nature of man only but the forme of a servant for a while upon him to make the most perfect and abundant satisfaction by the most exquisite obedience of which both the state of a sonne and condition of a servant was capable 7. The stone of offence whereat the Socinians who account themselves good Christians and doe not deny Christ to be the Sonne of God doe so much stumble is in part the very same with the prejudice which the Arians had of the orthodoxall truth whose breach or disruption in the Canon of the ancient Catholique faith the first Nicene Councill sought to repaire not by addition or superstruction of any new Articles of beleife but by a gentle diduction or dilatation of that sense which was included in the Apostles Creed or in the ancient rule of faith I beleeve in one God c and in one Lord Iesus Christ the only begotten sonne of God begotten of his father before all worlds and againe very God of very God begotten not made being of the same substance with the Father c. It is not improbable that the Arians and their followers might take offence or pick a quarell at this Title of being the only begotten son of God before all worlds the rather because some of the most ancient and not a few middle-age writers do seek to groūd this article upō that divine oracle Ps 2. Thou art my son this day have I begotten thee as if hodiè in that place did not literally and punctually referre to any peremptory day or time circumscriptible by remarkable circumstances or notable historicall events but were put for bodiè aeternitatis which implyes no time but an indivisible interminable duration And if the allegation were true in this sense there could be no question betweene professors of Christianity about the eternall generation of Christ Jesus as he is the sonne of God But so it often falls out that some one impertinent allegation or weake proofe being too much stood upon doth provoke or embolden such men qui ita veritatem amant ut velint esse vera quaecunque amant to deny the generall truth for whose confirmation weake and impertinent proofes are brought albeit the same truth might be most strongly prooved from many other irrefragable testimonies of Scripture That the Psalmist Psal 2. speakes of our Saviours resurrection from the grave is most cleare from the Apostles testimonie and in what sense it was fulfilled whether in the literall onely or in the mysticall or in both whether according to the plaine literall sense it tooke aswell retrò as antè or have any especiall reference to what is past shall by Gods assistance be discussed in the explitation of that great Article I dare not in this place use the former authority to proove the eternall generation of the sonne of God 8 That hee should bee the onely begotten Sonne of God otherwise then by his begetting from the dead unto glory and immortalitie or that he should be so before the World from all eternity may seeme to imply a contradiction in terminis For the Father must be before the sonne unlesse we take these termes as termes meerely relative not as importing any substance or persons All termes meerely relative quà tales are simul naturâ coaevall for standing Abraham though an ancient man was not Isaacs Father before Isaac was his sonne But if wee respect the persons or substances betwixt whom such relations stand the person of the Father is alwaies before the person of the sonne according to precedence of time or if we consider not the persons or substances but that which they call proximum fundamentum relationis that act or operation from which such relations do immediately result so it is true that generans est prior generato Begetting or to beget hath priority or precedencis though not of time yet of nature of being begotten But if the Sonne of God be coeternall to his Father there can be no place for either of these precedencies or priorities nor for any thing truely proportionable to them seeing in eternitie there is nihil prius nihil posterius no prioritie no succession How then can Christ Jesus be conceived to be the onely sonne of God begotten of his father before all worlds if to be before all worlds be as much as to bee from all eternitie or in eternitie To this wee answer that where the truth of the matter is unquestionable men soberly minded should not wrangle about the strict proprietie of words especially in mysteries whose comprehension far surpasseth mans capacitie and are even to blessed Angels ineffable or unexpressible in any punctuall or proper phrase The truth which the Nicen Fathers sought to establish was this that Christ Jesus was not made the Sonne of God before all worlds but was the sonne of God very God of very God from all eternitie coeternall and coequall to his Father For so they expresse themselves Hee was begotten and not made The manner of his eternall generation or begetting they seeme to resemble to the generation or production of light For so they say light of light very God of very God c. Now that light which the splendid body of the sunne diffuseth through the ayre but especially through caelestiall bodies is coevall with its Fountaine which produceth or begetteth it For it was never held a solecisme to call Lumen filiam lucis to say light is the daughter of the sunne But however it shall please men to expresse the manner of the Sonne of Gods Eternall generation the former inductions that Peter est prior filio naturâ et tempore that the person or substance of the Father hath alwayes precedency both of time and nature in respect of the person and substance of the sonne or that generans is prius naturâ generato to beget hath alwayes precedence of nature though not of time of being begotten are true onely in temporall generations or successions All men and other generable creatures since the world began have beene moratall de facto The first man was but conditionally immortall And albeit he might have lived for ever yet had he a beginning of life in time and so were his sons or successors to have albeit they had been borne immortall or both borne and begotten before he did subject himselfe and them to mortality by sinne If immortall creatures could have sonnes or successors by nature they were to be immortall by nature otherwise they should be a kind of monsters or an equivocall brood If then he who possesseth eternitie have a true and proper sonne which the word only begotten implyes after what manner soever he be his son though by a manner altogether unconceivable to us that son must be coeternall to his Father For the truly eternall God to have beget or produce a sonne which is not eternall but everlasting only à parte pòst is as unconceivable to reason as that an immortall Father should beget a mortall or
which we have not done but the good works we have done and wholly relie upon the mercies of God in Christ who once for all suffered for our sinnes and daily absolves us from them so oft as in sincerity of heart wee confesse our sinnes and implore his propititation for them Unlesse we knew the fulfilling of the Law whether by habituall or actuall righteousnesse or by doing those things which wee ought to doe or leaving those things undone which we ought not to doe to be impossible for us in this life our reliance on God in Christ could not be so firme or so perpetually constant as the doctrine of our Church so it be rightly imbraced will make it 3. The Socinians wandâ—r in the like but much grosser â—â—st of errours wounding one another whilest they shoot at us who are sufficiently armed against their poysoned arrowes by the armour of God on the right hand on the left to wit the distinction of persons in the blessed Trinity Indeed were there but one party or capacity in the divine nature which were the only party or person offended their arguments for remission of sinnes after their way would conclude against us who presse a necessity or convenience of satisfaction unto God But their strongest Arguments fall either wide or short of all such as maintaine this distinction of parties or persons in the divine nature For if the sonne of God or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were truely God from eternity and remained God after man did make himselfe the servant of Satan he might without wrong to any man to any party without wrong to himselfe for volenti non sit injuria voluntarily take the forme of a servant upon him and in that forme or low condition of man make perfect satisfaction per translationem paenae for all our debts for all our sinnes and our debts being fully paid restore us to the liberty and priviledge of the sonnes of God He both might and did truly purchase that peculiar dominion over us which he hath over all men an absolute dominion of punishing all Gods ungracious and of crowning all his thankfull and faithfull servants This dominion as it is peculiar to Christ was purchased by true and reall satisfaction made unto God 4. But what it was for Christ the sonne of God to take upon him the forme of a servant or wherin this condition or forme of a servant did properly consist are points which neither the Arian nor the Socinian did ever take into serious consideration If the Socinian would yet doe so he might clearely see that his former objections could not reach us but must rebound upon himselfe For the man Christ Jesus being so just a man as we beleeve and he grants he was unlesse he had been more then man truly God and truly a servant withall it could not have stood with the goodnesse of God nor with any rule of justice divine or humane either to have punished him for our sakes as we say God did or to have suffered him to undergoe such hard and cruell usage at the hands of wicked and sinfull men as the Socinians confesse he did undergo without murmuring or complaint But this is a point which cannot be orderly handled untill we come to the death and passion of our Lord and Saviour which was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or period rather of his servitude or of being in the forme of a servant which was the Basis of his humiliation And albeit I purpose not in that place to dispute whether God could possibly have freely remitted our sinnes without any satisfaction a question to which no wise men will take upon them to give a peremptory answer whether negative or affirmative yet I shall by Gods assistance there make it cleare that no other meanes of manner of remitting out sinnes of absolving or justifying us or of bringing us to glory which either the Socinian or the wit of man can imagine could have been so admirable to sober capacities as that way and manner which the Scripture plainly teacheth and that in briefe is this 5. The divine nature in the person of the Father requires satisfaction for the transgressions of man against the eternall Law and unchangeable rule of goodnesse or those positive Lawes which he had given in speciall to man The same divine nature in the person of the sonne undertooke to make satisfaction for us in taking our nature upon him and Hee having by right of consanguinity the authority and power of redeeming us the same divine nature in the person of the holy Ghost doth approve and seale this happy and ever blessed compromise This ineffable accord betweene the divine persons in the unity of the Godhead concerning the great worke of mans redemption is most exactly parallel to that accord which some of the Ancient have excellently observed betwixt them in that work of creation as hath beene before expressed in that article Not to repeat nor to adde to that which was there delivered but to continue these present discussions concerning the eternity and person of the sonne of God 6. Some there have beene and are who granting all that wee have said or can desire to bee granted concerning the incarnation of God or Trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead further demand why God rather in the person of the sonne then in the person of the father or of the holy Ghost should bee incarnate or made flesh But might not these men some perhaps will say as well have demanded why God the Father did make the world rather by the sonne then by himselfe or by the holy Ghost Or why this title of Him by whom all thing were made should be peculiar to God the sonne And to this question it would be a satisfactory answer to say that we must believe that the world was so made because the Scripture which is the only rule and guide of faith doth so instruct us or because the persons of the blessed Trinity for reasons best knowne unto themselves alone would have it to be so and so to be written But many arguments there be well observed by the ancient and better explicated by moderne Divines some of whose works are extant in print others worthy of the presse unto which I shall be as farre from adding as from detracting These reasons alone abundantly satisfie all the desires which I ever had to be informed in this point First seeing the blessed Trinity was pleased to have satisfaction made for the sinnes of mankinde and by this satisfaction to exhibit an exquisite paterne of justice and equitie Secondly seeing mans sinne did especially consist in rebellion the satisfaction was according to the rule or paterne of equitie and justice to be made by most exquisite obedience Now the most exquisite obedience that can bee performed is from a sonne unto his father or from a servant unto his Lord. Hence it pleased the eternall wisedome and sonne of God to take not the
a mortall Father an immortall sonne No Schoolemen did ever acknowledge the generation of the Son of God to be univocally like to other generation in all points besides the eternitie of it For even in that wee acknowledge it to be eternall wee difference it from all other generations by such an unexpressible superminencie as eternitie hath over time or diuine immensitie of all bodily magnitudes or the Divine Essence it selfe of Created Natures CHAP 26. That by the Sonne of God and the Word wee are to understand one and the same partie or person that the Word by whom S. John saith the World was made is coeternall to God the Father who made all things by him BUt to wave this point for the present concerning the maner how the eternall God should beget an eternall sonne the thread which we are to unwind as far as possibly we can without knot or ravell is this that Christ Jesus is â—eri bodiè yesterday to day the same only true sonne of God for ever truely coeternall to his Father And this being a point of so great consequence I will not allot one place onely for the clearing of it but insist upon it more or lesse in all the articles which concerne Christ For in all of them wee shall be enforced to incounter the Jew as well as the Arrian or Socinian 2 Whether of these two be the greater sinner or more dangerous enemy to the crosse of Christ that I leave to God the Father and Christ Jesus the judge of quick and dead and to the holy Spirit to determine But seeing it is no sinne to refute or censure both their errours the errour of the moderne Jew who utterly denieth Christ to be the sonne of God in any sense seemes to me more excusable at least lesse inexcusable then the errour of the Arrian or Socinian who granting Christ to be the sonne of God deny him to be coeternall to his Father And my reason is because it is not more plaine or pregnant out of the writings of Moses or the Prophets which the Jews only acknowledge that God was to be incarnate or to become man though that be most pregnant then it is from the Evangelist and other sacred writers of the new Testament whose authoritie the Socinian denies not that Christ is the only sonne of God from all eternitie Two or three testimonies shall suffice for the present Were there no other place besides that of the Apostle Heb. 7. 3. and that of S. Iohn chap. 1. these would captivate my understanding to the obedience of beleife in this point The Apostle speaking of Melchisedech saith he was without beginning without end of life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is albeit he had both Father and Mother beginning and end of dayes yet he is represented unto us without beginning or end of dayes that so he might be a type or shadow of the sonne of God But how farre a type of the sonne of God only in this as he was without beginning of dayes or end of life That the Apostle by the sonne of God did meane Christ Jesus and none else none deny The very scope and end of this parallel betwixt Melchisedech and Christ was to shew that Christ the sonne of God was truely and really such as Melchisedech was only by shadow or representation that is really and absolutely without beginning or end of dayes he who is who was is to come perfect characters of eternitie Againe it is evident that the sonne of God who died for us was the same person and party with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with that word which was made flesh This consequence is ungainesayable that if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word were without beginning or end of dayes God blest for ever and coeternall with him who said Let there be light Let there be a firmament c. then Christ Iesus the sonne of God who not only we but the Socinians grant did die for us was and is without beginning or end of dayes truely coeternall to God the Father 3 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of God was absolutely eternall not made so in time is a truth which the wit of man cannot more punctually presse against all that in future times should deny or question it then S. Iohn doth in the beginning of his Gospell And the manner of his reiterate emphaticall expressions of himselfe every later adding strength unto the former confirmes the opinion or tradition of the Ancient that he purposely wrote that maiestick proeme to his Gospell which is but a paraphrase though most divine upon the writings of Moses and the Prophets touching this great mysterie for preventing of the spreading of the Arian or like heresie whose seeds were by the envious man sowne in S. Iohns time after Christs other Apostles were fallen asleepe In the beginning saith S. Iohn the Word was What beginning doth he meane The same which Moses meant when hee said In the beginning God made the Heaven and the Earth The originall phrase whether used by Moses in the Hebrew or by S. Iohn in the Greeke exactly answers to the Latine in principio Now though every cause be Principium the beginning or that which gives beginning to its proper effect Yet Omne principium every beginning is not a proper cause of that which usually followes upon it For the first dawning or scaring of the morning is the beginning yet no true positive cause of the day following it is first in order of time but not of causality And this ambiguity of the Phrase in the beginning is the same both in the Hebrew and in the Chaldee as the learned in these tongues no parties in this businesse have observed Now in that first of Genesis we must take the word beginning not for the cause of all which followed but for the first in order or precedency of duration For the heavens and the earth if we take them as now they are were not made in that beginning or point of time wherein God is said to have made the heaven and earth Nor did any of these or any other parts of the world spring or result by way of causality from the first masse which was without order of parts or true forme otherwise the distinction of light from darknesse or separation of the waters which are above the firmament could not have beene works of creation properly so called but rather of generation whereas the Scripture tells us that these were the works of the first and second day much lesse could the production of plants or vegetables or substances endued with sense have been any proper works of creation after the heavens and earth were made When then Moses saith In the beginning God made the Heaven and the Earth this is all one as if he had said the heavens and the earth had a beginning that this unformed masse was the beginning or first draught of them and all things
face whilest he talked with the people who were not able to behold the glory But this vaile as our Apostle tels us 2 Cor. 3. 14. is put away in Christ It is true Yet this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the word was not the Christ to doe away this vaile till he put on the vaile of flesh The flesh then was a vaile to him but as a glasse or mirrour to us Wee may in Christ with open face behold that glory of God whose reflexe on Moses face the Israelites could not behold but through a vaile Christ then is that glasse or mirrour wherin the brightnesse of Gods glory which the Israelites could not then behold may now be seene But did the Iews or Israelites in the time of the old Testament or in that time wherein the Author of the booke of Wisdome wrote conceive any such matter as our Apostle here inferres that the glory of God should be more fully revealed or that men should be more capable of the participation of his presence in later ages then they had beene in former Some of them did others did not all of them ought even by their owne prenotions or interpretations of Scriptures so to have conceived and beleeved For thus some moderne Iews conceive of Moses his request What was that saith a great Rabbin amongst them which Moses our Master sought to attaine unto when he said I pray thee shew me thy glory 9 He requeged to know the truth of the being or essence of the holy blessed God untill that he were knowne in his heart like as a man is knowne whose face is seen and whose forme is ingravē in ones heart so that man is distinguished or separated in his knowledge from other men So Moses requested that the Essence of God might be distinctly knowne in his heart from the essence of other things so that he might know the truth of his Essence as it is But God answered him that the knowledge of living man who is compounded of body and soule hath no ability to apprehend the truth of this thing concerning his Creator That knowledge of God or sight of his glory whereof Moses was uncapable was truely ingraven in the heart of the man Christ Iesus and in his light wee see light He that saw him with the eyes of faith did see the father he did see the glory of the Godhead The brightnesse of the divine glory is alike inaccessible alike incommunicable in the Sonne as in the Father if we consider them in their divine nature alone but in the man Christ Iesus and in him alone wee may behold the brightnesse of the Divine glory which neither eye nor heart of man could behold in it selfe or in any divine person alone but only in the divine person which was incarnate 10 And it is not here to be omitted that the forecited 29. of Exodus ver 45 I will dwell among the Children of Israel is thus translated by Onkelus in his paraphrase ponam praesentiam divinitatis meae in medio filiorum Israel So Fagius with some others render it and why he so renders it gives the reason And the later Rabbines as one well conversant in their writings saith generally observe that whensoever it is said in the person of God that I will dwell amongst them this may not be understood but of the Majestie of the holy and blessed God To this purpose they alleage the 9. verse of the 8 Psalme His salvation is neere them that feare him that glory may dwell in our Land And Simeon in his dying song doth testifie that Jesus the sonne of Mary whom he imbraced when he was presented in the Temple was the salvation of God Lord now lattest thou thy Servant depart in peace according to thy Word For mine eyes have seene thy Salvation And although our Saviour whilest hee lived here on earth had no constant dwelling no place of inheritance yet at this time the Godhead or that glory of the Godhead of which the Psalmist speaketh was incorporated in him These and the like Scriptures S. Iohn did see fulfilled in Christ when he said the Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us and wee saw his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the Father that is such glory as could not bee communicated to any but to him who was by nature the sonne of God such glory as no flesh could behold otherwise then as it was in Christ or in the word made flesh such a declaration of the divine Majestie as none besides the sonne of God could declare So the Apostle saith ver 18. No man hath seene God at any time but the only begotten sonne who is in the bosome of the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath declared or expounded him But wherein doth this declaration consist or how was it made by the sonne Not by word only or by declaration of his will but by matter of fact or reall representation But of this point more fully in the exposition of the name Iesus Seeing Moses had said that no flesh could see God and live it may seeme strange to men which have not their senses exercised in the search of Scriptures that the Prophet Isaiah should avouch the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together Isay 40. 5. Moses speech and that conceipt which the ancient had that man could not see God and live was universally true untill the word or brightnesse of Gods glory was made flesh But this was the very mysterie which Isaiah in that chapter foretold as elsewhere hath beene declared in part and shall be as it comes in order to be handled more fully a little after this Chapter 11 That the moderne Iews can expect the God of their Fathers should dwell with them should walk with them should manifest his glory unto them after such a manner as their owne Doctors interpret his promise made to Moses to al these purposes after any other way or manner then the Evangelist witnessed he did walk with and manifest his glory unto his Disciples This to us Christians is an evident demonstration that the vale which their Forefathers put before their faces when they could not behold the brightnesse of Gods glory which shone on Moses face after he had seene God and talked with him is to this day put before their hearts when they read Moses and the Prophets For this glorious Majestie of God the very expresse or graven Image of his substāce which they say Moses desired to see but could not did so personally dwell in the man Christ Jesus that whilest he walked with his people God did walke with thē whilest he remayned within the territories of Iudah or Galilee salvation glory did dwell in their Land And to this day in whomsoever he dwelleth by faith in him God dwelleth by faith As he is the expresse image of the person of his Father so every one in whom he thus
after every manner his owne so as our bloud is ours yet his owne by a more proper more full and soveraigne title then our bloud is any way ours 11. Our flesh and bloud may be said to be our owne in two respects either as it is a part of our nature or an appertinence of our person In this last respect the fruit of the Virgins womb was the sonne of Gods own substance the flesh and bloud which hee tooke from her were his after a more exquisite manner or in a fuller measure of the same manner then our flesh and bloud are our owne Or if wee would speake the language of Philosophy her selfe rather then of Philosophers or of such as professe themselves to be her followers though ofttimes as wee say a farre off Our flesh our bloud our limbes are said to be our owne not so much or not so properly as they are parts of our nature as in that they are either parts or appurtenances of our persons That which is immediately next or linkt unto our person is by a more peculiar and soveraigne right our owne then any things whatsoever besides wee do possesse or are Lords of be it Lands goods or servants For whatsoever we possesse being not thus annexed unto our persons are but externalls their possession is communicable their propertie may be so alienated as others may make as good use of them as wee doe A man may be wronged in every thing that is his owne whereof he is by just title possessed but the wrongs done to a man in externalls doe not touch him so neerely as the wrongs done to his person or to any part or appurtenance of it 12. That there is a true and reall distinction betweene the natures and the persons of men or betweene things which are our owne by union of nature or by union unto our persons may thus be gathered Every part of our nature is eyther a part or an appurtenance of our person but every part or appurtenance of our person is not a part of our nature A man may suffer grosse personall wrong without paine or dammage to any part of his nature without losse of any commoditie that could be made of that wherein he suffered wrong it being in it selfe considered uncapable of wrong As in case some joynt or part of a mans body be dead and withered irrecoverably deprived of sense of paine of vitall motion it thereby ceaseth to be a part of the humane nature but it therefore ceaseth not to be an appendance or an appurtenance of his person He that should disfigure mangle or otherwise handle such a dead number any otherwise then the party whose it is were willing to have it handled doth wrong his person in a higher degree than if hee mangled or maymed his live goods or cattell and yet however he handle it he puts the living party to no paine is being as it is supposed no naturall or sensible part of his body nor could it have yeelded any commodity though it had been cut off before it was disfigured Offēces of this nature are not to be valued according to the excellency of the physicall complexion or constitution of the bodily part wounded or contumeliously handled but according to the excellency or dignity of the partie whose flesh or substance it is that is wounded or abused whether it be an entire live part of his nature or an appendix only to his person as being a joynt or member in part maymed or deprived of sense before Generally whether we speake of mens actions or sufferings undertaken for our behoofe to the losse of bloud or limbes we are not to value the one or other so much according to the physicall propertie or naturall worth of the member lost or damnified as according to the dignity of the person which voluntarily undertaketh such hard services for us And thus wee are to rate aswell the indignities and paines which our Saviour suffered in body by the Jews or Roman soldiers as the anguish of his soule in that great conflict with the powers of darknes neither according to the excellencie of his bodily constitution or exquisite purity of his soule but according to the inestimable dignity of his divine person of which aswell his immaculate soule as his undefiled bodie were no naturall parts but appurtenances only 13 Lastly that proper bloud wherewith God is said to have purchased the Church was the bloud of the sonne of God the second person in Trinity after a more peculiar manner then it was the bloud either of God the Father or of God the holy ghost It was the bloud of God the Father or of God the holy Ghost as all other creatures are by common right of creation and preservation It was the bloud of God the son alone by personall union If this sonne of God and high Priest of our soules had offered any other sacrifice for us then himselfe or the manhood thus personally united unto him his offering could not have beene satisfactory because in al other things created the Father and the holy Ghost had the same right or interest which the sonne had hee could not have offered any thing to them which were not as truely theirs as his Onely the seede of Abraham or fruit of the virgins womb which he assumed into the Godhead was by the assumption made so his owne as it was not theirs his owne by incommunicable propertie of personall union By reason of this incommunicable propertie in the womans seede the sonne of God might truely have said unto his Father Lord thou hast purchased the Church yet with my bloud but so could not the man Christ Jesus say unto the sonne of God Lord thou hast payd the ransome for the sinnes of the world yet with my bloud not with thine owne SECT 4. Of the conception and birth of our Lord and Saviour the sonne of God of the circumcision of the sonne of God and the name IESUS given him at his circumcision and of the fulfilling of the types and prophecyes concerning these mysteries CHAP. 31. The aenigmaticall predictions concerning Christs conception unfolded by degrees THat the predictions of the prophets which the Jew acknowledgeth for sacred are of divine infallible authority that according to many of these propheticall praedictions God in the person of the sonne was to become man the eternall word was to be made flesh that is to have our flesh and nature so united unto him that whilest our flesh and nature was conceived and brought forth the sonne of God was also conceived brought forth whilst the man Christ Jesus did suffer in the flesh the sonne of God did also suffer This is the briefe summe or extract of all that hath in this Treatise beene delivered This is the foundation of faith as Christian the radicall article of Christian Theologie It followes in our Apostles Creede that this only sonne of God Christ Iesus our Lord was conceived by the holy Ghost and
as they did certifie him of the distinct place of his birth This they learned out of the Prophet Micah Chap. 5. ver 2. 3. That of our Apostle Hebrewes 1. ver 1. is exactly verified in respect of the article now in handling The Prophets and holy men of God or God by their ministery spake of our Saviours conception and birth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not at sundry times onely or in severall ages of the Fathers but piece-meale or by scattered predictions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sundry wayes sometimes literally and plainely sometimes mystically or aenigmatically But in this later age he hath spoken unto us by his Sonne or in his Sonne For even the historicall passages of his conception and birth though delivered unto us by his Evangelists spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his very conception his birth and actions as well as the words uttered by him have their plaine and full language and if wee take them as set downe by the Evangelists are as the putting together of all what the Prophets had spoken scatteredly or represented by broken pictures or portions of truth After that maine head or fountaine of Prophecies was opened and had his course drawne by God himselfe not by any Prophet I will put enmity betweene thee and him c. Every succeeding age especially from the deluge addes some new rills or petty streames unto it the full current of which is conspicuous only in the Gospell CHAP 32. Saint Lukes narration of our Saviours conception and birth and its exact concordance with the Prophets TO begin with S. Lukes narration of his cōceptiō Cap. 1. ver 26. In the 6. month the Angel Gabriel was sent frō God unto a Citie of Galilee named Nazareth to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph of the house of David and the virgins name was Mary In these few lines wee have the exact Chorographie of those generall or more obscure descriptions which Isaias and Ieremiah had made of the place of his conception and in the words following wee have the particular and most exact survey of all Gods promises made to David or related by other Prophets concerning that sonne of David who was to rule over Iacob for ever When Saint Luke saith in the words forecited the Angel Gabriel was sent in the sixth moneth this may referre either to the time of Iohn Baptists conception as in all probability it doth ver 36. Behold thy Cosin Elizabeth shee also hath conceived a sonne in her old age and this is the sixth moneth with her who was called barren Or it may referre unto the sixth moneth of the yeare according to the ancient and civill accompt of the Hebrewes for untill the time of Israels deliverie out of Egypt the moneth wherein Iohn Baptist was conceived which answeres for the past part to our September was the first moneth in which as most later Divines are of opinion the world was created The moneth Abib which answers unto March with us became observable to the Israelites from their deliverance in that moneth out of Egypt and continues in their Ecclesiasticall accompt the first in order In the same moneth the conception of our Lord and Saviour was denounced by the Angell and our deliverance by him from the powers of darknesse afterwards accomplished and well deserves the title of the first moneth since his conception and passion but in whether of these two respects or whether in both the moneth wherein the Angell was sent be termed the sixt moneth is no matter of such moment or consideration as the tenour of his message ver 31. 32. And behold thou shalt conceive in thy wombe and bring forth a sonne and shalt call his name Iesus Hee shall be great and shall be called the sonne of the highest and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his Father David When the Angell said He shall be great and his mother shall call his name JESVS it is implied that as yet he was not great that he had not the beginning of that greatnesse which is here promised And may it not be as rightly implied that when hee saith Hee shall be called the sonne of the highest as yet he was not the sonne of the highest but first to brooke the name of Iesus and then first to be made and called the sonne of God when he was become great and had received the throne of his Father David But it is not without observation that the Angell saith not Hee shall be the sonne of the highest nor doth hee say that the blessed Virgin his Mother should bestow this name upon him as shee did the name of Iesus The intent and meaning of the holy Ghost in this place is that this fruit of the Virgins womb who was to be named Iesus by his mother from his circumcision should be called the sonne of the highest not in regard of his future greatnesse as man or as he was the promised sonne of David but by reason of his peculiar assumption or union into the person of the sonne of God who was Davids Lord before he was conceived and was publiquely to be declared the sonne of God by his resurrection from the dead At which time and not before hee tooke the especiall government of that Kingdome upon him which had so often beene promised to the sonne of David This meaning of the holy Ghost the Evangelist doth open unto us ver 33. Hee shall raigne over the house of Iacob for ever and of his Kingdome there shall be no end 2. Unlesse this holy of holyes who was now to be borne of the blessed virgin Mary had beene the sonne of God before this time hee should in reason be called the sonne of the holy Ghost For unto the virgin Mary demanding how this should be seeing shee know not a man ver 34. The Angel answered The holy Ghost shall come upon thee c. An Emphaticall expression of that which we beleeve in the Creede That the holy Ghost should worke his conception Now hee who is Author of the conception of any person which before such a conception had no existence is in propriety of speech to be reputed the Father of the party or person conceived But this very person whom we now adore under that name or title of Christ Iesus our Lord being before all World 's the true and only sonne of God albeit the holy Ghost was the Author of his conception as man a more principall cause and Author of his conception then any mortall Father is of his mortall sonne yet was not the fruit of the virgins womb to be reputed the sonne of the holy Ghost but of him alone who was the true and only Father of that person unto whom the fruit of the Uirgins womb was by the operation of the holy Ghost personally united The holy Ghost was not then the cause or Author of any new person but onely espoused or betroathed the humane nature of Christ which
before had no actuall existence unto him who was the sonne of God from eternity Now not he that gives but hee that takes the spouse given in marriage is the true husband And the spouse so taken from her espousall becomes the daughter not of him that gives her in marriage but of the Father of her husband with whom shee is now made one flesh Thus God the Father by this espousall thus wrought by the holy Ghost becomes the Father of the humane nature of Iesus which was now united unto his sonne after another manner then before hee had beene of any man and after another manner then the holy Ghost was or is the Father of the man Christ Iesus Christ then as God and man is the only sonne of God the Father The same Iesus only as man is the sonne of David 3. That the promised Messias was according to the Prophecies to be the sonne of David is evident but by what line all descent hee was to be the sonne of David or by what legall right the Kingdome of David was derived unto him is not without question amongst Christians David we know by Gods free donation was King of Iudah and Israel and Solomon by legall right did succeed him in his Kingdome And Solomons heires or Successours by bodily descent had as firme a title to the Kingdome of David as any other Kings or Monarchs have to the Crownes and dignities of their Ancestors But whether Solomons line by bodily descent were utterly extinguished before the conception or birth of our Saviour is a point neither much debated nor agreed upon by Divines If it were extinguished before that time yet Davids line did not determine with Solomons And for this reason haply our Saviour is instyled by the holy Ghost the sonne of David not so of Solomon albeit Solomon was as true a shadow of him as King as David had beene And Solomons Kingdome and raigne a fairer map of his Kingdome then Davids was And though our Saviours intermediate Ancestors according to the flesh from David downward were many as S. Luke and more then S. Matthew relates Yet he did immediatly succeede David in the Kingdom For so by the law of most Countries in case the elder brethrens sonnes or issues faile the third or fourth brother succeeds as lawfull heire not unto his elder brothers or their children but to their Grandfather or first donor Many may be immediate heires unto thē to whō they are no immediate Successours in lineall descent That Solomon and his line had no such perpetuity bestowed upon them by vertue of Gods Covenant with David as that it might not determine before the promised seed of David was exhibited the tenour of that Covenant as it is exemplified by the Author of the 89. Psalme puts out of question I have found David my servant with my holy oyle have I annointed him ver 20. He shall cry unto me Thou art my Father my God and the rock of my salvation Also I will make him my first borne higher then the Kings of the earth my mercy will I keepe for him evermore and my Covenant shall stand fast with him His seed also will I make to endure for ever and his throne as the dayes of Heaven ver 26 27 28 29. This last he speakes of Davids seede as of one not of his seedes as of many For so it followes ver 30. If his children forsake my Law and walk not in my judgements if they breake my statutes and keepe not my Commandements then will I visite their transgressions with the rod and their iniquity with stripes This visitation with rods and stripes imports more then fatherly chastisements true and reall punishments Yea heavie judgements upon Davids other children according to their deserts None are utterly exempted from Gods heavie displeasure besides the promised seede or Davids sonne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose prerogative is in the next words reserved by oath Never the losse my loving kindnesse will I not take from David nor suffer my faithfulnesse to faile my covenant will I not breake nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips ver 33. This is in effect as if he had said however Davids other sonnes provoke me I will not repent of that loving kindnesse which I promised to him it shall be accomplished in Davids seede for in respect of things alterable or reversible whether promised for the good of men or threatned for their woe God is usually said to repent but to whatsoever hee sweares of that he never repents Every event ratified by oath is either unalterable or irreversible The Lord hath sworne saith David Psal 110. and will not repent that is he will not change or alter that which hee hath promised To alter that which was only promised but without oath is in the phrase of the holy Ghost as we usually render the originall to faile or breake Covenant that is in more proper language to reverse a blessing promised Hence it is added in the next verse of the 89. Psalme Once have I sworne by my holinesse that I will not lye unto David that is I will not make void my covenant His seeds shall endure for ever and his throne as the Sunne before mee It shall be established for ever as the Moone and as a faithfull witnesse in Heaven This is that throne and that Kingdome which the Angel Luke 1. 32 33. foretold should be given unto the seed or fruit of the Virgins womb As for Davids other children or for Solomons race their title to the temporary Crowne of David was at the first but conditional or rather mutable for every conditionall estate presupposeth a state in being but a state mutable or reversible Such was the state of Solomon or the heires of his bodie aswell unto the kingdome of Judah as of Israel The Kingdome of Israel they utterly lost in the second descent The next Quaere is whether this their estate unto Judah or Israel which was by originall tenour reversible were de facto utterly reversed and the Covenant as it concerned them finally cancelled 4 And of this Quaere the branches are two first whether Salomons line were utterly extinguished before the returne of Iudah from the Babylonish Captivitie or in any age before the son of God and the promised seed of David was manifested in the flesh The second whether in case the utter extinguishment of Salomons line be a point doubtfull or by any authentick Author or record indeterminable This line were not in the same desperate case for recovering the Kingdom that Elies race was for regaining the Priesthood from which it was by solemne oath deposed That Solomons line was utterly excluded from inheriting the Kingdome of Iudah and Iacob the Jews and Christians for the most part agree And the tenour of that terrible sentence against Ieconiah according to the principles acknowledged by both will inferre no lesse As I live saith the Lord though Coniah the sonne of
scoffe the God of Israel made good in earnest by making this Jesus whom Pilate and the Jews had crucified both Lord and Christ that is a far greater King then Caesar himselfe whom they acknowledge their only King 6 Ioseph his supposed Father in all probabilitie was dead before this time of our Saviours passion so that the lineall right of the Crowne of David was now in Christ as the only sonne of the virgin Mary who had no child by Ioseph her husband nor hee any sonne by any former wife so that the whole right unto the Crowne of David which either or both of them had was by legall descent devolved upon this dying man who after his great humiliation was to be more highly exalted and in him alone that which was said by the prophet Ezekiel was accomplished exalt him that is low and abase him that is high And yet the same Prophecy had beene at severall times verified or fulfilled in part before And first perhaps in Ieconiah who after the debasing of Zedekiah his uncle by Nebuchadnezzar was exalted above other Captives by Nebuchadnezzars sonne Evil-Merodach And againe more punctually according to the prophets meaning in Zorobabel and others of Davids line after Solomons line was either extinguished or deposed but more fully afterwards in the blessed Virgin as shee expresses her thankfulnesse for it in her sweet song Luke 1. 52. Hee hath put downe the mightie from their seate and hath exalted the humble and the meeke Whether the blessed Virgin in her owne right or Ioseph her husbands while he lived were the next heire unto the Crowne of David is disputed by others unto whose determinations I have nothing to say in this place Whatsoever right either or both of them had was I take it derived from David by Nathan not by Solomon or his successors Ioseph and Mary were heires to the kingdome which Solomon did enjoy though not of his seede and so were Salathiel and Zorobabel from whom they directly descended 7 But whether her sonne should be the lawfull heire of David was no part of the blessed virgins doubt or question to the Angel But how shee should conceive a sonne according to the purport of the Angels promise that she questions Luke 1. 24. Then said Mary how shall this be seeing I know not a man To omit the idle fancies of some who would hence collect that the blessed virgin had vowed chastitie in single life as if I know not a man had beene as much as I am resolved never to know man The truth is that however shee was at this time espoused unto Ioseph yet the marriage was not to be consummated til some competent space after the espousals within which time shee did rightly apprehend the conception foretold her by the Angell was to bee accomplished or rather from the very time of this present dialogue and hence shee demands how it was possible that she should instantly conceive seeing she knew not a man yet are not these words of distrust they have no tincture of such incredulitie or slow beliefe as wee finde taxed in Sarah and Zachariah father to Iohn Baptist yet were both Sarah and Elizabeth the wife of Zachariah types or shadowes of the blessed virgins miraculous conceiving So were Hannah and Sampsons mother The conception of all their sonnes and they were respectively their only sonnes was wonderfull and without the ordinary course of nature peculiar blessings of him that maketh the barren to be a joyfull mother of Children Sarah and Hannah and Iohn Baptists parents had beene petitioners to the Lord of life for children and had their petitions ratifyed one by the Preist and others by the Angel of the Lord. But Sampson was promised to Manoahs wife by the Angel of the Lord without any petition on her part made to this purpose and promised withall to be a deliverer of his people from the Philistins And in this particular or in the maner of the Angelicall Annunciation the birth of Sampson was a most lively type of the birth of our Saviour albeit this conception of Sampson was not so strange as that of Isaac That Sarah in her decrepit age should conceive a sonne was a matter incredible and unparalleld in any age of the world before or since yet not properly miraculous Through faith saith the Apostle Heb. 11. 11. Sarah received strength to conceive seede and was delivered of a child when she was past age either for conceiving seede or for bringing it forth conceived yet both shee did because she judged him faithfull who had promised The faith by which shee conceived strength was the gift of God and the strength which shee conceived by this faith was such a wondrous effect as these gifts which are attributed to the faith of miracles But Sarah having received this strength by faith the conception was according to the course of nature it was with her after the manner of women not so with the virgin Mary who became blessed by beleeving the Angel She did not receive strength to conceive seede the performance of those things which were foretold by the Angel were from the Lord himselfe Vnlesse shee had beleeved shee had not beene established yet her beleefe did not cooperate with the effect promised That was the immediate worke of the holy Ghost by marying part of her substance to the person of the Sonne of God after a manner unknowne to her There was not first a marriage and then a conception nor a conception first and then a marriage both were accomplished at once CHAP. 33. S. Mathewes relation of the maner of our Saviours conception and birth and of the harmony betwixt it and the prophecies IT is well observed by divers good writers that S. Mathew begins the Genealogie of our Saviour Christ not from Adam where S. Luke ordine retrogrado ends it but ordine recto from Abraham because the Covenant of the promised seede was first by oath established in Abrahams line and afterwards more particularly in Davids whose sonne and heire our Saviour was though sonne by adoption or next heire in reversion unto Ieconiah who was the last as these Authors think of Solomons line the last at least that could pretend unto the kingdome of David And though it be said in our Saviours Genealogie according to S. Mathew that Ieconiah begat Salathiel yet this cannot be meant of a naturall begetting but of a civil He was the son of Salathiel in such a sense as the holy Ghost useth in the second Psalme ver 7. Thou art my son this day have I begotten thee to wit unto the Kingdome of Israel if this place be literally to be understood of David as the most probable opinion is though afterwards to be mystically fulfilled only in Christ who is not only Gods only begotten sonne from eternity but his first begotten from the dead and so made King of Kings and Lord of Lords But of these points in their due place 2
then actually made Christ and Lord. Unto these two offices of everlasting Priest and everlasting King hee was not actually anointed or fully consecrated untill his resurrection from the dead Was not then the Sonne of God Lord before his resurrection Yes being God from eternitie hee was also Lord from eternity So we are taught by Athanasius The Father is Lord the Sonne is Lord and the H. Ghost is Lord. Whosoever is truely God is also truely Lord. And in this acception of Lord as there be not three Gods but one God so there be not three Lords but one Lord in the blessed Trinitie The Father is the onely God the onely Lord the Sonne is the only God the onely Lord the holy Ghost is the onely God the onely Lord. But whether this title of Lord as it is here inserted in this article of the Creed import no more then that the Sonne of God is the true and onely Lord with the Father and the holy Ghost or whether it were not before his birth in some sort peculiar to the Sonne is a point neither cleare in it selfe nor easie to be cleared because the ancient Translators especially the Greeke and Latine render the three originall words Elohim Iehâ—vah or the name of foure letters however it be pronounced and Adonai promiscuously by Lord. And yet these three words in the originall have their severall significations or importances To omit the word Elohim About the name of foure letters there is much contention how it should be pronounced yet all agree that it 〈…〉 and essence of God is his most proper name and admits no plurall The proper signification of the name Adonai is as much as Dominus or Lord. 4 The reason as I take it why the Greekes and Latines have usually but one expression of both names is because the ancient Hebrews did not pronounce the name of foure letters unlesse it were in the Sanctuary or in solemne benedictions Nor did they write it so as it might be pronounced that is with any proper vowels but either with the vowells of Adonai or of Elohim Not the Greekes and Latines onely but the Chaldee paraphrase sometimes reads Adonai where wee read Iehovah or the name of foure letters And thus it doth not from mistake of the Hebrew vowells which in the time of Onkelus the later of the two Chaldee paraphrases were not exprest And God said to Moses I appeared to Abraham unto Isaac and Iacob by the name of God Almighty but by my name Iehovah was I not knowne to them Exod. 6. 3. Or as the Caldee by the name Adonai c. Wherfore say unto the Children of Israel I am the Lord and I will bring you out from under the burthens of the Egyptians and I will rid you out of their bondage c. Some good writers in the interpretation of this place observe that albeit Abraham Isaac and Iacob were in high favour with God yet they wrought no miracles as Moses the first among the sonnes of men did And hence they infer that Moses did worke all his miracles in the power and vertue of this name whether Iehovah or Adonai which was first manifested unto to him 〈…〉 many interpretations of this place Fagrus best approves this Although God were knowne to Abraham as Omnipotent and All sufficient to performe whatsoever he hath promised yet was he not knowne unto Abraham or other of the Patriarks by that name or title which did import the instant performance of what he had promised unto Abraham This was immediately imported in the name of foure letters or in those descriptions which God there gave to Moses of his nature and essence or of his present purpose towards Israel in the 3 of Exod. ver 14. I am 〈◊〉 I am c. 5 And the 〈◊〉 paraphrase it is probable did use the name Adonai in stead of the name of foure letters as most pertinent and most significant to this purpose For it properly pertaines to him who is not onely in himselfe Almightie or All sufficient but Lord of all to dispose of Kingdomes and inheritances to depose greatest Lords and advance meanest servants If the name of foure Letters were to the ancient Hebrews as Drusius with some others will have it ineffable this was a true character of his incomprehensible nature which they properly signifie Nor doth the usuall substitution of Adonai for the want of foure letters want matter of more than grammaticall observation This practise was a literall Embleme or Character of that which our Evangelist hath exprest in words assertive Iohn 1. 18. No man hath seene God at any time the onely begotten Sonne which is in the bosome of the Father he hath declared him In this declaration or exposition of God whose incomprehensible nature was charactred by his ineffable name made by the Sonne of God incarnate there was a greater improvement of mans knowledge of God in respect of that knowledge which Moses and the Prophets had than there was in Moses his knowledge of God in respect of Abrahams Isaacs or Iacobs Moses and his Successors did see the performance of that which the name of Iehovah or Adonai first revealed to Moses did import to wit deliverance from their bodily Enemies and in that deliverance they had a pledge of far greater blessings promised which yet they did not receive For as our Apostle testifies Heb. 11. 39. Though Moses amongst others through faith obtained a good report yet hee did not receive the promise that is the blessing promised nor was the nature of man capable of this blessing promised untill that God who was first revealed unto Moses under the name of Iehovah was made Lord and Christ 6. It had beene a question more worthy of Drusius his paines then all the questions which he makes concerning the name of foure letters whether the name Adonai were not in some sort peculiar to the Sonne of God or to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who was to be made flesh That this name Adonai is so peculiar to the Sonne of God as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is I dare not affirme For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth no where to my remembrance denote any other person in the blessed Trinity besides the Sonne Whereas the name Adonai is an expression which many times referres unto the Trinity or Divine nature And in this extent it must be taken when it is substituted for the ineffable name of God unlesse some speciall circumstances restraine it to the Sonne But in many passages of the old Testament both names are exprest according to their proper consonants And in all these places the name Adonai referres only to the Sonne as the name of foure letters denotes the Father As in that 110 Psalm where we read The Lord said unto my Lord it is in the originall Iehovah said unto my Lord Adoni or Adonai And in this place the name of foure letters referres onely to God the Father But so doth not the name Adoni
was eclipsed at the time when Nicias was General for the Athenians against the Syracusians Or when Columbus made first discoverie of America are questions which may be scientifically resolved by astronomicall calculations But whether Nicias through ignorance of naturall causes and grosse superstition committed that intolerable oversight which as Plutarch relates occasioned the overthrow of the Athenian forces by Sea Land or whether Columbus made that witty advantage of the like eclipse which Benzo in his history of America mentions cannot be known by any computation Astronomicall or Chronologicall This wholly depends upon the authority of the Historians Yet if by calculations astronomicall compared with the Annales of those times it should appeare that there were no such Eclipses in the yeares pretended for these practices this would convince these historians and those whom they follow of errour if not of forgerie On the other side if Astronomers should make it cleare that in the points of time assigned by these Historians there did fall out such Eclipses of the Moone this would free them from suspition of fiction so much the more by how much they were lesse skilfull or lesse observant of the coelestiall motions or revolutions of times wherein Eclipses happen 2. But sometimes the sensible events or experiments may square so well with historicall relations as to leave no place for curiosity it selfe to suspect either fiction or falsehood in the Historian As who could suspect the truth of the Roman Histories which mention the subjection of this Iland to their Empire for divers successions if he had seene their coynes lately digged out of the earth bearing the inscriptions of twenty severall Emperours Or who could suspect the historicall truth of their progresse into the Northerne parts of this Kingdome that have observed the ruines of that wall which they built and other monuments as sutable to their Narrations as the seale is to the signet The best is that the experiments which suite unto the histories of the old and new Testaments are more plentifull and and more pregnant then any externall ratifications of any other historicall narrations can be For of sacred historicall truth besides the legible testimonies of the great book of the creatures every little world may have a world of witnesses in himselfe Now if our beliefe of the histories concerning Christ and him crucified be but equall to our beliefe of other histories yet their authority or esteeme will be much greater because we cannot believe this truth but we must withall believe it to be divine and every man by nature hath a more sacred esteeme of matters which hee conceives to be divine then hee can have of things meerely mundane or humane 3. But where the truth of historicall beleefe is to our apprehension the very same and the degrees of our assent unto it equall yet the estimate of the same truth or its impression upon our affections is not the same These vary according to the severall waight of matters related though by the same Author and beleeved by equall degrees of the same kinde of beleefe Of Edward the seconds strange defeate by Robert de Bruce King of Scotland and of Edward the third and the black Prince his sonne or Henry the fifth their successe against the French wee have but one and the same historicall beleefe whether for degree or quality yet are wee not the same way or in the same degree affected with the one story as with the other The reading of Edward the third of Henry the fifts successe delighteth us English with the ancient honour of our Nation The remembrance of Edward the seconds defeate doth so disaffect us that wee could wish this story were not so true as the other But how unpleasant soever the annales of Edward the second be to some English yet wee never observed any of this age to weepe at the reading of them whereas in some provinces of this Kingdome the battaile of Pannierehugh the rebellion in the North and that lesse disaster in the yeare following that rebellion upon the English borders could not have beene mentioned or seriously related within our memory without many teares of such Auditors as had no other knowledge of the events save onely from histories or from traditions which can produce no better beleefe than historicall 4. Some cases then there be in which although the authority of the Historian be the same and albeit the matters related by them be for weight or substance the same yet shall they not make the same impression upon our hearts or affections Yea matters in themselves considered of small moment will sometimes sway double as much as others of more then double waight unto them although the historicâ—ll beleife of both be equall The circumstances from which historicall truths of lesser waight simply considered receive these extraordinary degrees of gravitation are specially three Vicinity of place Recencie of time and Peculiar references to our Selves to our Country to our Friends or Allies The true reason why the historie of Christs death in some degree I suppose beleeved by all doth worke so little or so successelesly upon most mens affections is because they consider his death though in it selfe a matter of greatest consequence yet as a matter past a thousand and some hundred yeares agone or as a matter done by the Jewes more then two thousand miles from our coast And thus they consider it without any peculiar reference to themselves as the cause of it or no more concerning themselves then as they are Pars quota humani generis some little parcells or graines of mankinde or of the humane nature which he redeemed these being more innumerable than the sand on the Sea shore 5. But how firmely soever we apprehend the truth of Christs death and passion for the substance yet this apprehension cannot produce a true compleate historicall beleife of his death unlesse our apprehension of the substance be seconded with the like apprehension of such circumstances as are peculiar to this history above others What circumstances are these Although he suffered but once and that farre off and long agoe yet whatsoever he then suffered or did doth as neerely as immediately concerne every man this day living in what place soever as it did those that were living when he dyed either such as were sorrowfull spectators of his death or Actors in it For albeit he were offred but once and that but in one place without the gates of Jerusalem yet this one offering was of value truely infinite and for efficacy everlasting And being such it must be equally applyable to all persons times and places In his death in his infinite and everlasting sacrifice every one hath a peculiar interest not Pro ratâ but in solidum by vertue of that atonement which he made by that redemption which he purchased once for all he hath an entire absolute right of dominion over every one of us and every one of us hath
to be their enemie and he fought against them And so it is said that he was grieved forty yeares with that generation which he had delivered out of Egypt And both places were they to be limited only with reference to times past could not be meant of God otherwise then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in a metaphoricall sense But as well that complaint of the Psalmist as this of the Prophet Esay were not meerely historicall but propheticall both to be fulfilled after a more exquisite sense in later ages For all Gods mercies and loving kindnesse to their Fathers were but as pledges or talents given by way of earnest for greater goodnesse and more tender mercies towards later generations so they would be thankfull for the former God whilest he was onely in the forme of God could not in strict proprietie of speech be troubled could not be grieved with compassion could not be wearied All those are passions or accidentall affections incident only to flesh and bloud or at least to natures subject to servitude and punishment But of God in our nature and forme of a servant all these patheticall complaints were most exactly accomplished Who was weake amongst his people and he not weakned by their weakenesse who amongst them did mourne and he not mourne with them who was afflicted in body or soule and he not partaker of their afflictions Of all those duties of Christian charitie or fellow-feeling of others infirmities practised by his Apostles and commended to us by them he by his practise and conversation set the most exquisite patterne more exquisite then any who was but man could have set For he was a man of sorrowes and infirmities to beare all our grievances He cured no bodily infirmitie though he cured many whose griefe untill the cure was wrought he did not suffer by exact and perfect sympathy And only by the anguish of his soule and spirit not Israel alone but all people throughout the world whoever found or hope to finde any must find rest and comfort to their soules and consciences Yet all this the wicked posterity of that wicked generation whose ingratitude towards the God of their Fathers did minister both matter of complaint and of prophecy to the Prophet Esay and the Psalmist no way regarded but requited all the paines trouble and affliction which he had undertaken for their poore brethrens bodily good and the comfort of all their soules with superaddition of those deadly griefes and sorowes which by the Romans help they brought upon him This God of Israel in former times had fought for them and had conducted them in the form of an Angell Ioshuah himselfe being but his deputy or under Cōmander But now that they have thus ungratefully requited him for all his loving kindnesse towards their Fathers whilst he was onely in the forme of God or did appeare in the garb or figure not in the substance of an Angell and for all the troubles and grievances undertaken by him for their good whilest he was in the substance of man and forme of a servant he at length became their Enemie and fought against them For as Visitors though farre absent do yet visite by their Commissaries so this God of Israell that Jesus whom the Jews had crucified being made King of Kings and Lord of Lords did judge Ierusalem and the Nation of the Iews by Vespasian and Titus as by his deputies It was he not they that in that great warre did overcome them As they had grieved him more then their Forefathers had done with whom he was grieved forty yeares in the wildernesse so they did remaine in the Land of their promised rest but forty yeares after his death and so they remained in farre worse case then their forefathers had done in the wildernesse and their posterity since have wandred throughout the world as unwelcome guests for almost these sixteene hundred yeares CHAP. 23. That God was to visite his Temple after such a visible and personall manner as the Prophet Ieremy in his name had done THe moderne Iew cannot deny that of the Prophet Ieremy chap. 7. ver 3 4. c. to be meant of God alone nor is he able to shew us how it was or could be otherwise fulfilled then of God incarnate or of God in the visible nature and substance of man-comming to visite his Temple Thus saith the Lord of hosts the God of Israel Amend your waies and your doings and I will cause you to dwell in this place Trust yee not in lying words saying The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord are these And againe ver 8. Behold yee trust in lying words that cannot profit Will yee steale murther and commit adultery and sweare falsly and burne incense unto Baal and walk after other gods whom yee know not and come and stand before me in this house which is called by my name and say We are delivered to doe all these abominations Is this house which is called by my name become a denne of Robbers in your eyes Behold even I have seen it saith the Lord. To have denyed that God at this time did truly heare what this people said did truely see what they did did perfectly understand their secret thoughts had beene an errour much grosser and more dangerous then the errour of the Anthropomorphitae that is of such as imagined God by nature to have eyes eares and heart like man For that was but an heresie or transformation of the Deity the other was Epicurisme the worst and grossest errour wherewith the very heathen or Infidels were possest And so the Psalmist describeth it Psal 94. 7. Yet they say the Lord shall not see neither shall the God of Iacob regard it Vnderstand yee brutish among the people and yee fooles when will yee be wise He that planted the eare shall he not heare he that formed the eye shall he not see c. 2. Sight and hearing were in those times as truly attributed to God as now they can be yet in a generall or transcendent not so exquisite so proper and formall a sense as the patheticall expression which the Prophet there used doth literally imply Behold even I have seene it saith the Lord. For certainely that implies a great deale more then by ordinary Catechismes or domestique instructions they could have learned thus much at the least that the Lord God himselfe who sent the Prophet to deliver this message The Lord God of Israel who neither slumbreth nor sleepeth would watch his oportunity unlesse they did amend these misdemenors to visit them and his temple not by a Prophet or deputed Commissary but in person and after as evident and visible a manner to flesh and blood as the Prophet had done but with farre greater power The Prophet had only meere spirituall power to protest against them no coërcive authority to punish the delinquents or to banish these abuses out of the Temple This case was
not a principall and an Analogicall sense The true reason that may be given for it is that the wisedome of God did thus fore-ordaine it that so this great mystery of the eternall Word 's becomming flesh might bee foreshadowed as well by verball character as foretold by expresse propheticall testimonies delivered by way of propositions or prefigured by reall types in the Law or in matter of facts in sacred history CHAP. 29. Of the true meaning of this speech the word was made flesh Whether it be all one for the Word to be made flesh and to be made man or whether He were made flesh and made man at the same instant BUt it being granted and I hope sufficiently proved that the incarnation of the Word is the very life and kernell of the Gospell that the Patriarchs and Prophets did solace themselves and taught their childrens children to doe the like in all their perplexities by assured hope of this great mystery in the Lords good time to be revealed yet the curious fancies of captious wits have been and will bee ready to question though not the matter or mystery it selfe yet the manner of our Evangelists expression of it the Word was made flesh To be made flesh is to be made a substance and the Word which is said to be made flesh was more then a substance the everliving essence the life and light of men before he was manifested in the flesh Doth he still remaine so So we Christians are bound to beleeve Yet might the Jew or meere heathen artist have liberty to oppose us they would find matter of argument to this or like purpose whensoever one substance is truly made another the former substance ceaseth to be what it was before For the truth of this generall rule instances are plentifull in all sorts of substances which are said to be made what they were not before when one simple Elements is made another when the water becomes a vapour it ceaseth to be water when the Vapour is made a cloud it is no longer a vapour when the cloud resolves into raine it is no more a cloud when of the Elements any third body is made whether perfectly or imperfectly mixt they cease to be what they were they lose both their forme and names Nor skils it whether one substance be made or becomes another which before it was not by course of nature or immediately by the finger of God or by the exercise of his miraculous power For it was a true miracle and a great one that pure water should be immediately made perfect wine and yet the water being made wine did cease to be what it was before it was no longer a simple Element but a true mixt body Now the Word as all Christians grant was an everlasting Essence more then a substance before it was made or became flesh How then can wee Christians mainteyne that it still remaines the same it was without any reall alteration or change whether substantiall or accidentall To this objection wee reply as before wee have done in other cases that multitude of instances how many soever cannot make up a perfect induction if in any one pretended for grounding a rule or proposition absolutely universall there be the least diversitie or dissimilitude of reason Every such diversity or disparity acquits the instance in which it is found for being comprehended under the rule or law otherwise universall Admitting it then to be universally true of all other substances or Essences in the World besides Whensoever one is made or becomes another which before it was not that substance which is made another doth lose it selfe or ceaseth to be what it was Yet this universall rule will not reach the instance now in debate concerning the Word 's being made flesh The reason is plaine not from the manner of this miraculous work but from the nature or supereminency of that everlasting substance or Essence which was miraculously made flesh All other Essences or substances which are capable of being made or becoming what they were not are capable of change or alteration in their substances They do not either lose their owne names or suffer the names of other substances to be put upon them untill they have put off their owne natures or lost possession of themselves The law of nature ties evē livelesse substāces more strictly not to change their names untill they be conquered or overcome by others then the laws of Heraldrie ties Nobles or Gentlemen not to alter their ancient Armes or names which they seldome do unlesse upon conquest or some marriage or alliance beneficiall or advantagious to their house or Family But the Word of God which endureth for ever was and is as unchangeable as God himselfe was and is from eternity more then all things Essence or being it selfe As all things were made by him so he might when he pleased bee made flesh or man without any change or alteration in himselfe either whilst all things were made by him or whilst hee were made this particular It is then the preheminence or superexcellency of his nature or Essence which exempts him from the former generall rule or pretended induction 2 For the more commodious expression as of divers other supernaturall mysteries or matters spirituall so of this great mysterie especially the the fittest resemblance which can be made of thē must be borrowed not from experiments or inductions in matters physicall but from cases of civill use or consequence Mutations accidentall there may be many physically accidentall in one and the same substance without any alteration in the substance in which such change is made Yet such changes of accidents properly inherent for the most part either adde some perfection to the substance or detract somewhat from it But for a person already invested with honourable names or titles and with realities answering to them to invest himselfe with realities or titles of an inferior rank is no disparagement to his former dignities Thus many Princes by birth and of great possessiōs sometimes take the names or titles of Knights are solemnely made Knights created Earles sometimes made Gentlemen of Venice and some Kings of this Land have beene made free of particular Companies or Corporations under their royall jurisdiction and so made without any impeachement or diminution of their royall titles but only to the grace or advancement of that order whereof they were made Knights or of those Societies and Corporations whereof they were made free And thus although the Word who before the beginning of time was with God was truely God was in the fulnesse of time made flesh this can be no impeachment to his Deitie or Divine person but an unspeakable exaltatiō or advancement of the humane nature which he took upon him And herein we poore miserable men so wee would be thankfull for it have a preheminence of the Angelicall nature in that the son of God God blessed for ever did vouchsafe to become one of our
be more or lesse capable of his presence or participation But this participation in what degree in what manner or measure soever it be had includes no physicall composition or confusion of natures Thus much Athanasius to prevent all captious exceptions against this similitude had sufficiently expressed in the place forecited though he be God and man yet he is not two but one Christ One not by the conversion of the Godhead into flesh but by taking of the manhood into God One altogether not by confusion of substance but by unitie of person 5. Some Philosophers there are and have been who although they grant a Physicall composition of matter and forme in man yet they deny the reasonable soule the intellectuall part at lest to be the forme of man or any part of the Physicall compound which in their Philosophy is prerequired to the constitution of man not any proper part of his essence or nature That visible live-live-substance wherein the reasonable soule during her pilgrimage here on earth doth reside as in a walking prison is in these mens Philosophy or Divinity as formally distinguished by its meer organical faculties or bodily senses from all other living sensitive creatures as any of them is from another And they are distinguished each from other only by the peculiar manner of the senses or modification of their organicall faculties The reasonable soule or faculty of reason is in this opinion rather the Crowne or Diadem whereby man excells all other creatures as their King or Governour then the Physicall forme whereby he is formally or specifically distinguished from them According to this opinion there should be in one and the same man two distinct compleat natures one bodily physicall compound indued with sense and subject to mortality another rationall and immortall And these two natures make one man not by physicall composition or union of matter and forme but by a peculiar subordination of the sensitive Creature unto the rationall or of sense unto reason as true as firme and reall as the subordination of life is to sense or bodily mixture is unto life or vegetation but not by the same manner of subordination If Athanasius his philosophy were of this mould his comparison would be true quoad modum however leaving the examination of this opinion to the Schooles let us examime his comparison quoad veritatem mensuram 6 Such Philosophers as grant the reasonable soule to be a forme truely physicall and an incompleat part of mans nature do not for the most part affirme that it is propagated from the parents of our bodyes but created by God as the soule of the first man was And yet even these men who deny the reasonable soule to be ex traduce do not avouch that only the bodily part or flesh of man is conceived but the whole man who consists of a reasonable soule aswell as of a body The full and perfect conception of every living thing includes not only a preparation of the bodily substance for receiving the foule but besides this the unition of the foule whether sensitive only or reasonable with its proper body And seeing the proper nature of man consists especially in reason there can be no perfect conception of man as man untill the reasonable soule be seated in and united unto the bodily substance fitted or organized for it Whether that bodily substance were before this union endued with sense or no is not much pertinent to the point now in hand However Philosophers may dispute that case this position is proper and philosophicall Man doth beget man and woman conceives man although the reasonable soule which is the principall part of man do not take its originall or beginning of being either from the man that begets him or from the woman that conceives and brings him forth but immediately from GOD. 7 This assertion likewise is Christian and Theologicall The blessed Virgin did truely conceive and bring forth Christ Jesus God and man the sonne of God and the sonne of David albebeit the Divine nature which is the excellency of Christ did not take beginning from her but was from all eternitie without beginning yet not united to the manhood till the conception wrought by the holy Ghost in the Virgins womb though both assertioÌ„s be most true yet the grouÌ„d of this theologicall assertion is more perspicuous and firme then the ground of the philosophers assertion wherewith it is paralleld Wee Christians may give a better reason of our faith and forme of doctrine then the Philosophers can give of their opinion or manner of phrase in this point First in the conception of ordinary or meere men the bodily substance or the materiall part hath a distinct existence of its owne before it be united unto the reasonable soule and the reasonable soule likewise hath a proper existence at least in order of nature if not of time precedent to its vnion with its body Nor is the union so perfect as to make simply but one existence of both It is actually one potentially two and in the dissolution of body and soule they are actually severed there is not then so much as coexistence or existence of the one in the other But neither the substance which the sonne of God took from the blessed virgin nor the reasonable soule which was united unto it had any proper existence before their union with the divine nature The bodily substance assumed by his divine person was a part of the blessed virgines individuall nature and had its whole existence in her before its assumption but by the assumption it hath existence wholly in him not as a part but as an Appendix to his divine person That which the Philosophers or Schoole Divines say concerning the creation of the reasonable soule and its union with mans body is more remarkably true of Christs humane soule The reasonable soule say the Philosophers infundendo creatur et creando infunditur is created by infusion and is infused by creation Christs reasonable soule was not in order either of time or nature first created then assumed sed assumendo creabatur et creando assumebatur it was created whilest it was assumed and it was assumed whilst it was created Whether it were united to the body or flesh from the first moment of their assumption is an extravagant to this assertion The substance likewise which our blessed Saviour tooke from his mother was not either in order of time or of nature first conceived or prepared by any praeviall dispositions for the divine natures habitation in it and then assumed sed inter assumendum concipiebatur et inter concipieâ—dum assumebatur it was conceived by assumption and assumed in or by its conception 8. The next branch of this inquiry is what is meant when wee say the fruit of the Virgins womb was assumed by the Sonne of God This forme of speech imports thus much at the least that the son of God or the divine nature in his person
was to be partaker of flesh and bloud as we sonnes of men are So the Apostle teacheth Heb. 2. 14. For asmuch theâ— as the children are partakers of flesh and blood hee also himselfe likewise tooke part of the same that through death hee might destroy him that had the power of death that is the Devill This participation of flesh bloud with his brethren is but an expression of the assumption Verely saith the Apostle ver 16 he tooke not hold of the Angels but he tooke hold of the seede of Abraham The meaning of these expressions as likewise of the originall word is that albeit the Angels were created by him yet were they not so assumed or so united to his person as the seede of Abraham was and is Nor is he partaker of their nature or of any other nature besides after such a peculiar manner as he is of the humane nature by assuming the seed of Abraham Some Schoole Divines and followers of Aquinas will have the former similitude of Athanasius to consist especially in this that as the reasonable soule doth use the body of man so the divine nature of Christ doth use the manhood as its proper united instrument Every other man besides the man Christ Jesus every other creature is the instrument of God but al of them such instruments of the divine nature as the axe or hammer is to the artificer which worketh by them The most puissant Princes the mightiest Conquerors which the world hath seene or felt could grow no higher in titles then Attilas or Nebuchadnezzar did Malleus orbis et flagellum Dei hammers or scourges of God to chastise or bruise the Nations But the humanity of Christ is such an instrument of the divine nature in his person as the hand of man is to the person or partie whose hand it is And it is well observed whether by Aquinas himselfe or no I remember not but by Viguerius an accurate summist of Aquinas summes that albeit the intellectuall part of man bee a spirituall substance and separated from the matter or bodily part yet is the union betwixt the hand and intellectuall part of man no lesse firme no lesse proper then the union betweene the feet or other organicall parts of sensitive Creatures and their sensitive soules or mere Physicall formes For the intellectuall part of man whether it be the forme of man truely though not merely physicall or rather his essence not his forme at all doth uâ—e his owne hand not as the Carpenter doth use his axe that is not as an externall or separated but as his proper united instrument Nor is the union betweene the hand as the instrument and intellective part at the Artificer or Commander of it an union of matter and forme but an union personall or at the least such an union as resembles the hypostaticall union betweene the divine and humane nature of Christ much better then any materiall union wherein Philosophers or Schoole Divines can make instance 9. These and the like speculations are neither unpleasant nor unprofitable if so the Reader will not restraine the former similitude of Athanasius only to this kinde of union But after what manner to what speciall purposes or what peculiar services the manhood of Christ is the instrument of his divine nature as the ancient for the most part unanimously affirme by Gods assistance in other Articles following or in the mysticall union betwixt Christ and his members Thus much in this place and for the present may suffice that the personall union betweene the divinity and manhood of Christ though it be in it selfe more admirable then comprehensible or expressible is more proper and firme then any union which can be made by mixture by confusion by composition or compaction of severall natures into one But what Athanasius meant in that expression of taking the manhood into God may if I mistake not to my present purpose which is only to lay the general grounds of these communications of properties which Divines whether antient or moderne obserue betweene the divine and humane nature of Christ be yet further explicated by answering the maine objection that can be made against Athanasius his similitude or these illustrations of it 10. Some haply will object and it is all I think that can be objected against us that as wee are such is our flesh such is our bloud We are by nature men and our flesh and bloud is by nature only humane or the flesh and bloud of men but if the flesh and bloud whereof the sonne of God is partaker bee as truely his as our flesh and bloud is ours shall they not be such as he is that is flesh and bloud truely divine not humane This must in no wise be granted otherwise the sonne of God should not be as the Apostle avoucheth hee is partaker with us of the same flesh and bloud The flesh and bloud which he assumed and was partaker of are as truely humane as mans flesh bloud are and of the selfe same nature that mans flesh and bloud are of And of such flesh he was to be as truely as properly partaker as we are And yet it is necessary that the same flesh and bloud which he assumed be as truely and as properly the flesh and bloud of the sonne of God who is by nature God blessed for ever as our flesh is the flesh or our bloud the bloud of the sonnes of men Otherwise albeit the flesh and bloud assumed by him had been as truely and as properly humane flesh and bloud as ours is yet could not the son of God have beene as true and proper a partaker of humane flesh and bloud as wee sonnes of men are For no party or person can as truely and really participate with another in that which is not his owne by as perfect right as it is the others who is partaker of it with him So then the flesh and bloud of our Saviour Christ was truely and properly Caro humana non divina sanguis humanus non divinus not divine but humane flesh and bloud and yet withall as truely and properly Caro Dei and Sanguis Dei the flesh and bloud of God as it was caro humana sanguis humanus humane flesh and humane bloud more properly the flesh and bloud of God then the flesh bloud of man For eveÌ„ the whole humanity of Christ aswell the reasonable soule as the flesh was and is the humanity of the son of God God saith the Apostle Acts 20. 28. hath purchased the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with his owne proper bloud Now if the Church be Gods owne not by creation only but by true purchase then the bloud by which hee purchased it was as truely his owne as our bloud or any thing within us or without us which we can owne is ours But was it Gods owne bloud after the selfesame manner or measure that our bloud is ours It was not in every respect or