Vnion Joh. 14.20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father and you in me and I in you that day refers either to the time when the Spirit should be given which is promised v. 16 17 or to the glorisied state spoken of v. 19 upon the effusion of the Spirit men may come to know something of this Union but it will never be fully understood by them till they be in Glory In the opening of it so far as the present state and the height of the mystery will admit of I must look into the Word and keep to that and fetch all from that for 't is Revelation and not Reason which here must give us Light The Word having reveal'd it Reason may be useful as an Handmaid to shadow it out by such and such Resemblances thereby to help us the better to conceive of it but that which must be our first and main Guide about it is Scripture Revelation Now the Scripture speaks of a threefold Vnion 1. There is the Vnion of three Persons in one Nature Of the Vnion of the Three Pexsons of the two Natures in Christ and of the Mystical Vnion 2. There is the Vnion of two Natures in one Person 3. There is the Vnion of Persons where yet Persons and Natures are distinct 1. There is the Vnion of three Persons in one Nature This is in the Trin-Vnity where you have three Persons united in the Godhead the Trinity in Vnity and the Vnity in Trinity One in Three in respect of Nature and Essence and Three in One in respect of Personality This is that ineffable incomprehensible Union which is between the Father Son and Holy Ghost in the same common Nature of the Godhead Of which the Apostle speaks 1 Joh. 5.7 There are three that bear record in heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one Here are Three and yet One Three as to their distinct Personal Subsistences and yet One as to their common Nature This a Mystery to be adored not to be fathomed a * The Union betwixt the Three Persons c. the knowledge of this is not nay cannot be attained unto by the Light of Nature No example can illustrate no Reason Angelical or humane can comprehend the hidden excellency of this glorious Mystery But it is discovered to us by a divine Revelation in the written Word and our Faith must receive and our Piety admire what our Reason cannot comprehend Cheynel of the Divine Trin-Unity ch ◠p. 19 Vide Aquin. p. 1. Qu. 39. Art 1 2. Lombard Lib. 1. Dist 2 3. Mystery much too deep for the Plummet of Reason to reach he that by Reason would go about to grasp it is as foolish as he that would attempt to put the Ocean into a bucket or to grasp the Universe in the hollow of his hand 2. There is the Vnion of two Natures in one Person This is that which we commonly call the Hypostatical Vnion or the Union of the two Natures in Christ his Godhead and his Manhood both making up but one Person You may thus conceive of it 'T is the substantial supernatural conjunction of the two Natures in Christ the Divine assuming the Humane and giving it a subsistence in its self so that both make but one Person and yet so as that the being and properties of both Natures are preserved intire As to this twofold Vnion I am not at present concern'd to speak to them when I shall come to the third Verse I shall have occasion there to speak to the latter 3. There is the Vnion of Persons where yet Persons and Natures are distinct and this is the Mystical Vnion The Mystical Vnion opened that which is betwixt Christ and Believers this I am only now to speak to Concerning which that you may not mistake the Nature of it you must know here is Vnion but no transmutation confusion or commixtion here is the union of persons but not personal union 1. Here is union but no transmutation confusion or commixtion I 'le put them together for brevity sake Believers are united to Christ but yet not so as that they are changed or transformed into the very essence or being of Christ so as to be Christed with Christ as some too boldly speak or that he is changed or transformed into the essence and being of Believers no you must not entertain a thought of any such thing Christ is Christ still and Believers are but Creatures still notwithstanding this Union though they be really and nearly united yet both keep their Natures distinct and are the same after the Union that they were before it As it is in the Persons in the Sacred Trinity (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasc de Orthod Fide lib. 1. cap. 11. pag. 42 there is Vnion but no confusion they are Essentially one yet they have their personal Properties and distinct Subsistences And as it is in the two Natures of Christ they are under a near Vnion they make but one Person yet for all this they are (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synod Calced distinct the Godhead is not turned into the Manhood nor the Manhood into the Godhead they are united but not confounded or converted for both of them even after this Union do still retain their * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasc Dial. cap. 66. essential properties without confusion or conversion So 't is in the Union of Believers with Christ for thus far we may make use of the two former Vnions to open the Mystical Union by they all agree in This though in other things they differ You may take a lower resemblance of it if you please In Man there is a near Vnion between Soul and Body and these two united make up the man * Vide Nemes de Nat. Hom. p. 97. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. yet upon the union the Soul is not turned into the nature of the Body nor the Body into the nature of the Soul they are not confounded though united they yet retain their essence and properties distinct the Soul is the Soul still and the Body is the Body still So it is in the Vnion between Christ and Believers 2. Here is the Vnion of persons but not personal union And here lies the difference between the Mystical Vnion and the Hypostatical Vnion The Hypostatical Vnion is Personal but not of Persons the reason is because in Christ there are two Natures but there is but one Person there is this Nature and that Nature in Christ but not this Person and that Person in Christ as Nestorius held there is in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliud aliud but not alius alius as the Learned express it Christ did not assume the * Vide Lombard Lib. 3. Dist 5. Person of man but the Nature of man into his Person Non assumpsit Hominem Personam sed
proper Son of God but how why not only as he was eternally begotten by him but also as he was miraculously Conceived by the Virgin Mary that agreeing to none but only to him And therefore in this Point upon their blending of these things together they are judged by Some * See Peltius Harm Remonstr Socin Art 4. to Socinianize Now though this Opinion doth come incomparably short of that which absolutely deny's Christ's eternal Generation provided that the abettors of it who seem to grant this Generation do state it right that is that they hold Christ to be begotten in the very Nature and Essence of God and therein equal to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which there is just matter of doubting as to the * Instit Theol. lib. 4. cap. 32. Person nam'd but now he making the Son in the Deity it self not co-ordinate but subordinate to the First Person I say though this Opinion thus stated be nothing neer so bad as the former yet †Censura Profess Leid in c. 3. p. 51. Trigland in Exam. Apâ—log cap. 5. Alting Theol. Elenc p. 151. c. et p. 181. c. Divines of another persuasion cannot close with it or let it pass without some Confutation The Arguments against it do very much fall in with those which have been insisted upon already 1. First if Christ be the Son of God as eternally begotten with respect to his Divine Nature and also the Son of God as conceived in time c. with respect to his Humane Nature then the Scripture doth groundlesly and needlesly distinguish betwixt his being the Son of God in reference to the one and his being the Son of Man in reference to the other Nature Why doth it make him to be * Rom. 1.3 4. God's Son according to the Spirit of Holiness i. e. his Divine Nature and the Son of David according to the Flesh i. e. his Humane Nature if with respect to both he be the Son of God this is to confound those things which the Scripture makes distinct and places under several references Christ's Sonships as the Son of God and as the Son of Man are two very different things and therefore they cannot have the same foundation 'T is true he who is the Son of Man is also the Son of God but as he is the Son of Man or in what is proper to him as the Son of Man so he is not the Son of God And 't is true these two in concreto may convertibly be predicated each of the other thus the Son of God is the Son of Man and the Son of Man is the Son of God but this is founded not upon the oneness of the foundation of the Relation nor upon the oneness of the two Natures but upon the * Inficiamur Christum esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. quamvis propter Naturam Humanam personae divinae hypostaticè unitam dicamus etiam in concreto hunc hominem Jefum Deum ac Filium Dei unigenitum esse per communicationem idiomatum c. Cloppenb Comp. Socin p. 38. communication of properties and the union of the two Natures in one Person It comes to this where the relations are distinct the grounds of these relations must be distinct and therefore Christ's Sonship as the Son of God and as the Son of Man being distinct there cannot be one and the same ground of them 2. If this was so that Christ was the Son of God conjunctly upon his eternal Generation and also upon his conception and advancement in time then he would strangely differ in the same relation I do not contradict my self in what I said but now under the former head for there I spake of both the Sonships of Christ which differ very much and must not be confounded but here I speak only of his single Sonship as he is the Son of God which is but one and must not be divided Observe me as the difference of the Sonships of Christ as the Son of God and as the Son of Mary depends upon the difference of their Grounds eternal Generation being the ground of the one and temporal Generation being the ground of the ooher so the oneness of the same single Sonship of Christ as the Son of God depends upon the oneness of the ground of it viz. his Generation by the Father for if you add any other ground to this then Christ ceases to be one Son then he is the Son of God partly by Nature and partly by Grace partly begotten and partly made partly from eternity and partly in time what a strange Son would Christ be upon these terms 3. There can be but one true and proper Cause of one and the same Filiation this hath been already proved Divines are so tender of multiplying this relation of Christ that several of them though they grant the distinction of his Natures and hold his twofold Generation yet they argue but for one Sonship to belong to him for say they Sonship belonging to the Person and being founded upon the Person Christ being but one Person therefore he can have but one Sonship so * 3. p. Quest 35. Art 5. in corpore Art Aquinas argues I concur with †See Durandus Rada c. Junius Martinius Amesius in Hoorneb Socin Conf. tom 2. de Christo c. 1. p. 30 31 32. Others who attribute a twofold Sonship to Christ but then I affirm that each of them have but that one single Cause or foundation which is respectively proper to them 't is only eternal Generation of the Father which makes Christ to be the Son of God and 't is only temporal Generation of the Virgin which makes him to be the Son of Man 4. We say Oppositorum opposita ratio if Christ be the Son of Man only because he was conceived of the substance of his Mother then he is the Son of God only upon the account of his being begotten of the substance of his Father as a * Dr O. ag B. p. 179. Worthy Author argues 5. Whatever is over and above eternal Generation is but manifestative and not constitutive of Christ's Sonship this hath been made out in the several particulars alleadg'd therefore it will be needless to add any thing further upon it I have shown wherein and how Christ is the Son of God his own proper Son I 'le but propound one Question and very briefly Answer it and then I shall have finish'd the Explicatory part 'T is this if Christ be God's Son because in his ineffable Generation the Divine Essence was communicated to him Quest. Of the different Communication of the Divine Essence from the Father to the Son and to the holy Ghost Answ why may not the Holy Ghost the third Person also be stiled the Son of God to whom the same Essence was communicated as well as unto Christ I answer No for two Reasons 1. Because 't is the same Essence in
We read Mark 11.9 They that went before and they that followed cryed saying Hosanna blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord Believers who liv'd before Christ's incarnation and they who follow since both are equally obliged to magnifie God for him both receiving the same benefit by him 2. It may be enquired Why Christ was incarnate just when he was why at this very Epocha or period of time rather than at any other was Christ incarnate why not either before or after but just then Answ why because it was that very time which God had set therefore called the fulness of time Gal. 4.4 He that is pleas'd to set the time for other things as for the Churches deliverances Thou shalt arise and have mercy upon Zion for the time to favour her yea the set time is come Psal 102.13 and so in several Other cases surely he was pleas'd to set the time for so great a thing as the coming of his own Son in Flesh he in his eternal decree had determin'd the precise time for this which therefore when it was come then Christ came now I say all must be resolv'd into this True there were some more immediate Reasons why he came just when he did he was to come before the Scepter was wholly departed from Judah Gen. 49.10 whilst the Second Temple was standing Hag. 2.6 7 8 9. during the Fourth Monarchy Dan. 2.44 Daniel's 70 weeks were almost expired Dan. 9.24 there was a general expectation raised in the world of the coming of the Messias as might easily be made out Now with respect to these things the Lord Jesus came at that very period of time whereat he did but they all falling out but in compliance with and subordination to the Decree of God therefore the determination of the time of Christ's Coming and Incarnation must ultimately be resolv'd into that O he came just when he did neither sooner nor later because the Father had appointed that very time Prop. 'T was not the Divine Essence absolutely considered which assumed Flesh but that Essence considered as subsisting in the Second Person 4. 'T was not the Divine Nature or Essence simply and absolutely considered which assumed Flesh but it was that * Tota igitur Natura Divina fuit incarnata sed non quatenus absolutè in se consideratur ut omnibus Personis communis sed quatenus personalibus proprietatibus seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Personâ Filii determinata coâ—sideratur Davenant in Col. 2.9 p. 240. Solus Filius suscepit humanitatem in singularitatem Personae non in unitatem Naturae Divinae Concil Tolet. Neque enim Divina Natura si propriè accuratè loqui velimus sed Persona Divina assumsit Naturam Humanam Divina quidem Natura unitur Humanae sed eam nòn assumsit assumere enim non est Naturae sed Suppositi Bisterf contra Crell p. 565. Vide Alting Theol. Problem p. 562. 577. Nature considered as subsisting in the Second Person If this restriction and stating of the Point be not admitted we cannot avoid our holding the Incarnation was common to all the Persons contrary to what the Church hath ever held and to what was asserted but even now therefore when 't is said †1 Tim. 3.16 God manifested in the Flesh you are to understand God in the Personal not in the Essential notion Prop. The Nature assuming was the Divine Nature 5. The Nature assuming was the Divine Nature that being considered as was laid down in the forgoing Proposition The Manhood did not assume the Godhead but the Godhead it * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasc de Orthod Fide lib. 3. cap. 2. p. 167. Man did not become God but God became Man 't is not said that †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. de Inc. Christi t. 1. p. 612. the Flesh was made the Word but the Word was made Flesh this is a thing so unquestionable that the very naming of it is enough Prop. That the Humane Nature was so assum'd as to subsist in the Divine that both Natures make butâ— one Person 6. The Lord Jesus the eternal Son of God God blessed for ever did so assume the Humane Nature as in a most mysterious and unconceivable manner to unite it upon the first framing or forming of it to his Divine Nature and to give that a subsistence in this so as that both do make but one Person the Essence Properties Operations of both Natures yet remaining the same without either conversion or confusion Here the Hypostatical Vnion is both asserted and and also described for wherein doth the nature of that Vnion consist but in that which is here laid down Of the Hypostatical Vnion Of it you read Col. 2.9 In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily i. e. Personally and Hypostatically Rom. 9.5 Whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the Flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever here 's both the Natures of Christ and both in him making but one Person upon the personal conjunction of which he 's call'd Emmanuel God with us Matth. 1.23 But not to insist upon the Proof of this Vnion which all but INFIDELS and SOCINIANS do believe The mysteriousness thereof I will endeavour as well as I can rather to explain and open it an undertaking which I enter upon the Lord knows with great fear and dread because of the loftiness and mysteriousness of the thing to be opened O 't is a thing so sublime and mysterious as that it transcends the capacity of Angels and Men how then shall I be able to speak of it or to it Take whom you will single out a Person of the sharpest wit the profoundest judgment the most elevated reason let all the most raised abilities concur in him and then set the Hypostatical Vnion before this person alas poor man how will he be puzzl'd nonplus'd unable to fathom so great a depth as this is And well he may since 't is the mystery of mysteries one of the first magnitude than which by a narrow intellect none more hard to be conceiv'd of or understood 'T is indeed sure and certain to Faith which believes it because God reveals it which readily answers all Objections and * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin Martyr solves all difficulties about it by resting on divine revelation but if Reason beyond its proper bounds will be prying into and judging of a thing so abstruse its blindness as well as its boldness will soon appear its bucket will not go to the bottom of a Well so deep its line is too short to measure such heights breadths lengths depths as are here to be found I do not in the least wonder that they who make Reason to be the supream Judge of matters of Faith do throw off the belief of this mystery for though it be not at all contrary to reason
that being suppos'd to be modest and rectified yet 't is infinitely above it There are several unions in Nature but all come short of this there 's no resemblance in the whole compass of Nature that doth exactly reach it Some I know speak of a * See Mr. Perkins on Galat. p. 273. plant which hath no root of its own only it grows and is sustain'd by a tree of another kind by which they would shadow out the subsistence of the Humane Nature of Christ in the Divine Others tell us the union of the * Yet there is a disparity in the union of these two in Man and of the two Natures in Christ Of which seè Dr. Jackson on the Creed 7th B. p. 333. Soul and Body in Man is of all resemblances the most fully expressive of this Vnion Now 't is granted these or some other such-like resemblances may hold forth something of it but alas 't is but something they go but a little way their discoveries are as imperfect as those which some Travellers make of the World who when they have seen and said all they can do yet leave a vast terra incognita undiscovered Without controversie great is the mystery of Godliness God manifested in the flesh c. Christ's incarnation hath the precedency before all the other mysteries which are there mentioned about him if that in it self be such a mystery how must the mystery thereof be heightned the Hypostatical Vnion being taken in and added to it The Mystical Vnion is very mysterious the Hypostatical Vnion much more Well therefore might I in the Proposition thus lay it down that the uniting of the Humane Nature in Christ to the Divine is done in a most mysterious and unconceivable manner Well! upon the due weighing of that which hath been said it concerns me with all tenderness and humility to treat of this Argument and to fetch in all the light and direction that ever I may for I shall need it all from the Word and Spirit The Hypostatical Vnion opened in some Particulars 'T is not a common or ordinary Vnion but special and extraordinary 1. I desire that this in the General may be taken notice of that the Hypostatical Vnion is no common or ordinary Vnion but that which is special and extraordinary O 't is an Union by it self that which is of a very different and peculiar nature from all other Vnions Of which there is great diversity for instance there 's an Union by apposition as in the several parts of a building by mixtion as in the several Elements in a compound body by alteration as when water is turned into wine there is a Natural Vnion as in the Soul and Body in man a Moral Vnion as betwixt Friend and Friend a Relative Vnion as betwixt Husband and Wife a Mystical Vnion as betwixt Christ and Believers an Vnion in respect of special presence or inhabitation of special assistance of special grace and favour which was all that Nestorius would grant in the Vnion of Christ's Divine Nature with his Humane but most falsely * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Athan de Inc. Verbi Dei p. 593. for then there would be no more for substance in the Hypostatical Vnion then what there is in that which belongs to all Believers Christ being in these respects united also to them though in a lower degree Now some of these Vnions are not at all applicable to Christ such as are so do yet come short of that high and glorious Vnion that is betwixt his Godhead and his Manhood alas take the highest of them what is it when compar'd with the Hypostatical Vnion You 'l ask me why or what is there in that more than in them let the following head be observed and there will be the Solution of this Question I add therefore The two great things wherei◠it consists 2. The two Natures are so united in Christ as that the Humane doth subsist in the Divine and that both do make up but one Person Herein lies the formal nature of the Hypostatical Vnion that wherein it differs from and transcends all other Vnions whatsoever the explication of this therefore I must a little insist upon Of the Subsistence of the Humane Nature in the Divine 1. First the conjunction of the two Natures in Christ is so near as that the Godhead imparts subsistence to the Manhood for the Manhood as 't is in Christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having no subsistence but what it hath in the Personality of the eternal Word so it subsists and no otherwise And here 's one great difference 'twixt the Humane Nature as in us and as in Christ in us it hath its proper personality and subsistence in Christ it hath not so But how comes this about take an answer to that from a * Estwick against B. p. 113 Judicious Divine It 's true saith he the essential parts of a man's Body and Soul being united would have constituted a Person as they do in all other men if they had been left to themselves but it was prevented and stayd from subsisting in it self and was drawn into the Unity of the second Person by Divine and supernatural operation whereby it was highly advanced and subsists in a more eminent sort than it could have done if it had become a rational humane Person * Incarnatio non est qualiscunque unio sed est specialissima proxima immediatissuna unio quâ Persona divina humanam Naturam suâ Personalitate carentem it a terminat ut eam personaliter sustentet ipsique illud complementum attamen longè eminentiori modo communicet quod a suà connaturali Personalitate accepisset Bisterf contra Crell p. 568. Vid. Davenant in Colos p. 244. And this may also prevent that Objection which from hence so readily offers it self viz. that if the Humane Nature in Christ hath not a personal subsistence belonging to it then it wants that perfection which that Nature commonly hath in all Men which seems to make it less perfect and excellent in him than 't is in them This is easily answered the Consequence is not good because the want of this subsistence is compensated with advantage in that subsistence which the Manhood hath in the Godhead in which the Humane Nature subsisting 't is so far from being depress'd that 't is highly advanc'd as the Sensitive Soul in man being joyn'd with a nobler Soul and subsisting in it is thereupon more excellent than the sensitive Soul in a Beast though there it hath a subsistence distinct from and independent upon the reasonable Soul The two Natures make but one Person 2. Secondly Such is the Vnion of the Humane with the Divine Nature in Christ that 't is taken into his * Deus in aeternam personam Deitatis temporalem accepit substantiam Carnis August Duas substantias accipimus in uno Filio Dei unam Deitatis aliam
Hominem in Personam But now in the Mystical Vnion 't is otherwise there 't is the Vnion of Persons but not Personal Vnion this I 'le endeavour to clear as well as I can In the Mystical Vnion there is the Vnion of Persons the Person of Christ is united to the Person of the Believer and the Person of the Believer is united to the Person of Christ For Faith being the uniting grace and this faith receiving the Person of Christ * Joh. 1.12 Faith is a receiving of Christ himself we cannot receive the benefits that come by him without receiving of himself as in Marriage the Consent is I take thee not I take thine c. Vines on the Sacram. p. 120. To as many as received him c it must also unite to the Person of Christ In the Marriage-Vnion 't is person joyned to person and so 't is in the Mystical Vnion also How is a Believer said to be in Christ it cannot so properly be said that he is in the graces or in the comforts or in the gifts of Christ but the meaning is he is in the Person of Christ so that this is an Union of Persons For further this Vnion doth not lye only in some moral or spiritual acts qualities or gracious indowments as oneness of will or oneness of disposition c. but it lies in the Oneness of Persons And therefore * Nostra ipsius conjunctio non miscet Personas nec confundit substantias sed affectus consociat confaederat voluntates Cypr. Cyprian's explication of this Vnion with Christ is not full enough Our Vnion saith he with Christ does not mingle Persons nor confound Substances so far very true but it unites affections and wills if he meant that this was all then 't is conceived he came short there is more in it than so for there is besides this uniting of the Affections and Will the uniting though not the mingling of Persons The Father Son and Spirit are one not only in respect of Consent as some most falsely tell us but also in respect of Nature and Essence Now far be it from me to say that Christ and the Saints are one in this sense yet withall I say even between them there is an higher Vnion than barely that of oneness of affection and will I say no more than what * Vide Zanch. in Cap. 5. ad Eph. p. 245. Polan Synt. Theol. Lib. 6. cap. 35. p. 454. Hujus Unionis interventu fit ut tum Beneficiorum Christi tum Substantiae ipsius fiamus participes quia beneficia omnia vis illa vivifica quae animas nostras sustentat in vitam aeternam non possunt à Corpore Sanguine Christi cui inhaerent adeoque ab ipso Christo divelli Trelcat Inst Theol. Lib. 2. p. 189. Bucan L. C. 48. p. 818 819. 'T is not an Union of Christ with a Believer in Accidents only as in Opinion Affection in Consent of Mind and Heart or in likeness of Disposition and Conversation but it is an Union of Substances Essences Persons As Mr. Perkins saith the Person of him that believeth is united to the Person of Christ Reyn. Praec p 49. Others who write upon this Argument generally say But that you may not go too high I add this Vnion is not Personal 't is but Mystical not Personal For then Christ and the Believer would properly and physically make but one person and then it would be so many Believers so many Christs and then the Believer would have no subsistence but in Christ as the Humane Nature of Christ hath no subsistence but what it hath in the Godhead and then he would merit in what he did as Christ quà Man did by virtue of the Personal Vnion Therefore we must conclude that though here is an Vnion of Persons the Person of Christ in a mystical way being united to the person of Believers yet here is not any Personal Vnion they both notwithstanding this remaining several and distinct Persons These things may seem as indeed they are abstruse and dark to you I 'le come to that which will be somewhat more plain and easie For the further Explication of this Great Mystery there are Three Things which I 'le speak to 1. I 'le endeavour to open the several Kinds or Branches of that Vnion which is betwixt Christ and Believers 2. I 'le give you those Scriptural Resemblances by which 't is shadowed and set forth 3. I 'le give you the several Properties of it Vnion Mystical Legal Moral 1. First Let me open the several Kinds or Branches of this Vnion 'T is Threefold Mystical Legal and Moral A Believer is united to Christ three ways Mystically Legally Morally Take any of these singly and they will not be enough comprehensive but take them jointly so there 's all in them Of the Mystical Vnion 1. First there 's the Mystical Vnion so we usually call it Which may be thus * Vide Bodium in Ephes 5.28 p. 786. more fully describing of it describ'd 'T is that supernatural spiritual intimous Oneness and Conjunction which is betwixt the Person of Christ and the Persons of Believers through the Bond of the Spirit and Faith upon which there follows mutual and reciprocal Communion each with the other If this Description be taken in pieces it contains in it the most considerable things to be known about the Mystical Vnion For 1. Here is the proper General Nature of it viz. Oneness and Conjunction Christ and Saints are united how why in respect of that Oneness and Conjunction that is betwixt them This the Scripture-Expressions do mainly refer to and clearly hold forth They are said to be in Christ and Christ in them they are said to dwell in Christ and Christ in them to abide in Christ and Christ in them to be one with Christ as he is one with the Father the several Scriptures which speak to these things have been already cited They are further said to be (a) 1 Cor. 6.17 joyned to the Lord and to be one Spirit to be (b) Eph. 5.31 32. one flesh Christ (c) Gal. 2.20 lives in them he is the (d) Eph. 1.22 Head they the Members he the (e) Joh. 15.5 Root they the Branches he the (f) 1 Cor. 3.9 11. Foundation they the Building he the (g) Eph. 5.28 c. Husband they the Wife All these expressions I say point to that Oneness and Conjunction which is betwixt Christ and Believers in which the General Nature of the Mystical Vnion doth consist 2. Here 's the Qualities or Properties of this Vnion 't is a supernatural spiritual intimous Vnion to which I shall speak by and by 3. Here 's the Subjects of this Vnion Christ and Believers And that too is set down with this modification the Oneness and Conjunction is betwixt the Person of Christ and the Persons of Believers of which before 4. Here 's the Media or
not of sameness so Matth. 5.48 Be ye perfect even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect So 1 Pet. 1.15 16 't is so to be interpreted here Believers are not one with Christ as he is one with the Father in respect of the manner of the Union but as to the truth and reality of it so 't is as verily as truly one with Christ as Christ is one with the Father 'T is an higher Vnion 'twixt the Father and the Son but 't is as real an Vnion 'twixt Christ and Believers Thirdly 'T is a spiritual Vnion Not a gross fleshly corporeal Union you must not so conceive of it but a divine inward spiritual Union 'T is the uniting of hearts and souls together in an imperceptible way and the bonds of this Union are spiritual namely the Spirit in Christ and Faith in us and the Union is to be judged by that which is the bond of it The Husband and the Wife are * Eph. 5.31 one flesh but he that is joyned to the Lord is * 1 Cor. 6.16 17. one Spirit I have set before you several external and material Resemblances of it but the Union it self is internal immaterial and spiritual When Christ had been speaking so much of it under the resemblance of eating and drinking he adds to prevent mistakes * Joh. 6.63 It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are life q.d. You must take me in a right sense in all that I have said I do not intend any fleshly or corporeal eatiug as some grosly imagine I only mean spiritual eating and drinking by Faith Neither saith he would I be thought to speak of any Union that is carnal and earthly 't is the heavenly and the spiritual Union onely which I design in all that I have spoken Fourthly 'T is a near intimous Vnion The Persons here concern'd are not only truly and really but nearly closely intimately united each to the other The Union betwixt them is so near that there is no Union excepting what hath been excepted to be compared with it so near that we know not how to conceive of it much less how to express it we may borrow some light here and there from the scattered Vnions of Nature but they all in point of nearness are vastly short of it In the * 1 Cor. 6.17 Text cited but now the Apostle tells us He that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit where he opposes joyning to Christ to joyning to an Harlot v. 16. Of which he saith He that is joyned to an Harlot is one body and though this be out of the due course yet he carries it up to the Marriage-Vnion for two saith he shall be one flesh But he heightens the Mystical Vnion with Christ he that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit This is the highest Scripture which I know for the describing of the intimousness of the spiritual Vnion First the Apostle says he that is joyned to the Lord In the Greek 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that is glewed to the Lord 't is the same word which is used Eph. 5.31 he shall be joyned or glewed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his wife It speaks the Firmness and the Nearness of the Union And then he says he that is thus joyned to the Lord is one Spirit what an Expression is this what could be spoken higher to be one Spirit is much more than to be one Flesh inasmuch as the Union of Spirits is the nearest Vnion that is imaginable The Apostle opposes the spiritual conjunction 'twixt Christ and Believers to that carnal conjunction that is 'twixt person and person he that is joyned to an Harlot is one body and one Flesh but he that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit Saints are not only Flesh of Christs Flesh and Bone of his Bone by which phrase the heighth of the Conjugal Vnion is set forth and by which the * Quae loquendi Formula ex literis Veteris Testamenti videtur esse desumpta Ita enim Fratres cognati de se mutuò loqui solent Os meum Caro mea Pet. Mart. Jews us'd to express the greatest nearness in consanguinity but which is much higher they are one Spirit with him 'T is not said they have one Spirit or that Believers are * Vide Grâ—â—ium in loc spirited as Christ was or that they are led acted animated by the same Spirit that he was though I conceive that is the very thing intended in the expression but the Apostle says the better to set off the intimousness of the Vnion Christ and they are one Spirit which is as high as any thing that could be spoken Again Believers are so near to Christ that in a sober sense they may be said to be a part of him yea such a part of him that he as Head and Mediator would not be compleat without them for as he is so considered they are his fulness Eph. 1.23 the fulness of him that silleth all in all 't is spoken of the Church the Body of Believers Once more the Union is so near that they both have one and the same Name Christs own Name and Title is given to them 1 Cor. 12.12 So also is Christ the Apostle means Christ Mystical not Christ Personal Compare Jer. 23.6 This is the name wherewith he shall be called the Lord our righteousness with Jer. 33.16 This is the name wherewith she shall be called the Lord our righteousness which is spoken too of the Church The Wife upon the Marriage-Vnion loses her own and is called by her Husbands name and so 't is here He that is Christ shall be called the Lord our righteousness and She that is the Church shall be called too the Lord our righteousness here is communication of names which speaks the nearness of the Vnion Nay Christ and the Believer are but * Ex quo fit ut ipsemet quoque Christus usque adeo arctè noster evadat nos vicissim illius ut apud Patris Tribunal Christus Ecclesia non quidem hypostaticâ substantiarum unitione sed quod ad istam communionem attinet mysticâ velut unum idem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unus Christus efficacissunè censeamur Bucan L. Com. 48. p. 821. One mystically though not substantially and this is the highest of all O this is a close and intimate Union indeed Fifthly T is a total Vnion I mean this the whole Person of Christ is united to the whole Person of Believers and the whole Person of Believers is united to the whole Person of Christ Christ is not in this or that single Nature but in both his Natures not in this or that Office but in all his Offices made one with them And they too reciprocally are made one with him as to the whole man not as to the Soul only but
or conjunction with him so far as the participation of one and the same Nature with him will go The Spiritual and Supernatural Union is that which hath been opened viz. that which is brought about by the Spirit and by Faith upon which the Creature is not one with Christ meerly in respect of his Manhood but he is one with him in an higher manner as being also according to his measure made a partaker of his Divine Nature that is to say as the Image of God is imprinted upon him as the several Graces of the Spirit are wrought in him as Christ and he are not only one flesh but also one spirit both having the same spirit dwelling in them and both being animated and acted by one and the same spirit Now to apply this Distinction The first of these Vnions is not sufficient to secure from Condemnation or to entitle to Salvation for then that being * Nullus est hominum cujus Natura non erat suscepta in Christo Prosp resp ad cap. Gall. c. 9. Of this see Cyril l. 10. c. 13. in Joh. Dei Filius quia suscepit humanam Naturam cum omnibus hominibus conjunctus est c. sed ista conjunctio generalis est tantum ut ita dicam juxta materiam Pet. Martyr common and general all men living should be saved and none should be condemned Even the graceless and unregenerate are men and have that very nature which Christ assumed but is this enough for an everlasting state of happiness Surely no! 'T is true even this natural union is very precious and the foundation of great joy and comfort to Believers O for such to remember that Christ hath match'd into their family sits in Heaven in their nature and is of the same flesh and blood with themselves this I say must needs be very sweet The Apostle speaks of it as a very great thing Heb. 2.11 He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of one This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admits of various interpretations I conceive this is the best Christ and the Saints are all of one that is all of one nature of one and the same flesh and blood for it follows v. 14. Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood he also himself took part of the same c. and v. 16. For verily he took not on him the nature of Angels but he took on him the seed of Abraham I say this Vnion is matter of great comfort to Believers but for Others who have nothing more than that Christ is man and hath assumed their flesh and is as they are and they as he what will this avail them What is Christs taking our flesh if he doth not give us his spirit what is it for him to be made like to us in our nature if we be not made like to him in his nature Christ with the humane Nature is in Heaven and yet thousands with the humane Nature are in Hell O rest not in meer manhood though Christ be man but get an higher a closer a more special Union with him or else it will be condemnation for all that 2. I distinguish Secondly Union with Christ is either External and Visible or Internal and Invisible The First is common and general yet not so common as the Material and Nartural Vnion spoken of before for all are Men but all are not Christians This lies in Church-membership the participation of Church-priviledges living under the Word and Sacraments passing under the Baptismal Seal making of some external profession of Religion c. The Second includes and supposes all this but hath a great deal more in it it notes real insition and implantation into Christ This Distinction is evidently grounded upon that of our Saviour Joh. 15.2 where he saith Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away here is the external Vnion for here is a branch which bears no fruit and yet it is in Christ how it must be understood in respect of Church membership external profession c. And every branch that beareth fruit he purgeth it that it may bring forth more fruit here 's the internal and special Union that which is as was said by real insition and implantation into Christ Now the enquiry lies here whether you be so in Christ as to be ingrafted and implanted into him the Former without this will signifie but very little 'T is indeed a great mercy to be a member of the Visible Church but this without a close and special membership with Christ will not secure a mans everlasting state if it be only external conjunction with Christ here it may for all that be eternal separation from him hereafter What is it for the Branch to be ty'd or fast'ned to the Stock if it doth not coalesce and incorporate with the Stock what is it for a man to be in Christs mystical Body only as the wooden leg or eye of glass is in the natural body where there is apposition but no coalition or union Certainly when Paul here tells us There is no Condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus he means such a being in him as is more than what is external and common or (a) Illi in Christo esse dicuntur hoc loco non qui mediatè tantum secundum quid in Christo sunt nempe ratione Ecclesiae ipsius quae corpus Christi mysticum c. sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intelliguntur veri Christiani qui immediate in Christo sunt per Unionem mysticam cum ipsius personâ fide virtute Spiritus Sancti c. Gomar founded upon any such bottom As particularly such as is by meer Baptism I mean when 't is the participation of the external sign only and there 's nothing more (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophyl They therefore who open the Words by this are too large and general Alas Baptism (c) Non loquitur Paulus de iis qui Sacramentum tantummodo Baptismi perceperunt quos extrinsecus duntaxat unda alluit non autem intus in animo Gratia expiavit sed eos intelligit qui sunt in Christo Jesu h. e. rem etiam Sacramenti adepti sunt Justinian in loc Qui sunt in Christo Jesu i. e. qui per Baptismum Christum induerunt eique per Fidem dilectionem incorporati sunt factique tanquam viva ejus membra tanquam palmites Christo ut viti insiti Perer. Disp 1. in Cap. 8. ad Rom. Qui sunt insiti per Baptismum in eo regenerati Estius alone will not do it there must be something more than the external badge and livery of Christianity or else that will come short both of Vnion here and No-Condemnation hereafter O how many are there who are baptiz'd live in the Church are visible members thereof who yet are far from being inwardly knit to Christ and therefore shall perish eternally This is to be
1 Cor. 1.29 and so the word is frequently used there to represent the whole manhood of Christ so Joh. 1.14 1 Tim. 3.16 Heb. 10.20 1 Pet. 3.18 passim When therefore 't is said God sent his Son in Flesh you are thus to conceive of it that Christ did not only take Flesh but that with it he took the whole Nature of Man that he was as truly so compleatly Man consisting of Flesh and Spirit Body and Soul yea that he assumed the entire Humane Nature with what-ever is proper to it two things only being excepted of which by and by In this extent and latitude you are here to take the word Flesh a part being put for the whole 3. Although it be said God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful Flesh yet we must distinguish between the Mission the Incarnation They differ in their Order Christ being first sent and then incarnate as also in the place where each was done for the mission was above but the incarnation was here below This I take notice of that I may the better clear up that ambiguity which seems to be in the expression which some among the Antients not understanding aright runn'd themselves upon very erroneous Opinions For it being said that God sent his own Son in the likenss of sinful Flesh they from hence inferr'd that Christ came from Heaven actually clothed with Flesh that his Body was immediately created there and that from thence he brought it down with him hither and to take in another of their * The first broachers of which were Apollinaris Valentinus c. Of and against whom see Najanz ad Nectarium Athan. de Incarn Christi tom 1. p. 619. 1083. Haeresy's that it was of such a nature as that it only pass'd through the Virgins womb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as water through a pipe or as light through a glass But you are not to give way to these apprehensions the true meaning of the Words being this Christ was sent in the likeness of Flesh not that he had it before he was on earth but it was his Father's Will for the fulfilling of which he sent him that he should descend and here below assume Flesh so that though the Apostle expresses it by being sent in the likeness c. yet his meaning is rather to or for or in order to the likeness of sinful flesh this was not done before-hand just at his sending but this was to be subsequent upon it in its proper time and place And Earth was that place where this stupendious mystery of a Christ incarnate did commence there was the attiring House where he put on his mean and mourning dress 't was in the Virgin where his Body was so curiously and so wonderfully wrought When he ascended he carried up his Body from Earth to Heaven but when he descended he did not bring down his Body from Heaven to Earth the foundation of his being incarnate was laid above in the purpose and command of the Father with respect to which he 's said to be sent in the likeness c. but his actual assumption of Flesh was done here below True he saith Joh. 3.13 No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven even the Son of man which is in heaven and Joh. 6.62 What if you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before but this you are to understand as spoken only upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 communication of Properties that being here attributed to Christ in one Nature as the Son of man which was only proper to him in the other as the Son of God 'T is also said of him that the second man is the Lord from heaven 1 Cor. 15.47 but that you are to take not as referring to the matter and substance of his body as if he brought that from heaven but only as pointing to his descent from heaven and the miraculous formation of his body here on earth And whereas Some speak as you heard of Christ's Body being immediately created and but passing through the Virgin as water through a pipe the falsity of that Opinion is very notorious for the Scripture plainly tells us that it was produc'd in another way that he was conceiv'd and born of the Virgin that the production of his substance was of Hers though in an extraordinary manner therefore 't is said Mat. 1.18 she was found with child of the holy Ghost and Vers 20. that which is conceiv'd in her is of the Holy Ghost and Luke 1.35 that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God and Elizabeth speaks of Christ as the fruit of her womb Luk. 1.42 and Paul sayes he was made of a woman Gal. 4.4 not made in a woman but of a woman From all which Texts two things are evident Of these things reade Tertull. in his excellent Treatise de Carne Christi p. 374. 1. that though the formation of Christ's Flesh was extraordinary and miraculous yet it was not immediately created especially not in heaven 2. that the Virgin Mary had a proper causality in the production of Christ's Body and therefore was not a meer pipe through which it did only pass 4. This sending of Christ in the likeness c. was not his assuming of a meer humane shape or his apparition only in the shape and form of a man but it was the real assumption of the humane Nature consisting of Soul and Body There 's a vast difference betwixt Christ's incarnation such apparitions as those which we have instances of in the Old Testament and that too not only with respect to the appanitions of Angels but also of Christ himself for it might easily be proved that 't was he who appear'd to Abraham Gen. 18.13 14 17. to Jacob Gen. 32.24 to Moses Exod. 3.2 compar'd with Acts 7.30 c. 35. But now his incarnation was a quite other thing for in that there was not the taking of man's shape but of man's nature not the taking of it so as to lay it down again after a short time as was in apparitions but so as to keep it and continue in it for ever The Apostle cry's out 1 Tim. 3.16 Without controversie great is the mystery of Godliness God manifested in the Flesh c. but had there been in that nothing more than a meer apparition of Christ in Flesh or in humane shape the thing had not been so strange that he should make such a mystery of it for he knew this was very common therefore there must be more in it than so To convince us of the truth and reality of Christ's Flesh in opposition to all phantasms and meer apparitions the Scripture speaks of him not only as appearing Mal. 3.2 Who shall stand when he appeareth 2 Tim. 1.10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ c. Heb. 9.26 Once in the end of
Matth. 22.45 Lord of David and the Son of David the branch of David and the root of David both ‖ Revel 22.16 root and off-spring how could such different things be affirm'd of him but upon the distinction of his two Natures that therefore is not in the least impeach'd by the Hypostatical Vnion True upon this Union there is the communication of properties betwixt them so as that that which is proper to one Nature is applyed to the other as you see Joh. 3.13 1 Cor. 2.8 Act. 20.48 and so as that that which is predicated of the one may be also predicated of the other I mean in the concrete for in the abstract this will not hold as I cannot say the Deity is the Humanity or the Humanity is the Deity yet I may truly say God is Man and Man is God a communication of properties thus far or in this sense we deny not it follows upon the Vnion but that that which is essential to one Nature should really Physically be convey'd and made over to the other Nature as Omnipresence Vbiquity Omniscience c. from the Godhead to the Manhood which is the Popish and Lutheran Communication this as implying a Contradiction and carrying in it a perfect repugnancy to the nature of the thing we cannot assent unto The Humane Nature in the first moment of its formation was united to the Divine 4. No sooner was the Humane Nature framed or formed but in that very instant of time it was united to the Divine Nature this also I put down as another branch of the main Proposition 'T was * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasc Orth. Fid. l. 3. cap. 2. v. Luommbard L. 3. Dist 2. taken as soon as it was made its first existence and its union were contemporary We distinguish betwixt the formation sanctification and assumption of the Humane Nature and we conceive of these as done successively in such an order first that Nature was form'd then sanctify'd then assum'd But this is meerly founded upon our conception not that it was so indeed and really as to the things themselves for in truth there was no priority of time priority of Nature I deny not betwixt the one and the other but at the very same moment wherein by the Power of the Holy Ghost the Manhood of Christ was formed it was also sanctify'd and united to the Godhead A Question here is moved by Some whether Christ's Humane Nature was compleat and perfect at the first that is whether as soon as ever his Flesh was formed his Soul was infus'd and united to it or whether as it is with us there was not some space of time intervening betwixt the formation of the Flesh and the infusion of the Soul in the discussing of which there is a difference among them Some being for the * Sharp Cursus Theol. p. 362. Affirmative and Others for the †Lud. Capellus in Thes Salmur part 2. p. 12. thes 15. Dr. Jackson on the Creed 7th Book Sect. 3. ch 29. p. 324. Negative But which is to my purpose all agree in this that whether it was only Flesh for sometime or whether both Flesh and Soul were form'd together yet still the Vnion began at the first instant of the Incarnation There was a time before Christ's Manhood did exist but as soon as ever it did exist there was no time wherein it was under disunion and disjunction from his Godhead Thus I have endeavoured by these Four things to give you a little light concerning the Hypostatical Vnion of the two Natures in Christ's Person which this Sixth Proposition led me unto a point of such high importance and so proper to the subject in hand that I could not wholly pass it over and yet withal so sublime and mysterious that I can neither speak nor conceive of it according to what is in it 7. Prop. 'T is probable if Adam had not faln Christ had not been sent in Flesh 7. Let me add but one thing further 'T is probable had there been no sin that Christ had not been sent in Flesh or had not Adam fallen and thereby involv'd his whole Posterity in a state of sin and guilt 't is probable that Christ had not been incarnate I express it modestly going no higher than 't is probable because though the Scriptures make it certain to me yet 't is not so to others nay some are of a quite other opinion The question is not de possibili what God by his absolute Power and Will might and could have done but only de facto whither if man had not sin'd Christ should actually have assum'd our Nature about which the Schools with other Divines are divided some * Scotus in 3. part disput 7. Quest 3. Absque praejudicio concedi potest etiamsi humana natura non peccasset adhuc Christum carnem sumpturum fuisse Alex. Alons 3. p. Qu. 2. memb 13. Catharinus de praed Christ Pet. Galatinus de Arc. Cathol ver l. 7 c. 2. Osiander c. affirming it some * Aquinas p. 3. qui. 1. art 3. Vasquez in 3. part tom 1. disp 10. art 3. Becan Theol. Schol. p. 3. c. 1. qu. 7. Calvin Instit l. 2. c. 12. against Osiander Hoorneb Socin Confut. tom 2. l. ◠c. 2. p. 253. Stegm Photin disp 15. p. 176. Alting Theol. Probl. Loc. 12. Probl. 5. p. 564. denying it The former affirm though sin had not been yet Christ would have come in Flesh not to have dy'd or suffer'd but only to have let the world see the glory and excellency of his Humane Nature that so great a work as his Incarnation might not have been lost or not done that God thereby might give out a singular demonstration of his Love to man the latter cannot lay so great a stress upon these things and therefore assert if man had not sin'd Christ had not been incarnate And indeed their Opinion seems to be more agreeable to the Word for that usually mentions saving from sin and the taking away of sin as the end and ground of Christ's taking Flesh My Text describes the state of the sinner to be desperate upon the terms of the Law and then upon that God sent his Son in Flesh it adds further he was thus sent to condemn sin in his Flesh so that had there been no sin to have been condemn'd he had not been sent in Fesh So Matth. 1.21 She shall bring forth a Son and thou shalt call his name Jesus for he shall save his people from their sins 1 Tim. 1.15 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners c. Joh. 1.29 Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world Dan. 9.24 Seventy weeks are determined upon the people and upon thy holy city to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins and to make reconciliation for iniquity Tit. 2.14 Who gave
and undefiledness by sin so they did agree He says his Father had prepared him a body Heb. 10. 5. now if the holy God in such a wonderful and immediate manner for such high and glorious ends will prepare him a body to be sure it shall be an holy body and such an one as shall be proper for the attaining of those ends which only an holy body was 'T was indeed upon our account and Christ's putting himself into our stead a passible and mortal body and so far like to sinful flesh but had it not been for that it had neither suffer'd nor dy'd In the Second respect so the whole Humane Nature in Christ was * Habuit Natura Humana quam Christus suscepit speciem peccati non tamen ea revera peccato contaminari potuit P. Martyr sinless He was true and very man but not in the least sinful man he was made man for the sin of man but yet was man without the sin of man That Nature which is so sadly depraved vitiated corrupted in us in him had its primitive original purity and holiness Sin was not so essential or so inseparably twisted into it but that God knew how to separate 'twixt the Nature it self and the deordination of it Christ took the one but not the other The Humane Nature is made up of soul and body both of these in Christ were unstained not having the least macula or spot of sin cleaving to them as 't was an unpolluted undefiled body so 't was also a pure holy spotless Soul The Humane Nature too is attended with such * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. vide Oecum in loc p. 301. affections and such †Particeps factus est infirmitatis non iniquitatis Aug. Trahens de homine mortalitatem non insquitatem Id. tom 3. 〈◊〉 1072. infirmities to all of which Christ submitted so far as they were sinless but no further as to the former he had Anger Sorrow Joy Compassion Love but without the least stain or tincture of sin as to the latter he underwent hunger thirst pain c. but yet under all he was without sin he could suffer but he did not nay he could not sin Hence he 's called God's holy one Psal 16.10 the holy Child Jesus Act. 4.27 the most holy Dan. 9.27 Jesus Christ the righteous 1 Joh. 2.1 God's righteous servant Isa 53.11 He was a Lamb without blemish and without spot 1 Pet. 1.19 holy harmless undefiled separate from sinners Heb. 7.26 't is said of him he did no sin 1 Pet. 2.22 he knew no sin 2 Cor. 5.21 he knew it in a way of imputation for he was made sin but as to any inhesion or commission so he knew it not The Apostle saith he was tempted in all things as we are yet without sin that must alwayes be excepted Heb. 4.15 he challeng'd all his enemies which of you convinceth me of sin Joh. 8.46 He says of himself he always did the things which pleas'd his Father Joh. 8.29 and now 't is said of him in him is no sin 1 Joh. 3.5 so that upon all this it appears that 't was but the likeness of sinful flesh A threefold Holiness in Christ Christ as Man had a threefold Holiness Original Habitual Actual 1. He was Originally Holy David bitterly lamented it that he was shapen in iniquity and in sin did his mother conceive him Psal 51.5 and so 't is with every man that comes into the world in the way of common generation the very foundation of our Being is laid in sin But 't was not so with out blessed Saviour in his Conception the first framing and forming of his Humane Nature there was nothing of sin for he was therefore * Haec est similitudo carnis quia cum eadem sit caro quae nostra non tamen ita facta in utero est nata ficut caro nostra Est enim sanctificata in utero nata sine peccato neque ipse in illâ peccavit Ideo enim Virginalis uterus electus est ad pattum dominicum ut in sanctitate differret caro Dommi à carne nostrâ Ambros conceived in the Virgins Womb in an extraordinary manner by the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost that he might be preserv'd pure from the common pollution so the Angel told Mary Luk. 1.35 The holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God 2. He was Habitually Holy there was in his Nature nothing but an universal rectitude and conformity to the rule and pattern of holiness he had therein grace all grace nothing but grace without the least mixture of habitual corruption We bring with us into the world Natures most wofully depraved such as are a very seed-plot and seminary of all evil but our Lord Jesus had a quite other Nature one that was perfectly sanctified and not in the least tainted with sin This also was brought about by his miraculous and extraordinary formation for had he been begotten as we are his Nature had bee tainted as well as ours is that which is begotten so I would read it rather than that which is born of the flesh is flesh Joh. 3.6 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean not one Job 14.4 The liquor will taste of the cask into which 't is put as water when it comes from the fountain may be very pure yet if it runs through a dirty pipe it will contract filth so let the Soul as it comes out of God's hands be never so pure yet upon union with the body begotten and propagated in the usual way both it and the nature of the person too will be defil'd therefore to avoid this Chirst was begotten in another way By which means he was also freed from the imputation of Adam's sin for he not descending naturally and seminally from Adam his sin was not imputed nor imputable unto him The Apostle indeed saith Heb. 2.11 Both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one i.e. of one Adam as the common root but they are not both of this one Adam in the same manner for they who are sanctified are of him and from him in a way of seminal propagation but he who sanctifieth was not so whereupon though Adam's sin be imputable and imputed to the former 't is not to the latter As according to the * Alting Theol. Problem prob 8. p. 571. Dr. Pearson on the Creed p. 365. usual illustration Levi being in the loins of Abraham paid †Heb. 7.9 10. tythes in him yet Christ who was also in the loins of Abrabam did not so all men being in the loins of Adam and carnally descended from him sinned in him and became partakers of his guilt but Christ though in some sense he might be said to be in
to the utmost of its capacity having nothing in its several faculties but truth in the Vnderstanding holy conformity in the Will heavenliness in the affections I say represent to your selves in your thoughts such a Soul and then think what an excellent Soul would that be just such a Soul is in Christ Indeed if we consider these constitutive parts of Christ's Manhood as they stand apart and by themselves they are excellent to a very high degree but if we go further and consider them in the Hypostatick Vnion then we are at a mighty loss and cannot conceive what a glory is by that conferr'd upon them As suppose a Pearl was put into a glass of Chrystal that would put a great radiancy upon it but what if the Sun it self could be put into this glass how radiant then would it be So here the Lord Christ having so precious a Soul dwelling in his Flesh even that if there was nothing more must make it very glorious but when the Godhead it self dwells in it how unspeakable must its glory and splendor needs be Leaving the parts let me speak to the whole the whole humane nature in Christ is transcendently excellent If the essential and eternal Son of God will so far condescend as to assume Man's Nature certainly in him the Manhood must have all that dignity glory perfection that ever it was capable of and surely never was the Humane Nature so advanc'd as in Christ If you consider it as 't is in us so it hath its worth and excellency for man is yet a glorious creature though 't is too true by the loss of God's image he hath lost very much of his glory As he was at first created in the state of innocency he was high indeed by the Fall the case is sadly altered the Humane Nature now is exceedingly debas'd and depress'd but yet even in its ruins as 't was with old Carthage it may be seen what once it was much is lost and the best is lost but all is not lost the glory of the Saint is gone but the glory of the Man in a great measure yet remains He is yet as to his natural composition and indowments very excellent the top of the whole creation God's * Vid. Nyssen de Hom. opif. c. 3. p. 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euryphamus in Stobae Ser. c1 p. 556. Theophrastus calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though God in him would vye with and out-vye all that he had done besides in the whole visible creation See Weems's Portrait p. 60 61. master-piece and highest workmanship endowed with a body curiously wrought with a Soul of divine original excellent in its being and operations And besides this which is general it pleases God in some to restore the Humane Nature in part to what it lost in Adam's fall to advance it again by Grace and Regeneration yea to take it up to heaven to the vision and fruition of himself And now 't is at its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here 's its non-ultra its highest advancement 't is not capable as in us of higher exaltation that what it hath by Grace and Glory This dignity and glory the Humane Nature hath in us but yet as 't is so subjected take it even at its highest elevation it comes infinitely short of the dignity and excellency of the Humane Nature of Christ the reason is because in it there 's all that hath been spoken in an eminent manner and besides which is higher than all the former it is taken into a near conjunction with the Divine Nature How glorious must that Manhood be which subsists in the Godhead and hath no subsistence but in that The nearer the Vnion is with that the greater is the perfection and glory of that which is admitted into that union And hence it is that there is such a fulness of Grace in Christ as Man over and above what is in the best of men that he is * Psal 45.7 anointed with the oyl of gladness above his fellows that his Manhood bears a part in the mediatory Office that 't is to be worshipped with Divine Worship as hath been proved before I say all this belongs to it by vertue of the Hypostatical Vnion from which in all things it derives super-excellent Glory And yet I must tell you this Humane Nature as high as 't is is the lowest thing in Christ that which is the highest in us is but the lowest in him Supremum infimi infimum supremi as Man he 's glorious but what is he then as God! What a Person is Christ take him altogether O let him be adored and reverenced by you as Man but especially as he is God-man So much for Information Use 2. Exhortation to several Dutys 2. Secondly was Christ sent in flesh hence ariseth matter of Exhortation to several Duties 1. I would exhort you to give a full and firm assent to the truth of Christ's incarnation To give a full and firm assent to the truth of Christ's Incarnation as also firmly to adhere to Christ as sent in flesh Here are two things which Iâ—le speak to apart First see that you give a full and firm assent to the truth of Christ's Incarnation 'T is a thing which the Scripture layes a great stress upon 1 Joh. 4.3 Every Spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of Antichrist whereof you have heard that it should come and even now is it in the world 2 Joh. 7. Many deceivers are entred into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh this is a deceiver and an Antichrist It seems the Incarnation of Christ met with early opposition his flesh was no sooner translated to Heaven but 't was deny'd on Earth this Apostle therefore who in his Gospel had been a great asserter of it in his Epistles will be also a zealous defender of it and see how warm he was upon it the denyal of Christ's coming and of his coming in the flesh for there lies the main emphasis he carries as high as Antichristianism and sets no lower a brand upon it Antichristianism doth not only lie in the opposing of Christ in his Offices which is the latter and modern Antichristianism but also in the opposing of him in his Natures as God and Man which was the first and ancient Antichristianism to deny Christ's Manhood and assuming flesh this is down-right Antichristian the very spirit of Antichrist if the Apostle here may be believed Now there 's a twofold denial of this one open express direct the other * Non attendamus ad linguam sed ad facta si enim omnes interrogantur omnes uno ore confitentur Jesum esse Christum quiescat paululum lingua vitam interroga Aug. in Ep. Joh. Tract 3. implicit virtual interpretative the former I hope is very rare the latter I fear is too common he