teacheth that Christ Iesus euen from his mothers wombe according to the flesh he tooke hath sitteth at the right hand of Gods power 49 If this also be true which the Apostle teacheth and the whole scripture confirmeth and the Catholike Church confesseth that Christ Iesus not only then sate at his Fathers right hand after he ascended into heauen but also is so placed in the same at Gods right hand as he is neuer read to sitte at such a right hand in any other place then in heauen therefore then it cannot onely not be saide according to the holy scriptures that Christ Iesus sitteth any other where at God the Father his right hand then in heauen but also it is false that he also so sitteth in the earth that he is no lesse present really in substance of his body in the bread of the Lords supper and in euerie place then he is in heauen 50 For the Apostle also in other places and specially in the epistle of S. Paule to the Hebrues denieth that he is vpon the earth namely in a corporall presence for as much as hee sitting at the right hand of the throne of maiestie in heauen executeth his office of priesthood 51 Moreouet wee hold beyond all controuersie that Christ sitting at Gods right hand is a figuratiue speach seing God to speake properly hath neither right hand nor left hand neither is it lawfull to imagine any carnall thing concerning the seates and thrones in heauen wherein they are saide to sitt and often-times in the scriptures this word sitting is vsed besides other significations for dwelling ruling exercising iudgment and for resting 52 But that the Apostle Paule ment not by this phrase that Christ Iesus in his owne bodie is truely and substantially present in all places besides that which hath bin already saide it is also euident by that which for declaration sake he adioyneth 53 For to this sitting of Christ at Gods right hand the Apostle addeth for declaration sake three thinges First that Christ is so placed at Gods right hand that he is aboue all principallitie that is that he hath no creature aboue him or equall to him no not in heauen but is made higher then the heauens and al heauenly things then he addeth that all thinges are made subiect to him that is that there is nothing beneath him ouer which he hath not power and authoritie thirdly that he was giuen to be a head of the church 54 Now as we said that whatsoeuer wee haue before spoken of the resurrection from the dead and so of the ascension ought to bee vnderstood according to the humane nature of Christ so wee thinke with the sound fathers that these thinges also must bee vnderstood especially according to the same humane nature 55 The exaltation of Christs humane nature aboue al things may be vnderstood two waies either in re-pect of the locall placing as this he ascended aboue all the heauens that the meaning may be the humane nature was placed locally aboue all created things or in respect of the excellēt preheminence of the dignitie and power thereof then the meaning may be Christ euen touching his humane nature was set ouer all created thinges and to him was giuen power and authoritie ouer all things For in these two manners any thing of the same kinde is said to bee ouer another eiin place or in dignitie 56 If then this saying be vnderstood the latter waye thereupon the vbiquitie cannot be proued seing Christ in that in his humane nature he may vse his authoritie ouer all creatures although he be not in substance of body euerie where If the former way then he is not euery where seing that which is euerie where is aswell beneath and at and within as aboue all creatures 57 But Paule doeth plainely teach that Christ touching his humane nature did so rise from the dead that hee was no longer among the dead and so ascended into heauen that hee was no longer on earth and so being exalted aboue all creatures sitteth at the fathers right hand that he is nether beneath nor within created things seing all thinges are put vnder his feete 58 Neither can the head bee saide to bee in it owne substance where the feete are although it be in them in vertue and operation and indeed aswell the head to the feete as the feet to the head are ioyned together in their substāce by the sinues and by the soule 59 But the Apostle saieth Christ Iesus is giuen for a head of the church namely according to his humanitie nowe the head is aboue all the bodie 60 The Apostle therefore ment nothing lesse by his wordes of Christs sitting at Gods right hand then to conclude that Christs bodie in it owne substance is present in all places Wherefore they doe great wrong to the Apostle which by their cauills labour to conclude this out of his words 61 Neither can any such Vbiquitie be proued by any necessary consequence out of that article of faith 62 For although it were graunted which cannot bee graunted that by the sitting at Gods right hand the humane nature is made truely by it selfe omnipotent yet vnlesse it bee prooued to bee so made omnipotent that it is also made infinite and immeasurable it can by no meanes bee conuinced that Christs bodie in it owne substance is euerie where present 63 For so is this the onely cause why God also in his owne essence is euerie where that if ye take immeasurablenesse from him he cannot be saide to be euery where in his owne essence 64 And if also yee faine an infinite body and therefore euerie where yet that it is whollie in all places at once you shall neuer prooue while the world stands vnlesse yee can shewe that the same body is also a most simple essence seing God is