not the same pâ—rson with his father but he is the Ioh. 10. 30. 1. Ioh. 5. 7. samâ— God The distinction betwixt thâ—m is not in râ—spect of nature essâ—ce or time for so they are one but in respect of their manner of subsisting in that one natâ—re Ob. 8. Eightly Christ is man and if hâ— be God also â—f he haue the nature both of God and Man then he is two distinct persons but this Gods word will not admit therfore he must needs want one of them Ans Indeed Cerinthus maketh Christ and Iesus two distinct persons Nestorius taught that there are two persons in Christ but without warrant from the word For although Eph. 4. 10. Christ haue two distinct natures the Dâ—itie and the Humanitie yet is he but one person For the person of the Son of God existing a true person from all eternitie did assume the humane nature being no person of it selfe into the vnitie of his person did appropriate it vnto himself without coÌ„founding or defacing the properties of either of the two natures so that albeit there be two distinct natures the diuine humane â—et there is but one person as a man is but one true person though two distinct natures concurre in him one of the soule and the other of the body It is true I graunt that the Word is a person but I denie that the soule and body of Christ being vnited to make a perfect man do make a distinct and perfect person For a persoÌ„ must not onely be sâ—me particular and singular thing but it must also subsist and consist by it selfe and must not be susteined of any other But Christs humane nature froÌ„ the first beginning therof was susteined by the person of the Word For it was at once both formed assumed of the Word into the vnity of his person made proper to the Word without this assumption or personal vnion it neither was nor had been nor should be Plin. Histo nat lib. 16. c. 44. A resemblance whereof wee finde in the plant called Misselto which grows not but in a tree of another kinde and thence receiues his sap Neither is this any disgrace but rather an honour to his humanitie because it doth subsist by the person of the Word And albeit all the faithfull be vnited to the Word yet it is onely in a lower degree to wit by communication of grace and not by communication of personall subsistence So theÌ„ we see that though there be two distinct natures in our Lord yet it doth not followe that he is two distinct persons because his manhood is not a person as other men are but Iohn is a person but so is not Chrâ—st as he is man Vse 1. a naâ—urâ— Thus much for the Doctrine the vses â—ollow First the consideration oâ— Christs God-head teacheth vs to respect and honor him with all diuine worship in humilitie and sinceritie of heart He is God therefore we must honour him as God and being God he is omniscient and all-seeing his â—ies are a flame of fiâ—e not more terrible then peircing All things are nâ—â—ed before him and no thâ—â—gâ—â— is hid from his vnderstanding It is not fig-leaues that can couer vs nor the hils that can hide vs from his eye sight Secondly it should terrifie the wicked that dishonour him that reiect his Vse 2 lawes cast off his gouernment and disgrace his seruants For being God he is able with ease to be reuenged of theÌ„ All creatures in heauen and earth are at his becke His authoritie is absolute and his power infinite All power in heauen and earth is giuen him and he Is 〈◊〉 6. Math. 28. 18 shall regine till he hath put all his eneâ—â—â—â— vnder hâ—â— feet Tâ—ose that will not that he reigne ouer theÌ„ shal be brought and 〈◊〉 before him Nâ—â—preces 〈◊〉 〈…〉 m neither price nor praying will perswade him if once he take in hand to iudge them to condemne them It is good for them therefore to take the â—â—â—e and to repent before it be too late Thirdly this doctâ—iâ—e maketh much Vse 3 for our comfort For seeing Christ is God we may assure our selues that he is as wel able as wilâ—â—ng to do vs good and to deliuer vâ— from euill and doth liue euer to defend and protect vs. For beeing God he is immortall and immutable Therefore we which are hiâ— may boldly say I will not feaâ—â— what mâ—◠〈◊〉 what man can do vnto me For he 〈◊〉 is our friend and fâ—uourer is God omnipotent and he will not leaue vs nâ—r forsake vs Art thou assâ—ulted by Satan fâ—ie to Christ thy God he can as easily â—mite him to the ground as Dâ—â—â—d did Golâ—ah Art thou vexed with sinne then go to him for he is able to saue thee from it He can drowne thy sinnes in his bloud as he drowned the Egâ—ptiâ—â—s in the sea Do the terrors of death arrest thee Do the pangs of hell seaze vpon thee Be not dismayd thy Suertie is God he can take away sinne which is the sting of death and can refâ—eâ—h tâ—y soule with the ioyes of 1. Cor. 15. 56. heauen Art thou poore or afflicted with sicknesse Comfort thy selfe and faint not For thy Lord is God he can either release thee from thine afflictioÌ„ or relieue thee in it as he did Daniel in the deâ—â—e of Lyons and the three children in the fierie furnace that thou shalt rather receiue good then susteine harme If he please not to deliuer thee yet he can and will if thou wilt not â—linch but depend vpon him vouch safe to giue thee fortitude patieÌ„ce to endure it And for the thorny crowne in this world he is able to honour thee with a crowne of gold of golden glorie glorious eternitie in the world to come Finally doe thine enemies presâ—e thee and seeke to deâ—oure thee Feare not For thy king is God and therefore able to conuert or subâ—eâ—t them He can either destroy them himselfe or make them to slay one an other as the enemies of good 2. Chro 20. 23. â—ehoshaphat sometimâ—s did Fourthly this doctrine serueth to Vse 4 conâ—ute the opinion of Eunomius who held that Christ was a mere man also the errour of the Monothelites who thought that Christ had one wil only but seeing that he is not only man buâ— God it followeth that he hath both an â—umane and a diuine will according to his two distinct natures which are not confounded in that one person by reason of the personall vnion but do truly â—â—separably and indiuisibly continue without confusion conuersion or transmutation So much for this second doctrine CHAP. IIII. The true members of Christ cannot be cut off and perish this conclusion is proued THirdly in that the Apostle here Doct. 3 saith that Christ hath washed vs in his Bloud we see how little reason there is for any to thinke that any of his true members can be cut off from
not to the perfect assurance of it but by degrees Pâ—â— Sanctification is imperfect in this life not accomplished 〈◊〉 the liâ—â— t 〈…〉 me Holines dotâ— not growe vp like Ioâ—â— Ioh. 4. his gourd in one night A vesâ—â—li with a narrow neckeâ—s not filled all at once The C 〈…〉 of God is not at his â—ull growth thâ— first day of his birth God 〈◊〉 not 〈…〉 ne stark dead â—â—th or 〈…〉 did G 〈…〉 〈…〉 wouÌ„d â—s the 1. 〈…〉 1. 〈◊〉 â—e 34. â—o◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 king 〈◊〉 The Moâ—â—â— we see i 〈…〉 at tâ—e 〈◊〉 first day of 〈◊〉 increase 〈◊〉 waxâ—th by little and 〈…〉 is wrought in vs by degâ—â—â—s no man is fully perfect For Who can say I am cleane So long as we Pro. 20. 9. Quamdiu â—â—uis necesse est peccatum eâ—â—e in mâ—brâ—â— tuis August â—â—â—e sin shall not die though it shall not damne vs because it is forgiuen vs. Sixtly remission oâ— sins is a part of iustâ—fication but sanctification is no part therof but rather an effect fruit 〈◊〉 argument thereof Lastly the washing away of sin in Iustification goes in nature before the â—â—olution of sanctification doth next 〈◊〉 nature succeede effectuall vocation For whoÌ„ God calleth them he doth in Rom. 8. 30. 〈◊〉 next place iustifie then sanctifie And I say in nature not 〈◊〉 time if we respect the first degree of saÌ„ctification Fâ—r when God doth actually 〈…〉 a man his sinnes when Christ doth actually bâ—â—h a man in his bloud and proâ—â—â—e the remission of his sins when God doth apply the merit of Christs bloud vnto a man then doth he also begin to refine and melt him then doth he cast him into a new mould and giueth him a new heart And as that woman with a peece of a mâ—â—stoÌ„e did brâ—ak the braine-pan of that vsurping tyrant Iudg. 9. 53. Abimelech euen so when God remits sinne he doth also as it were crack the brain-pan thereof with the milstone of his power and the strength of his Spirit and so in one article of time he doth dismount that vsurping Tyrannesse from her Throne he takes the crowne from her head and her scepter out of her hand and doth so disarme weaken her that she can neither damne vs nor domineâ—e within vs. And this being the sense let vs see what doctrines follow hereeof CHAP. II. The Man-head of Christ is proued Fiue reasons rendered why hee was to bee man FIrst in that the Apostle doth attribute Doct. 1 bloud vnto Christ I conclude that Christ was true man like other men sinne onely excepted This the Hebr. 2. 16. 17. holy scriptures do very plentifully manifest For hee is that Seede of the woman which should break the Serpents Gen. 3. 15. head And he is that Son which a virgin Is 7. 14. should conceiue and bring foorth He is sayd to be borne and circumcised to hunger thirst die and rise again all which do sufficiently proue the truth of his humanity Now it was requisite that Christ should be a man First that the prophecies that went long before of his humane nature might be truly fulfilled Secondly the iustice of God required that that nature should be punished which had offeÌ„ded Thirdly it seemed most equall in Gods eye that satisfaction for the sinne of man should be made in the nature of man Fourthly that he might be a mercifull Heb. 1. 17. high Priest able to be touched with the feeling of our infirmities Lastly that he might be able to suffer and die for vs. For the God head cannot possibly suffer beeing an impassible pure absolute 1. Tim. 6. 16. immortall vnchangeable nature Now as it was fiâ— that he should Iam. 1. 17. bee a man so it was also necessary that he should be sinlesse and holy First that his thoughts words and workes might be holy SecoÌ„dly that he might make vs holie and couer the impurity of our nature with the perfect purity of his Thirdly that he might offer vp a pure and spotlesse sacrifice Fourthly he was to be a preacher of holines a taxer of iniquity therfore it was fittest that he should be holy lest his practise should crosse his preaching and so marre his Ministerie Lastly that his humane nature might be aâ—â—omed into the vnity of the person of the Sonne of God who is most holie euen Holinesse it selfe If it be damanded why the Sonne should rather become man then either the Father or the Holy Ghost I answere it was most beseeming that the world should be redeemed and that all things should be restored by him by Ioh. 1. 〈◊〉 Col. 〈◊〉 16. Hâ—b 1 2. whome all things were created It was most fiâ—ting that he should saue man from death and procure him life who did at first vouch safe him life that as by him we receiued being so we might also by him receâ—â—e our welbeing Of this doctrine thâ—se vses may be made First we may behold the loue of Vse 1 Christ vnto vs who being the image of Col. 1 15. 16. God and the grand Creator of all things in heauen and earth did neuerthelesse for our good assume vnto himselfe the nature of man and not the nature of â—he Angels which notwithstanding is far more excellent far more diuine Heb. 2. 16. noble Secondly seeing Christ who is e 〈…〉 ll Vse 2 Phil. 2. 6. Reâ— 1. 5. to God Prince of all the kings of the earth did so farre debase himselfe for vs base wretches as voluntarily to take vpon him the forme of a Phil. 2. 7. seruant the shape and nature of man let vs arme our selues with the same mind neuer thinking any thing too base for vs to beare or doe which may serue for his glorie and the good of his Church Iâ— the Sonne of God did so humble himselfe why should we be proud and hautie If God thought not skorne to be made man for vs why should we thinke much to performe any seruice vnto him for the honour of his name how base or vile soeuer it maâ— seeme in the eve of man Thirdly seeing Christ is truly man Vse 3 made of the seed of the wo 〈…〉 hence is confuted ouerthrowne the errour of Gal. 44. the Maâ—tchâ—â—s whâ— held that Christs bodie was but imaginaâ—ie A sâ—igned bodie hath blood no more then a painted fire hath heate But Christ had true blood or else our redemption by his blood is a forged fiction and vntrue The errour of Macedonius and Valentinus who taught that Christ brought with him a celesticall bodie out of heauen But the Lord promised Abraham that in his seede all nations should be blessed Gen. 22. 18 The errour of Apelles who said that Christs body was of the ayre and that it passed through the virgin Mary as water through the pipe or chanell Whereas notwithstanding Dauid had a promise made him that his son should 2. Sam. 7. 12. 14.
sit vpon his throne reigne for euer And the language of the scriptures is that he was conceiued and borne not that he passed or ran through her Rather Act. 2. 30. Math. 1. 20. 23. Luk. 2 7. therefore Apâ—lles was the pipe through which this vayne conceite came into the world from Satan the fountaine thereof who is a lyer the Ioh. 8. 44. Ioh. 14. 6. father of lies as he that is truth it selfe affirmeth The errour of Apollinaris who held that Christ had not a reasonable soâ—le but that his Deitie is in stead thereof But this opinioÌ„ Christ himself directly Math. 26. 38. crosseth when he saith My soule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is very heauy vnto death and the scripture saith Hâ— yeelded vp the Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is as impossible for a true man to haue no soule as a liuing tree to haue no sap or for the sunne to haue no light or to speake more fitly aâ— it is impossible for a thing to be this or that without the forme or formall cause which makes it so to be As there can be no perfect body without the head so ther can be no perfect man without a soule The errour of Iodochus Harchius a Libertine who imagined that Christ had a double flesh one naturall from the virgin Mary now glorious in the heauens the other spirituall intelligible and made by the power of God of bread wine But we read but of one body one flesh and one blood which â—e â—ad The errour of 〈◊〉 who taught that the humane nature of Christ was after the vnion endowed with the properties of the Diuiâ—tie Indeed Damaâ—cene and Gregory say that the flesh Greg. Nâ—sâ— of Christ was dâ—ified but they meane it in respect of the comunction thereof to the diuine nature in one persâ—n and in regard of those admirable gifts by when his humane nature is not abolished but become more excellent then all crâ—atures The errour of the V 〈…〉 ries who attribute to Christs humaâ—â—â— the essentiall properties of the Dâ—uiâ—â—â—e as to bee present euery where Which ouerthroweth the nature of a true body which is finite and circumscripâ—ble Tâ—llâ—â— propâ—â—â—tateâ— tol it naturam For take away the properties of a thing and thou shalt destroy the nature of it And albeit his Deitie is in all places without exception yet it doth not follow that his Humanitie should be so too because it is personallâ— vâ—â—ted to it no more then that the pearle in the ring should-extend â—â—sâ—â—se as farre as the ring because it is iâ—yned to it or fastned in it Indeed 〈◊〉 things are so vnited together as that one of them reacheth no further then the other then one of them can be no where but the other wil be there also But if one of them extend beyâ—nd the other then wheresoeuer the leâ—â—er is there the greater is also but not so on the contrarie The body of the sâ—nne and the light thereof are câ—nioyned and yet the sunnes body doth not really reach as farre as the â—â—ght doth The eye and the sight are nearely coâ—â—oyned and yet the sight reacheth to many things vnto which the eye doth not extend it selfe Because therefore Christs manhead is farâ—e exceeded of his Godhead it can be no where but his Godhead will be Psal 139. 7. 8. 9. Non sequitur vt quod in Deo est sit vbique vt Deuâ— there also being infinite so well for place as it is for time and power and it cannot bee in euery place where his Godhead is It doth not follow saith Augustine that that which is in God should be euery where as God And though Christ sit at the right hand of God yet it doth no more â—ollow therof that he should be in all places then that as man he should be really before all time And whereas the Apostle saith that hee ascended to fill all thingâ— his meaning is not that hee Eph. 4. 10. ImmortalitateÌ„ ei â—edit naturaÌ„ non abstulit August went vp to fill all thing with his humanitie which is indeed become immortall but is noâ— depriued of the naturall properties thereof but by the distribution of the gifts of his Spirit into the hearts of the elect in what place soeuer they liue Or as Bernard pleaseth to turne and vnderstand it that hee might 〈◊〉 vt adimpleret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all things which were foretold and which were required to our saluation And so the Greeke word signifieth Math. 15. 17. where Christ saith I came not to destroy but to fulfill 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law Lastly seeing Christ was a true man and therefore hath a true body as other men all infirmities being now laâ—de aside it ouerthroweth the opâ—nion of the Râ—miâ—h Synagogue 〈◊〉 teacheth that his body is cor 〈…〉 ly and â—â—â—st 〈…〉 lly in the Sa 〈…〉 nt We beleeue that his body 〈…〉 ade of the purified substance of 〈◊〉 Viâ—gin and noâ— of Bakers bread 〈◊〉 that aâ— hath the essentiall properties of a true body as length latitude â—â—â—cknesse and circumscription and â—â—â—t it is noâ— both visible in heauen and invisible vpon earth And although hee promised to be present Math. 28. 20 â—â—th his Disciples to the end of the world yet we must not thence conclude that his body was to continue among men vppon earth after his aâ—conâ—ion For those words are to be vnderstood onely of the presence of Ier. 23. Enter praeâ—enter Deus hiâ— vbique potenter his power grace spirite or godhead which filleth heauen and earth Indeed it is true that as hee hath taken his body with him vp so he hath left his body behinde him that is his Church vnto whom also he hath giuen leaue to consecrate certaine outward elements to be signes and seales of his body and bloud and which is Eph. 5. Col. 1. by a kinde of figure tearmed his body and bloud For the body of Christ is three-fold Naturall Mysticall Sacramentall But wee speake in this place of his naturall body to which the soule is vnited to make a true humane nature CHAP. III. Christs God-head is proued by foure arguments A Second doctrine hence ariseth in that the Apostle saith that Christ Doct. 2 hath washed vs from our sinnes in his bloud wheÌ„ce I coÌ„clude that Christ is not onely man but also God For there cannot be that vigour vertue or validity in the bloud of any mere maÌ„ which is able to purge men of their sinnes and to procure the pardon of them and to satisfie the infinite iustice of God for them Therefore our Redeemer must needs be true God that his bloud might be meritorious and effectuall with God Besides this collection we haue euident testomonies out of holy writ and inuincible arguments to confirme this truth For the first Isaâ—ah saith that Christ shal be called the Mightie God Is 9. 6. Iâ—râ—my saith that his name