and from Sabbath to Sabbath shall all flesh come to worship before mee saith the Lord. The externall or ceremoniall Sabbath is a certain time ordained and in stituted by God in the Church dedicated to a ceasing from works and labours and given to the Ministery of Gods Word and to the administration of the Sacraments or to the externall publike worship of God This ceremoniall Sabbath was necessary in the Old Testament to be the seventh day and that on that day as also on other holy dayes the Leviticall ceremonies should be observed This ceremoniall Sabbath is a thing indifferent in the N. Testament This externall Sabbath is also of two sorts Immediate and Mediate Immediate is that which was immediatly instituted by God himselfe and prescribed to the Church of the Old Testament and this was diversly taken in the Old Testament Divers Sabbaths in the Old Testament The Sabbath of daies The Sabbath of dayes was every seventh day of the weeke which was in a more particular sense called the Sabbath both in respect of Gods rest from the Creation of the world and in respect of that rest which was commanded the people of God to be kept on that day Hence the whole seven dayes or the whole weeke was with the Hebrewes called by the name of the chiefe day the Sabbath or Sabbaths Now in the end of the Sabbath Mat. 28.1 when the first day of the Sabbath that is of the week began to dawne Likewise Levit. 23.15 the Sabbaths of daies were other festivall dayes as the feast of the Passeover Whitsontide Tabernacles Trumpets c. because in these feasts the people were to rest as on the seventh day The Sabbath of months The Sabbath of months was the new Moones The Sabbath of yeeres The Sabbath of yeares was every seventh yeere Lâ—v. 25.4 26 35. Levit. 25.8 wherein the Jewes were commanded to intermit the tillage of their fields And hereof also the whole seven yeeres were by a Synecdoche called Sabbaths Thou shalt number seven Sabbaths of yeeres unto thee even seven times seven yeeres The mediate externall Sabbath is that which God doth mediately constitute by his Church in the New Testament such as is the first day of the week to wit Sunday or rather the Lords day which the Christian Church ever since the Apostles time observeth instead of the seventh or Sabbath day in respect of Christs resurrection witnesse that of John I was ravished in spirit on the Lords day Revel 1.10 More briefly thus The ceremoniall Sabbath is twofold one of the old Testament another of the new The old Sabbath was tied to the seventh day and the keeping of it was necessary and was the precise worship of God The new Sabbath dependeth on the arbitrement or appointment of the Church which for certaine causes maketh choice of the first day and that first day is to be observed for orders sake but without any opinion of necessity as if that and no other were to be observed by the Church of which difference more shall be spoken in the Question next ensuing A Table of the distinction of the Sabbath The Sabbath that is to say the ceasing or rest from working is 1. Internall morall and spirituall as the rest from sinne 2. Externall and Ceremoniall instituted by God 1. Immediately in the old Testament as the Sabbath of 1. Dayes which were the 1. Seventh day 2. Feast-dayes of the Passeover Whitsunday c. 2. Months as the new Moones 3. Yeâ—res as every seventh yeare 2. Mediately by the Church in the new Testament as the Lords day 2. How the Sabbath belongeth unto us Christians THe Sabbath of the seventh day was even from the beginning of the world designed by God to signifie that men should after the example of God himself rest from their labours and especially from sinnes and afterwards in Moses law this Commandement was againe repeated and then with all was the ceremony of ceasing from labour on the seventh day ordained to be a Sacrament that is a signe and token of that sanctifying whereby God signifieth himselfe to be the Sanctifier of his Church that is to pardon her all her sinnes and offences to receive her to favour to endue and rule her with his holy Spirit for the beginning of new and everlasting life in her in this life which afterwards should be accomplished and perfected for and by the Messias promised to the Fathers And this is the reason why the Ceremoniall Sabbath of the seventh day is now abolished namely because it was typicall admonishing the people of their own duty towards God of Gods benefits towards them which was to be performed by Christ for which selfe same cause also all the other Sacraments and Sacrifices and ceremonies made before and after the Law were abolished by the coming of Christ by whom that was fulfilled that they signified But although the Ceremoniall Sabbath is abrogated and disannulled in the new Testament yet the Morall Sabbath continueth still and belongeth unto us and doth still remain which is that some time is to be allotted for the Ministery of the Church For as heretofore in the Jewish Church so now in the Christian Church we must ever have some day wherein the Word of God may be taught in the Church and the Sacraments administred But neverthelesse we are not restrained or tied to have either Saturday or Wednesday or any other certaine day For the Apostolike Church to distinguish it selfe from the Jewish Synagogue according to the liberty where-with shee is enfranchised by Christ instead of the seventh day hath on good reason made choice of the first day namely because on that day was Christs resurrection whereby the spirituall and internall Sabbath is begun in us Briefly the Sabbath doth not belong to us Ceremonially in speciall and particular albeit it doth belong to us and so to all men and ever continueth both morally and ceremonially in generall that is wee must have some day wherein the Church may be instructed and the Sacraments administred but wee are not tied to any certaine day Object against the abrogating of the Ceremoniall Sabbath The Jews against the abrogation of the Ceremoniall Sabbath thus urge Ob. 1. The Decalogue is a perpetuall law The commandement of the Sabbath is a part of the Decalogue therefore it is a perpetuall law and not to be abolished Ans The Decalogue is a perpetuall law as it is a Morall law But the Additions or circumstances and limitations of the Morall precepts annexed by way of signification were to be kept untill the coming of the Messias Object 2. The commandements of the Decalogue belong unto all This is a commandement of the Decalogue therefore it belongeth unto all Answ The commandements of the Decalogue which are morall belong unto all But this commandement is in part ceremoniall and so as it is ceremoniall it belongeth not to us albeit the generall belong unto us The reasons
that God plagueth and scourgeth sin with sin and the sins which follow are the punishments of sins which went before Actuall sin Wherefore also God gave them up to their hearts lust unto uncleannesse they wrought filthinesse and received in themselves such recompence of their errour as was meet Objects of sin Rom. 24 27. 2 Thes 2.1 Therefore God shall send them strong delusions that they should beleeve lies c. But whereas the wit of man to such a height of insolency it is grown is accustomed to frame the like arguments for the excusing of it selfe and shifting and posting it from it selfe unto God we must here enter some large discourse of the causes of sin and shake off mans frivolous pretences in his owne behalfe Destiny Some derive the originall cause of sin from the destiny of the Stars saying Foure pretended causes of sin I have sinned because I was borne under an unluckie Planet The Divell Others when they sin and are rebuked for their sinne they make answer Not I but the Divell was in fault that committed this deed Gods will Others leaving excuses directly cast the fault upon God saying God would have it so for if he would not I should not have sinned Gods permission Others When God say they might have hindered me and yet did not himselfe is the authour of my sin With these and the like pretences it is no new thing for men to sharpen their blasphemous tongues against God For our first Parents when they had sinned and were accused of their sin by God they translate and passe over the fault committed from themselves to others neither ingenuously confesse the truth Adam returneth the fault not so much upon his wife as upon God himselfe The woman saith he which thou gavest to be with me she gave me of the tree Gen 3.12 13. and I did eate as if he should say Except thou hadst joyned her to me I had not sinned The woman simply imputeth the fault to the Divell saying The Serpent beguiled me and I did eate These are the false impious and detestable judgements concerning the originall of sinne whereby the majesty truth and justice of God is grievously offended For the nature of man is not the cause of sinne for God created it good and perfect according as it is said And God saw all things which he had made and lo they were very good Sin is an accessary quality which took possession of man after the fall and no substantiall property although after the fall it became naturall and is fitly so termed by Augustine because now we are all borne in sinne Ephes 2.3 and are by nature the children of wrath as well as others But this point would be more amplified and enlarged 1. They who make Destiny a cloak for sinne define Destiny to be a linked order through all eternity and a certaine perpetuall necessity of intents and workes according to the counsell of God or according to the evill Planets Now if you aske them Who made the Planets God say they Therefore these men lay their evill to Gods charge but such a destiny did not all the sounder Philosophers maintaine Destiny is not the cause of sin Lib. 2. cap. 6. much lesse Christians Saint Augustine against two Epistles of the Pelagians unto Boniface They saith he who hold destiny maintaine that not only actions and events but also our wils themselves depend on the position of the Planets at the time of every ones conception or nativity which they call constellations But the grace of God surpasseth not onely all the stars and all the heavens but also the Angels Let us conclude these things with the word of the Lord by his Prophet Jeremy pronouncing to this sense Jer. 10.2 3. Thus saith the Lord Learne not the way of the Heathen and be not affraid for the signes of heaven though the Heathen be affraid of such for the customes of the people are vaine Wherefore that the Astrologers call the Planet of Saturn unmercifull sharp and cruell and the Planet of Venus favourable and gentle it is the vanity of vanities for the stars have no force of doing good or ill and therefore the fault of sinners ought not to be imputed unto them 2. That the Divell is not the onely authour of sin who when as wee commit sin The Divell not the only author of sin should beare alone the blame of the sin and our selves be free from fault it is most of all declared in this that he is able to induce and entice a man to evill but not to compell him For God keepeth under the Divell by his power that he cannot doe what he will but only what and so much as God permitteth him Nay hee hath not so much as power over filthy Swine much lesse over the most noble Soules of men He hath indeed a subtilty great force in perswading but God is stronger who also never ceaseth himself to put good motions into mans mind neither permitteth he more to Sathan then he maketh profitable for man Which wee may see in that most holy man Job in the example of Paul and in his words 1 Cor. 10.13 God is faithfull which will not suffer you to be tempted above that you be able Wherefore they are vain men who unload the blame of their wickednesse on the Divels shoulders 3. It remaineth that we shew also that God is not the authour of sin God is no cause of sin God say these miscreants would have it so for if hee would not I should not have sinned Againe When he might have hindered me and yet did not himselfe is the author of my sin These are meere cavils and foisty Sophismes of the impious rout God might by his absolute power hinder evill but he will not corrupt his creature man being just and righteous Wherefore he dealeth with man after the order of man he proposeth lawes unto him he proposeth rewards and punishments he willeth him to imbrace good and flye evill To the doing of which thing neither denieth he his grace without which we can do nothing neither refuseth he our diligence and labour Here if a man cease and give over the sinne and negligence is ascribed to man not to God though he could have hindred it and did not because he ought not to hinder it lest he should trouble his appointed and settled order and destroy his owne work Wherefore God is not author of evill or sin Now in the processe of this our discourse wee will gather in one the testimonies of Scripture resolve certain doubts and discover the very fountain and originall of sin Many are the testimonies of Scripture which teach us that God is not the author of sin of which it shall suffice to propose only some few God made not death Wisd 1.13 Ezek. 13.11 Psal 5.4 5. neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living I desire not
hypocrites have 3. In extent It comprehendeth the rest but is not comprehended by them Justifying faith therefore differeth from Historicall faith in that it alwayes comprehendeth Historicall but this is not sufficient to make a justifying faith as neither are the other two And it differeth from them all because by justifying faith alone righteousnesse and inheritance is obtained For if as the Apostle saith we are justified by faith and faith is imputed for righteousnesse 4. In effect end It only obtaineth the inheritance Rom. 3.28 Rom. 4.5 and the inheritance is by faith that faith then shall be one of these four But it is not historicall faith for then the divels also should be accounted righteous and heirs of the promise neither temporary for that is rejected by Christ nor the faith of miracles for if so Judas also should be heir Righteousnesse therefore and the inheritance is of justifying faith alone which indeed is properly simply and absolutely termed faith in the Scripture and is peculiar to the elect and chosen No man knoweth what justifying faith is but hee that hath it Now what justifying faith is no man truly understandeth but he who hath it for he that beleeveth knoweth that he doth beleeve as he who never saw or tasted hony knoweth not of what quality it is in the taste though you tell him much of the sweetnesse of hony But whosoever truly beleeveth that is hath a saving faith he both hath experience in himself of these things and also is able to declare them to others For 1. He being convicted thereof in his conscience knoweth Properties of justifying faith John 3.36 that whatsoever things are spoken in the Scripture are true and divine For faith is builded upon a certain or assured and divine testimony otherwise it were not a full perswasion 2. He findeth himself bound to beleeve them for if we confesse them to be true it is then just and meet that we should assent unto them 3. He principally respecteth imbraceth and applyeth to himselfe the promise of grace and of free remission of sins righteousnesse and life everlasting by and for Christ as it is said John 8.36 Hee which beleeveth in the Son of God hath life everlasting 4. He being emboldned on this confidence relyeth on the present grace of God and out of it doth thus gather and conclude of further grace By the present love of God towards mee and the beginnings of the first fruits of the holy Ghost which so great blessings God imparteth unto me I certainly resolve and am perswaded that God will never change his good will towards me sith he himselfe is unchangeable and his gifts without repentance therefore I hope also for a consummation and accomplishment of these blessings that is for plenary and full redemption 5. He rejoyceth in the present blessings which he hath but most of all in the certain and perfect salvation to come and this is that peace of conscience which passeth all mens understanding 6. Hee hath a will to obey the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles without any exception in doing or suffering whatsoever is therein commanded If I will beleeve God I must obey his will and think that this his will is not revealed unto us from men but from him Wherefore a man indued with justifying faith doth that duty which is imposed upon him strive the world and the divell never so much against him and undergoeth beareth and suffereth whatsoever adversities for the glory of God cheerfully and boldly having God his most benign and good Father 7. He is certain that his faith though it be in this life imperfect and languishing and oftentimes very much eclipsed yet being builded upon the promise of God which is unchangeable doth never altogether faile or die but the purpose which it hath of beleeving and obeying God continueth it striveth with doubts and temptations and at length vanquisheth and in the celestiall life which is to come shall be changed into a full and most certain knowledge of God and his will where we shall see God face to face 1 Cor. 13.12 All this whosoever truly beleeveth he feeleth sensibly in himself and whosoever feeleth this sensibly in himselfe he truly beleeveth 4. How faith and hope differ Faith apprehendeth things present hope respecteth things to come JUstifying faith is not confounded with hope though they both respect the same benefits for faith taketh hold of the present good as remission of sins or reconciliation and regeneration or the beginning of obedience and life everlasting in us Hope eyeth the good to come as the continuance of our reconciliation and the perfecting or accomplishment of everlasting life or our conformity with God that is full delivery from all evill Object Life everlasting is a thing to come We beleeve life everlasting We beleeve therefore that which is to come that is faith is also of things to come and so faith is hope it self Ans The Major must be distinguished Life everlasting is to come true as concerning the consummation or accomplishment thereof in this respect it is not now simply beleeved but hoped for We are saved by hope Rom. 8.24 1 John 3.2 How life everlasting is a present and how a future good Now we are the sons of God but it doth not appear what we shall be Life everlasting is also a present good 1. As concerning the will and unchangeable purpose of God who hath decreed from everlasting that which he hath begun in us and will also in due time accomplish it 2. As concerning the beginning thereof in this present life for everlasting life is begun here in the elect by the holy Ghost and in this respect is not hoped but beleeved according to those aphorismes and brief sentences of Scripture He that beleeveth in the Son hath life everlasting John 5.24 and hath passed from death unto life John 17.3 This is life eternall that they know thee to be the only very God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ. By faith then we are certain that those blessings which as yet we have not are not withstanding ours for Gods promise and for the unchangeable will in God to give them us but in certain hope we look for them as concerning their accomplishment The summe is There is one and the same act and operation of faith and hope but they differ in consideration It is called faith as it doth apprehend things to come as if they were present in regard of the unchangeablenesse of Gods will it is called hope as it doth certainly look for the bestowing of those things And in this sense the Apostle saith that faith is conversant in things hoped for Faith saith he is the ground and substance of things hoped for Hebr. 11.1 that is it is that which maketh things which are hoped for to be extant and present and is the evidence of things which appear not or are not seen to
and majesty for those which are proper unto created natures would not be good in God but rather a diminishing of his goodnesse 3. By reason of the immensity of his divine nature those things which are finite in creatures are in God infinite And therefore against sundry and divers disputes of the Philosophers concerning the chiefest good we learn in the Church that God is the chiefest good 4. Because nothing is unperfect or not subsisting by it self in God whatsoever is attributed unto him is not in him as forms or accidents in creatures but such is his essence and nature in a manner not able to be comprehended by our knowledge and understanding 5. His nature and will is a rule of that goodnesse and uprightnesse which is in the creatures for so far forth things are and are called good as they agree with the will of God 6. God is the only fountain of goodnesse and the first cause of all good things so shall all things have so much goodnesse as God doth create and maintain in them Luke 18.9 and in this sense it is said There is none good but God only even so as he is most perfectly good and the fountain of goodnesse The righteousness of God both generall and particular Righteous The righteousnesse of God sometimes in Scripture signifieth that which is accounted righteousnesse before him and whereby he maketh us righteous and that elsewhere legall which is holinesse of life or conformity with the law of God which God worketh in us by his Spirit begun in this life and to be perfected in the life to come James 1.20 as The wrath of man doth not accomplish the righteousnesse of God Or sometimes Evangelicall which is the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to beleevers of the free mercy of God as Rom. 3.21 22 But now is the righteousnesse of God made manifest without the Law having witnesse of the Law and of the Prophets to wit the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve Sometimes is meant that righteousnesse whereby himselfe is righteous and then also in many places it signifieth the faithfulnesse or mercy and benignity of God who according to his promises preserveth defendeth and delivereth the faithfull as Psal 31.1 Deliver me in thy righteousness But when it is properly spoken of the righteousnesse of God whereby himself is righteous as in this place he is called just 1. In respect of his generall justice and righteousnesse which is the order or nature of his divine understanding and will whereby God willeth and approveth doth him self and worketh in others unchangeably and unspeakably such things as he hath commanded in his law and neither willeth nor approveth nor worketh nor causeth nor furthereth any thing whatsoever disagreeth from this order but horribly hateth and detesteth them as it is said The righteous Lord loveth righteousnesse 2. In respect of his particular justice and righteousnesse which is the unchangeable will of God whereby God giveth to him selfe and will have given him by others that glory which is due unto the chief good as he saith I will not give my glory to another and punisheth all sin with such punishment as is equall to the offence that is with eternall as in them who perish or with equivalent as in his Son Christ sustaining the punishment for all those who are saved by him according as it is said Matth. 5.26 Thou shalt not depart thence untill thou hast paid the utmost farthing And cannot injure any creature whatsoever hee determineth of him or doth unto him because hee oweth no man any thing as it is said Psal 145.17 Acts 10.34 God is just in all his wayes God is no accepter of persons 3. Gods divine will is the chiefe and perfect rule and only square of uprightnesse and therefore God alone because hee is exceeding good cannot of his own nature will or work any unjust thing but the wils and actions of all creatures are so far just as they are made by God conformable to divine will Now although all confesse God to be righteous and just because God hath imprinted this notion and knowledge of him selfe among other in the reasonable creature because he is perfectly good and therefore is the rule of perfect righteousnesse because he witnesseth by examples of punishments and rewards that hee hateth and punisheth unjust things and liketh the just because he is the Judge of the world to whom it belongeth to compose or set and administer all things in a just order because lastly he oweth not any thing to any nature but by the right of a Creatour it is lawfull for him to dispose of all things at his will and therefore cannot be to any injurious as it is said When ye have done all say Luke 17.10 Rom. 11.35 Matth. 20.15 Wee are unprofitable servants Who hath given unto him first and he shall be recompenced Is it not lawfull for me to do as I will with mine own Men not able without the doctrine of the Church to conceive aright of Gods justice and. righteousnesse Yet notwithstanding it is far off that men should judge aright of the righteousnesse and justice of God without the doctrine of the Church because they have not the whole knowledge not so much as of the law wherein God made known his justice and can affirme nothing certain concerning the everlasting punishments of sins and are altogether ignorant of the punishment which the Son of God sustained for sins Moreover mens minds are troubled so that they doubt Whether all things be governed of God in a just and upright order Thee causes which make men to conceive amisse of Gods justice 1. When they see it go well with the bad and ill with the good And to this objection the doctrine of the Church only is able to make answer which sheweth that God deferreth the punishments of the wicked and the rewards of the good to another life inviteth the ungodly by his mildnesse and lenity to repentance proveth and confirmeth the godly by exercises and calamities punisheth and chastiseth many for their sins who seem in mens judgments to be guiltlesse It goeth therefore evill with the good but not finally Three causes of the afflictions of the godly Now as he deferreth the punishment of the wicked thereby to invite them to repentance so hee afflicteth the godly 1. Because they yet retain many sins 2. To prove and try them 3. To confirm their faith in them Object But justice requireth that never any good should be done to the wicked who rather were presently to be punished Answ Except there be a reasonable and just cause why to deferre their punishment Repl. But yet no harme should ever be done to the good Ans Not to those who are perfectly good But wee in this life are not perfectly good Repl. Wee are perfect in Christ Ans And therefore we are not punished
all other things of their being therefore called Jehovah as if you would say Being by himself and causing others to be Sâ—iâ—ituall Incorporeall invisible and to no sense of man perceivable Likewise in that he liveth of and by himselfe and quickeneth or giveth life to other things Joh. 1.18 4.24 Acts 17.24 â—8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Object 1. He oftentimes appeared Ans True in a bodily form assumed for a time Object 2. He was seen face to face Ans That is by the clear knowledge of the mind and not with the bodily eyes Object 3. He hath the parts of a mans body Ans Indeed they are ascribed unto him after the manner of men Object 4. The bodily man is the image of God Ans Surely he is so in the essence of his soul in the faculties and uprightnesse thereof Ephes 4. in wisdome righteousnesse and true holinesse not in the shape and figure of his body Intelligent Witnesse hereof is the mind of man and the notions shining therein which all proceeded from God Psal 94.9 Now He that planted the ear shall he not hear Eternall Having neither beginning nor end of being Thou art God from everlasting and world without end Psal 90.2 Other from the creatures Not Nature it self as some dream not the matter or form not any part but the sole efficient and the only maker of all things neither intermingled with any thing but of a quite different or other essence and utterly unlike all things 1 Cor. 8.6 Acts 17.29 Object 1. All things are of God Ans I grant they are by creation out of nothing Object 2. We are the generation of God Ans Yea verily by a similitude of properties John 1.13 and by creation Object 3. The Saints are born of God Ans Questionlesse by regeneration through the holy Ghost Object 4. We are made partakers of the divine nature Answ Undoubtedly by the dwelling of God in us and by our conformity with him Obj. 5. Christ is God and hath a divine body Ans To wit by a personall union and glorification Incomprehensible 1. In our cogitation and the cogitation of any creature 2. In the unmeasurablenesse of his essence 3. By communication of the essence which is in such sort the very substance of the three persons of the Divinity that it remaineth in number one and the same Most perfect in himself 1. Sole possessor of all blessednesse 2. And that in himselfe and of himself 3. with sufficiency to replenish all other things Object 1. The Lord hath made all things for himself Prov. 16.4 Answ Not to aid himselfe by them but to communicate himselfe to them Object 2. Hee useth the creatures ministery in accomplishing many of his works Answ Not as needing but honouring the creature Object 3. Wee yeeld him worship Answ It is our debt his due and the issue is our good and benefit alone Object 4. To whom is given that which is due unto him to him something cometh thereby more then hee had before Answ This assertion is false of that which is due by order of justice and pertaineth to the felicity of the giver Obj. 5. God rejoyceth in our obedience Ans He doth so our obedience being an object not an efficient cause of his rejoycing Unchangeable 1. In his essence 2. In his will 3. In place because he is immense and filleth all things Object 1. God repenteth him of things done Ans To repent and such like humane affections are attributed to God by Anthropopathy or after the manner of men Object 2. He promiseth and threatneth that which he performeth not at all Ans True but a condition and exception is alwaies understood Object 3. He dependeth on a changeable condition Ans To wit changeable in respect of mans will but not of Gods decree and counsell Object 4. He changeth his precepts observances and works Ans Namely according to his everlasting decree Omnipotent 1. He can do and doth all things which he still 2. And that at his beck without difficulty 3. As having all things in his own power Object Many things he cannot do Ans They are then the works of impotency and imperfection as to lie to die Of exceeding wisdome 1. In beholding and understanding himselfe and perceiving at once the whole order of his minde and nature which hee doth perpetually and exceeding perfectly 2. In being the cause of all knowledge in Angels and men Of exceeding goodnesse 1. Because Gods whole nature is such as is revealed in the Law and the Gospel 2. Because he is the cause and rule of all good in his creatures 3. Because hee is the most supreme good 4. Because he is the very essence of goodnesse Just 1. In respect of his generall justice and righteousnesse whereby hee willeth and worketh unchangeably such things as he hath commanded in his Law 2. In respect of his particular justice whereby he immutably dispenseth aright rewards and punishments In that he is the rule of righteousnesse and square of uprightnesse in his creatures Object 1. Hee doth good to the evill and heapeth evils on the good Answ Hee doth but not finally but onely for a time Object 2. Hee doth not punish the wicked out of hand Answ For he providently deferreth their punishments for speciall occasions best known to himself Object 3. No harm should ever be done to the good Answ Not to those which are perfectly good which wee in this life are not Object 4. Hee doth something contrary to his law Answ He abridgeth certainly something from his generall will by his speciall will Object 5. Hee giveth to men of equall condition unequall rewards Answ Yet giveth he to each of them that which no way is their due Repl. They are due by order of justice Ans God is bound unto no man Repl. Promise is a debt Ans The promise of creatures not of God the Creatour True 1. Because he hath the true and certain knowledge of all things 2. Because he neither willeth nor speaketh things repugnant or contrary 3. Because he faineth nothing nor deceiveth any man 4. Because he never changeth his mind 5. Because he ratifieth his sayings by the events of things 6. Because he enjoyneth and prescribeth truth to be kept of all Object 1. Hee fore-telleth that which hee will not have done Ans He fore-telleth that it shall come to passe but conditionally Object 2. He deceiveth the Prophets Answ That is Ezek. 14.9 he in his just judgment delivereth them up to the divell to be seduced Chaste 1. By reason of the exceeding purity of his nature 2. Because he is the lover and author of chastity 3. Because he doth most severely detest and punish all uncleannesse both internall and externall 4. Because by this notable note of difference he distinguisheth himself from unclean spirits and filthy divels 1 Thess 4.3 4. This is the will of God even your sanctification and that ye should abstain from
managing of all things or such a one as is superfluous and idle Wherefore there must needs be but one God that he alone may suffice for all 6. There can be but one infinite for if there were moe infinites none should be present every where and rule all There can be but one infinite Wherefore there cannot be more but one only God which is infinite 7. There is but one first cause of all things God is that first cause Therefore he is but one But one first cause 8. There can be but one only chief good For if besides that there were another chief good also that should be either greater or lesser or equall to the former chief good if greater the former should not be chief yet should it be God which were contumelious against God if lesser it should not be chief and so no God if equall then neither the one nor the other should be chief or be God The use of this Question is to teach us that whereas God is but one The use of this Question therfore no other besides this one God is to be adored or worshipped neither is any good to be expected from any other save only from him and to him alone all thanks for all blessings are to be rendred Obj. Many are called gods in Scripture Psal 82.6 1 Cor. 8.5 Exod 4.16 7.1 2 Cor. 4.4 I have said ye are gods Many are and are called gods in heaven and in earth Moses is called the god of Aaron and Pharaoh yea the divell is said to be The god of this world Ans Two significations of the word God There is an ambiguity and double signification of this word God which sometimes signifieth him who is by nature God and hath his being not from any thing but from himself and by himself and all other things are from him such a God is but one only Sometimes it betokeneth not the very divine eternall and immense essence but a God either so entituled for some similitude of the divine properties dignity and divine office and function Gods in the latter signification or an imaginary and fained god such gods are many Magistrates Judges and magistrates are entituled and called gods not that they have the divine essence communicated unto them and are by nature God but because of their dignity and divine office which they bear in Gods stead as it is said By me Kings reigne that is Prov. 18.15 because they are the Deputies and Vicegerents of God by whom as by his instruments and servants hee exerciseth his power and judgements here on earth hee therefore doth furnish and arme them with wisdome fortitude power authority and majesty as much as is necessary and sufficient to bridle the mindes of the multitude being desirous of licentiousnesse and to hold and keep them in fear and obedience hee doth also vouchsafe them the honour of his name by calling them gods that the subjects may thereby know that they have to deale not with men but with God himselfe whose Vicegerents they are whether they obey their magistrate or repine against him according to the Scripture Whosoever resisteth the power Rom. 13.2 resisteth the ordinance of God Angels The Angels also are called gods both for the dignity and excellency of their nature and gifts power and wisdome wherein they far surpasse men as also for the divine office and function which God exerciseth by them in this world in defending the godly and punishing the wicked Psalm 8.6 Thou madest him little lower then the gods that is then the Angels The Angels are ministring spirits Heb. 1.14 The divell The divell is called the god of this world for his great potency and power which he hath over men and other creatures by the just judgment of God Idols Lastly Many things are accounted gods in mens fancies and opinion 2. Cor. 4.4 Eph. 2.2 6.12 and are so called by men who worship the creatures as gods So idols are termed gods by a figurative speech of imitation Jer. 10.11 Phil. 3.19 Exod. 20.3 The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth shall perish from the earth and under these heavens Whose god is their belly Thou shalt have no other gods before me But here the question is touching the true God who is by nature God and hath his being and his power not from any thing but from himselfe and by himself and all other things are from him Such a God is but one only 4. What these names Essence Person and Trinity signifie and how they differ The explication of these words serve much for the understanding of the unconceivable mystery of the Trinity and therefore is it not to be read with a running eye ESsence in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is used in this doctrine for substance is a thing subsisting by it self that is a thing having a proper being not sustained in another although it be communicated to moe That is said to be communicable or communicated which is common or may be made common to moe that is said to be incommunicable which is not in moe neither can be affirmed of moe Mans essence is communicable and common to many men but this essence is in generall common not in particular and in number that is the nature and essence of all men is in generall one but not one in number for every man hath his essence distinct from others neither are all one man but many men But the essence of God is communicable in particular because the selfe same Deity in number and that whole and entire is common to the three persons and is the substance of the three persons and therefore the three persons are that one God who created all things not three Gods What a Person is A person is a thing subsisting individuall living understanding incommunicable not sustained in another neither part of another Subsisting By which word is signified that it is not an accident cogitation decree vanishing sound or any created quality or motion Individuall Not any generall but a particular one in number and therefore individuall and called individuall Living No inanimate thing which hath no life as a stone Understanding Not a thing which hath sense only as are brute beasts who are things living and sensible but not understanding and therefore are no persons Incommunicable Not the divine essence which is common to three not the substance of mans nature or any other thing created which is communicated to the thing begotten thereof or thence derived But a person cannot be communicated Not sustained in another Not the humane nature of Christ for this though it be subsisting individuall understanding incommunicable yet is it no person because it is personally sustained of the Word that is so that it together with the Word is the substance of one Christ and except it were subsisting in the Word should not at
Person no separate thing from the essence That the persons are not any thing separated from the essence which is common unto them nor the essence is any fourth thing separate from the three persons but each of them are the very selfe same whole essence of the Divinity But the difference is this that the persons are each distinct from the other but the essence is common to them three And that the person is no other thing subsisting or other substance then the essence may be understood in some sort by the example of a man One and the same man or one and the same substance is a father and a man or a son and a man and yet the manhood or to be a man is one thing the fatherhood or to be a father another but there is not one subsistent which is the father and another subsistent which is a man but one and the same subsistent is both because both manhood and fatherhood is in him manhood absolutely fatherhood respectively as in regard of his son What reference essence hath unto person Of the word Essence also it is further to be noted that God or the Deity or divine essence is not in respect of the persons the same which the matter in respect of the effect because God is unchangeable neither is compounded of matter and form Therefore we cannot say well Three persons are or consist of one essence Neither is it as the whole in respect of the parts because God is indivisible Wherefore it is not well said that the person is a part of the essence or the essence consisteth of three persons for every person is the whole divine essence one and the same Neither is it as the generall to the speciall because essence is not the generall to the three persons nor person a speciall to essence But God is a more common name because the essence of the Deity is common to the three persons and therefore may be affirmed of each of them But these names Father Son and holy Ghost are more strict because the persons are indeed distinct and cannot be affirmed the one of the other Therefore it is well said God or the divine Essence is the Father is the Son is the holy Ghost Likewise The three persons are one God or in one God Again They are one and the same essence nature divinity wisdome c. They are of one and the same essence nature divinity c. Yet it cannot be well said They are of one God because there is no one of these persons but is whole and perfect God Wherefore the divine essence is in respect of the persons as a thing after a rare and singular manner communicated in respect of those things unto which it is common For neither is there the like example of community in any created things For a generall is a certain thing common to many specials and a generall and speciall to many individuals but yet so that they are affirmed of those many plurally not singularly as that the father and the son or this father and son are two living creatures two men But we may not speak after this sort of God and the divine persons as to say The Father and the Son are two Gods two Spirits two Omnipotents c. Because there is but one God one Spirit one Omnipotent c. Wherefore that affirmation The Father is God the Son is God the holy Ghost is God is a true affirmation affirming that which is more common of a thing which is more restrict that is affirming the essence of the individuall which hath in some sort an analogy and proportion only with the speciall affirmed of his individuall but it is not at all the same nor of the same kind What the Trinity is By the name of Trinity are understood the three Persons distinct in one essence of the Deity by three manners of being or subsisting Now Trinity and Triplicity as also Trinall and Triple differ That is said to be Triple which is comprehended of three essences or is distinct by three essences Trinall is that which in essence is but one and most simple but hath three manners of being of subsisting God therefore is not triple because there are not more essences but Trinall because he being one according to his essence is three according to his persons 5. Whether these names are to be used in the Church HEreticks of ancient carped at these termes because they occurre not in Scripture But wee imitate aright the manner of speech which was usuall in the ancient and purer Church and by their authority and example retain these names 1. Because though they are not found extant in so many syllables yet phrases and speeches of neer affinity and likelihood yea and sometimes words and terms of the same signification which these are are read in Scripture For instance that of the Lords own mouth I am that I am Again I am hath sent mee unto you Again Exod. 3. â—â— it cannot be denied but that the word Jehovah answereth to that wee call essence So the word Hypostasis is used to signifie a Person in the Epistle to the Hebrewes Who being the engraved form of his person Heb. 1.2 Neither doth the Church in any other sense call the persons the Trinity then as John saith that There are three which bear record in heaven the Father the Word and the holy Ghost 2. Because the course of interpretation requireth that the words of Scripture be expounded to the learned by such words as being more usuall in other languages or matters and doctrines are more easie for them to understand and paveth and maketh plain a way unto them for the understanding of the speech and phrase of Scripture Otherwise if no words were to be used but such as are extant in the Scriptures all interpretation should be taken away It is lawfull therefore that the Church invent and use words and phrases of speech whereby they may significantly expresse the sense of Scripture and their owne meaning 3. Because the sleights and sophisms of Hereticks which for the most part they go about to cloak and cover with the words of the holy Scripture are more easily espyed and taken heed of if the same things be expounded in divers words and those especially short perspicuous and significant For it cometh to passe that by reason of the pithinesse and plainnesse of these terms Hereticks are dismantled and can no longer shroud their sinister constructions and apparent corruptions Neverthelesse if there were a consent and agreement on the things wee should easily come to an agreement about the words for we detest contention brawling about words Neither is the Church at controversie with other Gentiles and Hereticks about bare terms but of this main substantiall doctrine That the eternall Father and the Son and the holy Ghost are one God and yet neither is the Father the Son or the holy Ghost nor the holy Ghost the
Deity either of nature that is by divine properties created which are not equall with the Creatour so are the Angels or of office so Moses is called called god and all Magistrates Luke 1.32 But unto the Son Christ it is communicated by the nature or essence it self so that the very Deity is his substance Which we thus prove 1. He is the onely begotten and proper Son of God the Son of the most High who also is himself the most High But he is the proper Son to whom the substance of the Father is communicated As the Father hath life in himself John 5.26 so likewise hath he given to the Son to have life in himself Therefore the Son also is God of himself living and the fountain of life Wherefore this communicating of the Deity maketh him equall with God and the same God with the Father So far off is it from proving the contrary Repl. 1. Power was given to him John 5.27 being man Therefore it was not given him by eternall generation Ans It was given to the Word by generation to man by union of the Word Repl. 2. It was given him after his resurrection Ans Then was given him the full authority and liberty of using that power which he had alwaies All things mad by the Word All things were made by it and without it was made nothing Wee interpret That all creatures were made by him in the beginning and that also by him is gathered out of mankind and regenerated through the working of the holy Ghost an everlasting Church They construe it That by all things are meant those things which are wrought in the new creation that is in the collection and regeneration of the Church by the Gospel which is called the second creation Answ 1. Wee grant this point not the whole interpretation but only this point of the creation and if this were the sense yet hereof would it also follow That Christ were very God and by nature God The second creation also which is regeneration proveth Christ God 1 Cor. 3.6 9. Heb. 3.4 6. Eph. 1.33 4.8 10. 1. Because to work the first and second creation by his owne nature power and operation is the proper worke of one and the same very God God gave the increase So then is neither he that planteth any thing neither hee that watereth but God that giveth the increase Yee are Gods husbandry and Gods building Hee that hath built all things is God And Christ worketh this new creation not as an instrument but by his own proper vertue Which is his body even the fulnesse of him that filleth all in all things Hee ascended up on high hee gave gifts unto men hee ascended farre above all heavens that hee might fill all things Hee gave some Apostles and some Prophets By whom all the body receiveth increase I give unto them eternall life Hee sanctifieth the Church John 10 2â— Eph. 5 2â— and cleanseth it by the washing of water through the word 2. Because no man can give the holy Ghost but hee that is very God whose proper spirit it is But the second creation is not wrought but by the holy Ghost whom Christ the worker and effector of this creation sendeth Therefore hee is very God and Lord. 3. Because the new creation is the regeneration of the elect to eternall life This began even from Adam albeit it was wrought in regard of the Mediatour which was to come And it was wrought by the same Mediatour the Sonne in regard of whom or for whose sake it was wrought ever since the beginning For Christ as by his merit so by his efficacy and vertue is Saviour not onely of a part but also of his whole Church and body which consisteth of all the elect and sanctified even from Adams time By whom all the body receiveth increase Eph. 4 1â— Esay 9. â— The everlasting Father authour preserver propagator and amplifier of his Church through all ages of the world The Ruler that should come forth out of Bethlehem Mieah 3.2 was given from everlasting to he the Head and Saviour of the Church Hee shall be peace even before hee came out of Bethlehem and the Saviour of his Church against the Assyrians and all her enemies Gen. 3.83 The seed of the woman shall breake the Serpents head This victory and conquest over the Divell beganne even from the beginning of the world David acknowledgeth the Messias also to be his Lord a Priest and a King not only that was to come in the flesh Psal 110. â— but even now present to whom now long before God had said Thou art a Priest that is whom hee had already ordained to this office living working and preserving the elect There is one God and 〈◊〉 Mediatour between God and man 1 Tim. 2.5 which is the man Christ Jesus Therefore this man is the Mediatour of all from the very beginning hee is the Mediatour obtaining and giving the blessings which hee hath obtained unto all I give unto â—hâ—m eternall life John 10.38 Ephes 1.22 1 Pet. 1.11 3 Hee hath appointed him over all things to be the head to the Church The Spirit of Christ in the Prophets By the Spirit hee went and preached unto the spirits that now are in Prison Eph. â— 2â— which were in time passed disobedient Yee are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corâ—eâ—-stone Which place is diligently to be observed For then either Christ is the head foundation sanctifier and Saviour of a part of the Church onely which is most absurd or hee was this from the beginning of the world Hee is made the builder of the house whereof Moses also was a part Heb. 3.3 13. â—â— Jesus Christ yesterday and to day and the same for ever Ans 2. Wee deny their interpretaion For S. John there speaketh of the first creation Which wee shew 1. Because he speaketh of the second afterwards As many as received him to them he gave power to be the sonneâ— of God Of his fulnesse have wee all received Grace and truth â—ame by Jesus Christ Now hee therefore setteth downe the first creation before because both creations are the work of the same That therefore he might shew that the second creation was wrought by the Word it was necessary for him to teach that the first also was wrought by it For the same is the Creatour and Repairer of the world 2. Because he saith the world was made by him Repl. The world here is taken for the Church Ans No For he addeth And the world knew him not The same world which was made by him knew him not Therefore he meaneth the wicked whether elect or reprobate 3. Other places demonstrate the same My Father worketh hitherto John 5.17 and I worke Wherefore both of them from the beginning of the world Ibid. v. 19.20 worke the
Son which agree to none else who are called gods and whereby God himself discerneth himself from other creatures and forged gods For unto whom the essentiall properties of any nature or essence doe truly and really agree unto him the essence it selfe must needs be given Object 1. Hee that hath all things of another is inferiour to him of whom hee hath them The Son hath all things of the Father Therefore he is inferiour unto the Father The Son hath all thing from the Father not by grace but by nature Ans The Major holdeth and is true of such an one as hath any thing by the grace and favour of the giver for he might not have it and therefore is by nature inferiour but it is false of him who hath all those things by his owne nature which he himselfe hath of whom he receiveth them For seeing he cannot but have them it cannot be that he should be inferiour or should have lesse than he of whom he receiveth them But the Son hath all things of the Father which the Father hath and that by nature and absolute necessity that is in such sort as that the Father cannot but communicate unto him all things which himselfe hath belonging to his divine Majesty John 5.26 John 17. â—0 As the Father hath life in himself so likewise hath he given to the Son to have life in himself All mine are thine and thine are mine Therefore he is equall unto the Father in all things Obj. 2. Hee that doth whatsoever he doth by the will of another interposed and going before is inferiour unto him The Son willeth and doth all things by the will of his Father going before Therefore he is not equall unto the Father in vertue The Son doth all things with the content of the Father in like manner as the Father dignity and essence Ans The Son doth all things his Fathers will going before not in time and nature but in order of persons so that he willeth or doth nothing which the Father also willeth not and doth and whatsoever the Father willeth and doth the same also the Son willeth and doth likewise that is with equall authority and power Wherefore the society and order of the divine operations doth not take away but doth most of all settle and establish the equality of the Father and the Son as also of the holy Ghost THE FOURTH CONCLUSION The Word is consubstantiall with the Father THese three former Conclusions being declared and set down namely That the Son is subsisting or a person That hee is distinct from the Father That hee is equall with the Father the fourth is easily gotten and obtained against the New Arrians to wit That he is consubstantiall with the Father which is also in like maner to be understood concerning the holy Ghost For either this must be granted or of necessity there are made three Gods which they though in words they deny it yet in very deed affirme when they frame and feigne three essences and spirits They grant that the Son is like-substantiall that is of like essence and nature with the Father which â—â—â—â—deed true but this is not enough For the words Consubstantiall and Like-substantiall differ For like-substantiall signifieth moe persons and like essences as three men are like-substantiall For they are both three persons and three essences of like nature that is agree in humane nature But consubstantiall signifieth one essence and moe persons Thus in the God-head is not like-substantiall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because there are not three Gods but consubstantiall because there are three persons of one and the same divine essence For there is but one Jehovah that is one divine essence which is the same and is wholly in every of the three persons and therefore every of them are that one God besides which essence whatsoever is it is a creature not God The Father indeed is one person and the Son another person but the Father is not one God and the Son another John saith There are three which bear record in heaven but they are three persons not three Gods which bear this record We therefore hold against Arrius that Christ was not only like-substantiall but also consubstantiall with the Father that is hath the same individuall divine essence with the Father The Latine Church turneth the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall taking substance for essence It is therfore the same that co-essentiall that is of one and the same essence The arguments which shew the Father and the Son to be of one the same essence are these 1 Jehovah * Deut. 6.4 The English translations retain not the word Iehovah but use The Lord instead thereof which is the signification of Jehovah and therefore in effect all one Jerem. 23.6 Esay 25.9 Hag. 2.9 Zach. 2.8 Malac. 3.1 is but one essence or one God But the eternall Father and the Son co-eternall with the Father are that Jehovah Therefore these two are one essence and one God The Minor is proved 1. By those places of Scripture which call the Son Jehovah This is the name whereby they shall call him Jehovah or the Lord our righteousness The expected God and Saviour is called Jehovah But the Messias is the expected God and Saviour who in the same sense is called The Desire of all Nations Therefore the Messias is that Jehovah whereof the Prophet speaketh The Deliverer of the Church sent from Jehovah which is the Messias only is called Jehovah He is called Jehovah whose fore-runner was John Baptist But John Baptist was the fore-runner of the Messias or the Son of God Christ He therefore is called Jehovah Hitherto belong all the places in which are given to the Angel or Messenger of Jehovah both the name of Jehovah and the divine properties and honours But that Angel was the Son of God not the Father Therefore the Son is Jehovah Again the Minor is also hereof manifest Joel 2.31 Psal 68.18 Eph. 4.8 Psal 95.9 1 Cor. 10.9 Psal 97.7 Heb. 1.6 Psal 102.6 Heb. 1.10 Esay 8.14 28.16 Luke 2.34 Rom. 9.33 Esay 41.4 Rev. 1.17 21.6 for that what things in the Old Testament are spoken of Jehovah those in the New are referred unto Christ as He that ascended on High and gave gifts is Jehovah and the same is Christ Jehovah was tempted in the desart and the same is Christ He that is to be worshipped and is Creator of all things is Jehovah and the same is Christ The stone of offence The first and the last is Jehovah and the same is Christ Lastly the same is proved by those testimonies which attribute things that are proper to Jehovah unto Christ also as authour and effecter or worker of them 2. The true God is but one The Son is the true God equall with the eternall Father in God-head properties works and honour as hath bin before declared This same is
in office only and in the manifestation of his God-head For they which are in nature equall may be unequall in degree of office 10. This is saith Christ life eternall John 17.3 that they know thee to be the only very God Therefore the Son and the holy Ghost are not very God Ans In this place are opposed not the Father and the Son or the holy Ghost but God and Idols and Creatures Therefore these are excluded not the Son or the holy Ghost 2. There is a fallacy of severing and dividing clauses of mutuall co-herence and necessary connexion For it followeth in the Text And whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ Therefore herein also consisteth life eternall that Jesus Christ sent of the Father be likewise knowne to be very God as it is said The same is very God and life everlasting 1 John 5.20 3. There is a fallacy in transferring the particle Onely unto the subject Thee unto which it doth not belong but unto the predicate God which the Greek Article in the originall doth shew For the sense is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they know thee the Father to be that God who only is very God Repl. But this argument followeth Maximilian is Emperour Therefore Rodulph is not Why then doth not this follow The Father is God Therefore the Son is not God Ans These persons are finite and their essence cannot belong to moe but the Father and the Son are persons infinite and their essence may be of moe namely of three persons 11. Jehovah or the true God is the Trinity The Father is Jehovah Therefore the Father is the Trinity that is all three persons Ans Meere particular propositions conclude nothing And if the Major be expounded generally after this manner Whatsoever is Jehovah is the Trinity it is false for that which is Jehovah may be some one person of the Trinity The Syllogisme therefore is faulty because Jehovah is not taken in the same signification in both the premisses For the name Jehovah in the Major is taken absolutely and essentially for the three persons for one and the same Jehovah or true God is the Father and Son and holy Ghost joyntly but in the Minor it is taken personally for one person of the God-head that is the Father who is Jehovah of himself Repl. Jehovah is one in number Therefore it is alwaies taken in Scripture after the same manner Ans Jehovah is one in number of essence not of persons 12. Where are three and one there are foure But in God are three and one to wit three persons and one essence Therefore there are foure in God Ans The Major is to be distinguished Where are three and one really distinct there are foure But these three in God are not another thing distinct in the thing it selfe from the essence but each is that one essence the same and whole as they differ from their essence only in their maner of subsisting or of being The maner of existing is not a diverse substance from the existence being or essence 13. Christ according to that nature according to which in Scripture hee is called Son is the Son of God But according to his humane nature only hee is called Son Therefore according to that only and not according to his divine also hee is the Son of God and so by a consequent the Son is not very God Ans The Minor is false John 3.16 5.18 Rom 8.32 John 5.17 19. John 1.18 Heb. 2.16 John 3.13 17. John 1.14 For Christ is called the only begotten and proper Son of the Father and equall with the Father The Father hath created all things by the Son The Son from the very beginning worketh all things likewise which the Father doth The Son revealed the Fathers will of receiving mankinde into favour unto the Church before his flesh was borne The Son was sent into the world descended from heaven and took flesh But the Word which is God is the only begotten and proper Son of God and took flesh And not the humane but the divine nature of Christ is Creatresse and worketh with equall authority and power with the Father and descended from heaven Therefore God or the God-head or divine nature of Christ is both called in the Scripture and is the Son and by a consequent the Son is that one true and very God These Objections we may compare with those that are before set downe in the Common place concerning the Trinity of the persons For with whatsoever Sophismes the Trinity it selfe and divinc essence is impugned with the selfe-same also is each Person assaulted and contrariwise with whatsoever Sophismes one person is impugned with the same the whole essence of the Deity is assailed Besides some objections were there only proposed which are here more fully assoiled You may reade more of this point Vol. 1. Ursin from page 115. to page 125. Quest 34. Wherefore callest thou him Our Lord Ans Because he redeeming and ransoming both our body and soule from sins not with gold nor silver but with his precious bloud and delivering us from all the power of the Divell hath set us free to serve him a 1 Pet. 1.18 19. 2.9 1. Cor. 6.20 1. Tim. 2.6 John 10.28 The Explication Here we are to observe these two things 1. In what sense Christ is called Lord. 2. For what causes hee is our Lord. 1. In what sense Christ is called Lord. TO be a Lord is to have right and power granted by Law either divine or humane over some thing or person as to use and enjoy it and to dispose thereof at thy owne will and pleasure Christ therefore is our Lord 1. Because hee hath dominion over all things and over us also and hath care of all things and of us especially that is ruleth preserveth and keepeth us as his own to eternall life and glory as being bought with his precious bloud None of them is lost John 17.12 John 10 28. whom thou gavest mee None shall pluck them out of my hand 2. Because all things are subject unto him and we are bound to serve him both in body and soule that he may be glorified by us Ye are bought with a price therefore glorifie God in your body and in your spirit Cor. 6.20 for they are Gods Quest To which nature then is the name of the Lord to be referred Ans To both like as also the names of Priest Christ is out Lord according to both his natures King and Prophet For the names of the office benefits dignity and bountifulnesse of Christ towards us are affirmed of his whole person not by communication of properties as the names of his natures and properties are but properly in regard of both natures For both natures of Christ will and work our redemption For the humane nature of Christ is made the price of our redemption by dying for us his divine nature doth give and offer that price
shall be covered with this my skin And the Apostle saith Every man shall receive in his body according to that he hath done This mortality must put on immortality If then the bodies which have finned shall receive accordingly not other bodies but the same shall rise Therefore in the African Churches it was said I beleeve the resurrection of this flesh Cyprian in expos Symb. And the very word it selfe of rising enforceth as much for nothing can rise but that which is fallen This is the resurrection saith Ambrose as is intimated by the sounding of the very word that that which fell may rise that which was dead may revive Wherefore seeing our bodies shall rise no other bodies shall rise or be quickned then those which have fallen and are dead or no other then those which doe fall and die The justice also of God enforceth as much De side resurrect cap. 19. For this saith Ambrose is the order and course of justice that because the actions of the body and soule are common to both the body executing that which the soule decreed both of them should likewise come unto judgement both of them be either delivered up to perpetuall punishment 2. Thes 1.6 Cyprian in expos Symb. or reserved to eternall glory For the justice of God requireth that the flesh of the Saints which have fought in the field should also be crowned and the flesh of the wicked which have blasphemed against God should be tormented Wherefore to every soule shall be rendered not any other body what soever but the body wherewith it was once knit and coupled that forth-with the flesh with her owne soule may according to the actions of this present life either be gloriously crowned as chaste or as unchaste be extreamly afflicted Lastly as Christ rose againe in the same flesh wherein he died so shall we rise with that very flesh we now are clothed withall 1 Cor. 15.50 Object Flesh and bloud cannot inherit the kingdome of God These our bodies are flesh and bloud Therefore they cannot possesse the kingdome of God and by consequent not these but other bodies shall rise in the last day Answ 1. Flesh and bloud in this saying of the Apostle which maketh the Major proposition signifie some evill adherent quality of the substance or the substance in respect of that quality But in the Minor they signifie the very substance of our bodies How flesh and bloud 〈◊〉 denied the heavenly inheritance whereof the Anabaptists falsely understand their conclusion 2. Here is a fallacy of Accident For the reason proceedeth from corrupted substance to meere substance thus Flesh and bloud being mortall and corruptible as now it is shall not possesse the kingdome of God they fore simply no flesh or bloud shall enjoy the kingdome of God Which kind of reasoning is altogether inconsequent So then flesh that is sinfull and corruptible shall not possesse the kingdome of God but our flesh shall enter in being glorious and immortall and being then no more able to sinne neither shall it be corruptible The Apostle of purpose layeth this downe in the same chapter It is sowed a naturall body and is raised a spirituall body Repl. 1 Cor. 15.44 Our bodies shall rise spirituall bodies Therefore then our bodies shall not have the properties of our flesh Answ The Apostle calleth that a spirituall body not which is changed into a spirit in all properties In what sense our boâ—â—es shall be spirituall but which is guided by the spirit of God which is immortall and free from all miseries adorned with heavenly lightnesse glory might and holinesse As likewise on the other side he termeth that a naturall body not which is turned into the soule or is like unto the soule in all properties but which in this mortality is swayed quickned and governed by the soule That this is the meaning of the Apostles words is apparent by these reasons Verse 53. 1. Because he saith It shall rise a spirituall body but a spirit is no body 2. Himself addeth This corruptible body must put on incorruption 3. If any body after the resurrection should be so spiritual as not retaining at all any bodily properties then surely Christs body should have been so but now he saith to the Apostles Handle me and see Luke 24.39 for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee see me have Therefore much more shall our spirituall bodies have flesh and bones Thus Augustine interpreteth Apostles meaning Cons. Adimanw cap. 12. Whereas the Apostle saith that in the resurrection the body shall be spirituall we may not therefore thinke that it shall be a spirit and no body but he calleth that a spirituall body which without any corruption or death is altogether subject to the spirit For when he calleth the body which we now have a naturall body we may not imagine hereon that it is a soule and no body Therefore as the body is now called naturall because it is subject to the soule and cannot be called spirituall because it is not yet fully subject to the soule as long as it may be corrupted so then it shall be called spirituall when by no corruption it can resist the spirit and eternity 6. How the Resurrection shall be The dead shall be raised THe dead shall be raised with a shout and with the voice of the Archangel At the resurrection and with the trumpet of God and shall be presented before the high and most just Judge Jesus Christ The resurrection shall be in glorious manner and openly not fearfully not in secret and shall be far other then that which was wrought in some men at the resurrection of Christ For it shall be done all Angels men and divels beholding it yea with the exceeding joy of all the godly and with the exceeding feare and trembling of the wicked The living shall be changed They who then shall remaine alive shall be in a moment of time changed and be made of mortall immortall Read cap. 15. of the former to the Corinthians and cap. 4. of the former to the Thessalonians 7. When the Resurrection shall be THe resurrection shall be in the end of the world in the last day John 6.40 John 11.24 Mat. 24.35 I will raise him up at the last day This Martha confessed I know that Lazarus my brother shall rise againe in the resurrection of the last day But of that day knoweth no man no not the Angels of heaven but God only This question is to be held and proposed of us that our faith be not troubled while we are forced to expect and tarry or that we may not imagine to our selves any certain time when we think those things will happen and so begin to doubt and think our selves to be deluded when those things fall not so out nor come to passe at the time appointed by us This question maketh for the increase of hope
Supper therefore is often to be iterated and celebrated 1. Because of the words of the institution 2. In respect of the end and purpose of the institution because it must be done in remembrance of Christ Shew the Lords death That is beleeve that Christ dyed and that for you and then professe it also publickly before all Till he come Therefore it must be observed unto the worlds end neither is any other externall form to be looked for untill the day of judgement The words of the institution which have been hitherto expounded 1 Cor. 10.16 may be made more plain and cleer by these words of the Apostle The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ The cup of blessing That is the cup of thanksgiving which is received namely to this end that we may yeeld thanks to Christ for his death and passion The communion of the body likewise the communion of the bloud is to be made through faith partakers of Christ and all his benefits the same spirit being in us which is in Christ John 15.2 â—phes 5. 1 John 1.6 and working the same in us which he worketh in Christ Or it is a spirituall fellowship of the faithfull with Christ as of members with the head and branches with the vine Bread and wine is the communion that is it is the signe and testimony of our communion with Christ But this our communion as the Apostle briefly declareth consisteth in this that wee who are many are but one body Whence it is most easie to collect That this communion of Christ is not a corporalleating For it is wrought only by faith and the holy Ghost Christ is the head and we the members and all wee who are members have also a communion of all Christs benefits Therefore the head is common the benefits common and so the members also common among themselves wherefore their love and dilection is common and mutuall Quest 78. Are then the bread and wine made the very body and bloud of Christ ON THE 19. SABBATH Ans No verily a Matt. 26.29 Mark 14.24 But as the water of baptism is not turned into the bloud of Christ but is only a signe and pledge of those things that are sealed unto us in baptism b Ephes 5.26 so neither is the bread of the Lords Supper the very body of Christ c 1 Cor. 10.16 11.26 although according to the manner of Sacraments and that forme of speaking of them which is usuall to the holy Ghost d Gen. 17.10 11. Exod. 12.11 13. 13.9 Titus 3.5 1 Pet. 3.21 1 Corinth 10.4 the bread is called the body of Christ The Explication THe Papists Transubstantiation under which also Consubstantiation maintained by the Ubiquitaries and others is comprehended is in this Question of the Catechisme consuted and rejected and the sacramentall kind of speech which we use with the true sense of those words of Christ This is my body examined and unfolded We will first intreat of that forme of speech which we use and of the true meaning of Christs words then will wee handle the controversie of Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation That therefore which hath been heretofore spoken in generall of sacramentall phrases and termes must be restrained to this Sacrament For thus Austine himself descendeth from the generall rule of sacramentall termes unto a particular instance of eating Christs flesh Eâ—ist 23. ad Bonifâ—â— This saith he is the only way to find whether a phrase be proper or figurative That whatsoever in Gods word cannot properly be referred to some point of morall duty or to the truth of faith you may be assured that it is figuratively spoken And a little after hee produceth this example Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud yee have no life in you Hee seemeth saith Augustine by these words to injoyne us some hainous crime It is therefore a figurative speech instructing us that wee are to partake of Christs passion and joyfully and fruitfully to recall to mind how his flesh was crucified and wounded for us Wherefore as of Baptisme as hath been already declared so of the Lords Supper also the Scripture speaketh sometimes properly and sometimes figuratively The speech is figurative when Christ saith of the bread This is my body and of the cup This is my bloud Likewise when Paul saith This cup is the new Testament in my bloud For in these the name of the thing signified is attributed to the signe Paul also then speaketh figuratively when he saith This is my body which is broken for you because he attributeth the property of the signe which is to be broken to the thing signified Thus Cyprian must be understood When we drink of the cup we cleave to the crosse Serm. de Coena Hom 24. in 1 Cor. 10. Hom. 27. wee suck Christs bloud and lay our tongues in our Redeemers wounds Thus Chrysostome is to be interpreted when he saith Christs bloud is in the chalice Christs body which is in heaven is presented on earth to our view and is not only seen but touched of us nor touched only but eaten also he is held bitten and eaten of us in token of love as sometimes wee bite at him whom we love and touch his flesh with our tongue These sentences are not truly spoken or understood of the body of Christ but by a trope and figure usuall in sacraments Now the speech is proper when Christ saith Doe this in remembrance of me and when the Fathers every where say The breaking of bread is a memoriall a lively shadow of Christs sacrifice The bread signifieth the body of Christ It is a figure a signe a sacrament of the body of Christ Of the controversie concerning the words used in the Supper NOw whereas our adversaries the Papists and others deny that Christs words are sacramentally spoken and say we are to keep the letter wee must here adde something touching the controversie of the letter and meaning of the letter The Papists bear us in hand that by the vertue and force of consecration there is made a transubstantiation or changing of the bread into the body of Christ the accidents only remaining Others tell us of a consubstantiation or co-existence of Christs body in or with the bread The Transubstantiaries The Transubstantiaries and Consubstantiaries relie not on the simple meaning of Christs words together with the Consubstantiaries doe boast and glory that they understand the words of Christ simply and aright But neither perform that which they brag and boast of for that is the true simplicity and property of the word whereunto for the just understanding and interpretation thereof nothing is to be added neither ought to be taken from it neither any thing altered But as many as hold that the body of Christ
is with in or under the bread they adde unto the words of Christ and depart from true simplicity For if that which Christ said is simply to be retained and that not to be admitted which he said not then may we not say The bread is both bread and the body of Christ but simply this only The bread is the body of Christ For he said not My body is with or in or under the bread or The bread is both bread and my body together neither addeth he as these adde of their own really substantially corporally but he uttereth these bare words of the bread This is my body Neither have the Transubstantiaries their opinion drawn from the words of Christ simply understood namely that of the bread is made the body of Christ or the bread is changed into the body of Christ for this is their own forgery and invention For Christ said not that the bread was now made or was a making or should be made but simply said The bread is my body where no change could come between so that the words of Christ be simply understood Therefore falsly do they perswade the people that they simply rest on the propriety of Gods word when as manifoldly and most farre they swerve and depart from it The true interpretation of Christ words We Protestants retain the words of Christ without adding or altering to wit that the bread is the body of Christ and indeed the true and visible body which was given for us But because these words literally taken would admit a sense repugnant to the truth of Christian faith for if bread were properly Christs body it would follow that bread was crucified for us therefore we affirm that in Christs words a convenient meaning must be inquired after that is Christs words must be understood sacramentally namely that the bread is called Christs body because it is a signe of Christs body the cup or wine in the cup is called Christs bloud because it is a sign of Christs bloud the cup is also called the new Testament because it is a signe of the new Testament even as baptism is termed a washing away of sins and a laver of new birth because it is a signe of both these which are wrought properly by the bloud and spirit of Christ The true sense therefore and naturall interpretation of Christs words is This is my body which is given for you that is This bread broken by me and given to you is a signe of my body delivered to death for you and an authentick seal of your conjunction with me so that he which shall beleeve and eat this bread he truly and really after a sort eateth my body Here therefore to the signe is attributed the name of the thing signified both for the conjunction which the thing signified hath in the right use of the Supper with the signe and also for the proportion which the signe hath with the thing signified In this exposition we are not led and over-ruled by Philosophy and humane reason as our adversaries traduce us and bear the world in hand we are but we observe those rules by which in the joint consent of all sound wise men wee are to censure the interpretation of any Scripture whatsoever namely by the analogie and rule of faith by the nature of the thing or subject by the testimonies of Scripture which teach the same thing Three rules wâ—ereby we may judge of the interpretation of Scripture For by help of these three rules the naturall sense of Scripture is wont to be examined as often as necessity driveth us from the letter to the sense and meaning 1. That no interpretation be received dissonant from the rule of faith or repugnant to any article thereof or any commandement of the Decalogue or any expresse testimony of Scripture for the spirit of truth is not contrary to it self 2. That the sense derived out of words signifying any thing have a congruity with the nature of the thing signified by the words as in this present subject of the Supper whereon wee insist when any question or doubt is moved therein we are to enquire seeing it is a Sacrament how the Scripture else-where speaketh of Sacraments and of the Supper it selfe 3. That other like places be weighed and considered by which it is either manifest and granted or may be demonstrated by some circumstance that they contain the same doctrine concerning the same thing which is contained in the place in controversie For if we be fully resolved of the meaning of any cleerer and uncontroversed place we shall also be resolved of the sense of the place in controversie if the same thing be delivered in both So then it is out of doubt that that meaning of the words of the Supper which is agreeable with these rules is true and those untrue which disagree from them But this our construing and interpretation which indeed is not ours but the doctrine of Christ himself his Apostles and all orthodox or right-beleeving antiquity doth every way sute with these rules wherefore undoubtedly it is most true and best beseeming the truth of the Gospel Now let us come to the arguments by which wee prove our interpretation to be true they are of four sorts 1. Some are taken out of the text it self and circumstances of the institution of the Lords Supper 2. Some are taken from the nature of the thing or subject that is by understanding the speech as the thing it self doth bear and suffer namely according to the nature of all Sacraments 3. Some are drawn from an analogie of the articles of our faith or from a conference of places or parts of Christian doctrine 4. Some are taken from other like places of Scripture where the same thing is delivered in such words as are manifest and whereof there is no controversie 1. The first sort of arguments taken out of the text and circumstances of the institution of the Lords Supper He sate down 1. CHrists humane nature at the first celebrating of the Supper by a corporall kind of placing sate in his proper place at the table and now is in heaven wherefore then it was not neither is it now corporally in the bread or in the place of the bread He took bread 2. Christ at the first Supper took not into his hands nor brake his body but bread wherefore bread is not properly and really the very body of Christ This is my body 3. Christs body was born of a virgin But bread is made of meal therefore it is not really Christs body 4. Christ said of the visible bread being broken This is my body and of the visible cup being distributed unto his disciples This cup is the new Testament in my bloud Therefore the Papists retain not the letter when they say My body is contained under the forms of bread and wine nor the Ubiquitaries when they thus speak My body is in with under this
finer manner but simply rejecteth all eating of his flesh with the bodily mouth We may not therefore forge any corporall eating in the Supper contrary to the Gospel 6. The conceit of a corporall presence and feeding on Christs flesh under the bread is wholly different and diverse from the formall consideration of a Sacrament Therefore it is to be rejected The Antecedent is proved because it cannot be accounted either for the signe or the thing signified of which two every Sacrament wholly consisteth It is not the signe or sacrament because it is not object to the senses and if it were there is nothing which it might signifie And further it hath no proportion or similitude with the thing that is with the spirituall eating Neither can it be said to be the thing signified seeing the Scripture no where speaketh of an essentiall transfusion and reall commixtion of Christs flesh with our bodies neither can there be any except wee entertain the follies and dreams of Eutychians and Swenckfeldians For the sacraments testifie of those blessings only and them onely doe they seale unto us which are contained in the promise of the Gospel Againe it is not the thing signified because this eating may be without faith and is common to the godly and ungodly But the things signified in the sacraments are received by faith alone and of the faithfull and godly alone Besides if it were the thing signified none had ever beene sayed or at any time should have beene saved without it For in all Sacraments the things signified are the same and are given to all that are to be saved because they are the benefits of the Messias comprehended in the promise of the Gospel which benefits are the same unto all and without them no man is saved Therefore no place is left for a substantiall presence and mouthy eating of Christs body under the bread or under the forme of bread and this substantiall presence and mouthy eating is indeed nothing but a vaine name and Idoll in the world Object The corporall eating is a signe of the spirituall eating and a singular confirmation of faith Therefore Christs body is also a Sacrament or signe and invisible grace is the thing signified Answ The Antecedent is denied 1. Because Christs flesh under the bread is invisible Therefore it cannot signifie another invisible thing or strengthen faith For Sacraments or signes ought to be visible so that it deserveth not saith Erasmus to be called a Sacrament which is not accomplished by an externall signe For to this end and use are they given of God that they may as it were effectually shew to our outward senses that which is promised in the Word and performed by the holy Ghost in our hearts that they may be visible testimonies and pledges of the promise of grace exhibited and applyed Whence is that saying of Austine a Sacrament is a visible word And Lib. 19. cap. 18. cont Fault lib. 2. cap. 1. De Doct. Christ de Catech-rud ca. 26. Prosp in sentent it is a visible forme of invisible grace And A signe is a thing besides that forme which it presenteth to our senses causing something else by it selfe to come into the knowledge And the signes indeed of divine things are visible but the things themselves are invisible And that of Prosper The sacrifice of the Church consisteth in two things in the visible forme of elements and the invisible flesh and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Sacrament or signe and in the thing of the Sacrament that is the body of Christ Therefore no thing or action which is invisible insensible and not naturall can make the nature or appellation of a Sacrament And consequently they who will have Christs flesh in under or with the bread to be a Sacrament or will have the bread to be transsubstantiated into his flesh let them shew us a visible or sensible eating of it in the Supper lest they seeme to dissent from the ancient Fathers 2. There must be an analogy and proportion betweene the signe or Sacrament and the thing signified or the thing of the Sacrament For Except the Sacraments saith Austine had some similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not verily and Sacraments Now Epist 23. ad Bonifacium if Christ flesh be also a Sacrament and the thing of those Sacraments be invisible grace what proportion then and similitude shall there be between the two Sacraments but seeing there can be none it followeth that Christs flesh may not be called a Sacrament as being no lesse the thing it selfe of the Sacrament then eternall salvation signified by way of proportion by visible bread as by a signe Wherefore the sacramentall eating which is done naturally by the mouth doth not belong unto the body of Christ considered by it selfe in any physicall or naturall respect because unto this sacramentall eating the externall signes only are object in their owne nature S. Austine demanding how bread is the body of Christ and wine his bloud These saith he brethren are therefore called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another thing understood That which is seene Serm-ad Infant hath a corporall forme that which is understood hath a spirituall fruit If then thou wilt understand the body of Christ here the Apostle speaketh to the faithfull Yee ar the body of Christ and his members If then yee be the body of Christ and his members your mystery is set on the table c. 7. The communion of Christ which is promised in his Word and sealed in his Sacraments is not corporall but spirituall But the communion of Christ which is given in the Supper is the same with that which is promised in the Word and sealed in all other Sacraments Therefore the communion of Christ in the Supper is not corporall but spirituall The Major is manifest For in the Gospel no other communion is delivered or specified but that which is spirituall The Minor also is evident because the same benefits are proposed in all the promises of the Gospel which are presented and offered in the Sacraments For the Sacraments are the visible word because they promise that which the Word promiseth by visible signes and are seales of the promise of the same grace 8. There is one and the same signification of all the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament and in them one and the same communion of Christ But the signification of all other Sacraments and their communion is spirituall onely Therefore there is no other in the Supper The Minor is granted on all sides The Major is demonstrated by the Apostle in these words 1 Cor. 12.13 10.2 By one spirit we are all baptized into one body And All were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea and did all cate the same spirituall meate Object There is not the same thing signified of all Sacraments For in Baptisme the thing
Lib. 4. Dut. 11. c. Quidam The age and parentage of Consubstantiation This opinion Lombard relateth and testifieth that it was before his time maintained by some but he calleth it a Paradox a strange or wonderfull opinion Guitmund fathereth it on Berengarius after his recantation and termeth it Impanation Others impute it to one Walrame against whom Anselme hath two books extant Some fasten it on Rupert Abb. Tuit who lived not long after Guitmond about the year of the Lord 1124. Petrus de Alliaco Cardinall of Cambray saith In lib. 4. sentent q. 6. art 2. that he had rather defend Consubstantiation the Transubstantiation unlesse the Church of Rome had defined the contrary He lived about the year of our Lord 1416. Lib. de Ca. Babyl At length Luther approving the judgement of this Cardinal of Cambray as himself witnesseth first thought it no article of faith to beleeve that the substance of bread remaineth or remaineth not but either point might be held without heresie Afterwards it seemed more probable unto him that the bread should remaine and the body of Christ should be under in and with the bread And this is now their opinion who name themselves Lutherans Wherefore they interpret Christs words This is my body thus In this with this under this bread is my body and they glory and boast no lesse then the Papists that they retain the letter without any trope or figure And so have they ranked themselves that if they combate with Papists then the particle This noteth with them bread only and the bread it self is the body of Christ If they bend their forces against us whom they call Sacramentaries then the particle This shall not signifie bread only but bread with the body of Christ lodged invisibly therein and the sense shall be This is my body that is This bread and my body lying hid in this bread is my body They illustrate this their glosse with vulgar similies as they call them that Christ when he gave his invisible body in the bread in like manner said This is my body as the Country-man saith of the graine in his sacke This is corne pointing at the sack or the Merchant of the money in his purse This is money pointing at his purse or the Mother of the Infant in his cradle This is my child shewing the cradle only or the Vintner of his wine This is Rhenish wine when he reacheth out the Goblet These formes of speech are noted and observed out of their books and disputations But good men they have that luck which the Poet alotteth unto fooles Fooles when they seeke to avoid an inconvenience Horat. Serm. lib. 1. sat 3. fall into an evill For in place of that absurd miracle of the subsisting of accidents without any subject they have induced another more absurd of the penetration of two bodies and whether we respect the letter or the sense they have wandred departed farther from Christs words then the Papists For the letter thus lieth This that is This bread is my body The sense standeth thus The visible bread broken and distributed is my true and essentiall body given for you It is my true body not by any change of essence and nature as the Papists would have it for bread was not assumed by the Word for us neither was bread given and crucified for us but it is my true body in a mysticall sense and Sacramentall kind of speech according to the interpretation of the sounder antiquity of Paul yea and of Christ himselfe The Transsubstantials glosse is farte wide of this the letter and meaning of Christs words As then the Papists retaine not the letter when in stead of Christs words This is my body they annex this seraphicall or super-angelicall glosse This thing or substance whatsoever undeterminate contained under these formes is my body so much lesse doe these reserve entire the letter and sense of Christs words when instead of them they place their own saying My body is in with under the bread or The bread and the body lying hid invisibly in the bread is my body For neither is the bread alone nor the bread with the body inclosed therein properly Christs body as an empty or full purse is not properly and without all figure of speech termed money Now the phrases they use are too improper and too much unfitting that they would expresse For as for the instances produced by them we know as soone as the Countrey-man Merchant Mother or Vintner speaketh that graine is in the sacke money in the purse an infant in the cradle and wine in the goblet But when these men tell us This is Christs body we know not forth-with that Christs body is in the bread neither can it be proved because an Article of the Christian faith testfieth that it is in heaven Of the Schisme of the Consubstantials LUthers foundation and maine ground at first was those words onely of Christ This is my body Afterwards in a disputation bad with the adversaries of this opinion pinion the 27. and 28. yeere he retired and fled to the Ubiquity and for that one foundation or ground afore-named he assumed four other 1. The personall union of the natures in Christ The right hand of God which is every where 3. The truth of God which cannot lie 4. The three fold manner of the existence of Christs body in any place But being at length repulsed from these holds he betook himselfe againe to Christs words and desired that all disputation of Ubiquity should quite be revoked Notwithstanding since his time some Lutherans by profession finding no sufficient warrant for their cause in Christs words have set Ubiquity on foot againe and at this day account it the best stake in their hedge Three sorts of Lutherans though others utterly disclaime it Hence arose a faction and division among the Consubstantials some are * 1. Simplices simply Lutherans who by Christs words only defend the being of Christs body in the bread and the eating it with the mouth some are * 2. Multipraesentiarii Omnipotentiarii multipresentiarie and omnipotentiarie Lutherans that is such as think Christs body to be present at once in many hosts by reason of the omnipotency really communicated therewith Lastly some are * 3. Omnipraesentiarii Ubiquitarii omnipresentiarie Lutherans who to assoile the presence of Christs body in the bread lay hold on the shield of Ubiquity and teach that Christs body is every where present by vertue of the union with the Word and therefore is present in the bread both before and after the use thereof in the Supper and that the right of consecration doth effect only that it be eaten in the bread Of this our young Divines for the understanding of this controverfie may not be ignorant For hereby they perceive that at this day there are two maine columnes or pillars erected to under-prop Consubstantiation namely The two principall
hell or in the greatest matter of all others impiously to blaspheme if this be not The second Argument THe blasphemie of Samosatenus Arrius and the late Anti-trinitaries is this That Christ-man is not properly and by nature God but onely by an accidentall participation of Divine properties majesty honour power and vertue The Ubiquitaries also maintaine the same consideration of the God-head of Christ-man while they define the personall union by his communicating alone of properties whereby the flesh of Christ is made omnipotent and every where So that now that man is and is called God not that hee is properly and by nature God but because in finite power majesty and glory is given him from God and all the gifts of the holy Ghost are bestowed on him without measure Now this accidentall bestowing of the God head and all the properties doth not make Christ to be properly and by nature God but only by divine grace or God unproperly so called because it is not the very essentiall God-head of the Word but a certain participation thereof in vertue and efficacy And therefore the sounder Fathers objected unto the Arrians that they took away the true and eternall God-head of Christ when they made him a God not by nature but by grace b participation onely of dignity and majesty Therefore seeing the Vbiquitaries also equalling our Immanuel with God by participation of properties onely take away his true and eternall God-head wee doe disclaime and accurse this their doctrine as blasphemous and hereticall And that they doe this their own words and opinions witnesse Brentius in recog p. 20 Anar Thes 10. â—â— p. Tubin Thes 25 26. and Apol. â—agr 29. as Brentius and Jacobus Andraeas and others of them in their writings Whence we conclude that the Ubiquitaries hold the same opinion with the Artians and the Anti-trinitaries of the God-head of Christ-man that is that all esteeme him for God not by nature but onely by grace of participation new temporary created adopted If these things be true Christ shall not be God and man Lib. 1. de Trinita but a divine man such as the Ubiquitaries repute him who as Servetus hold this opinion That God can communicate the fulnesse of his God-head give his divinity majesty power and glory unto man But wee execrate and detest the same blasphemy of both The third Argument NEstorius taught That the union of God the Word with man was wrought by the participation only of equality as touching majesty honour power vertue and operation Neither doth hee make the difference of the dwelling of the Word in mans nature which himselfe tooke and in other Saints to consist in any other thing than in those gifts and graces bestowed by God on man The selfe same also doe the Vbiquitaries teach because they cry that there is no difference between the inhabiting and dwelling of the God head in Peter and in Christ except it be taken from the communication of the gifts or properties of the God-head and they contend that by this meanes this man which was taken by the Word is God because the Word doth nothing without him but all things by him This is nothing else than to make Christ man onely God by an accident Wherefore the doctrine of Vbiquity is altogether the same with Nestorius his heresie Tert. lib. de Trin pag. 6. 10. Tertullian saith If Christ be man onely how then is he present every-where being called upon and invocated seeing this is not the nature of man but of God to be able to be present in all places By this testimony is refuted the Ubiquity of the humane nature in Christ Object But the union of the divine and humane nature in Christ is unseparable Therefore wheresoever the divine nature is there is also the humane nature Ans It is true which is said that the union is unseparable The Word never forsaketh the nature once assumed and taken But the Word is not in the humane nature as the soul is included in my body Wheresoever my body is there must my soule needs be neither is my soule at the same time without my body But the Word is not so in Christ-man But hee is so unseparably and personally in the humane nature as that he is together also without the humane nature in all the parts of the world as he filleth all and in holy men and Angels by his speciall presence The personall union of both natures doth not evert the generall action and working of his presence and majestie neither doth it let or hinder the speciall working of his presence because the Word is effectuall and worketh forcibly in the regenerate The generall points wherein the Churches which professe the Gospel agree or disagree in the controversie concerning the Lords Supper THey agree in these points 1. That as well the Supper of the Lord as Baptisme is a visible pledge and testimony annexed by Christ himselfe to the promise of grace to this end chiefly that our faith in this promise might be confirmed and strengthened 2. That in the true use of the Supper as well as in all other Sacraments two things are given by God unto us and are received of us namely earthly externall and visible signes are bread and wine and besides these also heavenly internall and invisible gifts as are the true body of Jesus Christ together with all his gifts and benefits and heavenly treasures 3. That in the Supper we are made partakers not only of the Spirit of Christ and his satisfaction justice vertue and operation but also of the very substance and essence of his true body and bloud which was given for us to death on the Crosse and which was shed for us and are truly fed with the self same unto eternall life and that this very thing Christ should teach and make known unto us by this visible receiving of this bread and wine in this Supper 4. That the bread and wine are not changed into the flesh and bloud of Christ but remain true and naturall bread and wine that also the body and bloud of Christ are not shut up in the bread and wine and therefore the bread and wine are called the body of Christ his body and bloud in this sense for that his body and bloud are not only signified by these and set before our eies but also because as often as we eat or drink this bread and wine in the true and right use Christ himself giveth us his body and bloud indeed to be the meat and drink of eternall life 5. That without the right use this receiving of bread and wine is no Sacrament neither any thing but an emptie and vaine ceremony and spectacle and such as men abuse to their owne damnation 6. That there is no other true and lawfull use of the Supper besides that which Christ himself hath instituted and commanded to be ketp namely this that this bread and this wine be eaten and drunken
conversion For repentance doth not comprehend both that from which we reclaime our selves and that whereunto we are changed But conversion comprehendeth the whole because it addeth that mutation and change on which ensueth a beginning of new life in a true faith Now repentance signifieth onely the griefe which is conceived after the fact or sin Moreover the name of repentance is of a larger compasse than the name of conversion For conversion is spoken only of the godly who alone are converted unto God and in like manner is the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latine Resipiscentia spoken of the godly only because by these three names is signified the new life of the godly But repentance is spoken of the wicked also as of Judas who indeed repented of his wickednesse but was not converted because the wicked when they sorrow or are grieved are not afterwards converted or corrected Thus farre have we discoursed of the names and appellations of conversion now let us examine what the thing it self is A definition hereof proposed by his parts may be deduced out of the 88. question of Catechisme to wit that it is a mortification of the old man and a quickning of the new man It is more fully defined on this wise Mans conversion to God is a mutation or change of a corrupt mind and will into a good stirred up by the Holy Ghost in the chosen through the preaching of the Law and the Gospel on which ensue good works or a life directed according to all the commandements of God This definition is confirmed by these places of Scripture Jerem. 4.1 Esay 1.16 1 Cor. 6.11 Psal 34.14 Acts 26.17 18 20. If tâ—â—ou returne returne unto me Wash you make you cleane But yee are washed but yee are sanctified but yee are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God Eschew evill and doe good The whole definition is set down in the Acts of the Apostles I send thee to open their eyes that they may turne from darknesse to light and from the power of Sathan unto God that they receive forgivenesse of sins and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith in mee I shewed that they should repent and turne to God and doe works worthy amendment of life 3. What are the parts of Conversion The two parts of Conversion 1. Mortification 2. Quickning THe parts of Conversion are in number two as the Apostle sheweth The mortifying of the old man and the quickning of the new man So speak we better with the Apostle than if we should follow them who make Contrition and Faith the parts of Conversion Now by Contrition they understand also Mortification by Faith they understand the joy which followeth the study of righteousnesse and new obedience which are indeed effects of faith but not faith it self and Contrition goeth before Conversion neither is it Conversion it self nor any part thereof but only a preparing of men unto conversion and that in the Elect onely not in others And this is the reason why they begin the preaching of repentance from the law and then come unto the Gospel and so come back againe unto the Law The old man which is mortified is a meer sinner only namely our corrupt nature The new man which is quickned as hee who beginneth to cease from fins namely as our nature is regenerated The mortification of the old man Mortification or of the flesh is an annihilation and abolishment of the corruption of nature in us and containeth 1. A knowledge of sinne and of Gods wrath for sin 2. A griefe for sin and for the offending of God 3. The flying and shunning of sin Of this Mortification the Scripture testifieth thus If yee mortifie the deeds of the body by the spirit yee shall live Rent your hearts c. Come let us returne to the Lord c. Rom. 8 13. Joel 2.13 Hosea 6.1 By this appeareth that Conversion or Mortification is very unproperly attributed unto the wicked because in them is not any hatred or shunning of sin neither any griefe for sin all which Mortification doth comprehend Furthermore the knowledge of sin goeth before grief because the affections of the heart follow knowledge Griefe followeth the knowledge of sin in the wicked on a sense of some present and a feare of some future evill to wit of temporall and eternall punishments and this griefe in the wicked properly is neither a part of Conversion nor a preparation thereunto but rather a flight and backsliding from God and an entrance to desperation as appeareth in Cain Saul Judas c. It is called a grief not unto salvation and a griefe of the world Contrition not unto salvation causing death or a griefe not according unto God But in the godly griefe springeth from a sense of Gods displeasure which they seriously acknowledge and bewail and it is joyned with an hatred and detestation of the sin past and committed already and with an eschewing and avoiding all present and future sin This grief is a part of Conversion or at least a preparation to the same Contrition unto salvation 2 Cor. 7.10 and it is called Contrition unto salvation and a sorrow according unto God working repentance to salvation Now these three knowledge of sin griefe for sin and flying from sin differ in their subjects or places in man wherein they are seated The knowledge of sin is in the minde or understanding The griefe is in the heart The flying is in the will in that hee will not hereafter commit sin The averting is in the heart and will and it is an averting unto somewhat to wit an averting from evill unto good according to that of the Psalmist Psal 34.14 Eschew evill and doe good This former part of Conversion is called Mortification 1. Because as dead men cannot shew forth the actions of one that is living so our nature the corruption thereof being abolished doth no more shew forth nor exercise her actions that is doth no longer bring forth actuall sin originall sin being repressed For the dead bite not 2. Because Mortification is not wrought without griefe and lamenting The flesh rebelleth against the spirit and for this cause Mortification is also called a crucifying of the flesh Rom. 6.7 Gal. â— 17 Gal. 5.24 They that are Christs have crucified the flesh with the affections and the lusts thereof 3. Because it is a flight or ceasing from sin Neither is it simply called mortification but the mortification of the old man because by it not mans substance but sin in man is destroyed The words Old man are also added for distinctions sake between the repentance of the godly and ungodly For in them not the man but the old man and in these not the old man but the man is destroyed The quickning of the new man is a true joy in God through Christ and an earnest and ready desire of orderning our
is not translated unto them which is proper unto Christ Answ They cannot escape or avoide by this meanes but that they must needs be injurious unto Christ For the Antecedent proposition hath no sufficient enumeration of those waies whereby Christs honour is translated unto others For not onely they which by their own proper vertue and worthinesse but also they which by Christs vertue are said to merit of God those blessings that are proposed for the merit of Christ onely are put in the place and office of Christ For no man besides Christ is able to merit of God any thing not so much as for himselfe much lesse for others by his own obedience and intercession wherefore our Adversaries by this reply overturne their owne doctrine For if the prayers of the Saints are acceptable to God and are heard of him through the force and vertue of Christs merit and intercession they cannot be accepted nor obtaine any thing for us for their owne holinesse and merits as the Papists have hitherto taught us For he that standeth in need of a Mediatour and Intercessour himselfe cannot be the intercessour for other men albeit he may pray for others For he is here called an Intercessour who by the worthinesse and glory of his owne satisfaction and petition obtaineth grace and favour for others 13. Here they reply They which pray for us in heaven are to be prayed unto The Saints pray for us in heaven because in this life they pray one for another and in heaven their love is more fervent towards us then in this life and this may be done without any injury unto Christ our Mediatour and with assured perswasion of being heard either for their merits or for the merit of Christ Therefore we are to pray unto them Answ The consequence of this reason holdeth not Because the praying of one for another is no sufficient cause for which he should be called upon or prayed to who doth pray We gladly yeeld and grant that the Saints in heaven do most earnestly desire of God the defence and deliverance of their brethren namely of the Church militant on earth and that their prayers are heard according to the will and counsell of God whereunto they submit themselves And that this is the meaning and opinion of the ancient Doctors when they treate of the prayers of the blessed for the Church the considering and conference of the places themselves doth shew But that the Saints understand and pray against the evils and dangers of every one and heare out petitions and requests we deny Wherefore neither living in that heavenly fellowship and society neither conversing in this life are they to be called upon or prayed unto without manifest Idolatry 14. God saith though Moses and Samuel stood before me yet mine affection could not be towards this people Therefore the Saints departed pray for us Answ 1. Though we should grant this whole argument yet it followeth not hereon that they are to be prayed unto as hath been already proved 2. This is a figure of speech representative bringing in the dead praying as if they were yet living so that the meaning and sense is Though Moses and Samuel were now living and should pray for this wicked and reprobate people as whiles they lived they prayed for their people and were heard yet they should not obtaine grace or pardon The like place we reade in Ezekiel Though Noah Daniel and Job were in the midst of it As I live saith the Lord God Ezek. 14.20 they shall deliver but their owne soules Here Daniel which was yet living and Noah and Job which were long since departed are placed by the Prophet in the midst of the wicked praying for them 15. The Lord saith by Esaiah I will defend the City to save it for mine owne sake and for David my servants sake â— Kings 19.34 Therefore wee are heard also for the merit and intercession of the Saints Ans This protection and preserving of the City is not promised in respect of Davids merit but in respect of Gods promise of the Messias which should be born of Davids posterity Repl. The delivery of the City from the siege of the Assyrians is not promised and performed in respect of the promise of the Messias because that promise might have beene fulfilled without the benefit of delivery as also it was fulfilled after the taking and overthrow of the City Ans They erre that restraine Christs benefit to those things or promises onely without the performance whereof the promise made unto David concerning the Messias could not have been kept For all the benefits and blessings of God both corporall and spirituall both before and after the Messias was exhibited as well those without which the promise of the Messias could as those without which it could not be fulfilled are all performed unto the Church for the Messias sake For all the promises of God in him are Yea and are in him Amen 2 Cor. 1.20 And so doth the Scripture expound the like kinds of speaking as 1 Kings 13. Deut. 7. Lastly the benefits which God also performeth unto the wicked posterity of the godly are attributed to the godlinesse of their godly parents not of merit but of mercy and for the truth of Gods promises As Exod. 20. 32. Deut. 4.16 16. Jacob saith of Josephs sons Let my name be named upon them Gen. 48.16 and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac Here Jacob willeth himselfe and his fathers to be called upon after his death Therefore it is lawfull to call upon the Saints departed Ans It is an Hebrew phrase which signifieth not adoration but an adopting of sonnes so that the sense is Let them be called by my name or let them take their name from me that is let them be called my sons having the dignity and title of Patriarchs that two Tribes of Israel may come therein The like phrase is in Esay Esa 4.1 In that day shall seven women say to one man * According to the old Latines Let thy name be called upon us Job 5.1 Let us be called by thy name that is let us be called thy wives 17. Call now if any will answer thee and to which of the Saints wilt thou turne Here Eliphas exhorteth Job to crave the aid of some Saints Answ The words which goe before do shew that these words belong to a comparison of men with Angels whom he saith so far to excell men in purity that they doe not so much as make answer or appeare being called by men Wherefore this place doth more make against then plead for the invocation of Angels * This is translated according to the old Latine translation the words whereof the Papists urge 18. If there be an Angel one of a thousand to speake for him to declare mans righteousnesse He will have mercy upon him and will say Deliver him that he go not downe into the pit I
attributing of some proprietie unto one person of the God-head to the removing of the same from another person of the God-head The words God and Father sometimes taken essentially sometimes personally Why Father is here taken essentially Esay 6.9 Againe the name of Father as also the name of God when it is opposed to all the creatures is taken essentially not personally but when it is put with another person of the God-head it is taken personally Wherefore in this place the name of Father is taken essentially and the reasons hereof are manifest 1. Because the name of Father is not here put with another person of the Godhead but with the creature of whom he is invocated So also by the Prophet Isaiah Christ is called The everlasting Father 2. The invocating of one person doth not exclude the others when mention is made of their externall and outward workes 3. Wee cannot consider God the Father but in the Son the Mediatour And the Son hath made us sons by the holy Ghost who is therefore called the Spirit of adoption 4. Christ teacheth us that wee must invocate him also John 16.23 saying Verily verily I say unto you whatsoever yee shall aske of the Father in my Name hee shall give you 5. Christ giveth the holy Ghost therefore it is he himself of whom we aske him Object 2. Christ is called and is our brother Therefore he is not our Father Ans He is our brother in respect of his humane nature but he is our Father in respect of his divine nature Object 3. If he be called the Father who hath received us into favour for Christs sake then is not Christ understood by the name of Father because hee that receiveth us into favour for Christs sake is not Christ himselfe But the Father whom wee here so call receiveth us into favour for Christs sake Wherefore hee is not Christ Ans Hee that receiveth us into favour for Christs sake is not Christ himselfe that is in the same sense and respect Christ as he is our Mediatour is hee through whom wee are received but as hee is God hee is he that receiveth us Two causes why we say Our Father Our Christ willeth us to call God our Father not my Father Confidence Thereby to raise in us a confidence and full perswasion that wee shall be heard For because we pray not alone but with us the whole Church doth with one consent pray to him he doth not reject her but heareth her prayers according to this promise of our Lord Where two or three are gathered c. Object But oftentimes thou prayest at home the Church not being privy thereunto Ans The godly and the whole Church pray for themselves and all the members with an affection and desire Love and desire is an habituall quality of the soule remaining also when thou sleepest it is not a passion quickly fleeting or passing away Therefore when thou prayest alone at home in words the whole Church prayeth with thee in affection And this also maketh much for the engendering of confidence in us because as hath been said God doth not reject the whole Church Mutuall love Two causes why Christ admonisheth us of mutuall love doth hee by this word To admonish us of mutuall love wherewith Christians being endued must pray one for another And therefore doth hee by this word in the very Proeme and entrance of the prayer admonish us of mutuall love wherewith we must be affected towards our neighbour 1. Because there is no praying without the true love of our neighbour 1 John 4.20 neither can wee be perswaded that God heareth us For if wee approach unto God not accounting the sons of God for our brethren neither will he then account us for his sons 2. Because without the love of our neighbour there is no true faith and without faith there is no true prayer For whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14.23 Object It is the part of a Father to deny nothing to his children but God denyeth many things to us therefore hee is not our Father Ans It is the part of a Father to deny nothing unto his children that is which is necessary and wholesome for them but it is the part of a Father to deny to his children things unnecessary unprofitable and harmefull Thus God dealeth with us giving us all spirituall and corporall blessings that are necessary profitable and wholesome for us Quest 121. Why is that added Which art in heaven Ans That we conceive not basely or terrenely of Gods heavenly Majesty a Jere. 23.24 Acts 17.24 25 27. and also that we look for and expect from his omnipotency whatsoever things are necessary for our soul and body b Rom. 10.12 The Explication THe second part of the Proeme is Which art in heaven that is heavenly Heaven here signifieth the habitation of God and the holy Angels and blessed men whereof God saith heaven is my throne and Christ saith In my Fathers house are many mansions Esay 66. v. 1. John 14.2 God indeed by his immense essence is every-where but hee is said To be in heaven and To dwell there because there God is more glorious than in this world and doth also there immediatly shew and manifest himself Now the Lord willeth us to call him Eight causes why wee are to call God Our Father in heaven our Father which is in heaven To distinguish him from earthly Fathers 1. Thereby to shew the opposition and contrariety of earthly Fathers and this Father that so wee should thinke that God reigneth in heavenly glory and majesty and is a Father not earthly but heavenly even hee 1. Who sitteth in heaven 2. Who ruleth every-where with heavenly glory and majesty hath soveraignty over all things and governeth by his providence the whole world by him created 3. Who is void of all corruption and change 4. Who also doth there especially manifest himself before the Angels and doth there shew what a Father he is how good and how mighty and rich To worke in us confidence of being heard 2. To raise up in us a confidence that God heareth us For if hee be our Father and one that is endued with exceeding goodnesse which hee especially manifesteth and declareth in heaven then will hee also give us all things necessary to salvation and if this our Father be Lord in heaven and so omnipotent whereby hee is able to help us then is hee able most easily to give us those things which wee aske of him To worke in us reverence of him 3. To raise a reverence of him in us Seeing this our Father is so great a Lord that is heavenly who reigneth every-where who is able to cast both body and soul into hell fire let us then reverence such a Lord and approach unto him with exceeding submission both of minde and body 4. That wee call on him in fervency of
spirit 5. That the minde of him that worshippeth be lifted up to heavenly things 6. That heavenly things be desired 7. That the errour of Ethnickes might be met withall who thinke that they may adore and worship God in creatures 8. To admonish us that wee are not to direct our prayers unto a certaine place as in the Old Testament ON THE 47. SABBATH Quest 122. What is the first petition Answ Hallowed be thy Name that is Grant us first to know thee aright a John 17.3 Jer. 9.23 24. and 31.33 34. Mat. 16.17 James 1.5 Psal 119. sect 14. vers 1. and to worship praise and magnifie thy almightinesse goodnesse justice mercy and truth shining in all thy works b Psal 119. sect 18. vers 1. Luke 1. ver 46 47 68 69. Psalm 145.8 9 17. Exod. 34 6 7. Romanes 11.33 And further also to direct our whole life thoughts wordes and workes to this end that thy most holy Name be not reproached for us but rather be renowned with honour and praises c Psalm 71.8 and 115.1 The Explication Why this Petition is first in order NOw followeth the second part of the Prayer containing six Petitions Amongst them this petition of hallowing Gods Name is set in the first place because it is the end and scope of all the other Petitions For the end of all our affairs actions and prayers must be Gods glory Now the end is the first thing which is intended and the last thing which is performed and executed 1. Therefore the end of the other Petitions is to be desired if we will desire the rest aright according to that Commandement Seek yee first the kingdome of God and his righteousnesse and all these things shall be ministred unto you We are here to consider 1. What is called the Name of God 2. What is holy and what To hallow or sanctifie The Name of God signifieth What the Name of God signifieth Psalm 5.11 and 7.17 and 116 1â— 1 Kings 5.5 Exodus 15.4 and chap. 34. vers 14. 1 Sam. 17.45 Mat. 28.19 Acts 21. vers 13. and 2. vers 38. 1. God himself They that lovethy Name shall be joyfull in thee I will praise the Name of the Lord. I will call upon the Name of the Lord. Hee shall build an house unto my Name 2. The properties and works of God His Name is Jehovah The Lord whose Name is Jealous 3. Gods Commandement and charge his divine will and authority I come to thee in the Name of the Lord of hosts Baptise them in the Name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost 4. The worship trust celebration and confession of God I am ready to die for the Name of the Lord Jesus Be baptised every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ in which place as also Mat. 28. the Name of God signifieth both his authority and the confession of him Here it is used in the first and second signification to wit it is taken for God himself and for the divine properties and works in which Gods Majesty shineth What Holy signifieth Holy signifieth 1. God himself most holy and most pure or essentiall uncreate holinesse which is God himselfe For all vertues and properties in God are his essentiall holinesse Esay 6.33 So the Angels call God Holy holy holy Lord God of hosts 2. That holinesse which is in creatures that is their conformity with God which is begun in the godly and is perfect in the Angels 3. The ordaining and appointing of things to holy uses In this sense that is called holy which is destined to some holy use as the Temple of Jerusalem Hallowing signifieth 1. To acknowledge that for holy which is holy How we are said â—o sanctifie God the Altar the Vessels and the Priests The word Hallowing is taken in these three senses First to hallow or sanctifie is to acknowledge reverence and magnifie that as holy which indeed in it selfe is holy In this sense wee are said to hallow and sanctifie God who is holinesse it selfe 1. When wee acknowledge God to be holy or when wee acknowledge God to be such as hee hath declared himselfe in his Word and workes that is when wee know and think the same of Gods essence of his will and works of his omnipotency goodnesse wisedome and other his properties which God in his Word hath commanded and revealed that wee should know and think of them 2. When wee not only know God to be holy but also confesse and magnifie him and that in words and profession and in deeds and integrity of life 3. When wee referre the true doctrine knowledge and profession of Gods holinesse and likewise of our prayers and actions and even our whole life unto that end whereunto we ought and whither God hath commanded it to be referred namely to the glory and worship of God himselfe 2. To make that holy which in it selfe is not holy Secondly to hallow or sanctifie is to separate that from pollution and make it holy which in it selfe is not holy but polluted So the Word did sanctifie that masse or lumpe of flesh which he tooke even that nature which in us is polluted John 17.17 19. Ephes 5.26 2 Cor. 7.1 2 Tim. 2.21 1 John 3.3 1 Pet. 1.10 preserving it in himself from all contagion of sin and adorning it with perfect sanctity So God and Christ do sanctifie the Church namely by remitting us our sins and sanctifying us by the holy Ghost and by the continuing of both unto us So we are commanded to sanctifie our selves that is to keep our selves from all uncleannesse of the flesh Be ye holy for I am holy 3. To appoint a thing in it selfe either holy or indifferent to an holy use Thirdly To sanctifie is to ordaine and appoint that to an holy use or end which it selfe is either holy or indifferent So the Father sanctified the Sonne that is ordained him to the office of the Mediatourship and sent him into the world Thus God sanctified the Sabbath day the Temple the Sacrifices the Priests and thus Christ sanctified himselfe for the Elect that is he offered up himselfe to his Father an holy sacrifice for us Thus is the meat we receive sanctified by the word of God and prayer How we pray that Gods name be hallowed Of these three significations of Hallowing the first and second pertaine to our present purpose For our petition to God is that his name be hallowed not only of us but in us also that is we desire 1. That God would enlighten us with the knowledge of his holinesse and most holy name or as the Catechisme expoundeth it that we may know him aright and worship praise and magnifie his almightinesse wisdome goodnesse justice mercy and truth shining in all his works 2. That he would also sanctifie his name in us and more and more sanctifie and regenerate us so that in our whole life we may avert and
union as it was assumed Nor can there be any true reason of that union which destroyeth the reason of the substance of flesh but that reason of the union which he feignes by a certaine contradiction destroyeth the reason of the substance because it makes that which is locall to be illocall that which hath dimensions to have no dimensions that which hath quantity to have no quantity a body to be no body and a substance no substance VII But he also assumed a soule for he said My soule is heavie unto the death Mat. 26. which also he breathed out on the Crosse Mat. 27. to wit an intelligent soule which after death should remaine and which might grow in wisdome in the time of his humiliation Luke 2. The Animadversion This Thesis is right opposed 1. To the errour of Apollinaris feigning that the Word assumed flesh without a soule and that hee himselfe was in stead of a soule See Ambrose de Incay l. 1. c. 7. 2. To that Papisticall fiction of such a perfection in Christs soule as from its creation was so replenished with knowledge and grace that it could not learne any knowledge or grow therein which it knew not before See Bellarm de Christo l. 4. c. 1 2 3 4. 3. To the folly of Ubiquitaries and of this teacher concerning the ubiquitie and omniscience of Christs humanity even from the moment of his conception and union for if Christ did truly breathe out his soule upon the Crosse there must needs be a truly locall separation of the soule and body in death therefore by no meanes could the soule or body then be every-where Or if then the soule or the body was in any wise every-where and if in any sort there was not made a true separation of both neither did Christ in some sort truly breathe out his soul that i◠he did not truly dye which is false notwithstanding then that is in that separation of the body and soule the humanity was not separated from the Word but inseparably the union of the natures remained in death For Christ then was not truly man although hee died according to his body but living according to his soule therefore it followes irrefragably 1. That by affirming the ubiquity of Christs body or soule or of both we must deny that Christ truly died 2. That ubiquity neither is the forme of the hypostaticall union nor the specificall difference of it which Smidlinus in the conference at Maulbrun Pag. 14. Lat. p. 9. Germ. affirmed and laboured for Nor is it the effect or consequence thereof which afterward Chemnitius devised to correct Smidlinus his opinion For the union remained not onely in death but also in the whole state of his humilitie without any reall transfusion of the ubiquity or any other of the divine properties into the flesh without which the Ubiquitaries cry out that Christ is no more God then Peter was Out of all which it is plaine that ubiquity by this Thesis cuts its owne throat For how can a dead body hanging on the Crosse and lying in the grave and yet not separated from the Word have an illocall-manner of subsisting Likewise if the soule which the Word assumed could in the time of humiliation encrease in wisdome as Luke 2. then doubtlesse from the womb it could not be omniscient although it subsisted in the Word VIII This humane nature of Christ is not required to the dignity of the person of the Word as it is simply the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Word is a person of it selfe perfect and every way complete even from his eternall generation of the Father IX It belongs notwithstanding to the integrity of the Word incarnate or of Christ as be is Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose person after the Incarnation is compounded as the Ecclesiastick Writers doe witnesse The Animadversion If the flesh belong to the integrity of the person of the Word incarnate In the ninth Position there lies some deceit for he saith that the flesh belongs to the integrity of the Word incarnate that afterward hee may conclude the ubiquitie of the flesh when as the entire Word being incarnate is every-where But he cunningly saith that it belongs to the integrity of the Word incarnate but not to the integritie of the person of the Word incarnate lest hee should seem to conclude a quaternitie or make the Word one person and the Word incarnate another To the same purpose is it when he calls the person of the Word incarnate or of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compounded Now the orthodox Writers though they reject not simply these speeches for they themselves speak so without any feare of cavilling yet they warne us to understand them aright to wit in that sense as they were used by Ecclesiastick Writers to whose testimony our adversaries appeale lest wee should conclude that the hypostasis of the Word before its Incarnation was imperfect or that it is from some other hypostasis of the Word incarnate For so of necessity a quaternity must follow We must then stick to that which our adversary confesseth rightly Thes 8. that the Word is in it selfe altogether perfect and entire We must also hold what he acknowledgeth Thes 12. that there is not one Son begot of the Father from eternity and another conceived and begot of Mary in time but that there is one and the same For these being granted it is plaine that the Word and the Word incarnate are not two different persons but one and the same numericall hypostasis and that they differ not essentially but onely in some respect as Peter when he is clothed and when he is naked is one and the same person differing from it selfe not subjectively but accidentally Hence further it followes manifestly that nothing can be properly said to belong to the integrity of the Word incarnate which doth not also belong to the integrity of the person of the Word but to say this were to deny the perfection of the Word and to make a composition in God The Word incarnate is improperly a person created That the flesh then doth belong to the integrity of the person of the Word is to be so understood as the person is called compounded by Writers to wit not properly but improperly For on the first Thesis we shewed That the person of the Word incarnate is compounded made up constituted consisteth of two natures not as an heap of corne is made up of many graines a mixed body of elements Or as a living creature is compounded of a body and soule which are peculiar waies of composition Neither can they be attributed to the person of Christ unlesse many absurdities doe follow hence as Thomas shewes at length But the terme Composition is here taken in a large signification How the hypostaticall union is a composition for the position of divers things together in one which way soever it be for so the