XXIII That the Second Person of the Trinitie the Son of God only tooke on Himselfe our flesh IS it true that God will dwell with man Behold the heavens and the heavens of heavens cannot containe Him how much lesse a house of clay whose foundation was in the dust yet doth wisdome take her solace in the compasse of His earth and her delight is with the Sonnes of Men Prou. 8.31 So the Word was made flesh and dwelt in us Ioh. 1.14 And though he were in the forme of God and thought it no robbery to be equall to God yet as man had beene made in his likenesse and lost it so would hee bee made in the likenesse of man and to restore that first image unto man became obedient unto death even the death of the crosse Phil. 2.6.7.8 O Holy and most blessed teacher of our most glorious faith what high doctrine what holy mysteries what pretious promises doth the Christian faith containe That which is infinite dwels in in that which is finite the circumference in the centre The greatest of beings and the least are one Two births eternall and temporary and but one Sonne And because the essentiall proprieties of both natures doe still remaine he that is the Father of eternity is become a childe Esay 9.6 And hee that is the wisdome of the Father increases in knowledge Luk. 2.52 hee that no place can containe doth grow in stature and the Sonne of an eternall love doth grow in favour with God and Man In briefe hee that hath all things with God the Father save this that he is begotten hath all things with man except his sinne But although there be two generations and that of divers kindes eternall and in time in which respect almost all things are double in him yet is not hee two sonnes because Sonneship respects not the diversity of the natures divine and humane but onely the unity of the Person so that if there be but one Person of both natures there can be but one Son Wherefore seeing the Sonne of God took on Him not the Person but the nature of man yet the whole nature body and soule of the substance of his Mother And seeing that whole nature subsists in the Person of the eternall Son He in both respects both of his divine and humane generation is still the onely begotten Sonne of the Father onely begotten I say that he may be discerned from us that are adopted only sonne because we are not hereafter to looke for any other Saviour His onely Sonne not of Ioseph or any man according to the flesh For as according to the law of the eternall life which is in God He is begotten of the substance of the Father not without but in the Person of the Fathâ—r yet distinct therefrom so according to that generation whi h was in time was He begotten by the power of the Father without the Person of the Father being conceived in the wombe of the virâ—in For as a thing conceived in the minde of a man is the first wâ—rd or expression of his understanding which being spoken or written becomes sensible and to bee understood of others So the Sonne is in the Fathâ—r that eternall word understood conceived or begotten before the worlds and in the fullnesse of time not ceasing to be eternally begotten as before He was made manifest in the flesh even that word or life which was eternally with the Father was seene with eyes was looked upon and was handled with hands 1 Ioh. 1.1 2. So that as there is but one Father both in the eternall and timely generation so is there but one Sonne by a most holy most true and substantiall generation God and Man the Sonne of God and the blessed virgin Mary Now this one Sonne one Christ one Immanuel one Mediator one Person is such not by mixture not by confusion not by composition of the two natures nor yet by change of one into another but one by assumption or taking of the humane nature into the divine wherein the deity is to dwell eternally without separation but not without distinction And these two natures so dwell together in the Person of our Saviour as that for the unity of the Person the attributes which belong to one nature are given to the other as Ioh. 3.13 No man hath ascended up to heaven but hee that came downe from heaven even the Sonne of man which is in heaven And againe Acts 20.28 Feed the church of God which He hath purchased with his owne bloud And although I said before chap. 11. that relation properly so called was not in the divine generation but supereminent because all things here are coessentiall a the subjects no other beings than the termes that is the Father and the Sonne the foundation also coessential that is the divine and unconceiveable generation for the termes sake in the Father active in the Sonne passive And although in the second generation neither the subjects nor the termes are coessentiall the subjects are the Person of the eternall word and the Virgin Mary the foundation is the generation whereby the manly being passively was taken of the Virgin unto the person of the word yet in respect of this hypostaticall union or ioyning of the humanity unto the Person of the Eternall Sonne Mary the mother of Iesus is truely said the mother of God not that the Godhead tooke beginning from her but because she brought out that manly being which from the time of its first union was never separated from the Godhead And because the supposition or person wherein both natures are is one Christ of which Person she is truely called the mother though she be mother onely according to the flesh as is said Math. 1.23 A virgin shall bring forth a Sonne and they shall call his name God with us And againe Rom. 9.5 of the Israelites as concerning the flesh came Christ who is God blessed above all for evermore Amen But although there be one only Sonne yet in respect of the two nativities Hee is truely called the Sonne of God and the Sonne of the virgin though with this difference that by the eternall generation he tooke of the Father both his eternall nature and his Person by which he is the sonne of his Father by a supereminent reall relation but of his mother he tooke in time the humane nature but not any humane Person And therefore this Sonship is only rationall except it bee understood with the divine person in which the humanity subsists and so hee is truly said this man and the son of the virgin For as b he tooke on him the humanity soule and body to dwell therein for ever as the Evangelist speaks Ioh. 1.14 The word became flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and made his tabernacle in us So did hee give unto the humane nature to bee one Person in him So that God is now truely one with us that wee hereafter may bee one with him according
to debarre the use of reason in the questions of faith and if that bodily presence of Christ in every place for which he labours so had any ground in the Scripture if it brought any hope or comfort to the conscience if the Primitive Church or the Councels or the ancient Fathers had ever taught it I thinke that by this time reason would have found how to make it more probable than it is but because it is no Article of our Creed it is not fit to trouble you any further hereabout d Therefore God doth bring forth eternally his Sonne Re. 4. The truth of this conclusion hath beene diversly gainsaid For some have utterly denyed the Trinitie of Persons in the Unitie of the Godhead others with this truth have blended their owne devices The hereticks which held that as there was but one being in the Deitie so there was but one Person called by divers names of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost were of divers families according to the names of the speciall maintainers of this opinion but best knowne by the name of Sabellius one of the most subtile defenders thereof about the yeere 260. which heresie after a long sleepe was againe awaked about the yeere 1110 by one Porretanus who affirmed that the Persons in the Godhead differ not save onely in the apprehensions of our minde not by any reall or true distinction The Iewes likewise among other reasons doe therefore disclaime the Christian Religion because they suppose that by the Trinitie of Persons is taught a pluralitie of Gods contrarie to that which is Deut. 6.4 The Lord our God is one Lord. The Turkes also denie the Trinitie of Persons and hold it therefore impossible for God to have a Sonne because he never had a wife Now of those that held a Trinitie Simon that witch of whom you reade Actes 8. when the gall of his bitternesse had levened him thorowout gave out of himselfe that he in the person of the Father gave the Law to Moses in the dayes of Tiberius suffered in shew under the Person of the Sonne and afterward came downe on the Apostles in fierie tongues August de Haeres cap. 1. Hierarcha also from the words of the Niâ—en Creed that Christ was light of light affirmed that the three Persons were as three lights of which one tooke light of another and so he made the beings of the persons separate and apart whereas the Fathers in that Câ—uncell meant not any division or being apart but that the Sonne is of the substance of the Father without any lessening or abatement of the Fathers being as one light takes light of another without any loâ—e of light in the former The Metangismonites so called from their opinion taken from vessels that they might avoid the opinion of the separate being of the Persons held that they were as vessels contained one within another falselie supposing with the Anthropomorphites or Man-shapers that God was bodily and so conteined within a certaine space and againe misunderstanding that text of Scripture Iohn 14.11 where our Lord saith I am in the Father so that in the Divine nature they supposed some thing greater which was the Father and something lesse which was the Sonne and a third thing within them both which was the Holy Ghost But against that bodily being which they conceived you have reasons sufficient in the 9. Chapter The text of S. Iohn makes the matter more plaine for as it is impossible that two bodies should bee each one within another except by way of commixation so it quite overthrowes that foolish opinion because it is thrice there added that the Father is in the Sonne so that of necessitie there can bee but one being of them both For if the being of God be not most simple and pure as was shewed before Chap. 9. And if every being answers to the Originall then the essence of the Sonne must be most pure as the Father is so that if each of the Persons be in the other there can be no difference but onely in the manner of being onely See August de Civit. Dei lib. 11. Cap 10. Then concerning that third falshood which they supposed of a greater and lesser being it cannot possiblie stand with the nature of infinitie whether it be understood of extension or of vertue onely The Triformians likewise to crosse the errour of Sabellius affirmed three Persons and that the whole and entyre being of the Godhead was in all the three taken together yet not in every person wholly but so as one part of it was in the Father another part in the Sonne and a third part in the Holy Ghost By which falshood it would follow that the Godhead were in it selfe a divideâ—ble being and so a compound contrary to that which is concluded Chap. 9. The Tritheites are yet more mad then the former that it may appeare how boundlesse errour is They make the being of God not one and the samâ— as the Triformians did but affirme that there is a threefold nature and distinguish the Persons in their essence or absolute being in place also and other differences of particular substances as Peter James and Iohn and so make three Gods different and apart each from other The Tetratheites would seeme more subtile then all that had beene before them for they beside the three Persons of the Godhead supposed a fourth being which did communicate it selfe to all the three by which communication of divine nature everie one of those three became God By which sottish opinion it must follow that none of those three Persons could be either infinite or eternall if they receive their being from another if they be God by grace onely and communication of another being than their owne neither can their being be simple and one having one being of themselves and another imparted unto them But if that being which they call that fourth common being be that one most simple pure and eternall being which wee confesse to be God then it must follow necessarilie that in that being there bee three Pers ns as hath been declared in the Chapter before in every one of which the whole Godhead is all in all and all in everie one not by communication from another nor by participation onely but by the whole and proper possession of every Person essentially so that the Godhead is no other being than that which is in the three persons nor the three Persons any other thing than that manner of being which is in the Godhead eternally but they prove it thus Where are one and three trulie and really different there must needs bee foure But in the Deitie there is one being and three Persons really distinguished therefore foure severall beings I answer Where is one and three absolute beings there must needs be foure but in the Godhead there is one absolute being and three manners of being which are the Persons but the manner of being doth not make a number
argument is in effect all one with the former And you ought to have remembred that it hath often beene said that the distinction of the persons is reall and therefore not in our understanding onely The Persons taken together in their absolute essence admit no distinction but are all essentially one God And so every person by himselfe in his essence is likewise God But the persons understood apart according to the propriety of their personall beings are really distinguished and that reall distinction is their Personality and that personality is their reall distinction and that relation whereby they are distinguished is nothing different from any of these nor yet the propriety of their personall being is any other thing than that relation Therefore though the persons are not distinguished by or in that absolute being wherein they are all one yet is it most falsely brought in thereby that any thing shall bee in them beside their essence whereby they are distinguished For the distinction or difference of the persons arises from the action onely or working of the Absolute Being which yet is essentially in the absolute Being and differs not therefrom no more than heat in the fyer doth differ essentially from the fyer or reason feeling and growth in a man doth differ essentially from the soule of man 8. Every relative depends necessarily upon the correlative But nothing which is depending upon another can be truely God Therefore either the Persons differ not by relations only or none of the persons can be God or else there is no relation and so no distinction of the persons at all Answer It is a fallacious and froward kinde of arguing to presse the propriety of speech or use of words to darken the truth of things see log cap. 21. n. 5. It hath beene said 1. that the being of God is supereminently above all being above all created understanding to conceive 2. That relation in created things doth not onely presuppose a subject but also some quantity quality action or other affection in the subject whereon that relation doth depend 3. That those relations in the persons of the deity are nothing else but the very personall proprieties and that the word Relation as many other beside is taken into use in this argument onely to helpe the expressing of our understanding though indeed properly it bee not in the divine being yet can we not conceive but that there is an order in the procession of the persons as I have said elsewhere yet not such as shall bring in any dependence no not in the personall proprieties because the action or eternall working whence the personall differences doe proceed is essentially in the Godhead or if dependence must needes bee yeelded unto yet seeing it can bee nothing but onely the order of procession in the persons of the Godhead it brings in no such inconvenience as that thereupon it should follow that either the Sonne or the Holy Ghost were not God So the foundation of the doubt being but a hil of sand the whole building proves but a trifle And these are the principall reasons brought for the Sabellian heresie The authorities of the Holy Scripture which they falsely alleage hereto are such as prove the absolute unitie of the divine Being as you have heard before in the end of the eighth Chapter which Texts as they doe most strongly confirme the eternall truth of the absolute being of one God so doe they nothing gainsay the Trinitie of the Persons which other Texts of the Scripture teach as you have partly heard and shall heare further hereafter when wee come to speake in particular of the Persons of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost So it remaines now only to answer that which is brought for the opinion of the Tritheites which poore fancie though it may vanish at the fight of the Reasons which have beene brought for the simple and one Being of God in the eight Chapter yet because it would justifie it selfe by this doctrine of the Trinitie you shall see what the strength of their Reason is 9 That which is begotten and that which is not begotten must needs be very different The persons of the Trinity are begotten as the Sonne and not begotten as the Father and the Holy Ghost Therefore if every person be God they are different Gods Answer The things which in no respect are different must be the same and there can bee no difference put betweene things which brings not in a deniall on the one side and an affirmation on the other And this opposition is betweene all things howsoever differing So betweene the Persons of the Deity there must be a relative opposition As the Father ergo not the Sonne the Sonne ergo not the Father c. because there is a relative distinction but this doth nothing at all enforce a plurality of Gods or a difference of absolute Beings but of the Persons onely And if you desire to see other arguments like these reade Thomas Aquinas cont Gent. lib. 4. Cap. 10. and their Answers cap. 14. see also the note a on the 24. chap. following sect 9. and note a on the 33. chap. But the answers to all objections will bee easie if you remember what hath beene said and suffer not your selfe to be carryed away with shew of reasons taken from naturall things which though they bee most true in the creature which had a beginning yet can they no way bound or binde the infinite and eternall truth of Him that is Lord and Creator of nature as I have remembred you elsewhere Remember also to consider in Christ his essence which in all the Persons is coeternall and one and His Person begotten eternally of the Father And in this Person distinguish His natures divine and humane from his offices wherein remember 1. that His sending and obedience abate nothing from His equalitie with the Father concerning the unity of their essence 2. that these names which import His office are spoken of Him in respect of both His natures CHAP. XII That in the Glorious Deity there be Three Persons and no moe YOu misse here a great deale of learning and wit which other men have shewed in the mystery of unity and the number of the Three But because the reasons that might bee made from thence would bee but onely inductive and I desire to stand with you on the lower and plaine ground let us leave those high Speculations to them that please to read them among the Cabalists in Brixianus his comment Symbol and elsewhere and see what other reasons can be brought for the question in hand 1. Nothing can possibly be in the Deity but according to the uttermost perfection of Being that is essentially and necessarily Therefore if it bee not necessary to put moe Persons than Three in the Godhead then is it not possible But it is not necessary to put moe persons in the divine Being either Father Son or holy Ghost For so the
Apâ—llinaris as others Apollinarius contrarily upon that text of Ioâ—n 1.14 The word bâ—camâ— flesh held that in Christ the flesh and the word were câ—nsubstaâ—tiate or made one substance so that somewhat of the word was turned into flesh not remembring the interpretation which followes in the same place that the word made his tabernacle or dwelling in us 3. The Timotheans said That of the two natures thus united in Christ a third thing must result which is neither very God nor very mâ—n but a confused effect of both natures And this third being the Theodâ—sians held to be mortall but the Armenians hold it to be immortall and no way subject to any suffâ—ring The Cophti in Egypt hold but one nature in Christ not by commixture to cause a third being of both but interpret their meaning according to the true faith Brerewood Enquirâ—e Cap 22. 4. But on the other side Ebion Carpocrates and Theodotion affirmed that Christ was pure and onely man begotten by Ioseph of his wife Mary as other children and that God was in him as in Peter or Paul or any other man and by a greater progresse in virtue hee came to be more righteous than other because he received a more noble soule than other men by which he knew and reveiled heavenly truths and by an assisting power of God he wrought miracles as Moses or other of the Prophets had done before This heresie the Socinians as Wentz à Budowecks doth charge them have renewed of late yet after by him it seemes they are come to yeeld unto Christ as much as Arius 5. Artemâ—n Theodotus of Byzant or Constantinople Paulus of Samosata and Photinus held that Christ had no being before hee tooke beginning of his mother and so was onely man by nature but that God which Epiphanius expounds the Word descended into him which error Athanasius Epistola de incarnat contra Paulum Samosat holds to be all one with that of Carpocraâ—es 6. Cerinthus to that progresse in virtue of Ebion and Carpocrates aâ—ded this That Christ which hee interpreted the holy Ghost descended into Iesus the son of Mary when he was baptised in Iordan and made knowne unto him the Father whom hee knew not before and hence it came to passe that Iesus afterward did such great miracles because Christ was in him Thus of one hee made two Mediators one Iesus wherein Christ was and another Iesus without Christ for hee added that Iesus suffered and died but that Christ without any suffering flew backe to heaven as Colarbasus also after him did teach This Cerinthus is that hereticke as saith Epiphanius that troubled the Church in the Apostles time affirming that the Gentiles ought to bee circumcised and keepe the Law which heresie of his the Councell of Ierusalem determined Acts 15. 7. The hereticks called Alogiani because they denied Christ to bee God the Word hold in effect as much as the former concerning his nature but yet deny not but that for his great grace and virtue he was made the Mediator for other men But the writings of Saint Iohn they vtterlie denie because say they the other Evangelists doe no where call Christ the Word Answer But they call him and prove him to bee God as Matth. 1.23 God with us from whence is the gift of pophecie and power to cast out devils Matth. 7.22 so Marke 1.24 The devils confesse his power and him to be the Holy one of God And Luk. 1. 34.35 The Angel professes that holy thing which was to bee borne of the Virgin to be the Sonne of God All his glorious miracles prove as much which were neither wrought by the power of Baalzebub as the old Iewes nor yet by magicke or by the meanes of the Cabala as the later Iewes affirmed but onely by the power of God as our Lord himselfe proves by an unanswerable argument Luk. 11. â—â—rs 14. to 23. And these are the most famoused heresies of them who held but one nature in Christ â—iâ—ine as Eutyckes who changed the humane nature into the divine or humane as Apollinarius who thought the divine nature was changed into the humane or one mixt nature of both these as the Timotheans beleeved or purely humane as Ebion Cerinthus Phâ—tinus and the Alogians wherein it will not be unfit that we briefly consider their reasons and see what answers are or may be madâ— thereto § 1. And first concerning the heresie of Eutyches you may by this see how dangerous it is For if it be put that after the union of both natures the humane nature was utterly swallowed up of the divine so that the divine-divine-nature onely remayned then it must follow of necessity either that we are still in the state of damnation or that God must suffer and dye for us in the divine nature which as it is impossible so yet should wee be still in the state of câ—ndemâ—ation For if our redemption bee not wrought for us in our owne natâ—re the divine Iustice is still unsatisfied so wee are still in our siâ—ne And therefore the Councell of Chalâ—edon held by six hundred and thirty Fathers to condemne these errours of his viz. that the natures were apart before the union as if the humanity had had any being before it was taken to the Godhead or that the beings in themselves or their proprieties were either confused or changed confessed him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is one and the same Sonne in the two natures but remember the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the nature together with the proprieties thereof neither by mixture nor change of natures but as one individuall being consisting of both natures inseparably But some of the later Eutichians minced the mattier and said that unity of nature was not till after His resurrection But that both against the authority of the Scripture and reason it selfe For Hee received power of the Father to raise the dead to give eternall life to execute the Iudgement as he is the Sonne of man Ioh. 5. v. 25.26.27 all these things not yet performed And how can the heavens containe Him Act. 3.21 if hee bee onely God whom the heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot containe Kings 8.27 or what hope can wee have of being made like unto Him if Hee bee onely God yet have we assurance that as we have borne the image of the earthly so shall wee also beare the image of the heavenly 1 Cor. 15.49 The words of our Lord himselfe are yet more cleare Luk. 24.39 Handle me and see me for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee see me have The truth of his bodily being after his resurrection is there argued by his eating and many other infallible proofes during the time of 40. dayes Act. 1.3 And in the last two chapters of Saint Iohns Gospell all to this purpose that wee may beleeve that he that descended into the grave is even the same that ascended in the perfection of His manly being to appeare for
man Iesus Christ 1 Tim 2.5 who having himselfe in his owne body borne our sinnes upon the tree 1 Pet. 2.24 is set at the right hand of God and makes intercession for us Rom. 8.34 and hath commanded all them to come unto him that travaile and are heavie laden that hee may refresh them Mat. 11.28 3. When the Sonne was begotten and the holy Ghost proceeded either hee was or he was not If he were before he was begotten then was he not begotten if he were not then there was a continuance when he was not and therefore of necessitie he must be created Answer Eternitie hath no respect of time of before or after because it is one continuall perpetuity and whatsoever being or action is once therein it is eternall Therefore that difference of was and was not hath no place in eternity seeing the generation is eternall ever one and the same as you may see further in the treatise at the end of the booke 4. Whatsoever is begotten receives the nature which it hath from that which doth beget as a man from man fire from fire and in all other univocall generations in which though the natures be of one kinde yet must they needs be different in number as in Isaak and Iacob But this cannot be in the divine generation for so there should bee moe Gods than one or if the nature of the Sonne bee in number the same with that of the Father then doth the Sonne receive that nature either in part which is impossible because a most simple and pure being cannot be divided into parts or entyer and whole and so the Father should cease to be Neither is the generation as of a river out of a fountaine because the Divine nature is neither divisible nor possible to be encreased Therefore Iesus is not the Sonne of God by generation but by creation onely Answ The being of God is not materiall which only is subject to division into parts and that totality which is made of parts but his being is intellectuall and because it is infinite and apprehended by an infinite understanding it is necessarie that the divine being or understanding be wholly in the word or being understood I meane with that totality of perfection which is in the unitie of being spoken of in the first objection 5. Either the Father begat the Sonne with his will or against his will not against his will for so it had beene impossible that ever hee should have beene begotten if with his will then his will must be before and so the Son cannot be eternall Epiphanius rejâ—cts this reason because all the kindes of begetting are not reckoned up for in God saith hee is no deliberation for the inclining of his will therefore the Deitie is that nature according to which the Father did beget the Sonne neither ever ceases to beget him eternally But this is to beget the Sonne with his will seeing the will of God is his being according to which he workes eternally as you may further understand Chap. 11. note d Many such arguments as these are and many bee brought to this purpose of Arius all which as these that you have seene must take their grounds from inferiour truths in the creature which are utterly unfit for that generation which is eternall and Divine for to whom shall wee liken the highest or who shall declare his generation and therefore Athanasius Epist contra Arianos cujus initium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said rightly that the Divine generation was not to bee measured by the generation of man as those Arians used to deceive women and children And therefore the Scripture in expressing of the Divine generation calls the Sonne the Wisdome of the Father Prov. 8. The Word Iohn 1. The brightnesse of his glory and the expresse image of his Person Heb. 1. That the minde herein may bee utterly withdrawne from sensible and naturall things The Fathers also in the Nicen Councell to that question of Phaedo the patron of Arius how the Sonne was begotten of the Father answered that this question is not to be asked for seeing the creatures were not ever they could not make answer concerning his originall that was eternall And therefore as none knowes the Father but the Sonne so none knowes the Sonne but the Father And as I shewed you Log. Cap. 15. n. 6. and note thereunto That the certaine knowledge of every thing must be had from the rules that are proper and peculiar thereto so remember here that sith the creature can have no knowledge of the Creator but by that revelation which he maketh of himselfe you may ever repaire to his owne holy word to be instructed in his holy trueth 6. But from hence also Arius armed his heresie for because Wisdome saith of her selfe Pro. 8.22 The Lord possessed me the beginning of his wayes where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being translated in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee created me Arius from thence caused much perplexity unto the Fathers in this businesse and although Athanasius in his oration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves by divers arguments that the Sonne as concerning his Godhead cannot be created yet when he comes to give answer to this text hee interprets it thus The Father hath appointed mee a body and creating me among men hath ordeined me the Saviour of mankinde which though it be true yet is it not a fit interpretation for that text if yee consider the circumstances before and after The Fathers also of the Nicene councell being urged with this text answered from that addition the beginning of his wayes that the world was created for man so that man the reasonable or discursive wisdome of God as concerning the intent and purpose of God was first created although last in the order of actuall being Epiphan haeres 69. in answer hereto holds the distinction of wisdome created and increated but seeing no place of the Scripture expounds this place of Christ therefore saith he it is not necessary to interpret it of the Sonne of God but if you take the other circumstances it can belong to no other Then if it must needs be referred to Christ yet shall it be verified of his humane not of his divine nature At last he gives the true meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kanah he possessed or of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kanan he hatcht as a Chickin and reasons that as every chicken is of the same nature with the dam so the word also must have the same being with the Father and therefore bee begotten before all time eternally you shall finde the true reason of the difference of the translation in the tenth section following In the meane while it is not unreasonable to thinke that this Errour came by some interpreter that was an enemy to the Christian faith And yet among them Aquila translates it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he possessed me as other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of
the same theme which might easily be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he created Let the students of the holy mysteries give all diligence to read the holy Scriptures in their proper language For there this treason of Arius and all other hereticks is easily discovered 7. Hee that denyes himselfe to be good cannot be God But Christ saith of himselfe Math. 19.27 why callest thou me good there is none good but one even God Answ Good is either absolute and perfect which is God alone or else imparted the image of that Good and so every thing created was very good Gen. 1. Goodnesse is likewise in the vertue and disposition of the minde as Barnabas was a good man Act. 11.24 or manifest in the workes and thus Dorcas was full of good workes Act. 9.36 and our Lord wrought many good workes among the Iewes Ioh. 10.32 In these three kindes our Lord was good as man supereminently above all the orders of created things In the first kinde he was good as God which absolute goodnesse he denyed not to himselfe no more than Hee denyed himselfe to bee God at that confession of Thomas My Lord and my God but rather taught that young man if he had had wit to follow that perfection which hee prescribed For being by the young mans owne confession good it must follow of necessity by that rule of perfection Follow me that he was God and ought to be followed and obeyed Eph. 5.1.1 Cor. 11.1 8. Like unto this are those other arguments which they bring as where it is said Ioh. 6.57 Like as the living Father sent me and I live by the Father So hee c. If he live not by himselfe he cannot be God I answer that this life which the Sonne receives of the Father is not accidentall not of grace not of foresight or purpose but substantiall and eternall seeing the generation is according to the immutable being and eternall working of the Father and his spirituall perfection onely So they object from Heb. 3.2 That hee was faithfull to him that made him and Ioh. 14.28 My father is greater than I so 1 Cor. 15.28 when all things are subdued unto Him then also shall the Sonne himselfe be subject unto him that did put all things under him and many other which you may finde cited and answered by Athanasius and especially by Epiphanius in the places quoted before Wherein observe diligently the differences betweene those termes which signifie his nature and those which have reference to the office of his Mediatorship as in the first place of Heb. 3. Consider what he was made It is plaine by the verses before hee was made the Apostle and high Priest of our profession in which office he was faithfull to him that made him or appointed him thereunto so in the second place to that The Father is greater than I note the difference betweene the Divine and humane nature for the Sonne is inferiour to the Father by nature as man and so as he is the Mediatour in the dispensation of his offices as with us he makes up the body of his Church nay even in the Divine nature the Father is that eternall fountaine whence the Sonne hath his eternall originall although the honour of sending takes not away the equalitie of power nor the excellencie of nature from him that is sent so the greatnesse there spoken of is with respect of the office of the Sonne sent into the world that the world by him might be saved In the third place of delivering the kingdome to God the Father note the communication of idiomes or proprieties of speech according to the rules of Theodoret. That the words proper to either nature become common and indifferent to the Person as the God of glory was crucified 1 Cor. 2.8 that is that Person which is the God of glorie was crucified concerning his humane nature Secondly that the communitie of names makes no confusion in natures now the word Sonne belongs to Christ indifferently either as he is the Sonne of God and so shall hee raigne with the Father and the holy Ghost eternally and of his kingdome there shall be no end Dan. 6.36 Luk. 1.33 And seeing that he as the Son of man hath received all power Mat. 28.18 John 3.35 and 13 3. as to governe his Church Psal 45. so to raise the dead and to execute judgement Iohn 5.26 27. Acts 17.31 Hee shall raigne till all things bee subdued unto him and that he hath utterlie destroyed all the workes of the devill sinne ignorance and death Iohn 1.3.8 that as God the Father doth now raigne by him so he having performed all things which belong to him as the Mediatour may thereafter as God raigne with the Father eternally our everlasting king of glory when God shall be all in all his children as he is in him I am the more briefe in this argument because their arguments are answered in part before § 4. And because this question is neere to that which followes immediately and againe because it is the principall subject of that treatise by me so often mentioned therefore for conclusion first consider the danger of this venome which at once poysons all our hopes of that full satisfaction which is made unto the justice of God by the death of Christ for if he be a creature only then can he not be infinite and if not infinite then cannot the infinite justice that is offended by our sinnes receive a full and sufficient satisfaction by him as you might see it proved in the 21 Chapter before And beside these reasons you may take with you these remembrances against all Arians Turkes Iewes Socinians and other hereticks whatsoever and give honour and glory unto Iesus our Lord and God Esay 9.6 Vnto us a childe is borne unto us a Sonne is given and his name shall be called The Mightie God the Everlasting Father the prince of peace Ier. 33.15 16. In those dayes the branch of righteousnesse shall grow up unto David and Ierusalem shall dwell safely and he that shall call her See Mat. 11.28 is Iehovah our righteousnesse Micah 5.2 Out of Bethlehem shall hee come forth unto mee that shall be ruler in Israel whose goings forth are from everlasting Rom. 9.5 Christ is over all God blessed for ever and ever Amen and 1 Iohn 5.20 We are in him that is true even in his Sonne Iesus Christ This is the true God and eternall life § 10. Thus then our Lord Iesus being declared mightily to be Sonne of God by the testimony of the Father from heaven by his owne profession of himselfe confirmed by his glorious miracles Iohn 5.36.37 by his resurrection from the dead Rom. 1.4 by the consent of the Apostles and Prophets and by the testimony of the holy Ghost in the hearts of all his Children and being truly man by the testimony of his very enemies the onely question remaining concerning his beeing is that seeing all fulnesse must dwell in him
invisible Luke 4.30 Iohn 8.59 and 12.36 by which He walked on the waters Iohn 6.14 by whiâ—h He filled the world with wonders and that before His body was raised from the dead Beside it is not unreasonable for us to thinke that as the woman by whom sinne was brought into the world was brought out of the side of Adam so that man by whom the satisfaction for our sinne was made might likewise bee brought out of the side of the Woman For as it was sufficient for our redemption that our ransome was paid in our whole and perfect nature taken of the Virgin so was it likewise more honourable and beseeming the Lord of Glory having taken our flesh to be so borne Buâ— Eve you say was so brought to being while Adam was in a deepe sleepe I answer that it is not utterly improbable that the Virgin likewise in that birth was fast asleepe For first it was in the night the time of sleepe Luke 2.8 And it was according to all reason that shee which had conceived without pleasure should also bring forth without paine And although I affirme not this of any necessitie to bee beleeved yet among those many of whom you reade Luke 1.1 which set forth the declaration of these things that Gospel which was said to be written by Saint Bartholmew affirmes thus much Howsoever I thinke that Ierom spake too boldly Dialog 2. adversus Pelag Deum per genitalia virginis natum Neither can I give my consent to Tertullian lib. de carne Christi virgo quantùm à viro quantùm à partu non virgo That Mary was a Virgin in respect of her husband but no Virgin in respect of her Sonne For this in Iovinian was justly accounted an heresie Aug. here 's cap. 82. And that because it is contrary to the voice of the Prophet Behold a virgin shall bring foorth a Sonne I but Luke 2.23 saith that He was presented according to the Law Every male child that first openeth the wombâ— shall bee holy to the Lord which may seeme to belong so properly to Christ the holy One of God as to none other Answ I question not the birth but the maner onely And seeing it could not be but miraculous all confessing that it was not painefull I say that to Him who onely hath the power of miracles all things are easie alike And although the blessed Virgin at her Churching brought her offering commanded by the Law to shew her thankefulnesse and obedience yet doth it not follow thereupon that she was no virgin as other women are or needed any purification for that birth or that her Son was either borne or begotten as other children But the virginity of the mother of God is impugned not onely by these Ebionites but also by them that were called Antidicomarianitae or Antimaritae that is opposites to the Virgin Mary of whom one Helvidius an vnletter'd fellow sometime a scholler of the Arians was said to be chiefe about the yeere 389. Obiect 1 Now his opinion was That after Christ was borne His mother had other children by her husband Ioseph And that because it is said Matth. 1.25 That Ioseph knew her not till she had brought foorth from whence hee would conclude that after that he knew her Though in the sence of Helvidius this be unlikely Ioseph being fourescore yeeres old when he tooke her to wife as Epiphanius writes haeres 28. and that she knowing how she had conceived vowed perpetuall virginity her husband consenting thereto See Numb 30.7 yet the argument is onely from the doubtfull signification of the word Knew which in this place hath reference vnto the 18 and 19. verses where Ioseph suspecting her honesty thought to put her away but not daring to doe that being forbidden by the Angel he tooke her but yet knew not that is was not yet fully perswaded by his dreame that she was with child by the Holy-Ghost But when she had brought forth her Sonne then By her miraculous deliverance By the miracle toward the Shepherds By the prophecie of Simeon and Anna By the comming of the Magicians from the East-countrey By the admonition of the Angel to flee into Egypt and the slaughter of the Innocents that followed thereon he knew her to have bin with child by the Holy-Ghost and so to bee His mother that was the Saviour of the world Others had rather answere from the meaning of the word till unto or untill which with a negative in the time to come may signifie as much as never as it is said of Michal 2. Sam. 6.23 That she had no child till the day of her death As on the other side with an affirmative it may signifie ever as Matt. 28.20 I am with you alwayes unto or untill the end of the world not that he then forsakes them for whom He loves he loves unto the end that is eternally Obiect 2 Moreover it is there said that she brought foorth her first begotten Sonne whence Helvidius concluded that she had another Son afterward But Christ is not called the first begotten of his mother because she had other children after Him but because she had none before him So first begotten in this place is as much as only begotten For as he was the only begotten of his father according to His divine nature because he was the perfect Son of a perfect Father So was it fit that He should also be the onely Sonne of His mother because as Hee had in Himselfe all the perfection of Sonship So by His birth had Hee given to His mother the perfection of mother-hood above all women Obiect 3 3. But in Matth. 12.46 and sundry other places His brethren are mentioned I answere The name of Brother belonged indifferently to all the men of the same family or kindred as Abram spake to Lot Gen. 13.8 Wee are brethren as the Sychemites acknowledged Abimelech their Brother Iudg. 9.3 So all the Israelites call Benjamin and by a Synecdoche his tribe their Brother Iudg. 20.23 though he had been dead above 400. yeeres Therefore against Helvidius beside these conjectures either of Maries vowed virginity or that old age of her husband or those probabilities with sanctified minds more then probable That the Virgin her selfe had been most unthankefull if she had not been content with that glorious Son for whose faâ—â—e the holy women before her desired to be mothers and if she should wilfully have stained that virginity which she knew to have been so miraculously preserved unto her And Ioseph likewise having received the gift of continence had been too presumptuous if he had not forborne that sanctified body whom by the message of the Angel and so many miracles he knew to have conceiued by the Holy-Ghost Let vs looke to that which is the maine purpose and intent of the Scripture that in the setting up of that Kingdome which should be established unto David for ever 2. Sam. 7. from vers 12. to 17. Dan. 2.35.44 And
spoken of in that text of Iohn 16.14 is not of grace but by nature neither is it any other thing than this That as the Father from all eternity had decreed to reconcile the world unto Himselfe by the death of His Sonne and that the Sonne accordingly performed this in due time by His death upon the Crosse So the Father and the Sonne by that Holy Spirit which proceedeth from them both doth sanctifie the hearts of the elect and assure them that this reconciliation with all the fruits and effects thereof was for their eternall comfort and salvation For that peculiar manner of subsistence in the Divine nature which He taketh from the Father and the Sonne whereby it is most necessarily concluded that He is God is not heere spoken of 4. Objection The Holy-Ghost is no where called God in the Scripture Therefore He is a creature Answere 1. He is no where in the Scripture called a creature or mentioned among the creatures in Psal 148. or else-where Therefore He is God Answer 2. The proposition is false as it appeared by the texts cited out of Actes 5.3 4. and Matth. 28.19 where He is equalled with the Father and the Sonne and 2. Cor. 13.14 And Iohn 5.7 Moreover no sinne doth make a man lyable to an infinite punishment but that which is against an infinite being But the sinne against the Holy-Ghost shall not bee pardoned neither in this world nor yet in that which is to come Matth. 12.32 Therefore the Holy-Ghost is God Take hereto Actes 28. verse 25. and 27. with Rom. 11.8 and 1. Cor. 3.16 And as these texts of Scripture are sufficient to shew the falshood of this last objection So doe they manifest the vanitie of all the rest and confirme abundantly the trueth of this Article that the Holy-Ghost is God To bring the consent of Fathers and Councells to these Scriptures were as to encrease the light of the Sun by a burning candle yet because it was so plainely declared in the first generall Councell held at Nice by 318. Fathers in the yeere of Christ 325. you may remember it if you will In that Councell this Article was thus declared in that forme of confession which was framed by Hosius Bishop of Corduba As the Father and the Sonne so also the Holy-Ghost subsisteth with them of the same being of the same power of which they are And a little after Wee ought to confesse one God-head one being of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy-Ghost not teaching any confusion or division of the Persons of the unspeakeable and blessed Trinitie But according to the integritie of that faith and doctrine which was heretofore delivered by the Lord Himselfe to His Apostles and hath beene sincerely taught to us by our holy Fathers who kept it pure and intire as they received it from the Apostles wee beleeve and confesse the undivideable Trinitie which cannot sufficiently either be conceived in the understanding or expressed in wordes that is the Father eternally and truely subsisting a true Father of a true Sonne and the Sonne eternally and truely subsisting a true Sonne of a true Father and the Holy-Ghost verily and eternally subsisting with them And wee are ever ready by the power of the Holy-Ghost to proove that this is the trueth by the manifold testimony of the holy Scripture Histor Gelasij Cyzic Act. Conc. Nic. lib. 2. cap. 12. This faith was approved of all but because the present businesse with Arius was especially about the Sonne For he held that the Son was not of the subsistence of the Father nor yet very God That they might meet fully with that errour they agreed to that forme wherein it is confessed that the Sonne is light of light very God of very God begotten not made being of one substance with the Father c. Thus having ended the controversie about the God-head of the Sonne they come to the question of the Holy-Ghost against whom Phaedon a Philosopher and patron of Arius his cause objected thus It is no where written in the Scripture that the Holy-Ghost is a Creator and therefore Hee is not God To which the Councell opposed that which is in Iob 33.4 The Spirit of God hath made mee and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life And that in Psal 33.6 By the word of the Lord were the heavens made and all the hosts of them by the Spirit of His mouth To which they added that of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 12. verse 4 5 6. where the Holy-Ghost is called both Lord and God And so concluded that all the three Persons that is the Father the Sonne and the Holy-Ghost were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall or of the same substance Lib. Cit. Cap. 25. Likewise when this heresie of Arius concerning the Holy-Ghost was againe revived by Macedonius the second generall Councell held at Constantinople in the yeere 381. condemned the heresies of all Arians Apollinarists and Macedonians confirmed the faith professed in the Nicene Creed and for further explanation of the trueth in this point to that clause Wee believe in the Holy-Ghost they added the Lord and giver of life who proceedeth from the Father who with the Father and the Sonne together is worshipped and glorified c. And this is sufficient for the declaration of the trueth in this point by the authority of generall Councells All the orthodox Fathers consent hereunto Among whom if you desire to bee further acquainted with the arguments and objections on both sides you may reade the writings of that most noble Champion of the trueth of the holy Trinitie Athanasius and in speciall that sermon of the humane nature taken by the Word the oration against the ging of Sabellius and the first and second Epistle to Serapion and his first dialogue against Macedonius with him Macedonianus See also Greg. Nyss vol. 2. pag. 439. edit Paris 1615. you may also if you will take these objections and their answeres brought by Epiphanius to this question Haer. 74. and with them those in Thomas Aquinas Contra gentes Liber 4. Cap. 16. and their answeres Cap. 23. Another errour against the being of the Holy-Ghost is that which they call of the later Greekes and yet is not onely of the Grecians themselves but of all those Nations and Peoples that are of the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople which if you leave out the Countreys of the poore Painims in the East and West Indies is far greater than the pretended universality of the Bishop of Rome both in Europe and in Asia See Brerew Enq. Chap. 15. and besides them the Melchites or Christians of Syria the Armenians and Maronites hold the same heresie All these though they confesse that the Holy-Ghost is God the third Person in the Trinitie yet they say that He proceedeth onely from the Father not from the Sonne But although they account this but a later errour among the Greekes perhaps because the stirres thereabout after the
myst cap. 1. call the touch of the deity and affirme truely that it is more powerfull over the minde than that discursive knowledge of which I spake before But because this knowledge is ever with affrighting and addressed onely as the two former to the last it beseemes every man that would know God truely as hee may bee knowne for his owne comfort to cleanse his owne heart with all his diligence in prayer in meditation in reading of the holy Scripture in denying of himselfe in all his ungodlie and sinnefull lusts that he may become a holy and a meet Temple for God to dwell in And so hee may assure himselfe that God will give him experience of himselfe as hee hath promised Ioh. 14.23 That hee will come and make his abode with him This is that wise merchant who for this pretious pearle sels all that hee hath to buy it This is hee that eates of the hidden Manna Ioh. 6.50.51 Rev. 2.17 that receives that white stone and a new name written which none knowes saving hee that receiveth it This is hee that in the face of Iesus Christ as in a mirrour beholds the glory of the Lord so that hee is changed into the same Image from Glory to Glory as by the spirit of the Lord. Notes a GOd is not matier Anaximenes said the aire was God that he was therfore unmeasureable but had a beginning was always in motion Diagoras of Apollonia for he of Melos was the Atheist consented unto him as concerning the matier The opinion of Cleanthes I told you before which one while held God to bee matier in this sensible world in the uppermost ayre and in the Starres Parmenides imagined a mighty wide circle which encompast the world like a Crowne or garland therefore called by him Stephane to be God Xenophon and with him Plato where hee speakes in iest saith the world was God which we call Mammon and yeelds there were moe such but where he speakes in earnest as in his Epistles hee speakes of one God the Author of all things as we doe Aristotle could not tell how to gaine-say his master with his owne credit and so followed his judgement Heraclides of Pontus somewhiles said the Starres were Gods then heaven and earth So Theophrastus and sometime Zeno was for the Starres Chrisippus that was accounted most subtile amongst the schollers of Zeno was most wavering in his opinions sometime he thought the world was God sometime the uttermost or burning aire then water now earth after this ayre below and by and by the Sunne and the Moone and the Starres at last all together was but one God yet men canonized for their vertues must needs bee Gods apart and then much more the vertues for which they were immortall And thus they that would seeme wise while they cared to know more than the truth of God became idle in their imaginations and there foolish heart was full of darkenesse The parts which were before separate 2.1 b All parts are understood apart as things differing And therefore although divers formes are brought out of the power of the matier or propagate with the matier yet that affords no objection to weaken this argument But is destinate unto another totall 2.2 c If you looke on the question you shall finde it onely to be about such formes as these For it is not said that God is utterly no forme For forme is the most simple or pure being which wee can conceive but he is none of those formes which are allyed to matier The Angels are accounted formes but separate But I runne not with that opinion The Ideas are conceived to bee formes altogether separate not destinate unto matier much lesse is that most simple forme of formes the originall of all formes God is not the forme of any other Being 2.2 d The opinion of Democritus is contrary to this conclusion in that he makes mans soule to be God Straton thought that God was only a certaine divine power in Nature so said Chrisippus otherwhile and so Cleanthes where hee affirmed that God was the life of the world His opinion that reason was God was an errour against this conclusion also if by reason hee meant that reasonable soule the forme of mans bâ—dy Heraclides supposed God to change his shape at his pleasure Zeno said that reason in every thing was God or that he was that living law that gave life to every thing Wavering Chrisippus sometime held the life of the world to be God somewhile he cal'd him destinie Therefore God is no compound 3.1 c Among the matiers reckoned up before note a. some you see are compounded and they belong properly to this place as earth water and our ayre below of which none are simple elements but mixt one with another for generation sake and fitted to the inhabitants that dwell therein of which none could live in elements that are pure being themselves compounded Therefore God is not a body 4.1 f The schoole of Epicurus taught that God was in shape like a man and that he was also bodily For they thought that if hee were without a body as Plato taught he could neither have sence nor wisdome and so could no way be partaker of any pleasure or happines But concerning the pleasure which God enjoyes Plato teaches Epist ad Dionys that it is not in outward or bodily things which hinder the happinesse of the minde The weaknes of Epicurus argument is shewed by Cotta a follower of Plato Cic. de Nat. D. l. 1. the opinion it selfe confuted by the arguments here brought especially against the Audean hereticks that were called Anthropomorphites who upheld the opinion of the Epicurean Philosophers because the holy Scripture teaching men by their senses speakes of Gods powerfull right hand and treading down his enemies that hee was sorry in heart and specially where it is said Gen. 1. Let us make man in our owne likenesse They here understood the likenesse of the body not of the minde in holinesse and knowledge which we have lost must endeavour our selves to recover as we are exhorted Eph. 4.24 Put on the new man which is created according to God in righteousnesse and holinesse of the truth and againe Put on the new man which is renued in you unto knowledge according to the Image of Him that created him Therefore in God is no accident 5.1 Zeno g sometime affirmed that the yeare and the seasons thereof the spring the harvest the moneths also were God Chrisippus said the truth of things was God And if you account truth an accident you may referre his opinion hither You have now heard the difference of opinions among the Philosophers But how much wiser was Simonides that learned Poet who being demanded by Hiero king of Siracuse what God was He desired a day to thinke of his answer being the next day asked againe he desired two dayes And thus being often asked still doubled his time Being demaunded the reason he answered
that the longer he thought thereon the more hard and darke the thing seemed unto him What thanks therefore can we give unto God who by his holy word hath so fully revealed himselfe unto us that the holy Angels themselues with wonder desire to pry into those mysteries whâ—ch hee hath made manifest unto his Church by Christ 1 Pet. 1.12 1. Therefore his being is most simple 6.1 Against this conclusion a doubt or two may be raised 1. being without addition is affirmable of every thing But the being of God is not so For wee say the body or soule of a Man or an Angell is being yet not God Therefore the being of God is not a being without Addition And if addition bee made to the being of God whereby it may be distinguished from other beings it will seeme not to be a simple but a compound being I answer that the proposition being without addition is affirmable of every thing is true of that common predicate or transcendent being onely of which I speake Introd logic sect 3 n. 2 3. But the being of God is that one proper and pure being which belongs to him alone and receives no addition nor is affirmable of any other thing beside himselfe Secondly I answer that the conclusion of this syllogisme the being of God is not without additition being granted takes not away the former conclusion that his being is simple and pure Neither is the consequence rightly gathered thereon that if Addition be made it is not then a simple being For these additions bring in no such beings as to make the being of God either compound or mixt but only distinguishable from other beings For to say the being of God is one is pure is simple is incommunicable are here onely negation differences as one therefore it cannot belong to any beside himselfe Pure that is not mixt Simple that is not compounded Incommunicable whereof none can be partaker beside himselfe Nay those very positive additions of Goodnesse eternity infinity power wisdome c. are not additions of new beings but onely essential conditions of the same most simple being distinguished by us in our understanding For because our understanding receives nothing but by the sences from the creatures Therefore when it findes these severall perfections in the creature and acknowledges that no perfection can be in the effect which is not more eminently and excellently in the cause thereof it is compelled as it received these perfections in the creature with differences so also to referre them unto the Creator So this difference or plurality of attributes in God growes first in regard of the weakenesse of our understanding and secondly by that superexcellency of the divine nature whereby the understanding is so farre exceeded Therefore although our understanding bee no way able to compare all these severall perfections of goodnesse power wisdome c. together and then to conceive them as one but onely in one yet our undertakings how ever wandring or unable to conceive them as one infinite being can no way make any difference or othernesse in them or put any thing to the purity and simplicity thereof but must acknowledge the more pure the being is the more powerfull and therefore by one only action of that simplicity and one manner of working doth it bring forth most different and manifold effects both of the object and in the object or matier whereon it workes 2. Secondly it may be objected that the simplicity is more where there is no distinction than where there is But in the Godhead there is distinction of persons Therefore it may seeme his being is not most simple I answer That the distinction is not made in the nature or being of the Godhead which thing only takes away simplicity but only in the reall relations in which the being is still one and the same in all And although the relations be truly and really distinct yet that reall distinction or distinct realitie is but only relative and not bringing in any other being than is in the Godhead understood without these relations but only imports the order or manner of being 3. Thirdly it may bee objected that every thing that is must participate of being that it may bee and of some other thing that it may be something or a being in it selfe distinct from other beings So God by his being is and by his greatnesse and power He is infinite and almighty Therefore it may seeme his being is not simple I say the proposition is true onely in things that are by participation But God is absolutely of himselfe not by participation and that absolute and simple being of His is of it selfe essentially infinite and almighty and not by participation as was shewed chap. 8. ante in the answer to the first objection CHAP. X. That God is altogether as infinite in working as he is in Being A Most necessary truth and needing sufficient proofe not onely for the cleering of that which hath beene spoken but especially for laying the sure ground-worke of that which is to follow concerning the Trinity Therefore lend me the eare of your understanding that we may goe together in a matter of such weight And although the word worke in our common English in which I desire to speake is growne to meane almost onely bodily toyle yet you know there is the working of the minde also and according to the things spoken of you are bound either in your wit or honesty ever to be as gentle as you can in the meaning of words and to take them according to their greatest fitnesse But first you will say it ought to appeare that God doth worke For as Epicurus thought He neither troubles himselfe with any care or businesse of his owne neither yet is troublous to any other or mindes what they doe or say For if so then as he supposed He cannot in any wise be happy that hath so many things to thinke of But against this thicke-skin lazy opinion of Epicurus it shall appeare that this working or Action of God is his endlesse glory But you must understand that this worke whereof I speake is not meant of that whereby the dignities of God are manifested without in the creature but of that which is in himselfe alone And that he doth worke is most plaine 1. For as an infinite action cannot be without an infinite power so an infinite resting cannot bee but either with an infinite unablenesse or want of skill or infinite unwillingnesse to worke but an infinite unablenesse cannot stand with an infinite power nor want of skill with infinite wisdome nor unwillingnesse with infinite will And it was proved before that the power wisdome and will of God are infinite therefore he worketh also infinitelie but if the resting be not infinite but supposed to be slacknesse onlie or by turnes because of wearinesse that cannot stand with an infinite power nor with the simplicitie of the divine being for wearinesse cannot befall but
the foundation of our faith and hope for if Christ our Saviour be not very God and very man the being of our Mediatour and the alsufficiencie of his merit is utterly vanished fourthlie it is one of the maine and principall differences between our most high Religion taught us by God himselfe and the false worship of Idolaters of the Iewes Turkes Arians and other hereticks which from time to time have turned the truth of God into a lye Fifthlie we follow herein the holy Martyrs and the Fathers in the primitive Church and those Councells which have from time to time maintained this truth against all heresies And although it cannot bee denied but that even among the Heathens some of their wisest both Poets and Philosophers knew this mysterie by heare-say as they had received it from the Hebrewes as you may reade in Thom. Aquin. in lib. 1. dist 3. q 2. and more at large in Struchus de peren Philos lib. 1. 2. and from them in Philip Mornay of the truenesse of Christian Religion Chap. 6. yet among the Hebrewes themselves except the Prophets and schooles of the Prophets this secret was not knowne or taught and that as it may seem lest the misunderstanding multitude might fall into the Idolatrie of many Gods therefore is this thing so taught in the holy text of the Old Testament that the wise onely might understand it for although the Prophets knew well enough that in the dayes of the king Messiah this mysterie should be knowne even to the Gentiles for of him it is written in the 40. Psalme vers 9.10 I will not refraine my lips O Lord thou knowest but I have declared thy truth and thy salvation I have not concealed thy mercy and thy truth from the great Congregation Yet because they knew they ministred those things of which they spake not to themselves nor to the people of their owne times but for us unto whom the treasuries of the riches of God in Christ were more fullie to bee opened therefore they taught according to the dispensation of the Holy Ghost who hath so from time to time opened the fountaines of knowledge unto his Church and hereafter will as the holy Church shall be able to receive it This glorious truth then being plainely discovered to us in the New Testament let us see with what diligence and faithfulnesse reason that servant of God doth wait on the authoritie of his Lord and how thereby a wee are summoned to hearken unto this truth for although reason could never have found it out yet being taught what the truth of God is herein it joyes to see the necessitie of that truth which it is bound to beleeve But because I have written somewhat to this Argument already which that you misse not I have caused to bee printed at the end of this booke I may be somewhat more briefe herein Onely the reasons I take up here together and adde such other supplies as seeme to be wanting in that treatise § 2. The word Father is taken either personally as it signifies the first Person of the blessed Trinitie with the relation to the Eternall Sonne or else it is spoken essentially of all the three Persons in the Godhead with respect of the creature which is created susteined and governed thereby Of this through his helpe we shall speake hereafter Chap. 13. but first of the first person of the holie Trinitie The Greeke Churches by the authoritie of the Apostle Heb. 1.3 for the severall distinctions of the Persons in the Godhead hold the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hypostasis which wee from the Latin call a Subsistence or severall substantiall being by it selfe But the Latin Church turned it Persona from an old word Persola because it meanes one onely being intire of it selfe for Solus is of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is whole in it selfe and entire with all the parts but yet is Persona a title of honour given unto men alone for they define it to be Rationalis naturae individua substantia that is an individeable substance of a reasonable nature and from thence it is translated to God and Angels A Person then of the holy Trinitie is an incommunicable subsistence in the Divine nature These words have their ground in the holy Scripture to which in this great Article of our faith wee must ever have recourse by reason of the many and strong heresies that have beene thereabout Trinitie Triunitie or a threefold being in one hath ground in that Text which is in Matthew 28.19 Goe teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost But certaine it is that in our Baptisme wee bind our faith and allegiance unto Gâ—d alone So 1. Iohn 5.7 There are three that beare witnesse in heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are â— one thing or one being By subsistence understand a substantiall or essentiall being not comming to or being in the Deitie by chance It answers to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is different from substance nature being or the like teâ—mes that signifie any common or universall b ing for an Hypostasis meanes a peculiar being wherein the common nature is whollâ— and entyre as I said before and will say untill you understand mee For example the whole nature or being of man is understood in that word Man and so the Angelicall nature in that word Angell but Peter or Gabriel meane that particular person in which the common being is whole and entyre I meane so as that there is nothing essentiall in the being a man or Angell whereof Peter and Gabriel are not partakers essentially so wee understand the difference The being or essence of the Godhead is one individuall most simplie absolutelie and substantiallie one which infinite and undivideable being of the Godhead is yet neverthelesse in everie Person entyre and wholly so that nothing of the essentiall being of the Godhead is in one which is not in the other And therefore Iustin the Martyr and from him Damascen Dialect Cap. 66. and after them our sound Doctors of all sides agree that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a subsistence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that manner of being proprietie or reall relation which belongs to every one Person in the Holy Trinitie You may here not unfitly note the difference of these words Being Substance and Subsistence Being is that which is common to all things that are The word Substance properlie doth not so much import the verie inward being as that respect which it hath to the accidents that are therein Subsistence signifies that speciall manner of being which belongs to substances that are actually being If you will enquire further you may see what Thom. Aquin. hath writ hereto in Sent. lib. 1. Dist 23. qu. 4. or if you will the Introduct to log Sect. 4. Incommunicable that is peculiar proper or belonging to one alone so that one
cannot be another The divine Nature is used 2. Pet. 1.4 and here meanes that being or substance wherein all the three Persons are essentially one and the same One God One I say not compounded or made of the three Persons but One most simple and perfect being in all the three Persons of the Godhead Now the name of a Father is most poperly given unto God the first Person of the Trinitie for of him is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all fatherhood of the families both in heaven and earth Ephes 3.15 because that out of the perfection of His owne being hee brings forth a Person coessentiall that is of the same being with himselfe and coeternall yet distinguished from him by certaine incommunicable properties which is the Sonne and that by an eternall most holy infinite and spirituall working in himselfe according to that life holinesse wisdome power glory c. which are in him essentially and this spirituall or eternall working is the holy Ghost And because that this action of the Godhead in the bringing forth or eternall generation of the Sonne is onely in the essentiall being of the Deitie eternally therefore it is not an action of God proceeding meerely from the freedome of His will as it is said of the creature Revel 4.11 That for his will sake onely they are and were created For all such actions are exercised onely in things of themselves meerely not being in which God hath power to will or not to will their being but because that God doth worke according to the perfection of his most excellent being as Prov. chap. 10. So glorious and powerfull an action in himselfe cannot be in vaine therefore it is necessarie that the product effect or object of that action which is the Sonne be every way answerable to that action in the infinitie of glory wisdome power c. Neither yet is this action of God the Father compel'd or enforced for then it would not be glorious but it is with the infinitie of his owne will also because it is essentiall to him and whatsoever workes according to the being thereof b workes both necessarilie that is according to the unchangeable nature and yet most willingly because it cannot will contrary to the being thereof But in things wherein there is an absolute freedome of the will one way or other there must a choice bee possible which cannot bee but betweene two at least which not onelie an infinite will doth utterly exclude but even that naturall will also whereby every thing workes according to the inclination or propriety of the kinde So then neither can God in the infinitie of his will but will that being which is the image of himselfe the best of beings infinite in goodnesse and in glory Neither can He but worke according to the perfection of his being for the production of that which Hee doth will As all our naturall sences inward and outward worke willingly yet necessarily that is according to their naturall being upon their proper obiect For the Eye is not satisfied with seeing nor the eare with hearing Now is it yet further to bee remembred that although there be an infinite and eternall production of the Persons in the deity yet there is no bringing forth or multiplication of any new being For the Godhead being eternall it is not possible that any new Godhead should bee brought forth Neither yet can any addition bee made thereto because it is infinite And so you may conclude of all those dignities or perfections of the Godhead as wisdome power glory goodnesse c. Yet seeing goodnesse doth ever move that which is good to multiply the image of it selfe and power joyned therewith inableth goodnesse to worke and infinity with them causeth goodnesse and power both to be and to worke infinitely therfore it is necessary that in the Godhead there be an eternall multiplication or production of those true and reall distinct relations which we call Persons So that although goodnesse power infinity all the other glorious dignities which are in God be one infinite being one onely in the most simple pure and perfect agreement or concord of being yet these relations must bee distinct in such cleare difference that that one cannot possibly bee that other from which it is really and truely distinguished though in essence or being they be all one infinity c As in the being of goodnesse there is an infinite producer or bringeth forth of goodnesse which is the Father an infinite goodnesse brought forth which is the Sonne and an infinite production or bringing forth of goodnesse which could not be if either the efficient or bringer forth of goodnesse or the goodnesse brought forth were not For where either the agent or the object is wanting it is impossible that any action at all should be And therefore as the Sonne proceeds from the Father So the holy Ghost is most rightly said to proceed from the Father and the Sonne And this is the distinction of the persons according to their originall or procession But because all these are infinite and that in the infinitie of being and working there must needs be eternity therefore there can bee no beforenesse nor afternesse nor ceasing either to bee or to worke And therefore is none of these Persons before or after another but all three distinct Persons are one infinite and eternall deity The Reasons § 3. 1. If God bee infinite in his working as He is in his being then hee must needs worke to bring forth such as himselfe is and that both infinitely and eternally answerable to his being and this in the Godhead alone seeing that beside it nothing can be infinite and eternall But it is sufficiently proved in the 10. chap. That God is infinite in his working as hee is in his being Therefore by his infinite working He brings forth such as Himselfe is And by these three termes you see the holy Trinity expressed and proved 1. God infinite the Father 2. That which he worketh the Sonne The infinite working it selfe which combineth both together the Holy Ghost 2. Neither can power be infinite nor infinity powerfull if there bee not such an agreement betweene them that they may together both be and worke infinitely But if they bee and worke infinitely it is necessary that there bee a production in the Godhead For otherwise that infinite worke should be in vaine and not powerfull to produce the like But that is impossible therefore there is a production in the Godhead 3. If there be not a production of Persons in the Godhead as is before spoken then an infinite goodnesse is not a bringer forth of goodnesse and so followes a privation or ceasing in the working of goodnesse which brings on either a disability in the power or a want in the will or in the wisdome of the worker which cannot stand with his infinity of power will and wisdome of whom we speake Besides seeing in Him to be and to worke are all
of Proclus taken out of Plato as you may reade in Stenchus de perenni phi lib. 2. c. 16. These two saith hee unity and Being consisting in the Trinity the first begetting the second begotten the one perfecting the other perfected it must needs be that there is a certaine power by the which and with the which that unity gives subsistence and perfection unto that being For both the procession from that unity to being and the returne from that being unto unity must be by a middle power betweene them both For how can unity bee Being or Being bee one but by that power which is in both And this Trinity is the excellency of all understanding unity power Being the one bringing forth the other brought forth and power proceeding from unity ioyned with being And this is the first Trinitie that can bee understood or conceived to bee unity being and the power of them both by which divinity is the Father of being being is of unity The Father is the father of wisdome and wisdome the Son of the Father and between these a most high power hidden in the one of producing in the other of being produced as Plato hath shewed it wonderfully Thus Proclus The argument of Pythagoras is not of lesse weight That which is unchangeable must needs be eternal and alwayes one And as al change in every body is by reason of inequality of the parts so that which is absolutely and ever one must be ever in equality so verity and equalitie must be eternall and multiplicity and inequality must necessarily bee after unity and equalitie And as unity is the cause of connexion or being one so inequality is of division And the effect of the first cause must have priority before the effects of the second cause Therefore connexion also must be before division and change and if before change then also eternall And because there can bee but one eternall therefore unity equality and connexion must bee one thing And this is that threefold unity which Pythagoras taught was to bee adored Pet. Blondus de Trenario pag. 106. 107. And Cusa de Docta ignorantia lib. 1. cap. 7. Neither is that reason which Cusa Exerercit lib. 7. pag. 134 brings from Aristotle to bee slighted especially by Thomas that great Aristotelian Aristotle saith that the first cause of all must needs be both efficient formall and the end And three firsts there cannot be because before all plurality there must needs be unity Therefore it being one first it must bee a threefold cause efficient formall and finall The efficient cause is neither Formall nor Finall and the formall is neither finall nor efficient Therefore they are three distinct causes considered in their severall subsistences but considered in their firstnesse they are in being one alone many such reasons and authorities to this purpose you may reade in Struchus De perenni Phi. lib. 1. 2. But how much yet more fitly and more fully hath the illuminated Raimund shewed both this point and all those other which Tho. Aqu. hath given over as past all proofe For Raimund taking all those conditions of the divine being which the holy Scripture gives to God and without which that being could not be perfect and supposing and proving them to be infinite with all the conditions of infinity both in being and working hath taught the way to shew the Trinity of Persons in unity of being by every one of those conditions see Art mag Part. 9. And though his words seeme borrel and rude as bonificant bonificabile Bonificare in una bonitatis essentia Possificans possificabile and possificare in the being of power yet they are full of excellent meaning The learned and witty Cusa de visione Dei cap. 17. gives instance in the unity which is either unity uniting unity united or the union or knot of them both yet all these in the most simple being of unity And againe in love which is either in the Person loving or in the Person loved or in the knot of the Love betweene them all according in the nature of Love and without any of these Love cannot be perfect and compleate yet may every one of these be understood apart inasmuch as a man may love and not be loved loved and not love againe But where that which is Lovely is also loving there the bond of love is firmely tyed and love in every part entire yet is this love but in shadowes among us but perfect in the endlesse and perfect being of love 1 Ioh. 4.8.16 And thus in other conditions of the divine nature have other learned and devout men endevoured to shew their understanding and firme consent unto this high article of the christian Faith one in the power of God another in his wisdome c. according to the proofes you read before And therefore not to goe about to overthrow the reasons brought by Thomas because the authority of so great a Doctor may cut deeper than his reasons and so cut off if not the strength of the reasons in the articles following yet that comfort which the faithfull soule might have thereby I say that all the reasons which are brought to this article and so for the most part in all the rest are onely of two kindes First and chiefely from the impossibilities which would follow upon the contradiction of the thing in question which kinde of discourse I have taught as I can log cap. 8. n. 7. and chap. 26. more at large Secondly by that kinde of demonstration which I call by conversion of termes as I shewed log cap. 18. n. 3. in the syllogisticall handling of such arguments as in effect are all one with them which log cap. 13. n. 5. I shewed to bee by rule in the second kinde of equivalence Now both these kindes of argument prove the question onely that it is that is to say shew onely that the proposition is true and neither prove nor enquire how or for what superiour cause which in this and in many of the other questions here handled cannot be given And there is no proposition how true how universall or manifest soever but it may be proved by these meanes both in the affirmative For in things of the same nature and being whatsoever agrees to one most needs agree to the other and in the negative the ground of impossibilities and all negative discourse whatsoever is denied to the predicate must also bee denyed to the subject Now I thinke it is no more derogation from the truth to bee thus confirmed than it is simplie to bee affirmed as it is in the article of the Creed As if I say there is an eternall being the cause of all Beings there is an infinite wisdome the disposer of all an infinite power that governes all and thereupon conclude that there is a God What dishonour is here offered to God or his truth are not all these termes an eternall Being the cause of all beings An
infinite Wisdome c. convertible one with another and all of them meaning one being which wee call God have they not all authority in the Holy Scripture And shall not that which is truely affirmed of one bee as truely affirmed of the other And so on the otherside by impossibilities If there bee not an eternall being the beginner and cause of all other beings then that which is begun must bee a beginning to it selfe But this is impossible for so it should bee a cause and yet not bee Therefore there is a God And if any other kinde of argument bee brought either by rule or induction or syllogisme yet seeing superiour causes are not alwayes here to bee found whereby to make analyticall demonstration therefore the reasons for the most part are contayned within this bound onely to prove the Article that it is true Nay I adde yet further that the Theologian or divine is not tyed to the use of naturall reasons onely for proofe of his conclusions For so you should make divinity nothing else but naturall Philosophie except that the one should bee intended to the cause of all being the other to the effect in nature onely But you know that all truth whereinsoever it is being founded in the truth of God reason the searcher thereof must farre exceed the limits of nature or naturall causes Therefore although that conclusion of Tho. Aquin. stand sure that the philosophers could not come to the knowledge of the Trinity by the view of nature because nature was an insufficient meane to bring them thereunto which yet may receive limitation either in respect of the degree of knowledge which nature brings of the Creator as himselfe makes difference Proâ—em in lib. 4. contr gent. or in respect of the manner of concluding inductive onely yet will it not follow from thence that the articles of our Faith are utterly beyond all proofe of reason For as divinitie is of a farre higher straine than naturall Philosophie so are the proofes and reasons thereof from greater lights than all nature can shew Who knowes not that divinity as concerning a great part of the practice holds all morall Philosophie whose conclusions though from reason yet are not the reasons natural but morall Have not Grammar Logick and all other Artes and Sciences either instrumentall or principall certaine rules or principles which are true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is universally necessarily and convertibly or peculiar to that Science and yet not demonstrable by naturall Causes And to this very purpose Saint Augustine saith De Civ Dei lib. 11. Cap. 24. Diligentia rationis est non praesumptionis audacia ut in operibus Dei secreto quodam loquendi modo quo nostra exerceatur intentio intelligatur Trinitas That is the Holy Trinity may bee understood by us in the workes of God by their secret manner of speech in which they speake to our understanding And if this high mystery may bee understood by the creature as the Father shewes in that booke and other Christian writers elsewhere I doubt not but by those honourable titles which the holy Scripture doth give unto God it may much better bee made to appeare And if it were lawfull to prove the first and principall Article of our faith by reason and by reason I say without presumption of perfection in knowledge to prove that God is as it hath beene shewed by the warrant of the Apostle is it not likewise as lawfull in the Articles following And these things may seeme the more strange in Thom. Aquin. because in the 11. chap. of his fourth booke contra Gentiles he doth so clearelie deliver this point of our beleefe both by the authoritie of the holy Scriptures and the evidence of reason yea and that on the same grounds whereon Raymundus doctrine is builded that he may seeme to have lighted his torch at the lampe of Thomas Take the meaning of his words as they lye Seeing that in the Divine nature He that understands the action of his understanding and his intention or object understood are all one and the same being it must needs bee that whatsoever belongs to the perfect being of any of these be most truly in Him Now it is essentiall to the inward word or intention understood that it do proceed from him that understands according to the action of his understanding And seeing that in God all these three are essentially one for in him nothing can be but essentiallie it is necessarie that every one of these be God and that the difference which is betweene them bee not of being but of relation onlie or the manner of being as the intention is referred to him that conceives it as to him from whom it is therefore the Evangelist having said Iohn 1. The word was God lest all distinction might seeme to bee taken away betweene the Father and the Sonne addes immediately That Word was in the beginning with God Thus saith Thomas Oh but say you it is a dangerous case to commit matters of faith to reason I but there is no danger to commit reason to matiers of faith that is to make reason a servant of faith neither is our reason too good to give attendance on faith nor faith so proud as to scorne the service of reason therefore let this jangling and frowardnesse cease If I say any thing to your content accept it if not you are not bound to reade it but God hath not given us the knowledge of himselfe in his word that as parrats in a cage which with much adoe are taught a few words and then can say no more so we should hold our selves content when wee can say the Creed but that by continuall meditation in his word our knowledge and so our faith our love and feare of him might be increased dayly And this is it which S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 2.6 Wee speake wisdome among them that are perfect and againe 1. Cor. 1.22 The Grecians seeke wisdome and wee preach Christ the wisdome of God for in him are all the treasures of wisdome and knowledge hid Now it is apparent that he meanes not the wisdome of this world but that which is in things concerning God whereby we may be able to give a reason of the hope that is in us 1. Pet. 3.15 And this is that perfection whereto we ought to strive whereof the Catechisme doctrine of repentance of faith c. is but onely the foundation as it is manifest Heb. 6.1.2 For although the least degree of faith even as a graine of mustard seed bee sufficient to remove the high mountaines of rebellious and wicked thoughts that rise up against the obedience of the truth and consequently to save the soule through his mediation and mercie that doth not breake the bruised reed nor quench the smoking flaxe yet seeing every man as he hath received ought as a faithfull Steward of the manifold graces of God to profit thereby our
and so to bring out other Persons as this lewd consequence would enforce But the ground of this mistaking which I tell you of for avoyding of the like cavils is this that they consider not the superexcellency of the Divine being but measure it by the short and scanty rules whereby they measure the creature It is true in things here below that according to those naturall causes wherby everie thing is brought forth so may it likewise bring forth the like because that strength or power is given thereto for the propagation and preservation of kinde in the like which it cannot uphold in it selfe by reason of corruption neither is the generation of naturall things but with imperfection and their multiplication by decision of the seed into divers parts Neither doth any father communicate his whole being to that which is begotten by him neither can the species or common nature so farre forth as it is multiplicable even by one alone be savâ—d whole and entire in any one individuall But nothing of all this is in the most glorious spirituall and divine generation for that power of generation is not received but essentiall so that which is begotten is eternall and incorruptible The generation also is in the uttermost perfection because the whole infinite being is communicate thereby but that not for any abasement in the principle but because of the infinite perfection thereof Neither is matier for multiplication either possible or needfull here because all the fulnesse of Fatherhood Sonneship and procession are herein perfectly substantially infinitely and eternally because the procession is not such as tends to any thing without for so that which proceedeth should not bee coequall to the principle from whence it doth proceed But this procession is in the Divine being onely in every Person according to his peculiar subsistence answerable whereto no generation can be found in all the creatures 2. Another objection there is to the like purpose out of Heb. 1.3 where it is said of the second Person that hee susteineth all things by the Word of his power So that if hee being the Word of his Father have also a Word whereby he susteineth all things which therefore is another Word and not the things that are susteined thereby it may seeme that there is a multiplication of Persons and that the former objection is not fully answered I have said Log. Chap. 29. n. 5. That the appointment of all naturall causes to the bringing forth of their effects is the rule or law of Nature Now this law is that necessitie fate or destinie which is ordained by his eternall decree that made Nature and all things therein and blessed all the living creature with power to bring forth according to kinde as it appeares Gen. 1. And this is that Word of which S. Paul speakes No other divine Person but that Word whereby he melteth the yee and Snow Psal 147.18 that ordinance which the creature cannot passe Psal 148.6 Of which you may reade every where in the Holy text and especially in that admirable booke of naturall and Divine Philosophie the booke of Iob in comparison of which all Aristotles naturalls are not worth the while For seeing all naturall causes have their strength from him hath not hee bound nature within those limits beyond which hee gave it no further power to worke And within which hee is trulie said to worke by his word or by his power in the strength of which alone Nature her selfe doth worke Maker of Heaven and Earth CHAP. XIII That the World is not Eternall Section 1. THe puritie or uttermost simplicitie of the Divine being is the fountaine from whence all the perfections which are therein doe flowe for neither can any thing be living powerfull wise continuall glorious c. except it bee neither can any thing be such infinitely if it have not an infinite being but an infinitie of being cannot be but with the uttermost simplicitie of being For whatsoever is put to being takes away the simplicitie thereof and must needs be a limitation thereto and so take away the infinitie also The manifold perfections therefore in the Divine being are not additions of other beings to make composition therein or to take away the simplicitie thereof seeing they all signifie one and the same being but because the most simple being must needs bee the first of beings as being altogether in act or perfection and no way in possibilitie of being for then wereit not a most simple being if it were both in act of being that which it is and in possibilitie of being that which it is not therefore must all other beings depend hereon nay bee herein because all things are virtually contained in their principles And this is that eternitie of the creature which it had in the infinite wisdome and power of God before it was Gen. 2.5 For seeing that in God is infinite perfection and that nothing can bee wanting to that which is perfect neither yet can any thing be perfect but in him therefore the first and highest being of all things must bee in his perfection But because absolute perfection must needs bee with the uttermost simplicitie without othernesse or change therefore must all things in God bee one and he though one alone yet virtually all things But because all things were in him eternally one that they might in time bee different in themselves for otherwise they could never at all either have beene or have beene different It is necessarie to grant that in that one absolute being which the creature had in God there must be first a possibilitie for it to be in it selfe for as things utterlie impossible can never be so can there bee no possibilitie of being but by him Secondly a possibilitie for the things being to be different among themselves and that not onely in their severall kindes but also in their particular existences and this for the manifestation of that manifold wisdome of the Maker And from hence thirdly succeeds that actuall being which things that are being have by that Holy pleasure or will by which they are and continue in their severall beings which Will must needs bee partaker both of the infinite power and infinite wisdome that it might effect that which was possible and foreseene And thus is there in the Unitie of the creature a Trinitie also in possibilitie in difference and actuall being that wee should never forget to adore the eternall Trinitie in the Unitie But the question of the worlds eternitie is onely about this last manner of actuall being for it is not denyed that it is eternall in respect of that being which it had in God as the cause or in it selfe as possible to bee because that while it was not being it had not any power to resist that Almightinesse which called it out of not being into being though to speake more properlie that eternity which it had in pure possibilitie was not in it selfe because it was
contrary to the being and perfections of it selfe But if the cause bee powerfull and able to bring forth the effect then must the effect also bee perfect and upright and especially free from that which is most contrary to the cause thereof But it is before manifest that all things had their beginnings from God the most powerfull and working of all causes and because of the infinitie of his goodnesse and iustice hating wickednesse and sinne above all things therefore as all his creature was exceeding good so it followes likewise that man as farre as he had any being from God was also good and upright in his being and so without sinne 2. The ability and excellency of the end is more then the worthinesse of all those thing which are ordained for the end But it is manifest that all the visible creature of this world was created for mans use that he was prince and Lord of all For by the Law of nature and iustice that ought to bee chiefe which hath most excellency above other Now to set aside the abilities of the minde in the knowledge of things eternall and divine whereof no other bodily creature hath any feeling or understanding what creature under the whole heaven in the earth or Sea may set it selfe in comparison with man for those gifts which the Creator hath vouchsaf to him in the use of all things in the knowledge of their nature in memory and remembrance in the inventions of arts in the guiding and compelling of the creature to his service or utter destruction of the rebellious And therefore both in the creation Gen. 1.28 and againe after the floud the type of Regeneration 1 Pet. 3.21 were they all delivered into the power of man Now if all these things were for man and his use and they every one good in their kinde much more was man good and upright in his creation 3. Every thing is more exâ—ellent as it is for a more excellent and noble end But the end of man is more excellent than all the creature beside For they are for his use as their end but man for the service and glory of God as his end in the attainement of which alone hee can be happy And because that which is for any end must have conditions or fitnesse for that end it was necessary that man should bee created without sinne which above all other things the soule of his Creator did hate and for which alone he was put out of his service 4. Every corruption or marring of a thing must needs bee of that which was once good and the greater the perfection thereof was the worse is the corruption or wickednesse that is therein But it is too manifest that the nature of man is most corrupt therefore it was once very good and upright 5. If God had made man such as man now is rebellious and unthankefull towards Himselfe a plague and calamity to other men through injury pride and oppression a slaue to his owne sensuall desires in gluttony and filthie lust ignorant of the truth an enemy to all good following with greedinesse all manner of ill subject as to Sinne so to the due punishment thereof all manner of misery sicknesse and death both of body and soule then had Hee brought the greatest disorder into the creature even there where order was most necessary that is in the prince and Lord thereof yea such disorder as should be contrary to it selfe in respect of that hatred which men have one toward another then would he not in justice have brought those punishments on men which are due for their sinne in this life and damnation in that which is to come But all these things are against the wisdome goodnesse and justice of God Therefore man was created in a Contrary estate of innocency Iustice and holinesse 6. This truth the holy text doth shew For beside that which is said Gen. 1.31 That God saw every thing that he had made and behold it was very good it is said of man in particular that hee was created in the image of God Which because it is there three times repeated it is necessarie to consider what that threefold Image of God in man is that it may the better appeare what his excellency was and how great that losse was which hee indured by his sinne against so gracious a Creator Some among the most ancient Fathers as Irenaeus and Tertullian thought that the Mediator in that forme wherein he afterward appeared in our flesh and was seene and knowne to Adam Enoch Noah Abraham Moses and many of the Prophets for which they were called Seers 1 Sam. 9.9 formed man of the dust of the earth The word there used is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kidmuthenu according to our likenesse and signifies to be like by cutting or carving and so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used Gen. 2.7 8. which signifies to fashion out of clay like a Potter seemes to favour this interpretation you may see herewith Rom 9.21 and thinke on it Bucanus also Inst Theol. Loc. 8. q. 18. confesseth that there is nothing in his opinion but according to the Analogy of faith and brings his reason to justifie it Yet as if he had forgot himselfe he condemnes Osiander of madnes that followes it lib. cit loc 9. q. 15. And because other late Doctors though without reason disallow this judgement of the antient fathers see Med. Patr. Scult de nevis Iren. Tertull. Roberts Fund Rel cap. 17. I leave it in the middest till further proofe of the truth be made on the one side or the other Notwithstanding man is truely said to bee created in the image or according to the image of Elohim or Christ the Creator either naturally or else supernaturally naturally either according to the state of his body or of his soule or of the whole composition his body is an abridgment or compound of all bodily being because there is nothing in the bodily creature which is not in some sort in that little world of mans body as reason proves by his food and medicine out of all bodies here below and as the Physitians and all naturallists affirme and as Paracelsus more particularly every where shewes and proves So that as all things even bodily beings were created in Christ and therefore were in Him eminently by their formes and potentially as being by Him brought into act or effect So are they all in the body of man representatively and though by his sinne subject to the curse as he their Presbyter is yet shall they bee delivered from this bondage of corruption when the glorious liberty of the Sonnes of God shall appeare Rom. 8.19.20 to 24. And concerning the soule if you looke into the faculties thereof beyond them that concerne the body alone in growth and sense if in the understanding you consider the powers of the imagination or thought of the discourse of memory of the will and the freedome therâ—of
to dwell in a creature that was finite and therefore I say hee thought that God should rather dwell in the being of the Angels and in their nature gather all things unto himself then dwelling in the tabernacle of the manly being in which hope seeing himselfe frustrate he became an unreconcileable enemy to mankinde whereas the holy Angels esteeming duely of the benefit and being well content with that meanes whereby God would bee seene of them 1. Tim. 3.16 expect with patience and desire the fulfilling of the number of the elect And thus our Lord hauing made mans peace through the bloud of his crosse hath reconciled all things both in heaven and earth unto God Col. 1.20 For certainely if the Angels be for man as it is said Heb. 1.14 then can they not possibly have the perfection of their blessednesse but by man Let us therefore with reverence and thankfulnesse come unto that great mysterie of our Religion That God was manifest in the flesh The incarnation of God is the dwelling of the Godhead in the manhood in one person wherein the being of the Godhead and manhood remaine together everlastingly without separation yet in cleere distinction of their severall beings and so without commixtion to cause a third being but that each continuing truly that which it is in it selfe the Godhead according to his eternall decree without any change of it selfe in time tooke to it selfe the manhood that by himselfe hee might reconcile all things to himselfe and bring them to that estate of happinesse and glorie to which they could never have come if God had not so manifested himselfe in the flesh The internall actions of the eternall Deity are all infinite eternall and necessary to be that which they are But whatsoever God doth worke without himselfe in the creature it is onely according to his owne holy pleasure and will But yet seeing his actions upon the creature are the expressions of those perfections which are in himselfe of goodnesse of wisdome of power of glorie c. and that to this end that the creature may bee blessed in him and by him according to that measure of happinesse which he of his goodnesse hath appointed thereto therefore those reasons which are drawne from the dignities of God are of no lesse force for the truth of God in the creature then they were for the manifestation of the truth in himselfe And therefore as by those dignities which by the authority of his word are due to him wee have approved that truth which the holy Scripture teacheth us to beleeve of him both concerning the unitie of his being and the Trinitie of the Persons so let us endeavour in the proofe of this great question And although the great masters in the schoole have given ouer these questions as utterly beyond all proofe or testimony of humane understanding See Thom. Aquin. praef in lib. 4. cont Gent. yet seeing this is that maine point in our most holy faith whereby it differs most from all infidelity and false worships seeing it is that one thing wherein the ground of all our future hope and comfort doth consist if ever the understanding of a Christian held it selfe bound to doe service unto his faith most of all it is bound to give attendance herein I may somtimes use the word of necessity in the conclusions following yet understand me not as if I laid any necessitie or constraint upon God to doe or to suffer but the necessitie that I meane is in the consequence of the reason when the conclusion doth follow necessarily upon the grounds that are laid downe before 1. For although happines be only in the enjoying of that which is good and the greater the good is the greater is the happines but if the good be not enjoyed and possessed it causes no happines at all yet an infinite good is no way to bee come unto or possessed by that which is finite except by the voluntarie motion and inclination of it selfe it doe apply and give it selfe unto that which is finite And because every good spreads it selfe acccording to the power of it selfe upon that which is capable of it the greatest goodnesse is ever with the greatest communication of it selfe therefâ—re the infinite goodnes doth also extend it selfe according to the possibilitie of the creature to be possessed and enioyed thereby which cannot be till it have applied it selfe to something in the creature of which the rest of the creatures being partakers may also thereby be partakers of the infinite goodnesse Now if God who onely is infinite goodnesse had dwelt in the being of the Angels though that had beene made knowne to man yet because man doth not communicate with the Angels in nature or by any merit or service towards them he had had no benefit thereby whereas the Angels by the appointment of their ministerie to mankinde in their continuall presence and succour and that helpe which the soule hath by them in the delivery thereof out of this prison of the body and in the conducting of it unto the Divine presence have in iustice a reward for their service sake and a kinde of interest in all that good whereof man by their ministerie is made partaker 2. Moreover when man had sinned the law of justice required that the satisfaction should be made in that nature that had sinned so that if the Mediatour had taken on him the nature of Angels the satisfaction therein had not beene avayleable for the sinne of man 3. Thirdly the whole creature hath interest in man and man in the whole creature so that God by taking on him the nature of man hath blessed therby the whole creature as you may understand by the answer which is made Cha. 17. to the 5 Object § 4. But if he had the nature of Angels neither man nor the other elementall creatures had had hope of any restoring See Rom. 8.19 c. to 23. 4. Lastly if the deliverance of man had beene made in the nature of Angels the restoring had beene as unsufficient so also man had lost of his dignitie and honour thereby for man before his sinne was bound and subjected to God alone but then had hee beene subjected and bound to the nature of Angels And although man by his sinne nay even our Lord himselfe by his suffering for sinne was made somewhat lower then the Angels yet being raised from the dead the manly nature is exalted far above all principalitie and power and might and every name that is named in this world or in the world which is to come Ephes 1.20.21 Whence it will follow necessarily that God would dwell in the nature of man not in the Angels as you may understand by these Scriptures Heb. 2.14 Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood he also himselfe likewise tooke part of the same ver 16. Hee tooke not on him the nature of Angels but hee tooke on him the seed of Abraham And for
their attendance is it not said Heb. 1.14 Are they not all ministring Spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall bee heires of salvation Compare herewith Psal 34.7 and 91.11 and conclude with Saint Paul 1. Cor. 3.23 All things are yours and yee are Christs and Christ is Gods The questions before are neere to this as all the Articles of our faith are necessarie consequents one of another therefore let us briefely see by that which is already proved what we can gather to this conclusion 1. Either the whole race of mankinde must be lost and perish being tainted with the sinne of Adam or the infinite justice against which the sinne was done must for ever stand violated and broken or else a Mediator must bee found who was able to satisfie the infinite justice that was offended The first is against the wisdome goodnesse and love of God to his creature either to make mankinde in vaine that is to destroy it againe or to make it unto eternall punishment The second is impossible that an infinite justice infinitely able to avenge it selfe should endure it selfe for ever to to remaine violate and offended for so should it prize a thing finite and wicked before it selfe infinite in justice therefore there behoves to be a Mediatour who should fully satisfie the justice offended and utterly blot out the guilt of sinne Now an infinite justice offended must be satisfied by a punishment answerable that is infinite but no finite creature could any way be or be accounted infinite Therefore when none was found worthy either in heaven or in earth or under the earth the Lambe slaine from the beginning of the world tooke upon him our flesh to satisfie for the sinne of his creature and so by his infinite obedience for by His eternall spirit Hee offered himselfe to God Heb. 9.14 and by the infinite merit of his suffering for by that spirit the manhood both soule and flesh was enabled to endure those pangs and that punishment which neither all mankinde nor any other creature could endure was the infinite justice satisfied And thus Hee became mighty to save Esay 63.1 and having Himselfe in his owne body borne our sinnes vpon the tree did utterly abolish the whole body of sinne and found for us eternall redemption 2. The divine goodnesse hath created all things exceeding good Gen. 1. so much doth it delight it selfe in that concordance or agreement which is betweene the inward and the outward good But that agreement is the greatest which is in the unity of one person Therefore it is expedient that there be an incarnation that so in one person the goodnesse may bee most eminent and the concord most lovely 3. Otherwise you may propose it thus The excellency of the effect appeares by that conformity or agreement which it hath with the cause so then the inward worke of the infinite Goodnesse and the outward being accorded in the unity of one person the multiplication of the agreement is so great that it cannot possibly bee greater Therefore it followes that the Godhead bee incarnate for otherwise the concord in the inward and outward worke of the deity might bee greater than it is but that is impossible 4. The divine will concerning his workes without doth will and love that especially wherein the excellency of all his inward dignities doth most appeare But the excellency of all his dignities appeares most in this that God bee manifest in the flesh For thereby we are made partakers of the Divine nature 2 Pet. 1.4 of his glory vertue everlasting life and happinesse So that now there is but one end of God and his creature that is the glory of God of which and unto which God rejoyces over his creature to bring it and make it partaker And the Creature likewise reioyces to be made partaker And thus the end or perfection of the creature hath rest or accomplishment in the inward perfections of God and his inward perfections are manifest in his outward workes Therefore God would bee incarnate 5. And seeing that God infinitely blessed and happy in himselfe needed not the Creature but made it therefore that it might be blessed in him and that of his fullnesse the creature might receive that fulnesse of happinesse which it can possibly injoy therefore it is requisite that that fulnesse of his bee imparted unto that creature wherein all the rest of the creature hath interest which we have already proved to bee man chap. 17. § 4. ob 5. Therefore God would dwell in man that by man the whole creature might be blessed in Him 6. If God were not incarnate then the divine dignities should be lesse Infinite one than another For the infinite goodnesse by the infinite wisdome seeing that uttermost and perfect happinesse that might come unto man by the incarnation if his power his will and love of the creature did not answer thereto so that he would bee pleased to dwell in his creature then should they be defective and of lesse extent than his infinite wisdome But that is impossible Therefore it followes that God would be incarnate See the answer to the objection that may be made from hence § 1. on the 39 chapter n. 4. 7. If there were not an incarnation then the infinite wisdome should not have the view of that highest excellencie which is possible to be in the creature neither should the infinite power magnifie it selfe by the multiplication of it selfe in an outward subject so these dignities should not be glorious by all those meanes whereby it is possible that they might glorifie themselves But all these things are inconvenient Therefore it is reasonable to beleeve the incarnation lest ignorance weakenesse and defect of glory should bee found in the first principle which must of necessity take away His infinity proved chapter 3. understand the reason well For your more ease I will propose it affirmatively thus 8. If there bee an Incarnation then the divine understanding may have an outward object wherein it may be infinite both in the inward and outward working For whereas all created obiects are absolutely finite yet if the Divine being understood which heretofore we called the Sonne chap. 11. take on him our being our nature by that assumption is deified and so made infinite with that uttermost infinitie whereof the Creature can any way bee capable seeing the deity is neither without the humanity nor the humanity without the deity And so the divine understanding may be an outward obiect infinite as much as it is possible that a creature can be infinite And so the wisdome also may bee infinite in all possibility of infinity both in the inward and outward working And what I have said of the infinite wisdome of God must also be understood of all his other perfections of goodnesse of power of eternity of life of glory c. But if there bee no incarnation this infinite outward obiect is taken away and so the understanding and
us before the Father till the day of our redemption when he shall present us unblameable in his sight as it is said Heb. 2.3 Behold me and the children which thou hast given me see Ioh. 6.39 But see the reason of this heresie of Eutyches delivered by that second Synod of Ephesus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which murthered the vertuous and faithfull Flavian and blasted with their stinking curs all them that should affirme that there were two natures in Christ forsooth because hee is the onely Sonne of God not two Sonnes not two Persons but one Sonne one Person Euagrius Hist Eccles lib. 2. cap. 18. And yet our Lord saith of himselfe whom doe men say that I the Sonne of man am Math. 16.3 And as often is hee called in the Scripture the Sonne of man the Sonne of David the Sonne of the virgin of the carpenter c. as the Sonne of God and yet but one Sonne and yet but one person of both natures divine and humane as I shewed before in the beginning of the 23. chapter I referre you thither But the answer of that wise Prince of the Sarazens Alamundarus was sufficient to stop the croaking of those foule birds of the Ephisine cage of whom some comming to tainte him with that bane he told them that he had received letters that Michael the Archangel was lately dead when they answered that it was impossible that an Angel should suffer either sicknesse or death hee replyed And if Christ have not two natures aswell the manly as the divine how could hee endure the paines and death of the Crosse For if an Angel cannot dye much lesse hee that is onely God Theod. Collect. loc cit And this may be sufficient for all the rable rout of Eutyches But if you desire more reasons against his opinion you may finde them in Tho. Aq. cont Gent. lib. 4. cap. 35. And although this heresie be imputed unto Eutyches as I have shewed yet it is plaine that it was an heresie before Eutyches was borne For Saint Athanasius in his sixt Sermon hath most wittily and plainely refuted it § 2. The heresie of Apollinaris is as wide from the truth on the other side and as it favours of the heresie of the Theopaschites which you shall heare anon so it favours that sottery of the Manichees that made the Godhead divisible into parts as you have heard before chap. 8. note 6. 5. 3. or rather yet worse than so if any thing can be worse than that which is worst or more false than that which is most false 1. For if any part of God became man then God in part of Himselfe must cease to be God and God must suffer detriment or losse when part of His being is either taken away or changed to the worse 2. So God also should bee subject to composition and accidents contrary to that which hath beene proved chap. 9 numb 3.5.6 3. Whereupon it would also follow that seeing his being is most simple and pure if any of his divine being were coessentiall to his humanity then also the whole 4. And moreover it would follow that God were neither infinite nor eternall For whatsoever is changed into another ceases to be that which it was before But this is contrarie to that which hath bin shewed c. 2 3. so then all these things are impossible And therefore the Scripture concludes against this opinion that God is eternally one and the same as S. Iames also saith c. 1.17 that in Him there is neither variablenesse nor shadow of Change 1. But see their arguments First The Word became flesh Ioh. 1.14 Therefore the Word was changed into flesh bones sinewes haire c. Answer The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was became or was made hath divers significations because a thing may be said to bee to become or to be made this or that by any property or accident that is therein as a man at 20. yeeres old is made or becomes able to guide a Ship Cicero became or was made more learned by reading the bookes of Plato But thus the Word was not made flesh when hee tooke our nature on him for so should we make God subject to accidents so also our mediator after the union of both natures should not be essentially both God and man which must of necessity fall into one of these two Gulphs either that the manly being in Christ was but fantasticall and in shew onely as the Manichees and some other hereticks held or else that Hee may cease to bee a mediator betweene God and the Creature which were to take away our hope of everlasting happinesse Againe a thing may bee said to be to become or to bee made this or that substantially as when the food is changed into the substance of that which is nourished thereby then it is made or become that which it doth nourish But thus the Word could not become flesh but rather flesh should have bin made the Word For in al manner of working to the change of one thing into another the more noble and powerfull agent must have the preeminence But this is neither affirmed in the Scripture nor possible to be true Thirdly a thing may be said to become or to be made this or that essentially as every particular matier and forme under every species become or are made one individuall as the body and soule in Plato essentially become the proper person which we call Plato But thus the deity and humanity became not essentially one individuall under any common species or kinde For the deity came not to the humanity as the forme thereof which had the full and perfect proper forme the humane soâ—le and understanding Moreover all formes are ordeined for their matiers and all matiers have in them a naturall appetite to those formes whereof they are capeable But nothing of this was in that above-wonderfull generation For neither could the humanity when it was not desire that the deity should dwell therein neither was the deity ordained for any such end as to dwell in man but of his owne onely holy will and love to man was he pleased so to blesse the creature Therefore the Word was made flesh onely by the This woâ—â—â— was made signifies an â—nion not a Câ—â—â—ersâ—on Aâ—â—â—na Serm. 6. uniting or taking of the manhood unto himselfe whereby both the divine and humane nature became in Him one subsistence one Mediator one Person one Immanuel to which union in natures nâ—thing in nature can be equal or like For this is that wonder of wonders which passes the understaâ—ding of men and Angels to conceive for which his wondrous conception by the Holy Ghost his wonderfull birth of a virgin were by which his glorious miracles his wonderfull resurrection and ascepsion and the wonderfull happinesse and eternity of his creature are wrought And although as the two natures so their proprieties are different in Him so that wee may truely say of Him according
to the severall natures that hee was dead and yet could not dye that Hee suffered and yet could not suffer or the like yet must all these contradictions of necessity hee understood of the distinct natures in the unity of that one Person indistinct so that the difference bee in the natures not in the Person And thus the Scripture hath taught us to speake as it is said Ioh. 1.10 He was in the world and the world was made by him which clauses though they may receive distinction by the differences of his being yet in the unity of his Person none at all For the same Person hath made the world and yet was in the world as another man For to respect the Sonne according to the perfection of his deity although nothing be essentiall unto him but that hee bee eternally begotten of the substance of the Father yet since he was pleased to take on him the office of our Mediator it was necessary that hee should take also our being wherein alone the satisfaction for us should be wrought For as it was necessary that our Mediator should be God that hee might be able to save and to support the manhood induring that punishment which might satisfie the infinite Iustice and raise it up againe to life lest being swallowed up of those torments Hee should not bee able to give life to them for whom Hee suffered for the State of the members cannot bee better than of the head So was it necessarie that hee should bee made flesh that is become truly and essentially man that the punishment being borne in the nature that had offended that nature might bee restored to the favour which it had lost Necessary I say but I meane not by any absolute necessitie on the behalfe of God for Hee is Debtor to no man nor on him can any necessitie bee layd toward the creature without which he is infinite in glory and perfection but yet necessarie with that necessity of supposition that seeing God for the praise of his Grace would by Himselfe restore His Creature that had sinned it was necessarie that hee should take on him the nature and being of that creature at â—east in part if He would restore it but in part but because the creature had sinned in the whole not in soule alone nor in body alone nor in the one without the other it was necessarie that He should become whole and entire man not to take on Him the soule of man onely but to become also flesh that he might redeeme both soule and body 2. But they object that out of Saint Iohn chap. 1.14 wherein it is said that He dwelt in us as in a tabernacle and againe it is said by Saint Paul Rom. 8.3 and Phil. 2.7 that He was made in the likenesse of man By which texts it may be gathered that he was made man in respect of some property or accident only For he that dwels in an house is not said to be one thing with his house and may goe out of it when he list and he that is like another can no way possible be the same For nothing is said to be like to but to be it selfe I answ that neither by the one speech nor by the other is it meant but that he was truely and very man of soule and body as we are but seeing the humane nature hath a certaine shew or resemblance of clothing to the deity because the Godhead is not seene or apprehensible of the creature in his owne being but onely as He is man Therefore by that Metaphore of his dwelling in us as in a tabernacle are we called to the meaning and true understanding of the Mâ—saicall tabernacle whereby his manhood was figured and the promises after a sort made visible to the Fathers as by those texts of S. Paul we are brought to remember that as Adam was created in the likenesse of God and lost it so the Mediator that second Adam to restore that first image was made true man in the likenesse of the first Adam For this is one immortall hope that as hee is truely and indeed partaker of our nature and one with us so shall we be truly partakers of the divine nature 1 Pet. 1.4 and one with Him Ioh. 17.21.22.23 3. A fourth being cannot come into the Trinity but if that being which was taken of the virgin doe still continue a manly being so that neither the Godhead be changed into the flesh nor that into the Godhead it must needes follow that a fourth being is taken into the Trinity and so we are bound to worship a Quaternity for a Trinity Answer This seemed no inconvenience to the ancient Fathers as it appeareth by Athan. epist de Incar dom nost Ie. Chri. contra Apollinar For to this objection hee answers that the humane body of Christ is the body of the increated word and therefore is adored lawfully And the first councell of Ephesus against Nestorius see can 7.8 13. doe not suffer the use of the word Coadoration or Conglorification of the body of Christ lest they should seeme to make two Sonnes or two Persons or any way to admit any kinde of division betweene the divine and humane nature as Nestorius taught but that with one adoration wee ought to worship Immanuel For the two natures therein make not two Persons but one Mediator in one Person in which person we adore the deity in the holy Temple of his humanity according to the commandement Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and Him only thou shalt serve For neither is His humanity a person nor yet possible to be separate from His deity And seeing his humanity from the very instant of his conception never had any being but with the deity to part one of these from the other were to destroy the present being of his Mediatorship and to put Him in that state in which Hee was before his incarnation and that were to make void his sufferings and the glories which have hitherto followed thereon If you desire to intangle your selfe further in this question you may reade Athanas serm 6. epist ad Epict. and epist de incarnatione Dom. contra Apollinar and Epiph. advers Dimaeritas § 3. Now concerning that confusion or mingling of the two natures in Christ into one which the Timotheans imagined if neither the beings nor the proprieties of the beings divine and humane bee changed neither the Divine into the Humane as Eutyches imagined nor the divine into the humane as Apollinarius supposed it cannot bee inferred by any reason that any such confusion is or ought to be yeelded unto It is true which the Timotheans supposed that if any such mixture were the thing that did arise from that mixture must needs bee a third thing differing from them both For true mixture is the union of bodily parts changed by the mixture from their former being so that neither the being nor accidents of the things mingled is saved or kept
entire in the mixture but at least in part corrupted as in the mingling of wine and water of blacke and white colour neither the one nor the other remaine in their perfection And to admit this mixture in the union of the divine and humane natures in Christ as it is impossible in respect of the divine being which hath not any bodily parts So were it utterly to make void the comming of Christ which upon this mixture should have suffered in such a third being as had never sinned And if this foundation of the mixture of the two natures in Christ bee taken away all the Cage-worke of the Theodosians that the Mediatour is mortall and of the Armenians that hee could not suffer must needes bee rotten and unable to stand Therefore let us consent to that Antheme of the Church Miraâ—â—le mysterium Deus homo facius est id quod erat permansit id quod non erat assumpsit nec commixtionem passus neque confusionem O wonderfull mysterie God was made man Hee continued that which hee was Hee tooke to H mselfe that which Hee was not neither suffering commixtion to make a third being of them both nor confusion to change the one being into the other § 4. 5. 6. 7. Now it remaines to shew what were the holdfasts of Ebion Cerinthus Photinus and the rest of that ging For you may perceive how that although they had their private differences in their opinions yet like theeves they all conspired in this to robbe the Lord of glory of the Robe of His Divinity The reasons of their opinions after the long and wearisome reading of the Fathers which recite and answer them sometimes heavily and with much adoe you shall finde most briefly laid downe by Saint Thomas contra gent. lib. 4. cap 4. 9. 28. which in effect stand only in the misinterpreting of certaine texts of the holy Scripture For the better understanding of which let me remember you of these two rules First to hold stedfastly that the termes or attributes which are given unto Christ in the Scripture concerning His divine being belong unto him essentially and properly whereas the same termes attributed to the Saints belong unto them only by grace and appropriatly And by this difference you shall answer their cavils when being urged with such texts as this Heb. 1.5 Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee they answer the angels are also called the Sonnes of God Iob. 1.6 2.1 and magistrates Psal 82.6 yea all the Saints are called the Sonnes of God Phil. 2.15 and 1 Iob. 3.1 and this is only by a grace appropriate and imparted unto us whereas Christ is the Sonne of God according to his essence and true being as it is said Ioh. 10.30 I and the Father are one not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one Person but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one thing one being as Saint Paul interprets it Phil. 2.6 That he was in the forme of God that is in the most inward or essentiall being God for he hath no matier equall to God that every tongue may confesse that Iesus Christ is Iehova for so the word is there to be understood because the Greekes every where in the old Testament interpret Iehovah by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord. The second rule is that the proprieties of one nature in Christ doe not destroy or denie the other nature as where it is said that He was hungrie that he wept that he slept that He was ignorant of the Iudgement day and of the grave of Lazarus that his soule was heavie c. which belonged properly unto Him as man and prove that hee was truly man in bodie and soule yet doe they not at all take away the being of his Godhead but that with his manly being wee ought to confesse that hee is God blessed above all for ever and ever Amen Rom. 9.5 And by this difference well observed you may give a true answer to those texts which they falsly urge to their conclusion as where it is said All power is given unto mee in heaven and in earth Matth. 28.18 And againe Philippians 2.9 That God hath exalted him So where Saint Peter saith Acts 2.36 That God hath made the same Iesus which was crucified boil Lord and Christ By which texts and the like they would conclude that hee is not God by nature but for his merit and greater graces onely called God as it was said to Moses Exod. 7.1 Behold I have made thee a god to Pharaoh For say they Hee that receives of another to be exalted to bee made a Lord is not such of himselfe But this conclusion followes not but rather that which S. Paul affirmes Rom. 1.3 4. That Jesus Christ our Lord which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh was powerfully declared to be the Sonne of God by his resurrection from the dead when he in is humane beeing received all power and was exalted above every name and manifestly declared to be both Lord and Christ both God and man The power therfore and glory was in him being God essentiall and eternall and in him being made man manifested by his resurrection to dwell in that manhood eternally And as that which these heretikes clatter is directly against the authority of the holy Scripture so is it utterly against all sense and reason For if our Saviour were onely man then our comfort which wee should have by him as being able to save because hee is God were utterly destroyed as a Father saith I would not beleeve in him if he were not God And this according to the Word of God Ier. 17.5 Cursed bee the man that trusteth in man Moreover if Christ were onely man excelling others onely by his progresse in vertue so that for his greater grace above others he might be made a Mediatour for others then many mediatours might be possible to bee seeing Noah Daniel Iob and Moses exceeded others in vertue and by speciall grace many others might exceed them but so our Lord should not be the onely Sonne the onely Mediatour contrary to that which the Scripture witnesseth as you heard in the end of the Chapter n. 10. Therefore concerning the Mediatour what he ought to bee let the followers of Ebion and Photinâ—â— heare Saint Paul Heb. 4.14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest that is passed into the heavens Iesus the Sonne of God let us hold fast our profession And againe Verse 15. let the Eutychian heare and be ashamed for Wee have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities but was in all points tempted as we are yet without sinne Therfore Jesus our Mediatour is both God and Man Here you may remember if you will that which you read before Chap. 20 21 22. More you may reade to this purpose in Iust Martyr his Dialog Triphon in Irenaeus also lib. 3. Cap. from 21. to 31. Tertul.
de Carâ—â— Christi Epiphan haeres 28. 30. And especially in Tertul. de Trinit if that booke be his Thus we have seene the falshood of the Monophysites now it remaines that we also take a view of their opinions that hold more natures than one in Christ and among them to see the heresies of Nestorius 1. and Arius 2. and then the late opinion of Postellus 3. § 8. Concerning the position of Nestorius it may seeme that all authors agreed not what it was For hee that made that addition of the Timothean Nestorian and Eutychian heresie unto Saint Augustine makes the heresie of Nestorius nothing else but a mingle-mangle of the Photinian and Timothean heresie That Christ was man onely not conceived of the Holy Ghost but that afterward God was mixt with that man Againe Socrates Hist Eccles lib. 7. cap. 32. writes that many supposed that Nestorius sought to bring in the Heresie of Photinus whereas saith hee it is plaine by the writings of Nestorius that he onely avoided this that the virgin should be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Mother of God But Tho. Aquin. contra gent. lib. 4. cap. 38. cites Damascen to this purpose We affirme that there is a perfect union of the two natures not according to the Person as the enemy of God Nestorius affirmed but also according to the Hypostasis From whence Tho. concludes that this was the position of Nestorius to confesse one person in Christ and two Hypostases If by Hypostases he meant the Divine and humane natures united in the one Person of our Mediator neither Damascen nor Thomas can blame him for it But if by the manly Hypostasis consisting of body and soule he must meane a humane person as Thomas in the same place out of Boâ—tius determines you may see how they made a quarrell more than needed For though Nestorius had beene madd yet would he never have held one Person of both natures and also two persons But it is cleare by the later Historians of the Church that this among other was the heresie of Nestorius that as in Christ there were two natures so there were also two persons which opinion might easily take the originall from Cerinthus Phoâ—iâ—us and such as stunk of that Pumpe For if God the Word came to dwell in Jesus the sonne of Mary being a perfect humane person of body and soule whether at his Baptisme as Cerinthus taught or from the very instant of his conception as the Nestorians of this time affirme the position of Nestorius must follow of necessitie that there be in him as two natures so two persons For the Godhead destroyed nothing of the humane perfection which it found So that if it came not to the humane nature but in the subsistence of a manly person then that humane nature must remaine in the perfection of a person as it was before Whence that followes also not unfitly which hee further affirmed that the things of infirmity which were in Christ as to eate to drinke to sleepe to gâ—ow in wisedome c. belonged to the sonne of Mary without the Sonne of God and all the glorious miracles which Christ did worke were done by the Sonne of God without the sonne of Mary But the supposition of Nestorius that the deitie came into the humanity when the humanitie had perfect subsistence in soule and body that is in the perfection of a personall beeing is most false For the Word taking flesh of the Virgin caused it to become one person with himselfe so that the body assumed was the proper and peculiar body of God and the humane soule the soule of God not of any other Person but the body and soule of the Sonne of God and this not onely while the soule dwelt in the body according to the naturall life but also while he was yet under the burden of our sinnes his body in the grave his soule in Hell as the Apostle cites the Scripture Act. 2.27 Thou wilt not leave my soule in Hell neither wilt thou give thy Holy one to see corruption So then the body in the grave was the Holy One of God for nothing else of him was subject to corruption and though it were for a time forsaken of the soule yet not of the Godhead which thing the words of the Angel doe confirme Matth. 28.6 Come see the place where the Lord lay So that our Saviour on the Crosse yea even in the bands of death as concerning his body was still the Lord and God of glory 1 Cor. 2.8 Aâ—d if it be most true that God is more inward and more neare unto every thing than can be expressed by any words of beeing of essence of nature substance moities forme proprietie or the like because he is the foundation unto all these and in him all things consist How much more shall hee bee inward and fundamentall unto that body soule and Spirit of Iesus which hee was pleased to make his own that by that body and blood of his he might redeeme his Church as it is said Acts 20.28 That God purchased his Church with his owne blood that is with the life and blood of that body which was proper and peculiar unto himselfe Thus then the word was made flesh not by any transmutation or change of the one or the other from their true and naturall being but because that by a secret and unspeakable conjunction the Word was made one with the flesh and the flesh with the Word So then the Sonne of GOD tooke the humanitie not that it might be another person beside himselfe but being in himselfe perfect God he would also in himselfe be perfect man taking flesh of the Virgin The differences of union you may see if you will in the principles of N. Byfield Chap. 16. This union of the Godhead and Manhood is manifest by divers Texts of the holy Scripture For evidence of which we will first put this infallible axiome That of two different persons one cannot possibly bee affirmed of the other as to say that Peter is Iohn or Iohn is Peter neither yet that the proprieties of the one can belong to the other as to say that the Gospell of Saint Iohn is the Epistle of Saint Peter Now it is said Ioh. 16.28 I came forth from the Father and am come into the world which belongs to Him as to the Sonne of God as Iohn expounds it 1 Epist 4.9 and then it followes Againe I leave the world and goe to the Father which is peculiar to him as man as it is said Act. 3.21 Therefore Iesus the Sonne of God and the Sonne of the virgin is one and the same person so Col. 1.16 that same He by whom all things were made v. 18. is the head of the Church and the first borne from the dead and Rom. 9.5 Hee who is of the Fathers concerning the flesh is God blessed above all This our Lord affirmed of himselfe Math. 26.63.64 to be the Sonne
which hee must of necessitie communicate with the Creature And this is that Wisedome created and increate without which nothing was made This both the Creator and the Creature that forme of formes in whom by whom and for whom are all things pag. 21. 103 c. I answer That if it must of necessitie be put that God cannot worke without Himselfe because He is infinite and therefore immoveable then for the same reason it must follow that no such great created being can at all be except you will say that hee created himselfe and so was when He was not or that hee had his creation from some other originall than God which must likewise bee infinite in being able to create so excellent a being and yet finite that hee might move or not move himselfe thereto when he would But first this progresse would be infinite and beside that impossible For if neither God could move because Hee is infinite nor much lesse the creature when it was not how was it possible that any thing at all should be created Secondly Moreover it would follow hereupon that that were possible to the second cause which was not possible to the first but it is manifest that all second causes worke onely by the activity of the first so that if the first cause cease to worke much more the second Thirdly beside this the power of God should not be infinite if it could not worke according to his pleasure in things without But you say as Himselfe so His action is infinite and it is impossible that a finite being should be the subject of an infinite action I say though Sampson were able to breake a Cable yet might he straine one haire of Dalilah to straightnes not to lengthen it to lengthen it not to breake it This is true say you because he was as every creature partaker of being and not being of act or perfection and of possibilities or imperfection whereby he might move or not move at his pleasure But God is not so but alwaies actually whatsoever Hee may be But say I it is one thing to speake of the infinite action of God in himselfe and another of his action in the creature limited according to his Wisdome and His Will in respect of the outward object as I have shewed at large in answer to the objections for the worlds eternity chap. 13. note b ob 2. 3. 4. Neither is the will of God without an infinite Wisedome to dispose of all things in their times nor yet without an infinite power to cause every thing to bee actually according to His Wisdome and His will and the application of his will wisdome and power is sufficient to move all inferiour causes to give all manner of beeing to the Creature 2. But seeing the matier and forme of all things are after a sort contrary and that the bodily composition likewise of things below is of elements contrary in their qualities it is impossible that these repugnances should be brought together into one nat Med. pag. 21. Answ The Philosophers tell us of a certaine quintessence in which the different qualities of all the elements are brought to agreement and give us reason to beleeve it by which quintessence dwelling in every thing the contrarieties of the elements are accorded in every compound Raim Lulli and Ioh. de Rupesc de 5. essentia lib. 1. cap. 2. But seeing they keepe the experiment with themselves neither their reason nor their authority shall bee of any force with us But this is without all doubt that hee that had power to create all things had likewise power out of that created masse fruitfull with the seed of all things to bring out every thing in due time according to the kindes that were by him foreseene and determined And because wee have hitherto maintayned that God alone by his eternall wisdome Our Lord Iesus Christ was the Creator it must follow of necessity that the creature was also ordered and guided by Him For that infinite power which could doe the more and cause that to bee which was not might also doe the lesse and order it at his will So that for this objection wee are not compelled to acknowledge any such created being the Creator and disposer of all the rest And concerning that supposed repugnancy betweene the matier and forme of every thing it is but the begging of the question for all formes are produced out of possibilities of their matier excepting onely the soule of man and the divine endowments thereof as I shewed at large chap. 17. § 4. n. 2. 3. The third argument of Postellus pag. 28. is not much unlike the former drawne from the perpetuall change of things subject to generation and corruption For nature brings out nothing violently or in an instant therefore as the things that are began by little and little to bee by the power of the Spirit of God which moved upon the waters so by the power of the same Spirit are they still preserved in their order of being and by it they are changed from state to state And this spirit of God is that first created being that Mediator betweene God and the creature the spirit of the Vniverse actually moveable and applying it selfe to every thing and working in every thing by the power of the Trinity which dwelleth in Him For nothing which proceedes from the power of the matier is able to move it selfe no more than the matier was no not the soule of man but onely by His strength and activity by whose power it is Answer Concerning the progresse of things naturall from the evening of their beginning to the morning of their perfection I have spoken before But for answer to this I say that it is not necessary to put any such spirit of the universe such an applyable divinity as the Platonicks call Animam Mundi because things are changed from one state of being to another seeing the Holy Scripture tels us Psal 148.5 that all the armies of the creature were made because God commanded And for their changes in corruption and generation it is plaine it must be according to that degree which they cannot passe vers 6. which is the law of nature And moreover concerning the providence of God on every particular thing our Lord hath taught us Math. 10.29 that not a Sparrow fals to the ground without the will of our heavenly Father except Postellus will here except that that heavenly Father must signifie that first begotten of the creature which he doth meane Which interpretation would directly crosse that text Act. 15.18 That all the workes of God were knowne to Him from everlasting And nothing can bee in the second cause which was not in the first Therefore seeing the infinite power of God is that by which every thing is powerfull to worke unto that end whereto it was destinate we must needs confesse that Hee by His power workes what He will both in Heaven and in earth and
Rom. 8.26 That the Spirit maketh intercession for us wth gronings that cannot be uttered which cannot be but with earnestnesse of desire and paine but neither of these can befall unto God yet is our Mediator one yesterday and to day and the same for ever Therefore the Mediator is a created being which continually hath made and doth make intercession for the Saints according to the will of God vers 27. Answer Though Christ be our eternall Mediatour as was said above Obiect 6. one as the Sonne of God eternall one Sonne of the Virgin eternally ordayned in the counsell of God yet this Spirit here meant is that Spirit of the humanity of Christ as it appeares by the circumstance of the text For hee that searcheth the hearts knoweth the meaning of the Spirit so it is the Spirit of the heart of Christ our Mediatour whereby he intreates for the Saints For although our Lord Iesus be glorified in body yet is he the same body that he was before and his heart is touched with the feeling of our infirmities and even now sorrowes with us for our sorrowes as when he wept Iohn 11.35 For as Postel truely saith pag. 33. The beginning of his sufferings was in the body and though his bodily sorrow was ended in his death yet his sufferings in his soule and Spirit are not ended till that which is remaining to the sufferings of Christ be likewise fulfilled in the bodies of his Saints as it is plaine Acts 9.4 Col. 1.24 And therefore it is said of this Saviour or Angell of his presence in all their troubles he was troubled Esay 63.9 Heb. 2.17 4.15 16. But Saint Paul Colos 2.2.3 saith That all the treasures of wisdome and knowledge are hid in that mysterie of God and of the Father and of Christ Where the Father by a manifest distinction from God and from Christ must meane this meane being or created Mediatour which tooke flesh of the Virgin Answer Not so for although the eternall power and Godhead were manifest to all men by the creature that wicked men might bee without excuse Psal 19. and Rom 1.20 Yet none of the Princes of this world did understand that mysterie of the Gospell of Christ 1. Cor. 2.8 For that had beene kept secret since the world began but was now manifest in the last times Rom. 16.25 Col. 1.26 Therefore these treasures of knowledge are first to know God one infinite and eternall being then to know him the Father that is to confesse in the unitie of the Deitie the three persons 1. the Father eternall which cannot be without an eternall 2. Son neither can an eternall Sonne bee without an 3. eternall procession or generation Now to know this one God and him the Father and that one Mediatour betweene God and man the eternall Sonne dwelling in the man Iesus the Sonne of the Virgin is the height and perfection of all knowledge whereto man by all his search could never attaine Then so to acknowledge this truth as to live in holinesse as they ought that know it is that perfection of wisdome that whole duty of man whereto hee is called and this answer may serve for the like objection out of Ephes 1.3 17. So Saint Paul also Heb. 1.3 seemes not to give unto Christ equall glorie with the Father for he saith of him that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the beame which is of one nature with the fountaine of the light nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the shine of that beame but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a glimpse brightnesse or shine by reflection from that glory whereby it followes that he is not consubstantiall with the Father and so of necessity a created mediator Answer It is said 1 Tim. 6.16 that God dwelleth in the light which no man can approch unto that is that centrall or incommunicable light of the deity which no man hath seene or can see for the creature cannot comprehend what God is except it bee united unto him but yet because the creature cannot bee blessed but in God therefore is that light spread abroad or dilated from the centre into the infinite circumference of the divine dignitie by the infinite obiect of that light the Sonne our Lord Iesus by whom that light is participate unto men and Angels in that blessed vision whereby they are blessed in him and this is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or brightnesse of Saint Paul the same glory of God made communicable unto us by our Mediator not any shine or reflection of light in a forreigne obiect as the wisdome of God in the creature or the light of the Sunne reflected in the Moone or starres in which the light is made other then it was as the obiection mistakes it 18. Revelation 3.14 Christ is called the beginning of the creation of God therefore Hee was the first creature Answer If he be the beginning of the creation therefore he cannot be a creature for so should He be the beginning of himselfe so should He be when he was not so should he be a cause and yet not be but these are impossibilities Compare herewith Colos 1.15 And see the reason of the speech in answer to the fourth obiection § 11. The heresies concerning the proprieties of the Mediator are principally three of the 1. Acephali the 2. Agnâ—etae and the 3. Monothelites The Acephali or headlesse because they had neither bishops nor priests nor set times nor order for the service of God though that as the two natures in Christ were confused for from the Timotheans they descended so also the proprieties of these naturâ—s But if the first befals as was shewed § 1. 2 3. before then their confusion is also confounded The author of this heresie was one Severus a bishop of Antioch who dayly cursed the Councell of Chalcedon for that by their decree which you heard before § 1. they had forestalled this heresie But his blasphemous tongue cut out and he banished from his chayre were worthy rewards of such a Bishop Euag. lib. 4. c. 4. 2. From that heresie of Apollinarius came that of the Agnoetae that the divine nature of Christ was ignorant of many things as the day of judgement the grave of Lazarus c. For if the Godhead were changed into flesh as Apollinarius held Themistius might well conclude that both the being and also the proprieties of the Godhead must suffer losse thereby and so falsly ascribe unto the Godhead that which was proper unto the manhood But if the foundation were unsure as it appeared § 2. their building must needs fall to the ground 3. And because the opinion of Eutyches concerning the only divine nature in Christ began to be hated therfore Cyrus byshop of Alexandria upheld it by the opinion of one will in Christ for said he the humane will of Christ either is none or not at all moved as the will of man but onely by God But to take away those proprieties which
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gaber that mighty One even God and man in one person For seeing it was a new thing it must be such as never was before a miracle in the birth of a man which could onely bee in this That He should be conceived without a father among men and borne of a mother that was a maid as it is said Matth. 1.25 That Ioseph knew her not till shee had brought foorth The text of Ezech. 44. you shall heare by and by And beside these texts that are plaine and manifest others may seeme to import as much as that in Esay 9.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lemarbeh hamiscah to the increase of His dominion where from that close Mem signifying in their later Arithmeticke 600 and is not used but in the end of a word some will define the time from the fourth yeere of Achaz to the birth of Christ 600. yeeres but it holds not Others from thence will fetch the name Maria with as much adoe See Pet Galat. lib. 7. cap. 13. and lib. 4. cap. 10. But I like best of their opinion who thinke that the perpetuall virginity of Saint Mary was meant hereby yet will I rather professe my ignorance then presume to offer you any thing whereof I am fully perswaded Notes a THat our Lord Christ was borne of a virgin It was a worthy saying of Athanasius in Epistol Cathol 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The summe of our faith is the consubstantiall Trinity and the true God borne of the virgin Mary And well it accords with that of our Saviour Iohn 17.3 This is eternall lâ—fe to know Thee the onely t ue God and whom Thou hast sent Iesus Christ Whereto you have the full testimony of the devill himselfe in that with all his might he hath persecuted the professors of this trueth and endeavoured to deface it with so many errours as he by his ministers hath broached to the contrary Some you have seene before Note g on the 24. Chapter Some you shall have here in briefe against this Artâ—cle And they either concerne the Body of Christ § 1. or his Soule § 2. or else the Virginity of his mother § 3. Sect. 1 § 1. Simon the Witch according to that spirit of Antichrist 1. Iohn 4.3 denied that Christ was come in the flesh and so at once made voyd the Gospel of Christ 2. Valentinus denied that Christ had a true and humane body but onely heavenly and spirituall in which he â—assed thorow the Virgin Mary as water thorow a pipe without taking any flesh of her To the same purpose Cerdon and after him Marcion denied Christ to have beene borne of the Virgin Mary or to have had any manly body at all but onely heavenly or to have suffered but onely in shew 3. Apelles thought the body of Christ to bee a true substantiall body but yet to have beene borrowed partly of the starres from which hee tooke somewhat as Hee came downe from Heaven and partly of the Elements which body after He had risen from the dead was againe returned into the proper principles The madnes of the Manichees is as much as all the former came vnto and both the one and the other unworthy your hearing saving that you may give thanks vnto God that hath kept your heart upright in the holy faith of Christ yet shall you see them briefly examined note a in the end of the Chapter following Sect. 2 § 2. But the errors of Arius and Apollinarius concerning the soule of Christ must heere bee sifted a little neerer Arius held that Christ tooke of the Virgin the humane flesh onely and not the humane soule but that the Word did supplie all the faculties of the soule in Him 2. The Apollinarists called also Dimaeritae sometime denied that Christ tooke any flesh of the Virgin but said that Hee was perfect man while hee was yet in heaven before He was borne of the Virgin and that that same body of His was equall and consubstantiall to the Divine Nature because He made it unto Himselfe of the Divine being So that although He were borne of the Virgin yet was He in her body as in a place not as one of the same nature with her And these Hereticks though mungrells of Apollinarius and Marcion yet Apollinarius was accounted their Syre 3. Others among them affirmed that Christ tooke a body of the Virgin which was also enlived with a living but not with a reasonable soule And hence had they their name Dimaritae because they give these two third parts of the manly being unto Christ but said that a supercelestiall understanding supplyed the want of the reasonable soule These Hereticks were either most differing or most unâ—ertaâ—ne in their opinions as you may find by Socrat. Eccles hist lib 3. cap. 36. So by Athanas Epist ad Epict. Epist de Incarn Dom. and orat de Salut adventu D. I. Christi both against this opinion of Apollinaris And because both these opinions are against this Article you shall first see the reasons of Athanasius against his first position his second errour shall goe in common with that of Arius 1. The first reason of Athanasius is this The Trinity onely is vncreated but flesh had the beginning of man But Apollinarius might except by his owne positions That the Sonne made His body consubstantiall to Himselfe of the Divine being 2. Whatsoever is subject to sufferance is created But Christ suffered for us Therefore by a created body All is most true Yet Apollinarius might except againe by his owne position The Word became flesh and that Word was uncreated therefore also that flesh into which the Word was changed But I loose time to dally thus with these Hereticks Therefore for full opposition to this heresie and the rest recited before of Valentinus Marcion Apelles and their rabbles consider these reasons which are brought Chapter 20. to proove that the Mediator for the sinne of man must bee man and see how they accord with the Scrâ—ptures there cited Se also Galat. 4.4 and Phil. 2.6 7. You may see the reasons of Apollinarius for his opinions in Epiphanius haeres 77. of which I thinke these are the best 1. A true man y body is onely by the male-seed But Christ was not so begotten Therefore Hee had not a true manly but a heavenly body Answere The proposition is false For Adam was not of manly seed yet that true man from whom all humane nature descended Neither was our Lord lesse perfect man because hee was not so begotten See the 10. reason before 2. That which the Scripture hath pronounced sinfull may not bee given to Christ But the flesh lusteth against the spirit Gal. 5.17 and so is sinfull therefore not to bee given to Christ Answere That text of the Apostle is taken by a Metonymia For the flesh is not sinfull but the lusts that dwell in the flesh are against the spirit and sinfull But Christ tooke the creature not the sinne
a forged one Cent. 3. cap. 10. They bring also reason for say they If the Divine and humâ—ne natures in Christ be united personally then it is necessary that where the one nature is there must also be the other But the two natures are so united Ergo. Answere The consequence of the proposition is not good where one of the natures is finite the other Infinite as Saint Augustine saith God and man are one Person and both together are one Christ every where as He is God but as He is man in heaven Ep'la ad Dardanum But this question is by many handled at large and if you desire further satisfaction See the Catechisme of Vrsinus a Booke I thinke common and the question is there briefly handled See Doctor Willet Synopsis Pap. Contr. 13. Part. 1. See also Bucan Inst Theol loc 48. quest 60. c. But in summe against these or any other heresies which may rise against the trueth of this Article take the authorities of the holy Scripture Psalm 24.7 c. Psal 47.5 and 68.18 The place and circumstances of His ascension are remembred Mark 16.18 Luke 24.50 Act. 1.9 Reade hereto Ephes 4.8 1 Tim. 3.16 Hebr. 4.14 and 9.24 And that the naturall property of Christs humane body being now glorified is not destroyed so that is may be every where as the God-head is take these authorities of the holy Scripture First it is said of Him after His resurrection Matth. Mark Luk. He is risen He is not here And Act. 1.10 While they looked up stedfastly as He went which must not be by disappearing but by leaving of one place and passage to another and againe vers 11. This IESVS which is taken from you into Heaven therefore not bodily with them still as He saith Iohn 16.7 It is expedient for you that I goe away for if I goe not away that Comforter will not come but if I depart I will send Him to you And therefore it is said Act. 3.21 That the Heavens must containe Him untill the time that all things bee restored And this is spoken of His body neither can it be true of His Deity and if His body be contained in heaven how can it become a piece of bread or in a piece of bread on earth You will say if Christ were last of all seene of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 15.8 how was Hee still contained in the heauens for His conversion was after the ascension I Answere Even as Saint Paul saw in a vision a man named Ananias comming unto Him whom otherwise he saw not till afterward Act. 9.12 and yet the sight by vision from God is a most certaine and true sight Or if it were so that He were indeed in His body taken up into the third heaven as he makes it questionable 2. Cor. 12.2 so might he see as he professeth of himselfe in your understanding CHAP. XXXI ⧠And sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty THe great antiquitie of this Creed appearing to be even from the time of the Apostles brought some writers into an opinion that the twelue Apostles before their departure from Ierusalem to preach unto the Gentiles gave out this forme of confession of the faith to bee acknowledged of every Convert before they might bee baptized and appointed that all interpretation of Scripture should be made according to the rule of it as they will understand that text in Rom. 12.16 And some will yet bee more particular herein that every Apostle brought in that Article which he thought fit to be beleeved Yea and for a need they will tell you which Article every Apostle made and so have of necessitie limitted the Articles to the number of twelve But the Scripture admits no other rule of Interpretation than it selfe And so I confesse that the Creed may be a rule in as much as it hath the foundation in the Holy Scripture As Saint Augustine saith lib. 3. de Symb. ad Catech. Chapter 1. Deus in ecclesia regulam c. God would have one perpetuall rule to be in the Church which should be simple briefe and such as every one might easily understand according to which the godly might examine all doctrine and interpretation of the Scripture to receive that which is agreeable thereunto and to refuse that which is contrary And although for your satisfaction therein I have followed the fashion for the number of Articles as you may see yet it cannot be denied but that if you take every several conclusion for an Article there are in all 17. or 18 at least fifteene severall Articles of which this of our Lords sitting at the right hand of God will be one although in that number of 12. it goe as a part of the Article before Hee ascended into heaven But this is not a thing of any great importance And therefore let us rather looke to the certainty thereof for that is necessary for us to know and beleeve But it may be demanded why in the Creed such a Metaphor should be used as might endanger younglings and novices to thinke with the Anthropomorphites that the invisible God is like to man with hands and bodily parts To which wee may answere that the Christians I speake not of wilfull hereticks were not so ill instructed but that they knew right well how to discerne betweene Christ and a Vine Iohn 15. betweene a figurative and a proper speech And therefore the Fathers in the Church the Author or Authors of this Creed having a jealous care of the trueth of God doubted not to propose it in the words of God Himselfe Therefore seeing this part of Christs glory is so prophesied to bee fulfilled Psal 110. cited Heb. 1.13 The Lord said unto my Lord sit at my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy foot-stoole it is so to be retained in the Article of our Creed And although it bee a borrowed speech yet seeing it is so taken into use by our Lord Himselfe and by the Pen-men of the New-Testament it is by all meanes most fit so to hold it For so our Lord speakes Matth. 26.64 and Luke 22.69 Hereafter shall you see the Sonne of man sit on the right hand of the Power of God So Col. 3.1 Christ sitteth above at the right hand of God So Hebr. 1.3 and 10.12 and 12.2 with many other Scriptures to the like purpose The word To sit signifies either to tarry or continue as in Luk. 22.49 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sit that is abide or stay in the Citie of Ierusalem or else it signifies to raigne as in Esay 16.5 The Throne shall be established and Hee shall sit upon it in trueth So the right hand of God signifies either power as Act. 2.33 Hee being by the right hand that is the power of God exalted or else it signifies happinesse and joy eternall as it is said Psal 16. and 11. verse At thy right hand are pleasures for evermore And although some Interpreters make the meaning
Scripture the Hereticke Pelagius taught that man of himselfe wiâ—hout any speciall graâ—e of God might fulfill the divine Commandements and if â—he grace of God were at all needfull it was oâ—ely that a man might more eâ—sily through grace doe those things which he was commanded to doe of his owne free will But this grace said he is onely in our free will which our nature hath received of God without any * See what Pelagâ—us meant by this in answ to the Iesuits challeâ— in Ireland â—ag 478. 179. 480 481. c. merit of ours fore oing In this onely God doth helpe us thâ—t by the law and the doctrine wee may know what we ought both to doe and to hope for Aug. Haer. Cap. 88. By occasion of whi h heresie divers unnecessary questions have beene mooved about free will universall gr ce perseverance and the like which are no way availeable to the increase of godlinesse or the comfort of the conscience but rather have overthrowne the faith of â—ome and beene the feuell of Factions both in the Church and Common-wealth But as among the Corinthians when schismes and discontents arose concerning their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Love-feasts before the holy Communion the Apostle brings them to the simplicity of the first institution thereof 1 Cor. 11.21 So by the same Spirit of wisedome hath his Majestâ—e our gracious Soveraigne with the advice of our reverend Fathers the god y and learned Bishops cut off these curious questions with all inconvenience and sâ—andall as might grow thereby See his Majesties declaration before the Artâ— of 62. Read also the Art 9.10.11.17 So that now through the mercy of God by the piety and constant care of his Majesty and by the providence and zeale of our faithfull shepherds there is assured hope that these tares which so lately troâ—bled our neighbour Churches and by the seruants of the enuious man were attempted to be sowne in our beâ—uteous fields shall never spread any roote of bitternesse among us And although these questions thrust in themselues here in this place to be discussed seeing predestination is the eternall foundation of the holy Câ—tholike Church out of which there is â—o salâ—atâ—on and into which none can come but he that is holy It may seeme that t ought to be enquired what holinesse we have of our selues or what strength to come to that holinesse which we ought to have and what streâ—gth to coâ—â—iâ—ue therein But because obedience is better the sacrifi e and bee use reason ranging beyond these bounds which God hath set â—s accounted by Saint Paul Rom. 9.20 a replying agâ—inst God let us leave these quest on s aâ— Saint Paul left that of predestination to the meere mercy and will of God and that absolute Lordship which he hath over His creature as the tempeâ—er of the clay hath power over the same lumpe to mâ—ke one vessell to honour and â—nother to dishonour And seeing mans understanding searching into the thingâ— of God so farre above his reach as the infinite wisedome of God and His seâ—ret will are must needs fall into errour let us be contented to keepe our selues within those limits which God Hâ—mselfe hath set Deut. 29.29 The secret things belong unto the Lord our God but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children that we may doe them To this purpose Saint Paul writeth concerning this sealed secret 2 Tim. 2.19 The foundation of God standeth sure having this seale The Lord knoweth them that are His and let every one that nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquity Therefore lest any man should runne beside his owne hopes whilest be enquires too busily into the hopes of other men let us remember that wise and faithfull counsell which is in 4. Esdr 8.55 Aske thou no questions concerning them that perish The reason went before verse 47. for thou commest farre short that thou shouldest be able to love the creature more then He that made it ARTICLE X. ⧠The Communion of Saints CHAP. XXXVI THey that make this clause to bee onely an appendix for explication of the former as if they would say I beleeve the holy Catholike Church to be the Communion or fellowship of Saints come short of the uttermost meaning thereof For beside the two properties of the Church to be Holy and Catholike it is necessary to know what the Priviledges or prerogatives are which belong to that holy congregation that they may know that their seruice is not without reward These prerogatives are 4. 1. This CoÌ„munion of the Saints which is the ground and assurance of the rest For from hence it followes that we may assuredly beleeve that our sins are forgiven and therefore that our bodies shall rise againe and that to everlasting life But this Communion of the Saints is two-fold 1. Among themselves Secondly in the participation of those benefits which are purchased for them by the merit of Christ Yet this Communion among themselves is rather a third property than a priviledge of the holy Church and ariseth from that Communion which we have with Christ For he that loveth Him that begetteth loveth him also that is begotten of Him 1. Ioh. 5.1 2. And because all the faithfull are governed by one Holy Spirit therefore are they ever ready and willing to impart what gifts soever they have received to the common good of all that may be partakers thereof And this not onely in the supply of outward helpes as it appeared Act. 4.32 but much more in like affection one toward another in prayer one for another in supporting each the infirmitie of other as one member of the body is ever helpfull to another in comforting in exhorting and in the Spirit of Meekenes admonishing one another and every one in himselfe giving an example of a vertuous and honest life according to that commandement Mat. 5.16 Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good workes and glorifie your Father which is in heaven And these things proceed from that inward and spirituall Communion which wee have with God the Father and with His Son Iesus Christ as it is said 1. Iohn 1.3 For seeing wâ— know That God so loved the world as that He gave His Son to die for the life of the world wee ought also to love the brethren So likewise the spirituall Communion or participation of those benefits whereof wee are partakers by the merit of Christ stands altogether in this that He our Mediator God and Man having given Himselfe a ransome for uâ— God doth not now looke on us as wee are in our selues corrupted in our sinnes but as wee are washed but as wee are sanctified but as wee are justified in the name of the Lord Iesus and by the Spirit of our God as wee are one body with His Son and He our head is become our righteousnesse our sanctification and redemption So that through Him wee haue not onely these
priviledges here mentioned of the forgivenesse of our sinnes resurrection and life but also having in Christ the adoption of sonnes wee have by Him an entrance unto God the Father a right and interest in the eternall inheritance of the Kingdome of Heaven and whatsoever may bee availeable to our eternall happinesse for the gift was not as the offence as you might see Chap. 18. § 2. For as we know that Christ our Lord the eternall Son was partaker of our nature and are likewise assured that the greatest actions of God in His creature are for the greatest good that can come neere the creature So ought wee to bee perswaded that we also shall be made the sons of God by that Spirit of God that dwelleth in us as it is said 1. Cor. 6.17 He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit And these are the exceeding great and precious promises that God hath made unto us in Christ that by Him wee shall bee made partakers of the divine nature 2. Peter 1.4 this is that union and Communion for which our Lord prayes that it may bee made perfect in us Iohn 17.21 22 23. 1. For seeing the soule of man is a thing whose excellencie doth so farre exceed all things of this world it may not be thought that the happinesse and perfection of the soule can stand in things that are inferiour to it selfe as in riches honour worldly pleasure or the like But seeing it knowes that there is one onely infinite goodnes which because it is infinite must needs be eternall and able to satisfie all the desire of the creature that can bee partaker thereof therefore doth it aspire thereunto because in the injoying of that alone it can be made perfect And if this desire of the soule should be in vaine then the Holy Spirit of God which wrought this desire in the soule should have wrought in vaine then the infinite goodnesse which might satisfie the desire of the creature should be defective toward the creature and consequently not infinite then the promises of God made in His word should faile and the prayer of our Mediator cited even now from Iohn 17. without effect But all these things are impossible Therefore there is a Communion of the Saints with God and with one another as wee confesse in the article 2. If the merit of Christ bee infinite and that not for Himselfe but for His body which is the Church then it is necessary that an infinite reward be given thereto But the merit of Christ is infinite both actively and passively Therfore an infinite reward is due to us thereby So that by the Spirit of Christ which is in us we have communion both with the Father and the Sonne 1. Iohn 1.3 3. All the dignities of God are infinite and they are all to bee manifested in the creature so farre forth as the creature can bee made capable thereof Ergo. Now the foundation and originall of communion is in this that for as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood He also Himselfe tooke part of the same that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death Hebr. 2.14 and that to this end that wee might be partakers of His immortality and from that union of the divine and humane nature whereby our Lord of the seed of Abraham became one with all man-kind ariseth that spirituall and mysticall union of us with Him that howsoever we are absent in body yet being renewed by the Spirit of our mind we live unto Him have Him evermore abiding in us as we evermore abide in him daily more more grow up with Him into one mystical body as if we were flesh of His flesh and bone of His bones Eph. 5.30 and from this mystical union we have the assurance of that glorious vnion which shall be in heaven when we shal be joyned to our head inseparably and this is that vnion or communion which all the faithfull hope for whereof we have the assurance of His promises in His Holy word the signes and pledges of the Holy supper and the witnesse of the holy Spirit of God in our hearts And thus is Christ ours with His graces and His merits and thus according to the exceeding great and precious promises are wee made partakers of the divine nature not that wee participate of the incommunicable essence of the deitie but that by the renewing of the Holy-Ghost wee put off our corrupt desires and are transformed in our minds according as His Divine power doth give us all things that belong to life and godlinesse ARTICLE XI ⧠The forgivenesse of sinnes CHAP. XXXVII BEing is of God alone whose being because it is infinite therefore must it hold in it selfe all the excreamities of being so that nothing that is can possible be but by Him therefore seeing the soule the body and the abilities thereof are from God alone the devill can claime no interest in man in respect of any of these for none of these had their originall from him But because he was a murtherer from the beginning and inspired his inbred poyson into man even from the beginning the root of man-kind being thereby poysoned the venome spreads throughout all his race to corrupt both his understanding and his will that so his actions being corrupted by the ill which he wilfully committeth his being also may become abominable But as the Physicians make a difference betweene the body and the disease so He our gracious healer discernes betweene the being His owne worke and the corruption thereof the tares I meane which the envious man sowed thereupon to save his owne worke and to cast the venome and the effects thereof on the face of the enemy to the increase of his eternall damnation and first heales the understanding that it may see the sinne then the will that he may detest and avoid it And thus by the renewing of the mind are we transformed from the image of the devill and that stampe which his sinne did set upon us So that the satisfaction being made to the infinite justice both for our originall and actuall sinne the workemanship of God even our whole being may be glorifyed with that glory for which it was created which also it had in the eternall decree before this world was And because our great weakenesse caused of our inbred infection and our many sinnes ensuing thereupon doth every moment stand up as a wall of separation betweene our God and us therefore hath God given unto us such assured hopes of His mercy that although we fall we shall not be cast away because the Lord putteth under His hand Psalm 37.21 and sustaineth us with this confidence That although our sins be as red as scarlet yet they shall be made more white then snow Esay 1.18 And because this hope and confidence ought alwayes to be before our eyes as being the sure stay and anchor of our soules therefore is nothing
soules which they sent to Elysium as you may read of Anchises and others Aeneid 6. yet they supposed that their faâ—se gods and such as were by them canonized went up to heaven as Hercules Castor and Pollux Romulus and he that was one of the chiefe masters of the devills slaughter-men Iulius Caesar From whence you may reason thus The place of the greatest glory is most due to Him that is both the Creator and Restorer of all things But such was our Lord Iesus as it hath appeared before Therefore He ascended into heaven 5. It is necessary that the blessed and damned doe differ by all those meanes whereby the paines of the one and the blessednesse of the other may be increased The paines of the damned are increased by the horrour of that place wherein they are tormented therefore the ioyes also of the blessed are increased by the superexcellent beauty and pleasures of that place of their abode And because our Lord is blessed and holy above all that are blessed and holy therefore it is necessary that He should ascend into heaven 6. If Christ after His resurrection had not ascended into heaven then could no other creature bee blessed in heaven by His merit So the place of perfect blisse should be without inhabitants and therefore created in vaine So God should want that praise which were due to Him for His mercy and goodnesse shewed to the creature But these things are impossible Therefore the holy Angels and Saints are blessed in heaven and Christ our Lord their King among them See Iohn 14.2 3. and Ephes 2.6 7. If Christ our Lord had not ascended into heaven yea so that His ascension might be witnessed both by men and Angels Actes 1.10 11. then could not we which beleeve in Him have full assurance of those heavenly joyes that are laid up in store for us 1. So the Christian faith were all in vaine and we still subject to the punishment of our sinnes 2. So His Conception Birth Miracles Sufferings Death and Resurrection heretofore prooved should have beene in vaine So His owne preaching and of His messengers 4. So the prophecies of the Scriptures which were before concerning Him even since the world began should bee without their trueth 5. So the faith and hope of them which confesse the most gloâ—ious things of God concerning His goodnesse and mercy toward His creature which faith they have in Him being taught by Him out of his word and by the successe of all things that have come to passe accordingly should be frustrate But all these things are impossible And therefore God is gone up on high in triumph and our Lord with the sound of the trumpet all the holy Angels and the spirits and soules of the faithfull joying therein all the troopes of the heavens and the heavens of heavens attending His comming and submitting themselues to Him their Lord and King Open your heads ô yee gates and be yee set ope yee everlasting doores that the King of glory may come in Who is this King of glory The LORD of hostes mighty in battell euen our Lord IESVS who by the warres of His suffering and death on the Crosse and by the conquest of His resurrection hath overcome the powers of Hell He is the King of Glory Amen Notes a THerefore He ascended into Heaven This Article hath beene gainesayed by the heretickes diversly Cerinthus said That because Iesus was man onely conceived and borne as other men Hee was not yet risen but should rise at last Aug. de haer cap. 8. And thus by consequence he denied that our Lord ascended into heaven But this Iew both by nation and opinion is refuted before in all by the proofe of those Articles which he denied And because he brought nothing for the proofe of his opinions but onely opinion let them all vanish at the authority of the holy Scripture as mist before the Sunne Carpocrates as he had beene taught by Saturnilus said that the soule was onely saved Epiph haeres 23. So that the soule of Christ onely after it was freed from the body ascended to the Father Epiph heres 27. Against this heresie you may set the reasons and authorities of the Chapter before and them that follow in the Article of the resurrection of the body Chap. 38. The errour of Apelles you read before Note a on Chap. 26. § 1. N. 3. his reasons and their refutation you have Note a on Chapter 27. N. 3. The Seleucians confesse that Christ when He ascended tooke with Him His manly body and carryed it as high as the Sunne but there He put it off and left it there But Saint Paul affirmes that He ascended farre aboue all heavens that is all the visible heavens either of planets or starres yet they brought their reason out of the 19. Psalm vers 4. He hath set His tabernacle in the Sun So the vulgar translation of the Latines hath it from the Greeke and so all the Greeke copies reade it except that of Aquila who according to the Hebrew hath it thus In them the heavens He set a tabernacle for the Sunne and this helpes the Seleucians nothing But the errour which hath swayed most against this Article and which with their sacriledge if they could see it hath now defaced their Church is that of the Vbiquitaries who because they beleeve that very substance of the body and blood of Christ is received with the Bread and Wine they are compell'd to say That His naturall body may be in many and consequently in all places at once as His God-head is And therefore that this ascension of Christ must be nothing else but a disappearance out of the earth or a vanishing from the sight of men For the ground of their opinion they urge the word of our Lord This is my body This is my blood but they deny not the Bread and Wine to continue still which if it be true then the sence of the words must bee In this or with this Bread and Wine is my body and blood But the words beare no such meaning but prove much rather that transubstantiation or change of the Bread and Wine into the body and blood of Christ which the Papists would But this opinion of the Papists were to denie Christ to have taken flesh of the Virgin Mary and so to have beene made of the seed of David at least in part of His bodily being when His hody and blood should be made of bread and wine I but it is said Matth. 28.20 I am with you unto the end of the world Answere Not by His bodily being but by His continuall providence and the graces of His Holy Spirit as Saint Augustine saith Corpus suum intulit Coelo majestatem non abstulit mundo Tract 50. in Ioh. But the Centurists cite also the auctorities of the Fathers for their consubstantiation as of Iust Martyr in Tryph. of Tertullian against Marcion but corruptly and falsly and of Origen but