Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	father_n	son_n	subsist_v	3,592	5	11.9300	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15857	H. Zanchius his confession of Christian religion Which novve at length being 70. yeares of age, he caused to bee published in the name of himselfe & his family. Englished in sense agreeable, and in words as answerable to his ovvne latine copie, as in so graue a mans worke is requisite: for the profite of all the vnlearneder sort, of English christians, that desire to know his iudgement in matters of faith.; De religione Christiana, fides. English	Zanchi, Girolamo, 1516-1590.	1599 (1599)	STC 26120; ESTC S120607	223,465	477

a garment For this manner of speach although it doe not perfectlie declare the personall vnion Hypostatica yet it sheweth a manifest difference beetweene the person of the sonne of god taking and our nature taken For this same cause we embrace those kindes of speaches of the Fathers as mans nature was borne of the sonne of god to subsist in the person of the sonne of God and such like separating the person of the sonne of god taking from the nature taken and teaching that the person of the sonne of God by the comming of mans nature was made neither other nor more perfect VII A confirmation of the former opinion with an exposition of the place of Athanasius Surelie we confesse with Athanasius that as the reasonable soule and flesh is one man so God and man is one Christ that is Christ is onelie one person although there bee in him two natures yet not that the person of Christ if we will speake properlie is constituted or made of both these natures as of the parts as to the perfect coÌ„stitution of man no lesse the bodie as an essential part then the soule must ioyne together seeing the person of Christ was alreadie 1. Cor. 10.9 1. Pet. 3.19 and that whole and most perfect before it was shewed in the fleshe but the person of man as of Adam was none at all vntill the foule was coupled with the bodie and sith that nether the soule doth assume vnto it selfe a body or the body a soule as the sonne of God assumed vnto himselfe the seed of Abraham into vnitie of the same person And further sith the bodie and the soule are two existences as it is manifest in the creatioÌ„ of Adam but mans nature did neuer subsist by it selfe but onelie in the person of the sonne of God so that verie vniustlie doe some abuse this godlie saying of the holie man for proofe of their owne dreames For he which did shew himselfe and he is the person of the Sonne of god must needs differ froÌ„ the flesh wherein he did shewe himselfe and that not onelie before but also after his resurrection and sitting at the right hand of his father which as saith Augustine added a glorie to the flesh but took not away the nature VIII How Christ is one onely person and that eternall and vnchangeable but there are in the same two natures and how it is said to consist of them We therefore acknowledge and confesse against Nestorius that in Christ is onelie one person and that eternall most simple most perfect and the same shall remaine for euer namelie the person of the euerlasting sonne of God Further that vnto this eternall person there came in time not another person but another nature namelie mans nature and the same not as a parte of that person of whome it was taken but a thing farre different from it and yet takeÌ„ vnto it into vnitie of the same And therefore we thirdly confesse that in one the selfe same person of Christ there is now two natures the diuine and the humaine in which we doubt not that the same doth subsist doth liue and doth worke for which cause also we feare not to speake thus Christ consisteth now of his diuine nature his humaine being taken into the vnitie of person that he is after a sort compounded of them both IX Hovve the tvvo natures are vnited into one person without alteracion or confusion the properties and actions of either of them remaining whole and distinct But we beleeue and confesse that these two natures are truelie and inseparablie ioyned and vnited into one person of Christ that yet we doubt not but each of them remaineth whole and perfect and the one truely distinct from the other yea and that they do hold the essentiall properties and operations of each of them distinct without all manner of confusion so that as the diuine nature holding the properties remaineth vncreated infinite immeasurable simplie omnipotent and simply wise euen so the humaine nature holding hirs remaineth created comprehensible determined with certen limitts And as the diuine nature hath will and power whereby Christ willeth worketh as god such things as are of God so hath the humaine nature will and power whereby Christ as maÌ„ willeth worketh those thinges which are of man so farre forth as Christ in that he is God hee willeth not nor worketh by humaine will or power so neither as he is man willeth he or worketh he by diuine wil or power as it hath bin learnedly determined by the fathers both against Eutyches and against Macarius We therefore did alwaies like wel of that saying of Leo the first Epi. 10. c. 4 writing vnto Flauianus about the same thing where he saith He which is true God the same is also true man and in this vnitie there is no vntrueth whereas there meet together the basenesse of manhood and the excellencie of the godhead For as God is not chaunged by the partaking so man that is mans nature in Christ is not consumed by the dignitie for each forme vvorketh with communion of the other their ovvne propertie namelie the vvord vvorketh that which is proper to the vvord and the flesh performeth that vvhich is proper to the flesh Thus farre Leo that learned man which hee afterwards fetteth out by examples whereby it is plainelie shewed that as the natures are truelie vnited in Christ yet remaine distinct and not confounded so also were and are the actions for thinges which were proper to the word the flesh did not performe but the word that which was proper to the flesh the word performed not but the flesh To raise againe Lazarus from death was proper to the word but to crie Lazarus come forth was proper to the flesh yet both those actions were vnited to the raising vp of Lazarus because they were both one and in one Christ tend both to one purpose and yet they were distinct Likewise to forgiue sinnes was a proper actioÌ„ to the diuine nature but to say thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee was proper to the humaine nature To restore his sight that was born blinde was an action of his diuine nature but to put clay vppon his eies and to say goe and wash was of the humaine nature Therefore this personall vnion as it did not confound the natures so neither did it the actions but kept them distinct neither yet did it confound the properties of the natures For there be in one the same person of Christ these three things Natures the proprieties and faculties of the natures and the actions of them and these proprieties of natures in Christ are after the verie same manner that the natures and actions are Therefore as it is cleere that one nature passeth not into another nor one action is confounded with another so is it apparent that their proprieties are after the same sorte X. That it cannot bee prooued by the vnion

personally vnited to the diuine therefore the gifts of God conferred vpon the same are without measure as is declared in the aphorisme following The 12. aphorisme Although when I wrote this confession I thought to my selfe that I had haÌ„dled al things which belong vnto this article of the person of Christ yet I thought for the better explaining thereof to ioyne this also which followeth to that which I said before 1 There is and euer was one onely person of Christ For there is but one onely begotten sonne of God and one and the same Christ 2 This person being from all eternitie by the naturall begetting of the father is proper vnto the word but in time was made common to the humaine nature taken to it by vertue of the personall vnion For in the word the essence which it hath common yea the verie same with the father the holie ghost is to bee distinguished from the proper manner of subsisting whereby it comes to passe that it is a certaine Hypostasis or person distinct from the father and the holie ghost and therefore is and is called the Hypostasis or person proper to the sonne or to the worde But this eternall Hypostasis proper by nature vnto the word is by this vnion made common as we said with the diuine nature and the humaine taken vnto it namely that the vvorde doeth no lesse subsist really in this humaine form theÌ„ it doth in that diuine form in that respect is no lesse true and perfect man then true and perfect god yet the natures properties and actions remaining safe and distinct 3 Therefore into the vnitie of that immeasurable most pure and most perfect person was taken the humaine nature that is that lumpe consisting of the reasonable soule and flesh of man finite compounded and needing many things But how not so as that for example it coÌ„tained that infinite person within the bouÌ„des or limitts of it owne finite or determinate substance or that it spredd it selfe as it were stretched out into the largenesse of it And that which wee say of this propertie the same is to bee thought and beleeued of all the rest because they all remaine vnchaungeable and vnmixed How then was the humaine nature taken surely it was so taken into vnitie of the same person that yet it is not made the verie person but rather existeth in the person is borne and sustained of the person and euer dependeth wholly vpon the same For this vnioÌ„ of the natures according to the Hypostasis or vniting of the Hypostasis is made without alteration confusion or diuision 4 Whereby it also followeth that the nature taken to speake properly is not a part of this person as is aforesaid For like as of the vnion of the two natures there is not framed a third nature so neither by taking the humaine nature into vnity of the diuine person is there framed as it were a new person which should be the proper person of Christ and should differ from the person of the word which is the word it selfe For it is altogether the verie same nor doth it differ from it selfe except herein that the same which subsisted onely in the forme of God and was onely God now subsisteth also in the forme of a seruant is also man and before was as a king naked but is nowe clothed with our flesh as with a purple garment so that for this cause the fathers not amisse called the same in some sort a compounded person But marke also this difference besids the rest that the garmeÌ„t pertaineth not to the essence of a king but the humaine nature in Christ is in such sorte that without it cannot be defined what Christ is 5 Which is the cause why the humaine nature thus takeÌ„ is to be reputed acknowledged as it were a part of the person of Christ namely because it is so taken into vnity of his person that as the vvorde with this humaine flesh is said to be and is man so also this flesh in the word and with the word God is said to be and is God as Athanasius Gregorie Nazianzene Damascene and other fathers haue proued out of the scriptures for that flesh is God not by nature but by Hypostasie in which sense the same flesh is omnipotent and present in all places whereuppon it comes also that what honour belongeth to the word of it selfe the same is also to bee giuen to the flesh in the word and for the word because of them both there is but one and the same Hypostasie 6 Add this moreouer for better explications sake that the word although wheresoeuer it bee and it is in all places there also the same is not onely god but also man and that because it hath in all places the humaine nature vnited therunto by Hypostasie yet where soeuer it is it selfe it doth not make it selfe an Hypostasis or personal to the humaine nature but only there where the same nature existeth namely so as that nature is sustained borne and wrought or mooued by it For how should the same be said to bee sustained where it doth not exist the feete are sustained by the soule not wheresoeuer the the soule is be it in the head but onely where they themselues are existing When the flesh was in the virgins wombe the word being then personally vnited vnto it did not theÌ„ sustaine the same out of the wombe of Marie but onely it was Hypostasis vnto it in the womb which sustained the same there and not in any other place which is also to bee said of all the time of Christs life when he liued in diuers places Likewise after his death it was Hypostasis vnto his bodie when it was dead and buried sustained the same in it selfe but where surely not in heauen where the bodie was not but onely in the graue euen as also it was Hypostasis to his soule separated from his bodie not in the graue but out of the graue sustained the same in it selfe And now it sustaineth both the soule and bodie together in heauen not in earth much lesse euerie where 7 Neither doth it follow vppon this doctrine that the personall vnion is dissolued neither doeth it come to passe that the whole person is not Hypostasis to the flesh but onely in parte The reason is because this person of the word as it is infinite so also is it most simple and pure and therefore both is wholly Hypostasis to the flesh wheresoeuer the flesh existeth is also wholly Hypostasis in other places where the flesh existeth not being it selfe existing in the forme of god Indeed the soule as is aforesaide is wholly Hypostasis to the head giuing life to it and sustaining it but where not in euery part of the body but onely in that where the head it selfe is and out of the head is also wholly hypostasis to the feet sustaining them too not where the head is but where the

onely make ruleth and worketh all thinges in time without himselfe but also can bring to passe infinite things which he neuer will doe 8 Whereuppon it is also that the same is vsually deuided into actuall power which worketh whatsoeuer hee will and into absolute power whereby he can also do infinite things which he will not because otherwise he could not be said to be simply omnipotent 9 For as we hold not with them which think God is therefore called omnipotent because simplie whatsoeuer can bee saide or thought whether it be good or ill or if the same implie a contradiction he can doe the same so neither doe we subscribe to their opinion which hold that God is called and is omnipotent for no other cause but for that he can do whatsoeuer he wil that his power should so stretch no farther then his will but we beleeue he is therfore almighty in that besides he can do whatsoeuer he will he can also both will bring to passe innumerable things which he will neuer will nor bring to passe 10 For when the Scripture saith that God did whatsoeuer he would it plainely teacheth that he could haue done much more if he would And he which saieth hee will haue mercie on whome he will and he will harden whome he will he sheweth manifestly that he could aswell haue mercie on all or harden all as he can harden some and haue mercie on some and therefore that hee can haue mercie on more then he will haue merdie on and so that there are more things which he can doe then he will doe 11 For that which he can doe be can by his nature doe and therefore can not but be able to doe it vnlesse he could also so doe as that he should not be God But whatsoeuer without himselfe he willeth he freely willeth it and therefore could also not will it so as it is manifest that God can do more then he will seing he can will that he will not 12 Now we say God can doe all those thinges which are not repugnant either with his personall proprieties or with his essence and nature or which implie not a contradiction or lastly which are not of the defect or want of power if they be admitted 13 Thus although the father cannot bee the sonne nor the sonne the father neither also the father caÌ„ beget of himselfe another sonne or the sonne any other of himselfe yet therefore doeth nether the Sonne nor the Father cease to be omnipotent 14 For these are personall proprieties that the father should begett and not be begotten but the sonne be begotten not begett neither doth the essence of God beare it that there should be more fathers or more sonnes 15 Neither is any thing taken away from the power of god in that he cannot bring to passe but that he must be good iust wise seing he caÌ„ not be God vnlesse he be such as the scripturs describe him 16 So we take no power from God nor weakeÌ„ it at all if we say God cannot sinne he cannot suffer he cannot bring to passe either not to be that which he is or that those things which are done should not haue bin done because these things are partly of the defect of power and partly they implie a contradiction And therefore are directly repugnant to the trueth of God and simply impossible 17 And so is it the propertie of God to be omnipotent as that it can belong to no created thing 18 For seing omnipotencie is nothing else but the verie immeasurable infinite essence and able to be communicated to no creature that it should agree to that thing to be omnipoteÌ„t vnto which it doeth not agree to be God in it owne essence 19 Neither can a thing finite bee capable of a thing infinite seing euerie thing is receiued according to the measure as they saye of the receiues 20 Also it is no lesse contrary to the nature of God that there should bee more almighties then that there should be more gods Whereupon christian religion will not allow that the three persons in God should be said to be three almighties 21 Wherefore although the man Christ Iesus is truely omnipotent because hee is not man onely but also God yet his humanitie cannot be or be said to be properly omnipoteÌ„t without impietie 22 For the humaine nature of Christ though it be vnited to the diuine nature into one person of the word and yet as it is not therefore made God so neither is it made properly omnipoteÌ„t but held still the owne weakenes whereby it was able to suffer for vs and to die 23 For neither could it haue suffred if as God so also it had beene made omnipotent seing to be able to suffer is impotencie and therefore God could not suffer because hee is omnipotent 24 And if the humaine nature of Christ was made omnipotent through the hypostaticall vnion in Christ why doe the Scriptures attribute it not to his humanitie but to his deitie that his bodie sawe no corruption or that this soule being restored to him he rose from the dead 25 Furthermore as a humaine bodie through the vnion with the minde neither is made an incorporeall substance indued with will and vnderstanding neither receiueth from it either immortalitie or the vertue of vnderstanding or willing so neither the humaine nature through the vnion with the diuine nature of the word is made an essence subsisting by it selfe most simple and most perfect or hath receiued from it to be properly omnipotent 26 Noreouer the argument whereby the father 's prooued against the Arrians Christ to bee true God by the omnipotencie attributed in the holie Scriptures to the sonne is quite ouerthrowne if we graunt that the omnipotencie maye bee communicated to any created thing 27 Lastlie concerning religion wee must not speake but agreeable to the Scriptures and to the analogie of faith But the holie Scriptures doe declare none but onely God to be omnipotent neither did the church euer professe any otherwise in her creeds 28 Whereas Christ saide after his resurrection alpower is giuen vnto me Authoritie is one thing and power another neither said he it is giuen to my humanitie but to me neither was this spoken in respect of his nature but of his office of a mediatour And that office was and is of his whole person according to both natures 29 Therefore as we beleeue by the holie ghost God alone to bee truely and properly omnipotent so also with the whole church do wee confeffe and preach 30 But we doubt not that the humaine nature of Christ is indued both with that power though finite which farrexceedeth the power of all created things aswel in heauen as earth and therefore wherein it may well properly be called the mightiest of all creatures also forthe hypostatical vnion with the truely omnipoten worde although properly in it selfe it be not such yet we graunt it may in some sort be said

that they may auoide condemnation XI Errors Therefore wee condemne those which reiect the law out of the church as vnprofitable and not pertaining to christians and againe those which teach that a man may either wholie or in part bee iustified by the lawe fith it was rather giuen Io. 1.29 to shutt vp all men vnder sinne and to leade them to Christ who alone taketh away the sinnes of the world And this is brieflie our confession of the law deliuered from god by Moses and declared by the Prophets vvhich prepareth disposeth and bringeth men vnto Christ Rom. 10.4 and therefore Christ is ende thereof as the Apostle writeth CHAP. XI Of Christ the redeemer I. A summe of the faith of the person and office of Christ the redeemer WHen therefore the fullnesse of time was come Gal. 4.4 wherein the promise of redemption made vnto the first man was to be accomplished by the second God the euerlasting father sent his onely begotten sonne and eternal and therefore true God of the same nature vvith the father made of a vvoman alone and vvithout the seede of a man and therefore true man but vvithout sinne and so true Christ made subiect to the lavve and therefore circumcised that he in most perfect obedience might fulfill that lavv in the name of vs all made obedient to his father euen vnto death namely for vs for he being vvithout sinne deserued not to die that he might redeeme those which vvere vnder the law and all the elect euen by his obedience by his death and bloodshedding that is by a sacrifice of exceeding vertue for it vvas the blood of God and a most effectuall ransome that he might I saie redeeme vs from sinne to the old image of god to perfect righteousnesse yea from death to eternal life and from the kingdome of Satan to the kingdome of God and that we might receiue adoption of children and so in the ende bee taken into full and perfect possession of the heauenlie inheritance as sonnes and lavvfull heires And lastlie that he might gather together all thinges in heauen and in earth vnder one head and ioyne them to himselfe Eph. 1.10 for the glorie of God the father II. Christ the redeemer is true God and true man We beleeue therefore Iesus Christ to be the onely begotten sonne of God Ioh. 1.14 Mich. 5.2 Phil. 2.6 1. Ioh. 5.20 Mat. 1.1 and so the sonne in nature consubstantial and coeternall to the father and lastlie true God almightie also true man of the true seed of Abraham and Dauid conceiued vvithout the help of a man Heb. 4.15 Mat. 26.35 but onlie by vertue of the holie ghost in the vvombe of the virgine and vvithout sinne and borne of her indued vvith a true soule and a humaine minde and made like vnto vs in all thinges sinne onelie excepted so that he is true God of the substance of the father Ath. in sym begotten before all vvorldes and true man of the substance of his mother borne in the vvorld III. Onely the Sonne to be both God and man and onely Christ But so vve beleeue that the sonne of God is both true God and true man and therefore the true Christ and him alone vve confesse to bee such sith vve read that neither the father neither the holie Chost but onelie the vvorde it selfe vvas made flesh Ioh. 1.14 and the Apostle saieth that the sonne onelie vvas made of a vvoman and that he onelie suffred Gal. 4.4 although to the creation of the nature vvhich the sonne tooke vppon him not onely the Sonne but the Father also and the holy ghost vvere all concurrent IV. That the sonne vvas made man without anie change of himselfe but onely assuming to himselfe humaine nature And vvee beleeue that the sonne of God vvas made man vvithout making any confusion of the diuine and humaine natures vvithout his conuersion into flesh or anie chaunge in the flesh onely by assuming of the humaine nature into the vnitie of that person and as Athanasius speaketh In sym not by conuersion of the godhead into flesh but by taking of the manhood into God so that that vvhich he vvas he did by no meanes leese or let goe but that vvhich he vvas not he tooke vppon him as the Apostle saith Ieb 2.16 the sonne tooke on him the seede of Abraham and as he teacheth that as the sonne taking vppon him vvas not chaunged into the thing taken for God cannot be chaunged at all but remained the same that he vvas trulie distinct from the thing assumed and taken So that seede taken on him vvas not turned into the thing that tooke it but was vnited with the diuine nature into the vnitie onely of the same person according to that saying The word was made flesh The flesh therefore remained flesh and was not changed into the word V. Nether one nature tooke on it another nature nor one person another person but the person of the sonne of God tooke on him mans nature Whence also wee vnderstand that neither the diuine nature common to the three persons nay indeed one and the self same nature of them all did take on it humaine nature nor one person tooke on it another person but onelie another nature For neither did the sonne of God take on him any sonne of Abraham but the seed of AbrahaÌ„ that is humaine nature spreading from Abraham therefore wee acknowledge not two persons in Christ but onely the same alone by which all thinges were made and which was so perfect before it tooke on it the seede of Abraham that by the same taking it is not made anie other or anie perfecter person or yet indeed any whitt vnperfect VI. The humaine nature was not taken to make a nevv person in Christ or to make perfect the former but onelie to be coupled and vnited to his eternall and most perfect person For albeeit we acknowledge two natures in Christ the diuine and humaine yet we doe not admit that the humaine was therefore assumed that either a new person compounded of that this as of the parts should be made in Christ or that the former and the eternall person should bee made the perfecter by the coupling of a newe nature but onelie that mans nature beeing taken into vnitie of that most perfect and euerlasting person the sonne of God remaining the same that he was might be made that he was not and might haue what to offer vnto his father for vs. And therefore we doe not simplie allow it if one saye so the person of Christ is compounded of the diuine and humaine nature as the person of a man consisteth of a soule and a bodie But we allow the vsuall phrase in the church that Christ clothed himselfe or was clothed with our flesh Whereupon Augustine saith Christ came downe from heaven as a naked man comes downe a hill but he went vp againe clothed with our flesh as vvith

of the natures that there is a true and a reall chaunging of the diuine proprieties into the humane nature of Christ For wee allow that axiome or principle of the Fathers against the Eutychians and Monothelities namelie that they vvhich haue the same essentiall proprieties haue also the same natures and essences and they whose naturall proprieties are confounded they haue also their natures confounded Which being of it selfe true in all things then is it especiallie true in God in whome the essentiall proprieties are indeede nothing else but the essence it selfe that it must in verie deed needs follow if those essentiall proprieties can truelie and properly be communicated to anie created substance so that it may be made such as God is as for example simplie omnipotent then the diuine essence it selfe caÌ„ also be communicated vnto it so that it might be made equall to God in substance therefore consubstantiall with God if it might be made equall vnto him in power or anie other proprietie So herein is admitted a double that a grecuous offence One is that when we communicate truelie and properlie to a creature those thinges which belong to God wee make the creature equall to god Neither can this exception serue to shift it that God hath them of himselfe but the humaine nature in Christ taketh them of the Godhead For euen the Sonne is not of himselfe nor hath he his diuine essence of himselfe but of the Father yet is he notwithstanding equall to the father and hath the same nature with the Father Another offence is that vvhile vve attribute diuine and so infinite proprieties to the humaine nature as infinite povver we depriue the same of the ovvne and proper qualitie not othervvise then the glorie of the resurrection shall depriue our bodies of the basenesse of corruption vvhen it shall bee truelie communicated vnto them and not othervvise then the cleare light of the Sunne if it bee let into the ayre vvhich vvas lightened onelie vvith the light of a candell it extinguisheth that light For if the infinite povver vvorketh and doth all thinges the finite shall be idle and therefore none at all But sith this heresie euen in our time is largely and plainly refelled by many learned men we which doe here exhibite this briefe simple confession of our faith to the church of God and to all posteritie will add no more to that which hath bin said XI Hovve great the force of this personall vnion is Meane while wee beleeue and confesse the force of this vnion of the natures in the person of Christ to be so great that first whatsoeuer Christ is or doeth according to the diuine nature that same whole Christ the Sonne of man may be said to be or to doe and againe whatsoeuer Christ doth or suffreth according to his humain nature that same whole Christ the sonne of God God himselfe is said in the holie Scriptures to bee to doe and to suffer As that God that is Christ man and God redeemed the church vvith his bloode Act. 20.28 vvhenas the force of the redemption pertained to the god head the shedding of his blood onelie to the manhood Yet both these actions are ioyned in one and each of them may be spoken alike of whole Christ although they were and are distinct because the natures although distinct yet are coupled together in Christs one person Yea Christ the mediatour according to his humanitie neuer did or doeth anie thing wherin his diuinity did not or doth not work together and he neuer performed anie thing according to his diuinitie whereunto his humanitie was not assisting or consenting that the Fathers verie fitlie called all the works of Christ the Mediatour ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ that is performed both by God and man Secondlie as the force of the vnion is so great betweene the Father and the Sonne that he doeth nothing nor communicateth anie good thing to the world but by the Sonne euen so the force of the personall vnion of the two natures is so great that no grace no saluation no life can come to vs from the deitie but by the humanitie apprehended of vs by faith so that hee must needs be coupled to the flesh of Christ that will be partaker of eternall life whereunto that saying of Christ tendeth Ioh. 6.53 vnlesse ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man ye shall haue no life in you Lastlie it causeth that wee cannot adore the deitie in Christ but wee must also therewith adore the humaine nature and that the diuine and humaine nature must both bee reuerenced with one reuerence onelie according to that same And when he bringeth in his first begotten sonne into the vvoolde Heb. 1.6 he saith and let all the Angells of God worship him Him saith hee that is whole Christ God and man together when as notwithstanding the humaine nature of it selfe and considered alone in it selfe nether can nor ought to bee worshipped for God alone is to bee worshipped but the vnion not whatsoeuer but this personall vnion of the diuine nature with the humaine causeth it Therefore albeit that God dwell in the Saintes yet they are not to bee worshipped nor prayed vnto as is Christ the man Wherfore we confesse this vnion whereof we speak to be of great force yet we saie that it is an vnion which excludeth al confusion and transfusion For if the vnion betweene the father the sonne and the holie ghost in one essence then which vnion there can be none greater thought or imagined doe not take away the distinction of the persons then nether this vnion of the natures and so of the proprieties and actions in one person can take awaye the distinction of the same and bring in confusion XII Christ in that he is man is indued with a very great yet a determinate power and other gifts Finallie wee beleeueÌ„ that Christ like as in that he is God he is simplie omnipotent simplie wise and so it may be said of all his other attributes so in that he is man hee is indued of the father with a power and knowledge verie farre yea almost infinitelie exceeding the power and knowledge of all thinges created either in heauen or earth and yet a determinate or finite power and so it may be saide of all his other gifts and vertues loue prudence fortitude iustice grace trueth and the rest of which Esaias saith Esay ii 2 Ioh. 1.14 Luk. 2.52 and the spirit of the Lord shall rest vpon him c And Iohn He was full of grace and trueth Also Luke he grew in wisedome and fauour with God and man For which cause also he is saide Ioh. 3.34 Col. 2.3 in that he is man to be exalted aboue all principalities and povvers also that the spirite is giuen vnto him aboue measure also that in him lye hidden the treasures of wisedome and knowledge Whereby it comes to passe that he in that hee is man is

all into euerlasting glorie with Christ Neither doe wee doubt but Christ purposed to foreshew vnto vs the second by the first and the third by the second that by that which was alreadie made we might bee confirmed in the hope of that which was to be made VI. As the first vnion was made that satisfaction might bee made for our sinnes so the second is made that vve might bee partakers of that satisfaction Wee beleeue therefore that letting passe those things which pertaine not to this matter in hand wee may come neerer that the Sonne of God by the euerlasting will of the Father and therefore of himselfe also and of the holy ghost like as he tooke vpon himselfe into vnity of his person our flesh that is mans nature conceiued by vertue of the holy ghost in the wombe of the virgine that he might in himselfe purge vs of our sinnes and in that flesh he most perfectlie fulfilled the lawe of God for vs beeing made obedient vnto his Father euen vnto death and at the length the same flesh being offred vp in sacrifice for our sinnes he obtained in himselfe eternall saluation for vs so also that he might make vs partakers of this saluation by sacrifice of his flesh assumed for vs he was willing accustomed to take vnto him and to knitt and ioyne all his elect vnto him in another kinde of vnion namelie in such a coupling as in it wee may bee vnited with him though not into one person yet into one misticall bodie whereof he is the head and euerie one of vs members and may be made partakers of his diuine nature VII As the first is made by vertue of the holie ghost so is the second As we certainelie knowe that as the Sonne of God our Lord Iesus Christ in the first vnion coupled vnto himselfe our flesh and blood by vertue of his spirite for he was conceiued man of the holie ghost and therefore without sinne for which cause also he is called the man from heauen so also in the secoÌ„d vnion he doth communicate his flesh and his blood and his whole selfe vnto vs and in the same communion doth knitt ioyne and incorporate vs into him by the power of the same his spirite that alwaies the bonde where with Christ is coupled with vs and we with Christ might bee the same spirite of Christ which as it did bringe to passe in the wombe of the virgine that the sonne of god should be made flesh of our flesh and bone of our bones so also by working in our hearts and incorporating vs into Christ it bringes to passe that wee likewise by participation of the bodie blood of Christ should be bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh especiallie seeing hee stirreth vp that faith in vs whereby wee acknowledge and embrace him for true God and man and therefore a perfect Sauiour VIII The vnion of vs with Christ is spirituall yet so as it is true and reall So we beleeue that this other vnion also is almost no lesse then the former so spirituall if we may so speake that yet it is true reall Because that by the spirite of Christ wee allthough remaining on the earth yet are truely and reallie coupled with the bodie blood and soule of Christ raigning in heauen so as this misticall bodie consisting of Christ as the head and of the faithfull members sometime is simplie named Christ So great is the coniunction of Christ with the faithfull and of them with Christ that surelie it may seeme not to be said amisse that as the first vnion was made of two natures in one person so this is made of many persons as it were into one nature 2. Pet. 1.4 Eph. 5.30 according to those sayings That ye should be made partakers of the diuine nature And Wee are members of his bodie of his bones and of his flesh IX A confirmation of the former opinion hovve straight this vnion is For like as the soule in a man because it is one and the same and no lesse whole in the head and in each member then it is in all the bodie together it causeth that all the members do vnite and ioyne themselues into one bodye vnder one head euen so by vertue of Christs spirit because it is one and the same in Christ and in euery of the faithfull it causeth that all of vs knitte spiritually together both in soules and bodies into one we are all one and the selfe same body with Christ our head a body I say misticall and spirituall because it is ioyned and compact by a secret band of the same spirite X. This vnion because it is made by vertue of the holie spirit cannot be hindred by anie distance of place Whereupon it followeth that this true and reall vnion though spirituall of our bodies soules with the bodie and soule of christ can be letted by no distance of place though neuer so great because that spirite is so mightie in operatioÌ„ as it reacheth from earth to heauen and beyond and ioyneth in one no lesse strictly the members of christ being on earth with their head in heauen sitting at the right hand of the Father then the soule of a man ioyneth together the hands and leggs and other members into one bodie with the head yea though that man were so great that his head did reach vnto the ninth spheare and his feete stand fast in the center of the earth So great is the vertue of the soule theÌ„ how great is that of the holie spirit the true and almightie God XI The spirit by whome this vnion is made is giuen of Christ to the preaching of the gospell and administration of the Sacraments Furthermore wee beleeue that his spirite whereby christ both coupleth himselfe vnto vs and vs vnto him ioyneth his flesh with ours and ours with his is communicated of the same christ vnto vs by his meere grace when and where and how he please yet ordinarily at the preaching of the gospell and administration of the SacrameÌ„ts Of which thing was a visible testimonie which we read how that they in the primitiue church which imbraced the gospell by faith and were baptised in the name of christ or vpon whomsoeuer the hands were laid besids the inuisible grace receiued also diuerse sensible giftes of the spirite XII This vnion is the especiall ende of the gospell and Sacraments Whereuppon we do easily gather which is the principall end both of preaching the gospell and administring the Sacraments namelye this communion with christ the Sonne of God incarnate who suffered and died for vs but now raigneth in heaueÌ„ and imparteth saluation and life to his chosen which communion was begonne here but was to be perfected in heauen so that we by this true reall copulatioÌ„ of our selues with his flesh blood and his whole person may also be made partakers of eternall saluation which was purchased by him and stil remaineth and

iustly denie Tho. 3. p. q. 2. ar 4 For what proportion can there bee betweene that which is finite and the infinite betweene the creature and creator But by the way confessing with the auncient fathers that it maye be called ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ compounded in that sense as the scripture saieth the word was made flesh and that he which was in the shape of God was now made in the likenesse of man And this is nothing else but that this eternall Hypostasis doth now subsist in two natures so as Christ is no lesse true man then true God Hereunto tendeth it which before we said of the similitude of the soule body for of these two as true and essentiall partes consisteth the person of man how the same doeth not agree fitly euerie way and yet we allow of the same similitude in that sense which Athanasius and other fathers vsed it to shew the true and substantiall vnion of the two diuerse natures although it do not fully agree in all things to this great misterie as Iustinus in his exposition of faith and other fahters haue freely coÌ„fessed The similitude of the garment is much vsed of the auncient fathers especially of Athanasius and it is agreeable to the scriptures For the flesh of Christ wherewith his deitie was couered the Apostle calleth a vaile Heb. 10. ve 20. And most excellently by this similitude of the garment that opinion of the reall imparting and communication of the diuine proprieties with the humaine nature is quite ouerthrowne which some doe much labour to prooue by the similitudes of a fire-hoatiron and of a bodie with life in it which they can neuer doe The seuenth aphorisme We haue said that the bodie and the soule are two existenees which is manifestly prooued in Adam whose bodie did first subsist by it selfe then the soule being also a substance subsisting by it selfe was ioyned vnto it The same is also prooued by the separation of the soule from the body whereof each doeth remaine subsisting by it selfe But seing they are the essentiall partes of a man each of them indeed seuerally are existences but yet vnperfect and being ioyned they make a perfect existence that is the person of man But thus standeth not the case in Christ touching the diuine and humaine natures for his humaine nature neuer subsisted by it selfe any waies before he took it on him nor subsisteth yet after the taking but onely in the word which word was euer by it selfe a most perfect existence The 10. aphorisme The similitude of the sunne doth not altogether so fittly agree as that similitude of the glorie which our bodies shal receiue because that glorie shal cleane take away al the shame and reproch of our flesh but the sunne doeth onely dimme the light of a candle and not cleane put it out yet notwithstanding this similitude of the sunne doth plainly shew what we meane namely that by the reall communication of the sunne with the ayre the light of the candell is made altogether vnprofitable and so as it were put out and to be no light at all yet that the essentiall proprieties of the flesh are neuer quite taken away or so weakened by the personall vnion that they serue to no vse it is manifest And yet this indeede could by no meanes be auoyded if the humaine nature should really participate with the diuine omnipotencie so that it could doe whatsoeuer God could doe For the word the sonne of God neuer tooke vnto him held or holdeth any thing in vaine Therefore by this similitude of the sunne is strongly confirmed that which is prooued by the similitude of the glorie which shall take awaye all ignominie from our bodies The 11. aphorisme That same whole Christ c. Here in the first part to the name of Christ is added the sonne of man in the other parte the sonne of God God that we might shewe how that diuine attributes are spokeÌ„ of Christ the man and humaine of Christ God seing the very person of Christ is ment in either part For the same Christ one and the same person is whole God whole man though not wholy as Damascene speaketh for in two distinct natures he subsisteth one and the very same This doth Damascene thus declare lib. 3. cap. 7. The whole Christ is perfect God but the vvhole subsistance of Christ is not onely God for it is not onely God but also man And the vvhole Christ is perfect man but the whole subsistance of Christ is not onely man for it is not onely man but also God For the whole subsistance doth represent the nature but whole Christ the person But whereas we spake of his actions done by him either according to his humane nature or according to his diuine that yet one and the same and whole Christ performeth the same it depeÌ„deth vpon this that the actions were as the schools say of supposite natures But the diuersitie of the actions proceedeth from the diuersnesse of the natures or formes by which they were done Sith therefore there is in Christ two natures and but one person thereon it comes that there is but onely one worker namely whole Christ two natures that can worke and two kinde of actions Now these actions are called the actions of God and man not so much for that they proceede from one agent which is ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ God and man as that not onely the deitie but also the humanitie meet together for this worke of our saluation each ioyning his actions with the others actions And this is the first and principal force of this hypostaticall or personall vnion namely that by it the two natures and their properties actions are so vnited in one and the same person that he who by the forme of God wherin he hath froÌ„ the beginning subsisted is God and by the forme of a seruant wherein he now subsisteth is man and the same being whole God is whole man and being whole man is whole God and consequently is wholy omnipotent and euerie where present whole inomnipotent and existing in a certen place and the same whole died and whole by dying destroyed death And thus it finally followeth that to the obtaining communicating applying of our saluation not onely his diuine nature worketh but also the humaine worketh with it The secoÌ„d force followeth of the first namely that the humaine nature was made the deities instrument vnited personally thereunto and therefore a most forcible and effectuall instrument to bestow all benefites vpon vs. The third that by this vnion this masse or lumpe of humaine nature is lifte vpp to such dignitie that we neither can nor ought to beÌ„d our actions of adoration faith prayer loue to the onely deitie of Christ as is declared in the confession For we are coÌ„maunded to worship the sonne himself that is the person Heb. 1. and to beleeue in him The fourth force is that because this humaine nature is

Martyrs confirmed and the faithfull do yet assuredly hold Thus saith Vigilius By this the very same is vndoubtedly prooued which was also by the other before namely not onely that the worde and flesh cannot possiblie be both of one nature as the Monophysites affirmed but also that the proprieties of the one nature cannot really be communicated to the other so as indeed it should haue the same in it selfe and that the one nature should be made the very like that the other is as thus that the flesh by reason of the vnion with the word should also with the same word bee made present in all places in it owne esseuce For from this proposition which is held for graunted of all sound beleeuers namely The flesh through the vnion with the word hath not gotten this proprietie of the word that it selfe should with the word be present in all places in it owne substance from this proposition I say he concludeth therefore neither is it made of the same nature with the word This certenly is the argument of Vigilius yea of the whole catholicke church What remaineth onely this that if it may be said to bee present in all places it can be said to bee so by no other meanes then by the Hypostasie of it which is the very word For in Christs humaine nature there be only two things the proper essence of his nature with his proprieties and gifts created and the common Hypostasis with the diuine which is the word it selfe His proper essence is finite or determinate and so is onely within one place The Hypostasis is infinite immeasurable and most simple or vnmixt And therefore in this onely and not in the proper essence the flesh of Christ can be and in verie deed is present in all places That which hath bin said of this propriety the same is also to be thought of all the rest aswell those of the word as of the flesh For also in the argumeÌ„t before going against the Monophysites book 4. chap. 4. he concludeth the same from certaine proprieties of the word as is to be vncreated inuisible vntouchable said that it is impossible the flesh should partake in those qualities Hereuppon he concluded therefore the flesh cannot bee of one nature with the word sith it can by no meanes be made inuisible vncreated vntouchable vnderstand this in it owne essence whereas notwithstanding in the Hypostasis of it which is common to it with the vvorde it is in verie deed as in all places present so also vncreated inuisible vntouchable and what not seing in the same Hypostasis it is also god These things are all most assured and plaine and do depend vpon that infallible rule which he deliuered in the fift booke and second chapter namely We saye better and more catholically it is common in him and not vnto him And we say better it is proper to him and not in him I beseech all christians by our Lord Iesus that setting aside all the vaine dreames of priuate men and reiecting all the affections hatreds enmities of their flesh and imbracing the assured and wholesome doctrine of the auÌ„cient church and christian loue wee maye all ioyne together into one holy league of friendship euen as we haue all one God one mediatour one baptisme one hope of our vocation to the glorie of Gods name the building vp of the church the saluation of our soules For sooner then we suppose shall wee be summoned before Christs tribunall seate that euerie one may giue account for that which he hath done in the bodie and in this life seing that after this life there is no hope of pardon no place for amendment CERTAINE POSITIONS OF THE same Zanchius Of some principall articles of our christian faith against diuers heresies at sundrie times disputed on partly at Heidelberg partly at Newstade FOr what purpose I published this confession with my obseruations vpon it for the verie same cause at this time haue I gathered together these positions concerning sundrie matters in question which were handled partly vnder Frederick the third of godly memory at Heidelburge partly vnder my fauourable Lord Iohn Cassimier erector of this schoole here at Newstade against diuers heresies and being all brought together I thought good to haue them printed with my confession thereby that al posteritie might euidently see that I neuer consented to any of these heresies which in these dayes of ours haue beene fetcht againe from the depth of hell and this to Gods glorie the edification of the church and the saluation of manie through our Lord Iesus Christ Amen Of one true god eternall father sonne and holy ghost yeare 1572. 1 THere is one onely Iehouah creatour of heauen and earth and God of Israell 2 And this God though he bee one onely Iehouah yet is he not one but meere Elohim the number and names of whome the sonne of God manifested in the flesh hath clearlie and apparaÌ„tly reuealed vnto vs without all doubt namely the eternall father the eternall sonne and the eternall holie ghost 3 Further these three Elohim are true existences and those vndeuided liuing vnderstanding willing and therefore as the church hath euer vsed to speake true persons 4 And the father sonne and holie ghost are so distinct among themselues as the one is not the other 5 Yet euerie one of them is the true Iehouah 6 Yet are there not therefore manis Iehouahs but onely one Iehouah Of the nature singularitie and immeasurablenes of one true God yeare 1573. 1 BY the name of the nature of God is vsually signified not onely his essence simplie considered in it selfe but also all his proprieties or attributes by which hee is declared to vs and for our sakes of what sort he is 2 And therefore God is rightly saide of his owne nature to be gentle wise good and such like 3 But albeit hee vseth to applie many qualities like to this his owne nature vnto men by which wee are made iust good wise yet his owne nature he doth communicate to no created thing which hee cannot indeede communicate vnlesse their could more Gods bee made 4 God also besides his other proprieties is simplie simple or vnmixt that he can no waies be said to be compounded of many things no not of his being and essence 5 For although hee attribute vnto himselfe manie thinges in the Scriptures as it were manie qualities as to bee good iust mightie c yet no quality doth in very deed fal into god but of what sorte soeuer hee is the same hee is in his owne simple essence but by these diuerse names the infinite perfection of his most simple essence is signified vnto vs. 6 But God not onely admitteth no composttion in himselfe but also falleth not into concretion or substance of any created thing as that he should bee either the forme or matter thereof 7 God is furthermore truely immeasurable and in finite therefore present euery where and that

was a disobedieÌ„ce Gen. 2.17 3.6 Rom. 5.19 which was shewed not so much in the outvvard deede as in the purposed consent of his minde vvherin he vvould not be obedient vnto god III. What and how manifold a death followed Adams sinne So vve confesse that man being then destitute of the fauour of god by his ovvne faulte did loose that life vvherein he liued holily vnto God his minde being darkened his vvill depraued and all integritie of nature vtterlie lost Ioh. 8.34 Eph. 2.1 Rom. 5.12 name lie in those things vvhich pertaine to god and to a life acceptable to God and so vvas made the seruant of sinne the slaue of sathan and quite dead vnto god Moreouer he incurred both the death of the bodie vvhich is novv come vnto all men with al the calamities of the bodie and also the eternall that is the most miserable grieuous and most vnhappie life of the vvhole man more intollerable vvithout comparison then anie death vvith the deuill in euerlasting torments vvhence he could not be deliuered but by Christ 1. Cor. 15.22 IIII. That in Adam all men sinned But for as much as al mankinde which was by naturall generation to issue from Adam was then in his loines whereby the commandement vvith the curse annexed pertained not onelie to the person of Adam but to all mankinde likewise The Rom. 5.19 efore with the Apostle do vve beleeue and confesse that in Adam sinning all men sinned so that that disobedience was not onelie proper to Adam himselfe but also made common to all mankinde sith his guiltines enwrapped all men who were then and are yet dailie carnallie to be begotten of his seede Euen as the Apostle to the Romaines plainly teacheth yea and most strongly prooueth by an Antithesis or contraposition of the disobedience of Adam and the obedieÌ„ce of Christ For if the obedience of Christ be no lesse ours by imputation then his owne by his proper action because wee are regenerate of his incorruptible seede and of his spirite it followeth that the disobedience likewise of Adam must be imputed vnto vs and we touched with his guiltines because we are borne of the seed of his flesh being father of al men V. The corruption of mans whole nature followed vpon Adams disobedience in all men But like as the corruption of our vvhole nature Rom. 7.7 Aug. tom 7 con Iul. Pela li. 5. c. 3 immediatlie by gods iust iudgement tooke holde on the person of Adam for that actuall disobedience called of the Apostle Concupiscence which is both a punishment of the former sinne a sinne and a cause of other sinnes euen so being taught by the holy scriptures we beleeue and with the whole church confesse that all men which by naturall propagation are conceiued of his seed ar borne infected with the contagion of his corrupt nature For all men sinned in Adam and by the guiltinesse of his disobedience wee are all kept bound VI. What we properlie call originall sinne Wherefore we doe so saie that this haereditarie fault and contagion of nature is sinne in all men and so we vse to cal it originall sinne that we do not separate it from the guiltines and imputation of the first disobedience Euen as likewise on the other side we doubt not but the righteousnes of christians doth consist not so much in the regeneration of nature which is made by the spirit of Christ which is vsuallie called by the name of inhereÌ„t righteousnesse as in the imputation of the perfect obedience and righteousnes of Christ whose members we are VII That contagion of nature is verie sinne And although that contagion was inflicted not onelie vppon Adam alone but also on his whole posteritie for a punishment of that first transgression of Gods commaundement yet wee hold this as certainelie out of the holy scriptures as whatsoeuer is most certaine Rom. 7.7 that the same is not onely the punishment of sin and the cause of all other follovving sinnes but also a verie sinne it selfe euen so great as were sufficient to condemne vs. VIII That concupiscence of it owne proper nature is a sinne in the verie regenerate Yea so farre doe we learne that concupiscence of it owne nature is a sinne fighting against the lavve of God and making all men subiect to condemnation vnlesse they bee deliuered by Christ yea that in the regenerate themselues though the guiltines being taken away by faith in Christ it be not imputed vnto them anie more yet we doubt not 1. Ioh. 3.4 Rom. 7.7 but it is a sinne yea and that worthy of eternall death sith it is ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ a transgression of the lawe and is by gods lawe condemned as the Apostle teacheth IX From concupiscence ingrafted in vs the riuers of sinne doe continually flowe Futrhermore we beleeue that this our naturall deformitie is such a fountaine of al sin and that euer so abounding that from it doe continuallie spring most corrupt waters of e-euill affections of vngodlie thoughts vvicked desires which vnlesse they be by the spirit of Christ restrained they breake out at length into manifest sinnes offences some worse theÌ„ others so that there is not any man so holie which beareth not about him this puddle of vices yea and feeleth not the filthie vapors breathing from it and is not often sprinckled and bespotted with that noisome contagion Euerie man is tempted of his ovvne concupiscence saieth Iames vvhen he is drawne avvaye by his ovvne concupiscence Iam. 1.14.15 and is entised then vvhen lust hath conceiued it bringeth forth sinne and sinne wheÌ„ it is finished bringeth forth death X. That God is not the author of sinne Now all these things beeing thus wee are confirmed in that beleefe wherein wee hold that god is not the author of sinne sith he neither created Adam euill or prone vnto euil but iust and righteous neither did hee intice or mooue him to il but he of his own accord and by his free-will sinned 1. Io. 2.16 neither yet vvas this naturall peruersnesse from god but of it selfe it followed that disobedience of Adam being depriued of his righteousnes god most iustly so permitting and punishing mans traÌ„sgression by that worthie punishment XI Errors We condemne therefore with Ireneus and the whole church all those which make god the author of sinne likewise all Pelagians as wel new as old which denie that all men sinned in Adam and are holden in the guilte of the first offence or doe labour to prooue that this ingrafted concupiscence is onelie a disease and a punishment of sinne but not indeede a sinne it selfe or at least in the regenerate will not haue it to bee worthie the name of a sinne Wee condemne also those which haue taught that originall sinne is a substance because this opinion either makes god the author of sinne or else denies that god is the maker of euerie substance and confirmes the doctrine

Eutychians which on the contrary side as Christ is but one onelie person so they leaue him but one nature onelie namelie the diuine teaching that the humaine nature which he assumed either is wholy turned into the diuine or els so mingled and confounded with the diuine that they make no difference at al in him between the proprieties and actions of his diuine and humaine natures Wee condemne also those which haue proceeded from the former as Macarius with his followers which make but one onelie will in Christ namelie the diuine and therefore admit no proper action at al of the humane wil in Christ We condemne likewise the Cerdonians also in this pointe that they said Christ did not truelie suffer nor was truelie dead but that he fained a suffring or as some heritiks say he suffred and died putatiuelie and therefore with these we also coÌ„deÌ„ne all which taught or teach the like things as namelie that Christ rose not againe truelie in the same flesh wherein he died but in another of a diuerse nature or else that if he rose in the same yet that he did not truelie ascend into heauen and carrie the same into heauen and chaunge the place of it Wee also also with Hierome Cyrill and other of the fathers condemne the Originists and their like who taught that Christ rose againe with a bodie like vnto a spirite most subtill and in it owne nature inuisible and not subiect to the senses all those likewise as Iewes and Turkes which denie that the worlde is redeemed by the benefite of Christes death Also all those lastlie which goe about to proue our saluation to be grounded vppon any other thing either in parte or altogether then onelie in Christ and blasphemouslie doe auouch that sinnes may bee expiate or remitted by anie other sacrifices then that one sacrifice of Christ onelie For wee acknowledge one onelie redeemer Iesus Christ without whome as there is no true God so no true saluation and one onely sacrifice the oblation or offring wherof being once made not onelie all the sinnes of the elect were once washed awaie in the person of Christ but also beeing yet continuallie washed away euen vnto the ende of the world are remitted to them that beleeue CHAP. XII Of the true dispensation of the Redemption the saluation life which is laid vp in Christ alone and therefore of the necessarie vniting and participation vvith Christ I. Saluation and eternall lise is laid in Christ that from him it may bee communicated to be WE beleeue that euen as the sinne of Adam and death which followed the same remained not in Adam alone but from him as from the head of all mankinde it did and doth flow into all men which by a common generation haue bin and are borne of him so likewise that the righteousnesse of Christ and the eternall life due vnto him is not holden in Christ alone but is deriued into all those who by the regeneration of the holie spirite are made one with him and as true members are ioyned vnto him as head of the whole church and that to this ende and purpose Christ came in the flesh and that all our saluation and life consisteth in him as in our head that it may indeed be bestowed and communicated vppon all the elect of God which are vnited vnto him II. The grace of redemption and saluation is offred vnto all men but indeed is not communicated but to the elect who are made one vvith Christ For we beleeue Mar. 16.15 16 that although the grace of redemption saluation and eternall life which God bestoweth be earnestly propounded and offered vnto all men by the preaching of the gospell for that very manie are not made partakers of the same it is through their owne fault yet is it not indeed communicated but vnto those who beeing from the beginning chosen and predestinate vnto it in Christ as in the head of all the elect that they should bee his members and so made partakers of saluation were afterwards in their time called by the gospell indued with faith and so grafted into Christ and made one with him III. To the true participation of eternall life howe necessarie this true vnion or communion is with Christ For euen as the braunch can draw no liuelie sapp from the vine Ioh. 15.1.2.3.4.5.6.7 nor the bough from the tree nor the members anie motion sence or life from the head vnlesse they be ioyned to the vine tree and these to the head euen so cannot men receiue anie saluation or life from Christ in whome onelie it consisteth vnlesse they be grafted into him coupled in a true and reall vnion and being coupled doe abide in him IV. That we cannot be vnited vnto Christ vnlesse he first vnite himselfe to vs. Sith therefore the whole participation of true righteousnes saluation and life hangeth and dependeth vppon this most necessary coÌ„munion with Christ and vnto the same is referred both the preaching of the gospell and administration of both the Sacraments yea the whole Ecclesiasticall ministrie Therefore what our faith coÌ„cerning the same is we purpose to declare witnes to the whole church as brieflie and plainelie as may be in certaine assertioÌ„s or positions which after follow Of the communitie with Christ 1. Ioh. 4.10 And first we beleeue that as we therefore loue Christ as Iohn saith because he first loued vs. we come vnto him by our spirite because he came first vnto vs by his and therefore wee imbrace him by faith because he first by vertue of his spirite imbracing vs stirreth vs vp to faith so we also can by no meanes cleaue and bee vnited vnto him vnlesse he first doe ioyne and vnite himselfe vnto vs. For the one is the cause of the other the first of the latter Wherefore we must pray vnto him Ioh. 14.23 that he will come vnto vs and make his abode with vs. V. How many fold is the vnion of Christ with vs and of vs with Christ and how they are ordered in themselues We acknowledge furthermore this coniunction of Christ with vs and likewise of vs with Christ to bee threefold one which was once made in our nature another which is dailie made in the persons of the elect which yet goe astraie from the Lord and the last which shall be likewise with the Lord in our persons when they shall be present with him namelie when God shall be all in vs all And the first is referred to the second the second to the third eueÌ„ as nature is ordained to grace and grace to glory For the first is also made by assuming of our nature into the vnitie of the person ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ Of the word The second is made by assuming of our persons into grace and into one misticall bodie with him and as Peter speaketh into participation of his diuine nature The third shall likewise bee made by assuming of vs

theruppon and to the reuerend brethren N. N. and other coÌ„gregations round about vs who haue al of them liked very wel thereof Thus farre out of the letters of that learned man almost to the same purpose could wee bring many things besids out of letters written from other about the same matter but for that it greatly needeth not wee will for breuitie sake omitt the same Therefore to our matter An obseruation vpon the whole confession When we vse the word of condemning we meane nothing els theÌ„ that the heresies which haue bin condemned by the catholick church the same also wee condemne and which it allowed not the same also we allow not and this we desire to leaue witnessed to all posteritie Vpon the first chapter aphorisme 4. Whereas we haue giuen the first place next after the canonicall books to the Apocryphi in the volume of the Bible we did it induced by the authoritie of the greek and latine churches who did alwaies giue that honour vnto them that they should be ioyned with the canonicall books See the places in Hierome Cyprian and the councell of Laodicea cyted in the confession the first chapter fift aphorisme Moreouer we spake of books not of any manner of writinges For otherwise wee preferre the generall creeds before the Apocryphi Vpon the second chapter Of God The first aphorisme Though the propertie of existences bee to exist in the essence yet speaking of God we would rather vse another manner of speach that more vsuall for certaine causes as namely to teach against the reproches and skoffes of the Arrians of our time that the diuine essence is not found but onely in the persons and therefore that we do not make an essence aparte by it selfe subsisting from the persons wherein yet three persons should subsist as though the catholicke church should forge foure existences in God The third aphorisme Of this reall communication of the essentiall proprieties of God we haue also written a seuerall treatise in the booke which shal be intituled Of the incarnation of the sonne of God vppon the words to Phil. 2. Who when he was in the forme of God c. Vnto which we referre the reader who so he bee that desireth a further explanation of this doctrine Surely the Lord Iesus when he said No man knoweth the sonne but the father and no man knovveth the father but the sonne and he to whome the sonne will reueale him he plainely excepted his created minde from that essentiall knowledge wherewith the father knoweth that is as the schoolemen speak comprehendeth the sonne and the sonne the father teaching that what knowledge soeuer creatures haue in themselues coÌ„cerning God the same is some waye reuealed vnto them and therefore such knowledge is not the essential infinite knowledge which is in God but a created and a finite or determinate knowledge Vpon the 5. chapter of the worlds creation c. The 2. aphorisme That the heauen of the blessed wherein the Lord Iesus is now in his bodie doth differ froÌ„ the earth and from the other heauens and is aboue all those visible heauens besides that which hath bin already said these few proofs do also confirme Eph. 4. Christ is said to haue ascended aboue all heauens in another place he is read to haue ascended into heauen and to bee in heauen and to sitt at the right hande of the father Therefore this heauen is aboue the other heauens and differeth from them So in the third to the Colloss the Apostle distinguisheth the place where Christ is at the right hand of the father from the earth and calleth it vpward saying Seeke yee the things aboue sett your affections on things aboue where Christ is and in the 4. of the first to the Thess he saieth the Lord shall descend from heauen namely into these lower partes and all the godlie shal be caught vp into the ayre to meete Christ in the cloudes That heauen therefore is aloft not on the earth not in the ayre much lesse in euerie place For he shall come downe in the visible shape of his body froÌ„ the high heauen into these parts to iudge the quick and the dead Of this heauen wee haue spoken particularly in our bookes Do operibus dei of the workes which he created in the sixe daies Wee therefore disallow of that doctrine which is contrarie which distinguisheth not the heauen from the earth nor this heauen from other heauens but would proue it to be euerie where Vppon the 7. chapter The 11. aphorisme Among other thinges which Iulianus the Pelagian obiected to Augustine proouing defending originall sinne these were some that either he made God an author of sinne or the deuill a creator of man and that because the Pelagians thought that Aughstine made originall sinne the very substance of man Al which obiections he confuted in his 7. Tome against Pelag. the 5. booke and first chapter in these words Neither do we ascribe iniustice to God but rather equitie in that euen infants are punished not vniustly with such and so many euills as we see neither doe we attribute the making of man but the corrupting and depraâ—ing of mans originall to the deuill neither doe we graunt a substance in the sinne but an actâ— of it in the first man and a contagion thereof in all his posterity neither do we graunt vnto infants a conscience without knowledge in vvhome is neither conscience nor knowledge but he knewe what he did in vvhome all haue sinned and from whome all haue drawnâ— corruption c. Vpon the 9. chapter The 5. aphorisme How they can winde themselues out of this errour which denie that the fathers did eate the true flesh of Christ we see not as though because he was not as yet indeede existing in nature therefore he was not existing in the assured promise of Christ consequently could noâ— be apprehended and eaten by faith For this proposition is generall and to all men at all times belongeth Vnlesse ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man yee haue no life in you For life is not imparted but onely to those which by faith as members to the head are ioyned to the flesh of Christ by the flesh to the spirit or ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ To the word which is life Vpon the 10. chapter The 3. aphorisme For God would shew c. That which I said of the first second third and fourth estate had bin more cleare if I had told what man was before he sinned what after hee had sinned what vnder grace and what he shal be in his glorie Vpon the 11. chapter of Christ the redeemer aphorisme 6. That the person of Christ speaking properly is compounded of the diuine nature which is immeasurable and most pure and of the humaine which in respect of the diuine is lesse then a pricke to an infinite masse as of two partes truely and properly so called wee together with the schoolemen do

obey the bishop presbitery next vnto theÌ„ These those superior bishops did call together all their whole clergie and did instruct them in knowledge and the diligent execution of their office But whereas it was the Lords will that his people should mutuallie loue among them selues and should mutually care one for another euen as farre and wide as might be possible for all christians are one bodie the holie fathers ordained that the bishops of each prouince for then all the romaine iurisdictions were distributed into prouinces should meet together with their presbiteries so often as the necessitie of the churches required but alwaies twise in the yeare and there they should enquire concerning Christs doctrine and discipline howe the same was administred and how it prospered in the churches that where they found anie default they might correct it that which they knew to be well they might confirme and set forward And that these Synods might also bee ordered aright and orderlie they would haue the Metropolitaine the bishops of euery mother cittie to be the chiefe directors to call them together and to guide theÌ„ For in each prouince the head citty wherin was the maÌ„sion or seat of the chiefe gouernor was called Metropolis or the mother cittie And therfore they inioyned vnto these Metro politaine bishops a certen care charge ouer al the churches throughout their prouince that if they should vnderstaÌ„d of any thing taught or done amisse either of the ministers of the churches or of the coÌ„mon sort that they should giue warning therof in time if by their admonitions they could not ameÌ„d the same theÌ„ for the correction therof they should call a Synode of bishops for it was not graunted vnto theÌ„ that they should execute any iudgement vpoÌ„ their owne authority ouer churches which had bishops of their owne for the power of iudgmeÌ„t ouer both clergie laity was only in the haÌ„ds of the bishop elder of the same place And the bishops themselues were iudged by the Synods Therefore when there were any bishops to bee ordained for churches it was decreed that they should assemble at the same church withall if it might without hurte of the churches if not with some at the least two or three of the bishops of their owne prouince which if he were not alreadie elected should guide and gouerne in the election of the bishop and the election being done should examine it and inquire of the man elected most seuerelie and make due proofe of his whole life and of his skill and abllitie to performe the office and duetie of a bishopp And then at last should inuest him in his bishops function All which thinges were instituted and serued to this end that there might be as much know ledge and mutuall care betweene churches the ministers thereof as could be possible both for the remoouing expelling of all scandalls of doctrine and life and also to the earnestes and more effectuall maintaining prouoking encreasing of the edification of faith a life worthie of Christ our Lord. In so much as if any one did loyter or neglect their owne duetie the other bishops might be readie to help yea euen so farre forth as to the suspending of the obstinate and vtter casting them out of their bishops function Wee should consider what Saint Cyprian writeth to Stephan the romaine bishop concerning Martian bishop of Arelatensis who fell into the sect of Nouatian booke 2. Epist 13 and which he writt in his 3. epistle and first booke Of a certaine flock distributed vnto euerie one of the shepheards and which hee spake in the councell of Carthage as hee writt to Quirinus Nowe further when the world beganne to be full of churches that the Metropolitanes had also neede of their peculiar care for not all there beginning now to grow very many had other skil inough or watchfulnes inough for their place for euer and in all orders of meÌ„ there be few that doe excell the care of some prouinces was committed to certen bishops of the chiefe churches as to the bishop of Rome of Constantinople of Antioch and Alexandria and afterwards of Caesarea Cappadocia and certaine others as by reason of the great encrease of churches of the faithful necessitie did require But notwithstanding these primate bishops whom afterward they called Patriarches had no authoritie ouer the other bishops or churches more then as I said before the Metropolitaines had ouer the bishops and churches of their prouinces Euerie one did owe a speciall care and diligence to that portion of the churches that belonged to him it was his duetie also to admonish the bishops in time if any had offended or neglected his duetie and if admonition preuailed not then to add the authoritie of a counsell Among these the first place was giuen to him of Rome both for the reuerence of S. Peter and also for the maiestie of the cittie Which reason the fathers afterward following gaue the second place to him of Constantinople as being a second Rome and the bishop of the emperiall sea whereas Antioch before had obtained the second place among these patriarches But as the nature of man depraued by ambitioÌ„ did euer labour more that his rule might stretch farre then to gouerne well these patriarches by occasion of this generall care of the churches committed vnto them drewe vnto themselues first the ordaining of their neighbour bishops and by that ordaining they crept by little and little and at last confirmed a iurisdiction ouer such bishopps and their churches which mischiefe when it grew to bee verie great there beganne a grieuous contention for a vniuersall rule ouer all churches which the first that laboured to get vnto himselfe was one Iohn bishop of Constantinople vnder the emperour Mauricius concerning which coÌ„tentioÌ„ there are extant many epistles among the epistles of S. Greg. booke 5.6.7.10 At length vnder Phocas hee of Rome obtained this title of vniuersall bishop which the bishops of that sea beganne more and more by degrees to abuse euen vntill by occasion first by diuision of the Empire vnder Charles the great afterwardes by dissentions of princes and nations whereby they tore and rent the power of the emperors of the West and other kinges they exalted themselues into that antichristian power which nowe they bragg of hauing oppressed the powers first of bishops and then of all kinges and emperors Thus therefore hath Sathan ouerthrowne the holesome obedience and gouernment of the clergie orders For the romaine Antichrist got to himselfe an immediate rule ouer all both clergie and laitie hath dissolued broken the care and charge of bishops such as were good bishops ouer those that were committed to their trust But seing it must needs be that all orders of clerks must haue their gouernors ouerseers therefore the power of bishops must be restored as also of Archdeacons and al others by what name soeuer they be called to whome

anie portion of gouerning and keeping the clergie is committed and also a watchfullnes and inquirie that there be none in this order vngarded or vnlooked vnto Thus farre Bucer not onely rehearsing but also commending the custome of the auncient church ordaining diuers orders of ecclesiasticall functions whereof we before spake I should also haue had consideration of those churches which albeit they imbrace the gospell of Christ Iesus yet they still retaine their bissiops and Archbishops both in deed and name What that in the churches euen of the protestants neither bishops indeed nor archbishops are wanting whome hauing turned the names out of good greeke into badd latine they call Superintendents and generall Superintendents yea there also where neither those old names in good greeke nor these newe in ill latine are vsed at all yet there are wont to bee some superior persons in whose hands is almost the whole authoritie The controuersie then hath beene about the names but seing wee agree about the thing why should wee coÌ„tend about the names By the way as I did not disallow the Fathers in that matter whereuppon the question is so can I not but loue the zeale of our men which do therefore hate those names because they are afraide least with the names the old ambition and tirannie should bee brought in againe to the destruction of the church Aphorisme 12. For neither did Christ ordaine any such head neither would the fathers admit therof because it was not expedient for the church but contented themselues with the foure Patriarches of Rome Constantinople Antioch and Alexandria all which were of an equall authoritie and power and euery of them conteined within his owne bounds as also it was decreed in the couÌ„cel at Nice coÌ„firmed in others that not without many very weightie causes whereof in my iudgement this was not one of the least least there should bee a doore set open to tirannie in the church but rather if that any one durst attempt any thing against the sound doctrin of Christ against the libertie of the church then the other archbishops with their bishops of no lesse authoritie might oppose themselues against him suppresse his insolencie and cut of his tiranny The church in respect of Christ is a kingdome in respect of men which are in it and ether rule or be ruled it is an Aristocracie Aphorisme 21. These be two questions farre differeÌ„t whether bishops may also be princes and princes bishopps keeping also their principalities in their hands and whether they which are both bishops and princes besids their ecclesiastical authoritie may also haue ciuill power ouer those that are their subiects and so whether their subiects must obey them as princes or not In my Aphorisme I spake not one word of the former question for it was not needful but onely of the latter Now who seeth not how I shewed by apparent demonstrations that princes must be wholly obeyed howsoeuer rightfullie or wrongfullie they bee made princes For why should not they that are subiects both to the princes and Archbishops of Colone Mentz and Treuers in matters that are not repugnant to christian pietie be obedient vnto them Surely it were meere sedition in them not to obey them And if to these why should not they also which are within the iurisdiction of the bishop of Rome in the same matters for the same cause obey him For there is one and the same reason of them all Of the former question as I saye I spake not at all neither purposed I nowe in this briefe confession to discourse thereof knowing that all are not herein of one opinion much may be said to and fro both wayes that place in the 20 of Mat. Yee know that the Lords of the Gentiles haue dominion ouer them and they that are great exercise authoritie ouer them But it shall not bee so among you some expound it one waye of the Apostles onely and ministers of the word others another waye of all Christs disciples and all christians An appendix to the eleuenth chap. Of Christ the redeemer or of the person of Christ THey which write that the essentiall proprieties of the diuine nature are reallie communicated to the humaine nature not that they be in the same either essentiallie and formally or subiectiuelie and habitually but onely by the reason and respect of the personall or Hypostaticall vnion for so they speake darkelie indeede and ambiguouslie when both they might and ought to speake plainer if they meane this in no other sense then as Vigilius writ and thought namely that the proprieties of the natures are made proper to Christ himselfe but are common to the natures betwixt themselues not in theÌ„selues but in Christ that is in his person I will not surelie gainesay them neither do I thinke that any good or learned man will gainesay them For Vigilius according to the catholick churches doctrine speaking out of the councell at Calcedon said and declared that the proprieties of the humaine nature were made commoÌ„ to the diuine in the verie same sense that the diuine are also saide to bee communicated to the humaine But now these proprieties of the humanitie as to suffer or to die are so communicated to the deitie that for all that yet the verie deitie is not made in verie deede passible or mortall the cause whereof Vigilius setteth downe to be this namelie because to die and to suffer are not made common to the deitie but onely in the person so that they can not truely be said but of the humaine nature by it selfe and of the person in respect of the humaine nature Wherefore we must euen so thinke and saye altogether of the communication of the diuine proprieties Vigilius owne wordes bee these booke 5. chap. 2. And now sith out intention is chiefly bent against those which following the error of one nature doe with a willfull obstinacie resist the decree of the Calcedon councell I thinke it not amisse for the remoouing of their vaine contradictions and beating to peeces their glassie opinions with the mallett of truth to rehearse some fewe things concerning the humaine nature of the sonne of God which they euerie waye denie to be in him and to shew what want of christianity is in them and how farre of they bee from the hope of euerlasting life It is a rule of the catholick faith to confesse one and the same Lord Iesus Christ as true God so also true man one of them both not two into one the same without all time borne of the father the same in time borne of the virgine so that each of these births do so hold on Christ that he suffred not any losse in either retaining in himself that was proper to him both waies that is that the nature of the word should not be chauÌ„ged in the flesh the nature of the flesh was not swallowed vpp in the word Hereuppon the same Lord Iesus Christ

is true God and the same true man existing vnspeakably of two natures vnited together in one person in the virgines wombe which natures seing that in this wonderfull covnion they are not abolished in him to shew a plaine extance and appearance of the proprietie of them both in himselfe being one he did and spake thinges belonging to both not deuiding the wordes nor parting the aspects nor seperating his deeds but he himself being one speaking and doing in himself and by both that which was agreeable and was proper to both natures And to make it more plaine which we haue said let vs vse an example as thus I my selfe am hee which with my bodilie eyes doe behold a white colour or a blacke and againe I am hee which by sight of my minde doe iudge of the euill of iniquitie and the good of righteousnesse yet notwithstaÌ„ding I am not now diuers persons because I doe both these in a diuerse respect For I doe not see the difference of coulours with the same eyes with which I see the diuersitie of speaches and yet I am the verie same which doe this both the wayes both are in me not to see righteousnesse but onely with the eyes of my minde and it is in me not to see colours but onely with the eyes of my flesh and it is in me not to heare wordes with my eyes and in me not to see light with my eares in me not to iudge of tastes with my nose and in me not to perceiue smelling at my mouth And whereas it is wholly mine owne proprietie in my selfe to see to heare to smel to taste and yet it is one thing in me whereby I see another whereby I heare another wherby I taste or smell and all this being in me wholly and yet in a certaine priuate respect deuided and diuers I my selfe notwithstaÌ„ding cannot be deuided or seperated So therefore Christ himselfe also being one and the same created and not created hauing beginning being without beginning growing in age vnderstanding and receiuing no increase of age and vnderstanding suffering death not yeelding to the lawes of death receiuing honor for his desert yet hauing need of no maÌ„s honor and al these things being diuers in him yet are meerely proper vnto himselfe And therfore he diuideth not in himself the words affects and deedes agreeable both wayes in himselfe because both are properly his owne yet hauing one proprietie by the nature of the word which remaining God he lost not and another by the nature of the flesh which being made man hee receiued Wee will yet speake more to confirme more plainely this one nature for their sakes which through their vnsaide skilfullnesse not vnderstanding the proprietie and communion of the natures howe it is said to be in Christ do abuse and vtterly refuse the same words It is diuerse and another thing not to haue beginning and to subsist by a beginning to die and not to bee able to suffer yet as they are both proper vnto Christ so are they both common not vnto him but in him For if wee say common vnto him we must needs bee vrged and driuen to giue and shew some other with whom the same should be common vnto him which necessity of instance cannot but incline to the impious opinion of Nestorius We therfore better and more catholically saye it is common in him and not to him and so wee say better it is proper to him and not in him Therefore it is proper to him to dye by the nature of his flesh which is mortall and it is proper to him not to dye by the nature of the vvord which cannot dye Likewise by that vnspeakable misterie of the vnion of both the natures the mortallitie of the flesh was common in him to the nature of the vvord which could not dye and the immortalitie of the vvorde was common in him to the nature of the flesh which yeelded to death Therefore as it is proper vnto him in respect of both natures to dye and not to dye so it is common in him in both natures to doe that which is their proprietie and as I maye for example sake say it is proper to me to carry the marke of the blacknesse of a stroakein my bodie by the nature of my flesh so it is proper to me to carrie the stripe of a word that is of some hard speach in my minde by the nature of my soule and it is also proper to me not to carrie the same stripe of wordes in my bodie by the nature of my flesh And sith both these are proper to me and both of them different from my bodie and from my soule because neither my bodie vnderstandeth anie hard or any pleasing speaches neither can my soule be made blacke by the stroake of a whipp yet both these are common in my selfe both to my soule and to my body because neither my soule placed out of my bodie doth feele that which is proper to it to feele nor my bodie without the companie of my soule can carrie the marks of the blowes That therefore which is proper vnto me in either of them and yer different from neither of them that is common in my whole selfe to either of them which is proper to either of them And yet I am the verie same in them both being both of them common in me and I am the very same in either of them being both proper to me This saith Vigilius What can more fittly be said for the deciding of this present controuersie of the reall communication of the proprieties For this whole treatise of Vigilius is resolued into these speciall propositions pertaining to our cause For setting first downe a rule of the catholicke faith which in the text is marked with the letter A then from the same hee draweth certaine positions by which he manifestly confuteth the heresie of Eutyches The summe of that rule of faith is this that one and the same Christ is God and man both natures are kept whole in him Out of this rule Vigilius gathered these positions 1 The Lord Iesus Christ is the same true God and the same true man The reason for he existeth of two natures the diuine and the humaine vnspeakablie ioyned and vnited together in one person and that in the virgins wombe This is against Nestorius against Eutyches is added another position 2 These natures in that wonderfull covnion are not abolished in Christ The confirmation followeth by the life of Christ because the Lord Iesus both by his sayings and deeds did shew that the proprieties of both the natures remained safe and whole in him therefore he addeth 3 To she we an extancie that is an existence of the proprieties of them both in himselfe being one namely that the proprieties of both the natures did exist distinct in him he spake and did things of both natures himselfe being one This is also against Eutyches But how namely so that

is truely attributed also to the diuine nature But how can that be sith passion cannot fal into it It is therefore common to it to suffer not in the owne essence for that nether could nor can suffer but in Christ that is in the person of Christ which consisteth of the two natures and therefore which onely according to the flesh suffred so that in the proper essence of the deitie thereis no passion but it is onely in the common person by reason of the flesh and consequently God is also said to haue suffered when notwithstanding the deitie suffred nothing but onely the person of god man that is he which is God and man suffred according to the flesh I will rehearse this againe The proprieties for example of the humaine nature as to suffer to die they are therefore said to be common to the deitie because the deitie also hath them For if in no sort it had theÌ„ the same could be said no wayes to be made coÌ„mon to it with the flesh Now then they are truely said to be commoÌ„ to the deitie with the humanitie not simplie but in Christ because it hath them not in it selfe that is in the owne essence as the flesh hath but onely in the person of Christ which is one and the same person of both the natures seing it subsisteth in both of them The soule also hath the proprieties of the body common vnto it selfe not in it owne essence as the bodie but in the person of man who as he consisteth of them both as being his essentiall partes so also he hath in himselfe really the proprieties of them both so as he may truely be said to be visible and inuisible mortall and immortall This which is said of the proprieties of the humaine nature common with the diuine not in the proper essence of it but in the common person of both the natures that the same also is to be thought and saide of the diuine proprieties with the humaine we are taught by Vigilius bishop and martyr These things being in very deed thus it hereupon is to bee gathered what manner of speaches may be thought agreeable to these matters If a propriety of the flesh as to suffer be in some sort common to the deitie theÌ„ it may in some sort be said of the deitie If it bee not in such wise common to the same as to haue it in it selfe as in it owne essence nor as an essentiall parte of it selfe nor as an accident in the subiect then the deitie cannot bee said in it owne essence to bee subiect to passion But if it bee common vnto it onely in person then to suffer cannot be said of the deitie in the abstract but onely in the Concrete this is by such a worde wherein the deitie maye bee so signified as the person may bee signified with it such as bee the Concrete names as God For by this name so farre forth as therein is signified the person of Christ which is also God and not bare man it is truely and really said that God did suffer and died yet not fimplie and according to his deitie also but onely according to the flesh whose propertie it is to suffer and to dye Wherefore as this is most true God suffered so this is most false the deitie suffred or that Christ also according to his diuine nature suffred This is the doctrine of Vigilius and the whole church But seing that which Vigilius hath deliuered of the proprieties and communion of the natures is indifferently said of all the proprieties and their communion in Christ so that by this hypostaticall or personall vnion the diuine proprieties are said to be made commoÌ„ to the humanitie in the same sense that the humaine are to the diuinitie namely not in the essences of the natures themselues but onely in Christ and in the person of Christ it followeth like as the proposition is impious the deny by reason of the vnion with the flesh in the person of the sonce of god is made partaker of passion in it owne essence so also this is blasphemous the humaine nature by reason of the vnion with the diuine receiueth of it that it is omnipotent really in it ovvne essence c. Now if we add that which the same Vigilius left in writing out of the common consent of the whole church booke 4. chap. 4. this doctrine which we shewed eueÌ„ now out of him will more plainely appeare For disputing against the Monophysites defenders of one nature he plainely prooueth by the diuers proprieties which were seene in one the same Christ and which the holy Scriptures do speak of that the word and the flesh cannot bee in him all one nature he bringeth a reason because one nature cannot receiue in it selfe any thing that is contrary diuers besides other things he also writeth thus Moreouer if there be but one nature of the word and of the flesh how can it be but that the worde being in all places the flesh must be fouÌ„d in al places too For doubtlesse when it was on earth then was it not in heaueÌ„ now being in heaueÌ„ it is not likewise on earth yea it is so farre from being on earth as that according to it we looke for Christ to come downe from heauen whome according to the word we beleeue to bee with vs on earth Therefore according to your opinions either the word with his flesh is contained within one place or the flesh with the word is in all places whereas one nature cannot receiue in it selfe any contrarie or diuers things But it is verie contrarie and farre different to be circumscribed or contained in one place and to be euerie where and seing the word is euerie where and the flesh is not euerie where it appeareth that one the same Christ is of both natures and that he is euerie where according to the nature of his diuinitie and is contained in a place according to the nature of his humanitie that he hath beene created and hath no beginning that he hath died and hath not bin able to dye the one he hath by the nature of the word whereby he is God the other by the nature of the flesh whereby the same God is man Wherefore this one the sonne of God the same made the sonne of man hath a beginning by the nature of his flesh and hath no beginning by the nature of his diuinitie he was created by the nature of his flesh and was not created by the nature of his diuinitie hee is circumscribed by the nature of his flesh and is not contained within place by the nature of his diuinity he is lesse also then the angels by the nature of his flesh and is equall to the father according to the nature of his diuinitie he died by nature of his flesh died not by nature of his diuinitie This is the catholick faith and confession which the Apostles deliuered the

God Of the first the Apostle Saint Paule saieth VVee are predestinated into the adoption of the sonnes of God and therefore to a heauenlie inheritance of the other that it was done for the praise of the glory of his grace 6 The saluation therefore of the elect in Iesus Christ is certaine and necessarie the foundation whereof is the ternall free and vnchaungable purpose of the will of God 7 Who so haue beene chosen from the beginning in Christ vnto life euerlasting and to the meanes thereunto all they and onely they in the time appointed of the father ver 7 which is called the fulnesse of time were in verie deede through Christ and in Christ redeemed from their sinnes and so from the euill which followeth sinnes the Apostle saying in Iesus Christ vvee haue redemption euen remission of sinnes 8 Neither were we redeemed Tit. 3. v. 5 ver 7. according to the merits works of righteousnes which we haue done but according to the mercies of God and according to the riches of his grace by the blood of Christ Iesus both which are manifestly confirmed by the Apostle 9 And albeit the eternall father redeemed saued vs by his sonne by whome he also created vs yet the â—onne is he which by an especiall respect the church of God vseth to call the redeemer of mankinde and our Sauiour 10 For the Sonne alone Lev. 25. ver 48.49 was and is God and man and he alone had the right of proprietie as they call it or of kindred to redeeme vs hee alone shedd his blood whereby as by a ransome we were redeemed Lastlie he it is alone in whose person our redemption is made perfect and accomplished 11 By the name of this ransome which wee are said to haue in Christ â— Cor. 1. v. 30 wee meane that full and accomplished redemption in as much as it containeth not onely remission of sinnes in this life but also in the life to come after this a perfect deliuerance from all ill and from the bondage of all corruption so that there is no ransome which we haue not in Christ our most perfect redeemer who as he is made vnto vs by God our wisedome righteousnes sanctification so also our redemption Of the resurrection of Christ Iesus from the dead his ascension into heauen and sitting at Gods right hand out of the first of Paule to the Ephesians yeare 1581. 1 GOd did effectually shewe the greatnes of his power in Christ Eph. 1. â—â— by raising him from the dead therefore onely God by his infinite power is the efficient cause of the resurrection of Christ and all the dead 2 Yea but Christ also by his power raised him selfe from death as he said destroy this temple Ioh. 2.19 and in three dayes I will build it vp but hee spake of the temple of his bodie and that Ioh. 10.17 I lay downe my life that I may take it againe Christ therefore is no lesse God then the father neither is hee God of lesser might 3 But one and the same cannot be truely the raiser and the raised from the dead vnlesse he consist of diuers natures of the diuine according to which he doth raise and the humane according to which he is raised Therefore the same Christ as he is true God coessentiall with the father so hee is true man coessentiall with his mother and his brethren 4 Neither can any bee truely said to be raised and to rise from the dead vnlesse the same bee truely said to be dead and to haue died But death consisteth in a true separation of the soule froÌ„ the bodie whereby the body which dieth may presently bee rightly called a dead carkasse Christ then if he truely rose from the dead it can by no meanes be denied but that he also truely died his soule being truely separated from his bodie 5 If then sith he truely died neither his soule for that time of his death was in his bodie neither sith he was truely buried his bodie while it honge vppon the crosse was in the graue or while it lay in the graue hong vppon the crosse neither sith God truely raised him from the dead either his soule recalled his body or his body recalled himselfe from death to life therefore the humane nature in Christ was neither omnipotent nor euery where present in it owne substance 6 For as this consequence is not good Christ Iesus himselfe was dead and buried and rose againe from the dead therefore he was dead and buried and rose againe according to both his natures So neither is this behold I am vvith you euen to the ende of the vvorlde therefore not onely in his deitie but also in the substance of his humanitie hee is really present with vs on the earth 7 But as this consequence is good Christ being God suffered therefore he suffered not according to his deitie but according to his humanitie so is this other Christ Iesus being man is euerie where and simply omnipotent therefore he is euery where and omnipotent not according to his humanitie but according to his deitie seing the diuine nature is no lesse vnited to the humane then the humane is to the diuine in the same person of Christ Iesus 8 If God himselfe and so the diuine nature in Christ raised his body from the dead not by the same bodie but by it selfe namely by the diuine nature then it is false that the diuine nature in Christ did all things and doeth not onely in and with but also by the humane nature 9 For the soule of Christ Iesus doth not work all thinges by the bodie as neither doe our mindes vnderstand or will thinges by the bodies and that for this cause that as the philosophers also taught our minde dependeth not on the bodie Much lesse then doth the deitie of Christ worke all thinges by the flesh which it tooke 10 For doth the deitie vnderstand by the humane vnderstanding or doeth it will by the humane will or doth it keepe or sustaien the humane nature in the person of the word by the verie same humane nature or doth it beare all thinges by the humane flesh or rather by the word of it owne vertue Lastlie if the forme of God doe nothing but by the forme of a seruant how can that saying of Leo be true each fo rme doth the propertie of it selfe vvith communion of the other 11 Like as therefore the forme of God is one and the forme of a seruant another so the actions and proprieties of the one and of the other be diuers though manie times both the one the other haue one and the same worke and operacion 12 Wherefore this is no coÌ„sequence to whomsoeuer Christ commeth with the father according to the forme of God to him he also commeth and abideth in him in his owne substaÌ„ce according to the forme of a seruant much lesse that he is so euery where 13 Further

like as no other but the verie same Christ rose from the dead so he rose in no other but in the verie same bodie in which he suffred died and was buried 14 For he could not be truely said to be raised and to rise from the dead except that which truely died the verie same quickened againe should rise againe 15 Now the bodie wherein Christ suffred died and was buried was a true humane bodie visible palpable circumscribed Therefore Christ after his resurrection had and retained no body but that which was circumscribed in a certaine place and wheresoeuer it was and is might and may be seene and handled 16 Add also that the Apostle carefully discoursing of the qualities with which our bodies being raised vp to eternall life shal be indued he saith not that they shal not be subiect either to the eye or to the touch or not bee circumscribed in a definite place but he rehearseth onely incorruption glorie and power as is the agilitie thereof and that they shall rise spirituall not that the corporall substance shal be chaunged into an incorporeall but that they shal be as the greeks call it immortall and shal be full of the holie spirite dwelling and working in them The Apostle therefore taught that these are qualities neuer to bee seperated from the bodies namely that they shal be circumscribed visible palpable Wherefore neither did Christs body after his resurrection put of these qualities 17 Neither is that exception any thing that Christ after he was risen came in to his disciples the dores beeing shut For it was not therefore either made vnvisible or vncircumscribed or vnpalpable seeing Christ being come in and seene of his disciples presently saide Feele or handle and see Luc. 24. for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me haue And therefore as the Fathers teach there was no chaunge made of Christs bodie no more then there was when he or Peter walked vpon the waters but by the omnipotency of his diety hauing power ouer all things the doores gaue place to the true and firme bodie of the sonne of God 18 Wherefore not without cause did the Fathers condemne not onely Marcion the Maniches and others which taught that Christ tooke not a true and firme humane bodie but a phantasticall one and did all things according to imagination and phantasie but also the Originists Iohn of Hierusalem and Euticius of Constantinople Hier. tom 12. ad PaÌ„mach Greg. in Iob. lib. 24 c. 29. Bishops and others which said that Christs bodie after his resurrectioÌ„ was made so spirituall that it was more thinne then ayre and therefore invisible and vnpalpable 19 Seeing then that in the supper no other bodie of Christ is giuen vs to be eaten but that which was broken for vs that is truely suffered and died it followeth that Christs ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ body which we eate in the Supper is truely circumscribed visible and palpable and consequently seeing nothing is seene touched or perceiued in the Supper besides bread the same body cannot in it owne substance really be contained vnder the formes of bread and wine or lie hidden in the very bread and wine 20 Nowe we acknowledge the resurrection of Christ is both the cause and an example of our as well spirituall as corporall resurrection The cause of the spirituall because the Apostle saith to the Rom. 4. he rose againe for our iustification and an example because he saith Rom. 6. we are burâ—ed togither with him by baptisme into his death that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father so we also should vwalke in newenesse of life 21 But that he is the cause of our corporall resurrection we doubt not 1. Cor. 5. for that the Apostle saith If Christ be risen againe we shall also rise againe and for that he also saith Christ is the first fruits of them that rise and an example for that the same Apostle also writeth he shall chaunge our vile bodies Phil 3.21 that they shall be like his glorious bodie 22 Wherupon It also followeth either Christs bodie not to be invisible vnpalpable vncircumscribed and so not spirituall bodies but incorporall spirits 23 For where Christ saith Feele and see for a spirite hath not flesh and bones as yee see me haue hee did not onely conclude that himselfe was no spirite but he especially taught this that there is no flesh nor bones but may bee seene and felt 24 The Scripture teacheth and the church coÌ„fesseth that our Lord Iesus Christ being raised from the dead did shew vnto his disciples for fortie daies space by many arguments that he was truely risen and then euen in the beholding of the Apostles that he was lifted vpp from the earth ascended into heauen Therfore like as no other Christ rose againe then he which died so no other ascended into heauen nor in no other body then he in which that truely rose againe froÌ„ the dead the sonne of God truely humane visible palpable and circumscribed 25 Wherefore as the conuersation of the same Lord Iesus Christ wherein he conuersed amoÌ„g his Apostles after his refurrection for fortie daies space was not fantasticall but reall and true so also his ascension was not onely visible but also truely as the fathers say locall when the Apostles sawe him ascend from the earth vp into heruen 26 But such an ascension and mouing cannot agree to his divine nature therefore he ascended according to his humane nature 27 Yet by the way we denie not this but that Christ as God like as he is said to haue descended from heauen in respect that he abased himselfe taking vpon him the vile forme of a seruant and suffred in it so also it may rightly be said that he is exalted and ascended vp into heauen namely in respect that in the very same forme of a seruant when it was glorified euen the forme of God was after a sort glorified by his ascention and after it that is was made glorious in the wholle world 28 But it is apparent that as this consequence is not good Christ himselfe beeing God and man ascended into heauen in a locall and visible moouing Therefore he in the same sort ascended according to his dietie so neither is this good Christ God and man is with us to the ende of the world truely and in his owne essence therefore he is present on earth as wel in the substance of his body and soule as in the essence of his dietie 29 If also the Apostles sawe with their eies Christan his owne body by chaunge of place ascending from earth into heauen then the heauen into which he did ascend caÌ„not be an vbiquitary heauen but it must needes be farre distant from the earth 30 Moreover nature and all right requireth that for every thing some certeÌ„ place must be assigned as we see god hath done in all the things which he created Seing then no created thing

can be found more excellent then Christs body both for the vnion with the word and for the wonderfull gifts created in the same and so also for the most perfect glorie and happines wherein he nowe liveth It must needes be that this bodie must exist in some certaine most happie place 31 Neither can it proceede but onely from trupiety and from our true reverence towardes Christ that we should beleeue that his body doth dwell not vnder the earth not in the earth not in the waters not in a peece of bread not in every leafe of a tree not in the ayre or in the celestiall speres but in a place as the most happie faire perfect so the highest of al others which we with Ambrose think the Apostle spake of when he said that he was caught vp 2. Cor. 12.2 4. into the third heaven and into paradise 32 To this the same scripture also teacheth the Catholike faith beleeueth and confesseth that the same Iesus Christ shall come out of that heauen in the cloudes Phil. 3.20 1. Thes 4.16 1. Thes 4.17 to iudge the quicke and the dead and that we beeing raised from the dead shall be caught vp into the aire to meete him in the cloudes and so shall be with him in that heauen for euer 33 And this heauen Ioh. 14.2 which is called the Fathers house and the heauenly citty and by many other names The scripture prooueth to be placed aboue all the visible and mooveable heaueÌ„s saying that Christ is ascended aboue all heauens Eph. 4.16 and that he is in heauen 34 For this heauen wherein he is in his body and wherein we shall be in our bodies and soules cannot be some vast and I knowe not what vncreated roome partly because nothing is vncreated but God partly because it is plainely to the Hebr. Heb. 11.10 said to be Gods workmaÌ„ship 35 Moreover the chiefe and principall efficient cause of that moouing wherein his bodie was carried vp into heauen was the divine nature remaining in him according to that to the Phil. 2. God hath exalted him And he was taken vp of God into glory But a secondary efficient cause was the gift of agility which followed his glorious resurrection bestowed on the humane nature by the diety by which agility that flesh ascended vp not held and sustained by angels or by the cloudes as once Elias was in the fierie chariot but of it owne accord and without trouble or difficultie and therefore that motion was not a violent motion 36 Now this ascention of Christ our head was the cause and the example of our ascension which shal be into heaven For sith the head is ascended it must needes be that the members shall ascend and as his ascension was so ours shall bee For he shall chaunge our vile bodies to be like to his glorious body and we shall be caught vp into the cloudes to meete Christ in the ayre and so we shall be with the Lord for euer 37 If then ours shall be a true ascention and that we shall truely be lifted from the earth into heauen Therefore Christs body also did truely ascend from earth into heauen not imaginarily or putatively 38 And this doctrine of Christs true ascention into that highest heauen and his perpetuall abiding there is most profitable and full of coÌ„solation 39 For first it serueth to strengthen our faith about the certaine place where with the eyes and hands of our faith we may behold touch and take hold of the body of Christ Then to establish our hope namely that it shall be that before the resurrection of our bodies our soules beeing separated from our bodies they shall neither discend beneath the earth nor shall flote in the waters or the aire nor roule about with the spheres but shall be carried aboue all these heauens to that blessed and heauenly house of the Father into which Christ in his body is already entred that they may be euer with Christ Lastly to kindle in our hearts the loue and desire of a heauenly life and conversation as the Apostle saith If ye be risen vvith Christ seeke those things which are aboue set your affections on thinges vvhich are aboue vvhere Christ sitteth at the right hand of God 40 Of Christs sitting at the right hand of the father thus speaketh the Apostle And hath set him Christ raised from the dead and carried vp into heauen in the heauenly places farre aboue all principallities and power and might domination and euerie name that is named not onely in this vvorld but also in that which is to come and hath made all thinges subiect vnder his feete c. YVhatsoeuer is read otherwise in the holy scripture or confessed by the church in the Creedes concerning this sitting is agreeable vnto this 41 But we caÌ„ no where read that for this sitting at Gods right hand either Christ Iesus tooke any other body call it howesoeuer or that in his naturall body there was any chauÌ„ge made of the substance of it or of any of those naturall qualities and essentiall proprieties which it retained after his resurrection It is therefore manifest that in what body Christ rose and ascended into heauen namely a visible palpable and circumscribed body in the same he also sitteth at the Fathers right hand in the highest heauens and wheresoeuer he is or pleaseth to be he keepeth still to himselfe such a body 42 The Apostle also witnesseth and the church confesseth in the Creedes that Christ first died was buried raised from the dead and taken vp into heauen before he fare at the Fathers right hand Therefore either it is false that Christs humaine nature theÌ„ first receiued a gift for substance of his body to be really euery where or if it be true then it receiued it not by the hypostaticall vnion which was made in his very incarnation 43 Neither is this exception any thing that by the hypostaticall vnion this was giuen him in the first act as that if he would he might be present every where but by the sitting at Gods right hand it was giuen him in the second act that is that he was indeed present every where 44 For besides that the tearmes of this distinction are tearmes not taken from the fountaines of Israel but out of the puddles of sophisters Christ himselfe also refelleth this exception when speaking not of the first act but of the second that is of his actuall presence he said both a little before his death Where two or three shall be gathered together in my name there am I in the middest of them and after his resurrection bofore his ascension he said Beholde I am vvith you even to the ende of the world 45 By those sayings it evidently appeareth that either Christ spake not of the reall preseÌ„ce of his body but onely of the presence of his diety and power of his spirit or that he is present to vs

in the same manner that he was to the Apostles namely visibly seeing he saide not I will be but I am neither is there any necessity to alter the sense of those wordes 46 Adde this that if he speake of the same reall presence of his body and that this promise pertained not to the Apostles onely but also to all the faithfull which were then in the world Christ had not spoken a trueth For he was not before his death or after his Resurrection present in a visible presence with all the faithfull which were then in the world and which were gathered together in his name 47 VVherefore the doctrine of the reall and substantiall yet invisible presence of the body of Christ Iesus on the earth and euerie where is not agreeable with the holy scriptures but seemeth to come neere to the Maniches who as Augustine sheweth against Faustus saie that Christs bodie doth invisiblie hang on euerie tree 48 If Christ also satte not at Gods right hand in his bodie before his resurrection and ascension into heauen as the wholle Church confesseth then their doctrine is impious and hereticall which teacheth that Christ Iesus euen from his mothers wombe according to the flesh he tooke hath sitteth at the right hand of Gods power 49 If this also be true which the Apostle teacheth and the whole scripture confirmeth and the Catholike Church confesseth that Christ Iesus not only then sate at his Fathers right hand after he ascended into heauen but also is so placed in the same at Gods right hand as he is neuer read to sitte at such a right hand in any other place then in heauen therefore then it cannot onely not be saide according to the holy scriptures that Christ Iesus sitteth any other where at God the Father his right hand then in heauen but also it is false that he also so sitteth in the earth that he is no lesse present really in substance of his body in the bread of the Lords supper and in euerie place then he is in heauen 50 For the Apostle also in other places and specially in the epistle of S. Paule to the Hebrues denieth that he is vpon the earth namely in a corporall presence for as much as hee sitting at the right hand of the throne of maiestie in heauen executeth his office of priesthood 51 Moreouet wee hold beyond all controuersie that Christ sitting at Gods right hand is a figuratiue speach seing God to speake properly hath neither right hand nor left hand neither is it lawfull to imagine any carnall thing concerning the seates and thrones in heauen wherein they are saide to sitt and often-times in the scriptures this word sitting is vsed besides other significations for dwelling ruling exercising iudgment and for resting 52 But that the Apostle Paule ment not by this phrase that Christ Iesus in his owne bodie is truely and substantially present in all places besides that which hath bin already saide it is also euident by that which for declaration sake he adioyneth 53 For to this sitting of Christ at Gods right hand the Apostle addeth for declaration sake three thinges First that Christ is so placed at Gods right hand that he is aboue all principallitie that is that he hath no creature aboue him or equall to him no not in heauen but is made higher then the heauens and al heauenly things then he addeth that all thinges are made subiect to him that is that there is nothing beneath him ouer which he hath not power and authoritie thirdly that he was giuen to be a head of the church 54 Now as we said that whatsoeuer wee haue before spoken of the resurrection from the dead and so of the ascension ought to bee vnderstood according to the humane nature of Christ so wee thinke with the sound fathers that these thinges also must bee vnderstood especially according to the same humane nature 55 The exaltation of Christs humane nature aboue al things may be vnderstood two waies either in re-pect of the locall placing as this he ascended aboue all the heauens that the meaning may be the humane nature was placed locally aboue all created things or in respect of the excelleÌ„t preheminence of the dignitie and power thereof then the meaning may be Christ euen touching his humane nature was set ouer all created thinges and to him was giuen power and authoritie ouer all things For in these two manners any thing of the same kinde is said to bee ouer another eiin place or in dignitie 56 If then this saying be vnderstood the latter waye thereupon the vbiquitie cannot be proued seing Christ in that in his humane nature he may vse his authoritie ouer all creatures although he be not in substance of body euerie where If the former way then he is not euery where seing that which is euerie where is aswell beneath and at and within as aboue all creatures 57 But Paule doeth plainely teach that Christ touching his humane nature did so rise from the dead that hee was no longer among the dead and so ascended into heauen that hee was no longer on earth and so being exalted aboue all creatures sitteth at the fathers right hand that he is nether beneath nor within created things seing all thinges are put vnder his feete 58 Neither can the head bee saide to bee in it owne substance where the feete are although it be in them in vertue and operation and indeed aswell the head to the feete as the feet to the head are ioyned together in their substaÌ„ce by the sinues and by the soule 59 But the Apostle saieth Christ Iesus is giuen for a head of the church namely according to his humanitie nowe the head is aboue all the bodie 60 The Apostle therefore ment nothing lesse by his wordes of Christs sitting at Gods right hand then to conclude that Christs bodie in it owne substance is present in all places Wherefore they doe great wrong to the Apostle which by their cauills labour to conclude this out of his words 61 Neither can any such Vbiquitie be proued by any necessary consequence out of that article of faith 62 For although it were graunted which cannot bee graunted that by the sitting at Gods right hand the humane nature is made truely by it selfe omnipotent yet vnlesse it bee prooued to bee so made omnipotent that it is also made infinite and immeasurable it can by no meanes bee conuinced that Christs bodie in it owne substance is euerie where present 63 For so is this the onely cause why God also in his owne essence is euerie where that if ye take immeasurablenesse from him he cannot be saide to be euery where in his owne essence 64 And if also yee faine an infinite body and therefore euerie where yet that it is whollie in all places at once you shall neuer prooue while the world stands vnlesse yee can shewe that the same body is also a most simple essence seing God is

chaunge nor confusion among themselues or among there proprieties so also the actioÌ„s are so the actions of one and the same person that yet they are truely distinguished betwixt themselues and so distinguished that those which proceed from the one nature and are proper thereunto they although they be done with the communion of the other yet it is not lawfull to say that they be done by the other or that Christ doth them according to the other nature 13 Where fore like as wee allowe the fathers when they saye that Christs actions in redeeming sauing vs were are done by god man so also we greatly commend that famous saying of Leo the bishop of Rome in his epistle to Flauianus we teach that it is with a stedfast faith to be holden namely Each forme vvorketh with communion of the other that which is proper to it selfe as the word working that vvhich is proper to the word and the flesh performing that which is proper to the flesh 14 For he suffred for vs died and was buried according to the flesh but he gaue the grace of deseruing and redeeming to his suffring by which he redeemed vs according to his deitie but all these he willed according to both the natures 15 Also he rose from the dead ver 20.21 and ascended in a visible and locall ascension into heauen exalted aboue all Angels according to his humanity yet he wrought the same resurrection ascension and exaltation according to his diuinity but he willed it according to the will of both the natures 16 Like as then we beleeue that Christ redeemed vs according to both the natures according to that God purchased his Church by his owne blood so also we doubt not but the same Christ sitteth at his Fathers right hand and resteth in the heauenly places gouerning all thinges with his Father and dispenseth and communicateth the grace of redemption and euerlasting salvatioÌ„ to the wholle church which is his bodie and to euerie member according to both his natures the word working that which is proper to the word the flesh that which belongeth to the flesh 17 For although he vseth the ministerie of the word and sacraments by men to the imparting of salvation vnto vs yet the same Christ both as he is God and as he is man is properly the very same which calleth vs giueth vnto vs faith and repentance and he iustifieth regenerateth quickeneth and bringeth into eternall life all that beleeue by the working of the power of his might 18 For this cause also our faith whereby we take holde of saluation in Christ and eternall life must not respect and rely vpon either the one or the other nature of Christ severally but on whole Christ himselfe as the Ephesians were said to haue faith in the Lord Iesus 19 Whereon it followeth that who so do deny either the one or the other nature in Christ or deuide the one from the other or confouÌ„d theÌ„ both together so that they acknowledge him not for true God and true man in all things sinne excepted like vnto vs and imbrace him not for such and therefore for a true and perfect redeemer they can neuer be made partakers of redemption and eternal saluation 20 For as he that beleeueth in Christ such as he is hath life eternall so he that beleeueth not cannot haue it Of those thinges which are spoken of our Lord Iesus Christ after the vnion and in what sort they are spoken Out of the 1. to the Ephesians Positions Anno 1582. 1 THe Apostle writeth that Christ was raised from the dead and therefore he truely diâ—â—â—â—â—d in another place The Lord of glory was ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ yea we often read howe the sonne of man was deliuered vnto death But in all these enunciations the speach is ever of the same person namely the sonne of God incarnate Therfore the person of Christ which is in these propositions the subiect or that whereof another thing is spoken is vsed to be signified by 3. kindes of names namely by those which betoken the divine nature onely and that sometime in respect of the essence sometime in respect of the hypostasie or persons as The lord of glory the onely begotten sonne of God or which betoken in like sort the humaine nature onely as Man the sonne of Mary or which betokeÌ„ both natures togither as Christ Immanuell god incarnate 2 We adde herevnto that Christs verie persoÌ„ is signified by those names also which are taken from the offices of a mediatour as these Amediatour a Redeemer a Saviour a high priest an Advocate and such like But these may be referred to the third kind because by them are shewed and made known both the natures in one person 3 The concrete names which haue denomination of the natures as Man of the humanity and God of the diety when in speaking of Christ they be the subiects or the first part of the enunciation or sentence they haue two significations one formall as the schooles say and the other materiall of which by the former is meant the verie nature by the other the person which hath such a nature whereof it taketh denomination 4 For as names in the abstract do signifie only the nature and propriety which is in a thing so all names in the concreat doe betokeÌ„ both the nature and qualitie which is in the thing and the hypostasis wherein it is as for examples sake the name of Iust betokeneth both Iustice wher with one is made iust him which is Iust both together 5 Therefore by these Subiect names which hauing their denominations from the natures do shewe the person of Christ sometimes is declared the propriety of the natures sometime the vnity of the person and therefore the Subiects must be vnderstood and expounded according to the diversities of the Praedicates that is of those things which are spoken thereof 6 In this proposition the sonne of God is eternall the subiect namely the sonne of God must be expounded according to the proprietie of the nature But in this the onely begotten sonne of God suffered the subiect the onely begotten sonne of God must be vnderstood according to the vnity of the person For he suffered which was not onely man but also God yet the dietie remaining vnpassible 7 We denie not but manie times are found wordes in the abstract which are the Subiects as the light came into the world as also some which are Predicats as Christ is the light of the world our righteousnesse our peace but these stâ—Ì„d in steade of concretiues as the light came into the world that is he which lighteneth vs. Wherefore for the manner of such like words they are to be referred to some of the foresaid three kindes 8 Furthermore there are three kindes of attributes which vse to be spoken of the same person of Christ God and man by what name soeuer it be signified For some are propper to the divine nature and

therefore cannot really be communicated to the other nature as to be impassible eternall immeasurable Some are proper to the humaine nature and therefore cannot altogether indeede be communicated to the other nature as to be made to be finite and passible And other some propper to the wholle person consisting of both natures and therefore common to both natures together as to be a mediatour a redeemer a Sauiour 9 To this third kind pertaine those actions which the greeke Fathers called the actions of God maÌ„ or actions divine and humaine because in the workes of our redemption each forme worketh not the property of the other but of it selfe yet with the communion of the other the worde working that which belongeth to the word the flesh performing that which belongeth to the flesh 10 Of these three kinds of Atributes we find in our selues an example not vnlike For in a man some thinges are proper onely to the soule as to be immortall to vnderstand to wil soÌ„e thinges to the body only as to be mortall palpable heauy Some things common to them both as be such works to the performaÌ„ce whereof each part worketh that which is proper to it with communion of the other as to write to speake to runne and to doe whatsoeuer is done by the ministery of the body yet not without the vertue and guidance of the soule 11 Nowe of this which hath beene saide of the diuers Subiects Praedicats there followeth a diuersitie also of PraedicatioÌ„ Euery Praedication therefore of Christ is either proper and simple or els improper and figuratiue 12 The proper and simple PrÄ™dication falleth two waies one is when those thinges which are proper to one nature they are predicated or said of the person of Christ beeing expressed by a name either denominated of the same nature or proper to the person as this our God or Christ is omnipotent and euery vvhere present also this man or Christ suffered and died The other is when such things as are proper to the wholle person they are said also of the wholle person signified by a name that containeth both the natures such as these are that belong to the office of a mediatour and the honour of an head as Christ Imanuell God incarnate redeemed vs sanctified vs saued vs is a King to be vvorshipped which are said therefore to be proper to the person because they can be seuerally applied to neither of the natures Nowe all such be proper and simple propositions because in all which are of the same kinde the Praedicates be coupled with the Subiects in all those thinges which are of the verie same kinde 13 The improper and figuratiue praedication is likewise twofold one wheÌ„ as these things which are proper to the wholle person either belonging to the office of a mediatour or to the honour of an head the same are saide of on of the natures signified either by an abstractiue or a concretiue name As the flesh quickeneth the blood washeth from sinne God redeemed the Church the Mediatour of god and men Man c. The other when that which is proper to one nature is said of the other nature signified by a name which is concretiue and which be tokeneth the person as God suffered and died man when he was on earth was also at the same time in heauen 14 For in thâ—se improper propositions of the latter sort the proprieties of diuerse kindes are coupled as wordes concretiue and therfore god is vnproperly said to suffer in as much as the name God in it owne propper signification doth betoken the divine essence which cannot suffer but in respect of the person being meant which is also man it is a true though an improper propositioÌ„ therefore these things are said of the wholle person by a Synechdoche whereas indeede they agree not to the same but onelie in respect of one nature 15 This latter forme of an improper speech we call the coÌ„munity of proprieties as the greeks doe which Theodoret expounding calleth the communitie of names And Damascene the troope of retribution 16 For with them ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ was a concretiue worde signifying the proprietie of some nature And ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ or ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ was when as the ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ or proprieties of one nature were mutually and reciprocally spoken of the concrete name of the other nature which name did signifie the person so that it is meere folly to thinke that the Fathers when they spake of the comnication of the Idiomes that they meant to speake of any reall powering or communication of the essentiall proprieties of one nature into the other seing they write plainely the vnitie maketh the names common but neuer maketh the things common 17 For if our talke be of the natures themselus Theod. diâ— 3. p. 67. B. which are in Christ Theodoret with other fathers teacheth vs that wee must so speake as we do not saye that those which are proper to the one nature are in very deed common to the other but that wee giue to either of them alone that which belongeth to it Euen as that which belongeth to the soule wee giue it not to the body and contrary wise But if we speak of the person we must so frame our speach that we may declare those things which are proper to each nature to bee truely and indeed common to the whole person euen as also we giue to the whole man really and in trueth aswell those things which belong to the soule as to the bodie Now his very wordes after his bringing in of the similitude of the soule and the body the whole man follow thus So we must speake of Christ And when we speake of the natures in Christ wee must geue to each of them those things which do befitt each we must know what things are proper to the diuinitie what to the humanitie but whenas we speake of the person we must make those things which are proper to the nature common and must fitt these verie same to our Sauiour Christ and we must call him both God and man both the sonne of God and the sonne of man both the sonne of Dauid and the Lord of Dauid both the seede of Abraham and the creatour of Abraham and so of all the rest The same doctrine he also confirmeth out of Amphilochius bishop of Iconium and out of other fathers in many places in his dialogues 18 Damascene also to expound the same matter to wit how the same thinges which belong to one nature should be communicated to the other namely in person writeth thus The word doth approprsate vnto it selfe those things which belong to man For those thinges which pertaine to his holy flesh be his and he doth by a manner of mutuall praedication impart those things which are proper to himselfe vnto the flesh by reason of the being of the partes mutually one within the other and their

the diuine in the abstract also by reason of the simplicity thereof For this proposition is as true and proper he deity is omnipotent as this God is omnipoteÌ„t yea euen omnipotency it selfe And againe Humanity and a man is mutable 34 Of the person expressed by the proper name and that name Rule 4 which noteth both the natures or by a name signifying the office of a mediatour as well the things which are proper to the one or to the other or to both the natures together may truely and properly be spoken as Christ is omnipotent also Christ is man Christ died Also Christ is a redeemer a mediatour Also the mediator is God is man is immortall died redeemed vs. 35 Of the person signified by a name of one nature Rule 5 the things which are proper therevnto may truely and properly be spoken as This God or onely begotten sonne of God is eternall and omnipotent Also This man or the sonne of man was borne in the last daies Rule 6 died 36 Those things which are proper to the wholle person cannot be spoken but by a Synechdoche a part taken for the wholle of one nature signified either by an abstractiue or concretiue name as The flesh quickeneth God redeemed his Church 37 Wherefore this saying of Leo each forma worketh that which belongeth to it selfe we with Damas say to be all one with this and that properly Christ worketh according to each forme 38 So where Iohn said his blood washeth vs from sinne and Christ saith my flesh is meate indeede also where it is said to quicken and that it is to be worshipped those wordes are put for concretiues namely the flesh of Christ for Christ incarnate and the blood of Christ for Christ by his blood 39 For he which said he that eateth my flesh hath eternall life the same said He that eateth me he shall liue by me And he which writ his bloode washeth vs from sinne the same expounding himselfe saith Christ shall wash vs from our sinnes by his blood And they which taught that Christs flesh was to be worshipped they also expressed the cause namely not because it was flesh but because it was flesh of God and therefore that Christians do worship not flesh properly but God incarnate 40 Of the person signified by the name of the one nature Rule 7 the things that belong to the other nature may indeede truely and really be spoken but yet improperly and figuratiuely by communicatioÌ„ of the proprieties As the sonne of man it both in heauen and on earth at once Also the onely begotten and Lord of glory was crucified 8. Rule 41 Here of followeth another of the one nature signified in a concretiue name the thinges propper to the other may truely be spoken by reason of the person togither noted yet not really but onely in respect of the name As God taken in the formall signification died man is eternall 42 Wherefore we say that those thinges are praedicated or spoken by communication of the proprieties which beeing proper to one of the natures are made common also to the other in the concrete by the mutuall manner of praedication namely while they are really attributed to the person wereof each nature is a part 43 For seeing Christ most truely and really is both God and man we doubt not to say and with the wholle Church to teach that he suffered namely for example sake according to the one nature and suffered not namely according to the other 44 And seeing the scripture saith both that God is immortall also that the same died was crucified we teach that in the former speech the name of God is taken essentially in the latter hypostatically or personally and therefore that both these are true in the speach concerning Christ but that both of them are spoken of the same in a diuerse manner of praedicatioÌ„ 45 Whatsoeuer things we reade to haue beene really giuen to Christ in time after the vnion the same may truely and really be spoken of the person in respect of the humanitie therfore also of the humanitie it selfe but it is to be vnderstood that they cannot be spoken in respect of the divinity and being signified by a concrete name but onely by communication of the proprieties An example of the first Esai 11. the spirit of wisdome shall rest vpon him c. An example of the other Ioh. 3. He hath giuen vnto him his sonne who is from heauen whoÌ„e the father sent his spirit aboue measure For he as he is the onely begotten sonne cannot be said to haue really receiued the spirit but onely by communication of the proprieties 46 But the thinges which we confesse were giuen after this manner were not the essentiall proprieties of God but onely gifts of creation and as they call theÌ„ habituall graces which belong partly to the perfection of Christs humaine nature partely to the perfecting of the office of a mediatour partely to the honour of the head of the Church 47 For the essentiall proprieties of God are vnited most really with the humaine nature in the same person but they are not really communicated to it in it owne verie essence 48 For to omitte almost infinite of other reasons testimonies of the Apostles auÌ„cient Fathers what things Christ receiued as Man in the essence of his humaine nature he receiued the same that he might as beeing head deriue theÌ„ into his meÌ„bers as Athanasius Cyril are witnesses seing he therefore sanctified himselfe that we also might be sanctified and the oile was powered vpon Aarons head that it might runne downe on al his members euen to the skirts of his clothing 49 And who except a mad man would saie that the essentiall proprieties of God are deriued vnto vs. 50 The cause also why Christ as he is God caÌ„not be said to haue receiued gifts of creation is by Cyrill assigned to be this Because as God he needed them not Therefore if also as he is maÌ„ he receiued the essentiall proprieties of God really communicated vnto him he cannot then be said to haue receiued the created gifts of the holy ghost For to that ende serueth a finite power in him which is indued with an infinite power really communicated vnto him Finis

Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Text snippets containing the quad