they would interpret the Place is clear without they make the Scripture speak Contradictions and so to be taken up into Glory be to be received gloriously on Earth and then up is down above below Earth Heaven Besides it is the same Word which is used by the Septuagint for the Assumption of Enoch and Elijah and in the New Testament for the Ascension of our Saviour Mark 16.19 Acts 1.2 Acts 1.11 22. Wherefore this being the constant Notion of the Word we must either learn a Language which the Scriptures know not and the Holy Ghost never use or else according to their own Rule Jesus must be this most High God manifested in the Flesh Would you read this Doctrine engraven by the Point of a Diamond Consult St. John's first Epistle chap. 5. ver 20. We know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an Vnderstanding to know him that is true and we are in him that is true even in his Son Jesus Christ This is he true God and eternal Life To this our Adversaries object only That there is a Possibility the last Words in Grammatical Construction may be referred to the Father But because the Son is the immediate Antecedent to which the Relative can properly be referred 2. The Son is here chiefly treated on which is the Rule they give for interpreting such Places of Scripture And 3. since the Reason rendred why we are in the true God is because we are in the Son viz. because the Son is the true God And 4. in St. John the constant Title of our Saviour is Eternal Life Since I say all these Reasons are in the Text it self why the Title of the true God should be attributed to the Son and not here referred to the Father who indeed is spoken of in the Text but at a distance I cannot but conclude that our Saviour is the True God and Eternal Life the most High God the God of Israel If we look into the Old Testament we shall find many Places which directly speak of the God of Israel which are interpreted by the Apostles in the New to be meant of none but Christ If David say The Israelites lusted in the Wilderness and tempted God in the Desart and Moses describes the History thereof Numb 21.5 6. and tells us God sent fiery Serpents to destroy them St. Paul will tell us this God was Christ 1 Cor. 10.9 Neither let us tempt Christ as some of them also tempted and were destroyed of fiery Serpents What indeed would these Men have if we must not believe such Places and palpable Truths as these are Will they make both us and themselves Idolaters And yet they do no otherwise who give the Honour and Worship to the Creature which is due only to the Creator for besides that God saith he will not give his Honour to another what I pray you is Religious Worship but that Homage Faith and Obedience which ought to be paid and is really due from the Creature to the great Creator Now as it is impossible that God can be otherwise than the first Cause and Creator of all things and so cannot devest himself of that Soveraignty which he hath over the Creature so it is equally impossible that another should have the same Homage Honour and Religious Worship with the most High God without Idolatry and yet we are bound to honour the Son as we honour the Father unless he be likewise the first Cause the great Creator which for a Creature to be implies a Contradiction Since then the Reason of the Law viz. our Obligation to worship God upon the Account of Creation always continues why not the Law it self which commands Thou shalt worship God alone and him only shalt thou serve If they say their Worship of Christ is subordinate and directed through Christ to God the Father why then do they call the Romanists Idolaters Why do they not shake Hands with Bellarmine and kiss the Pope's Toe who allows no other Worship to the Virgin Mary and the rest of the Saints than they do to Christ whom they make altogether a Creature Neither will their Simily of a King and his Son or a Favourite do here for a King may devest himself of his Royal Authority but it is otherwise with God he cannot but be the first Cause of all things and therefore the Creature will be always bound to worship him as such Now as it 's contrary to the Justice and Truth of God to command us to worship him for the first Cause for the Creator who is but a mere Creature So since we are obliged by Scripture to pay the same Homage Faith and Obedience to the Son as to the Father to honour the Son as we honour the Father we must conclude that the Son as well as the Father is the first Cause the great Creator the most High God the God of Israel But I will not stand any longer to prove the Sun gives Light Our Saviour himself who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the highest Reason proves the Truth of this Doctrine in this very Gospel appointed for this Day in the Verses immediately following the Text from the In-dwelling of the Father and the Son the Greeks call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latines Circumincessio but I know not well how to render it Our Saviour saith Because I am in the Father and the Father in me which is fully expressed by the Apostle For in him saith he dwells the Fulness of the Godhead bodily The second Argument is drawn from his Words or Doctrine The Words saith he that I speak I speak not of my self but the Father that dwelleth in me The Prophets of old spake as they were moved and directed by God but here it is God himself that speaks God who at sundry times and in divers Manners spake in time past unto the Fathers by the Prophets hath in these last Days saith the Divine Author to the Hebrews spoken unto us by his Son his natural Son The Word being here taken emphatically as appears by the Opposition here made to the Prophets who are in Scripture-Language stiled the Children or Sons of God Never Man spake as he spake by his Adversaries own Confession Vox non hominem sonat est Deus certè What was blasphemously ascribed to Herod is most certainly true here it is the Voice of God and not of Man The third Argument is taken from his Works and Miracles He the Father saith Christ doth the Works believe me ver 11. For the very Works sake they declare my infinite Vertue and demonstrate my Omnipotency The ruffling and roaring Winds the boisterous Waves obey his Voice and the Seas acknowledg the Lord High Admiral of the Ocean to be aboard The Fish bring Silver in their Mouths to do Homage and pay their Quit-Rents to their supream Lord and Maker The Loaves and Fishes multiply as receiving another Nature from the God of Nature and the Author of all
Christus Deus THE DIVINITY OF Our Saviour Asserted and Vindicated from the Exceptions of the Socinians and others In a SERMON preached at St. Peter's Hungate in Norwich upon the Festival of St. Philip and St. James in the Year 1673. By BERNARD SKELTON Sometime Vicar of Hinton LONDON Printed for Jonathan Robinson at the Golden Lion in St. Paul's Church-Yard and Samuel Oliver Bookseller in Norwich MDCXCII THE BOOKSELLER TO THE READER THIS Discourse was long ago suppress'd by the Author after it had been sent to the Press and the Copy was lost But a Gentleman who lived with the Transcriber retriev'd a Copy and has at his own Charge and Trouble exposed it to the World the Author neither correcting nor reviewing it so that whatever Errata's you meet with all must not be laid upon him This I remember he told me that if he had put it out himself he would have cut off a great many extravagant Enlargements so he termed them which though they passed in the Pulpit could not but be irksom to an intelligent Reader who expects not Words but Reason THE Divinity of our Saviour Asserted and Vindicated from the Exceptions of the Socinians and others JOHN 14. part of the 9th Verse He that hath seen me bath seen the Father ST Peter himself was not more eminent in the Church of God than he whose Festivals we this day celebrate If Cephas was a Pillar so was James also And in that pure and primitive Council mentioned Acts 15. he is so far from coming short of St. Peter in Place and Dignity that the general Vogue will here give him the Priority For after he had heard the Opinion of the whole Council he as chief of this Divine Convocation briefly rehearseth their several Opinions and lastly gives his definitive and determinative Sentence That we trouble not them who from among the Gentiles are turned to God And though Rome hath raised her proud Hills above the Clouds and stretched forth her Neck beyond her Sister-Churches yet we know that Jerusalem was the Mother of us all There the Gospel was first planted from thence it was dispersed through the World and St. James was the first Bishop thereof if we may believe Baronius And why then may not St. James's Successors challenge Supremacy as well as St. Peter's since Jerusalem was the Mother-Church But if St. Peter's Confession gave him this Prerogative St. Philip will step in here and say he made it before him for in John 1.45 he tells Nathanael We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write Which is nothing else but a Periphrasis of the Messiah and is so interpreted by Nathanael also ver 49. Thou art the Son of God thou art the King of Israel But not to make the Apostles contend or justle for Superiority since they had learn'd of their Master that he that would be greatest must be their Minister and he that would be chiefest must be Servant to all it is most certain that these our Apostles were in the number of those Stones which were the Foundation of the New and Heavenly Jerusalem the City of God Neither in their way were they inferiour to any in the Work of the Ministry and the promoting the Interest of the Gospel For St. James refiding at Jerasalem hath as well as St. Paul the care of all the Churches and by his Catholick Epistle confounds Heresy confirms the Brethren advanceâ—h the miraculous Tower of Prayer particularly that by the Elders of the Church confutes the Solifidians proves that Faith without Works is no better than the Faith of Devils which believe and tremble that without Works it is dead And the Doctrine thereof hath been long since buried till of late Years it revived and gained a Resurrection at Gentva St. Philip preached the Gospel in Stythiu and found more Humanity among those Barbarians than with those that stiled themselves Christians For after awenty Years Travel in that large and barbarous Country where contrary to expectation both himself and Doctrine found a most welcome Reception so easily can the meek Temper of the Gospel triumph over salvage Natures and Giant-like Spirits he returned to Hierapolis a City of Syria where he encounters and confutes the Ebonites those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who denied the Divinity of our Saviour and there say some he found a Tomb others a Marâ—yrdom So early had Hereticks learn'd as well as Jews to overwhelm with Stones whom they could not gainsay by Scripture If we look into the Gospel we shall find him as soon as he was made an Apostle making others Disciples bringing Nathanael the true Israelite to the King of Israel obliging the very Gentiles making Greeks do Homage to the King of the Jews and here in this Gospel whereof my Text is a part earnestly intreating to be instructed in that Doctrine for which he was content to die Shew us saith he the Father and it sufficeth And Jesus saith unto him Have I been so long time with you and yet hast thou not known me Philip He that hath seen me hath seen the Father I shall not trouble you with any subtile and accurate Division of the Words but from this great Truth here asserted by our Saviour I shall raise this one Observation or Doctrine which is the natural Consequence of the Words That Christ is one in Essence with the Father he is the most High God the God of Israel For if this be true which our Saviour asserts that whosoever seeth him seeth the Father and who dare doubt it since it's Truth it self that speaks it we must rationally conclude either that he is the Father which is denied by all or else that the Father and he have one and the same Divine Essence For whether we make use of rational spiritual or corporal Opticks whether this Vision be made by the Eye of the Understanding and we interpret the Words He that knows me knows the Father or else by the Eye of Faith and so He that believes in me believes in the Father or we take the Words properly and by seeing is meant the Action of our corporal and sensitive Organ the result will be the same the Consequence not different For if it be true that whosoever knows or believes Christ knows the Father the Consequence will be what our Saviour asserts John 10.30 That he and the Father are one But to these object Socinus and the Racovian Catechism first That these Words can by no means be applied to the Divine Essence which say we as well as they is invisible and inaccessible to the most piercing Eye of poor Mortality since the Angels themselves are forc'd to vail their Faces But this is so sensless a shift that they must be blind indeed who cannot see how to answer it For who ever was so quick-sighted yet as to spy the Essences of Things Essentia rerum non incurrunt in sensus Who ever look'd upon a Man and spied his
Soul that Bird of Paradise perking upon a little Glandule in the midst of the Brain and from thence giving its imperious Dictates to every Member of the Body Or else what Tube or Spectacles did he use to see the Soul diffused through the whole and be wholly in the whole and yet wholly in every part thereof Now though when we look on a Man we cannot see his Essence and yet by his Discourse and Reason we see and know he hath the Essence of a Man so whosoever looks on Christ though the Divine Essence be invisible yet since he that sees him sees the Father must necessarily acknowledg that he hath the Essence of the Father he is one with the Father he is the most High God the God of Israel But say the Objectors If this be granted yet the Consequence you make is altogether illogical for if it be true that he who sees Christ sees the Father it naturally follows that Christ is the Father and not as you say that he is one in Essence with the Father And so contrary to your own Principles you confound the Persons and make the Son the Father and the Father the Son which is a Contradiction and altogether impossible To this I answer that the word Father in the Scripture is taken either essentially and absolutely for God or the Divine Nature or else personally and respectively in reference to the other Persons of the sacred Trinity An Example of the latter we have in the Commission of Baptism Go and disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost And again There are three that bear Record in Heaven the Father Son and Holy Ghost And an Example of the former we have in those Words of the Jews We have one Father even God And of the Prophet Isaiah chap. 9.6 His Name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor The mighty God The Everlasting Father Now either the Prophet meant he should be called as he was to be and then the Everlasting Father must signify essentially the Eternal God or else he should not be what he foretold he should be called And so there is here no Prerogative of the Messiah foretold but the Prophecy is a mere Scoff and an ironical Mock of him who was to be the Desire of all Nations And the meaning is he should be called the wonderful Counsellor but he shall be only one of no Parts no Wit Counsel or Advice He shall be called The mighty God but shall be only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a poor weak silly Man He shall be called The Everlasting Father but shall be the most despicable amongst the Sons of Men. Now since this Interpretation is contrary to the Scope of the Prophet and the Tenour of the whole Scripture and it 's a Contradiction that in one and the same Respect the Father should be the Son and the Son should be the Father we must conclude that the word Father in this Prophecy must be taken essentially for God or the Divine Nature And if here and in several other Places of Scripture which my time will not now give me leave to enumerate the word Father is so taken why not in this Speech of our Saviour's which will make the Sense clear and obvious to the meanest Understanding He that seeth me seeth the Father that is seeth God him who hath the Divine Nature or else which amounts to the same is one in Essence with the Father There is yet an Interpretation more which is the learned Hammond's in his Paraphrase on the New Testament where he saith The Son is said to be the Image of his Father and whosoever seeth the Son seeth the Father alluding to the Expression of the Apostle where Christ is said to be the Brightness of his Father's Glory the express Image of his Person But this is so far from helping our Adversaries that indeed it doth both confute and confound them For though as they say truly the Image and that it represents cannot be the same yet the Son cannot be said to be the Image of his Person without he have one and the same Divine Nature and Essence For every Image either expresseth the outward Lineaments and Proportions of the thing it represents as a Picture Statute and Impression or else together with the out ward Lineaments the Gesture and Motion of the thing it represents as a Mirrour or Looking-glass Thus Man as he was created in Holiness and had Power given him over the Creatures did represent or was the Image of God in the Imitation of the Divine Operations or in the Exercise of his Power Justice and Mercy or else it expresseth the Nature Genius Person and internal Form of that whereof it is the Image Thus the Son of Man cannot be the natural Image of his Father unless he hath one and the same specifical Nature with his Father and is like him in the Qualities and Endowments of the Soul Non progenerat Aquila Columbam 't is a Man only that begetteth a Man 't is a Man not a Horse or a Lion can be the express Image of the Person of a Man Thus nothing can be the express Image of Infinity but what is infinite And the Son of God the eternal Son of an eternal Father God of God Light of Light is the express Image of his Father's Person As he hath one and the same not specifical for the Divine Nature is indivisible and can be but one since it is impossible there should be more than one infinite most perfect Essence but individual Divine Nature and Perfections And so the Words according to this Interpretation amount to thus much that he that seeth Christ who is the express Image of his Father's Person seeth him who cannot but be of the same Nature and Divine Essence And so the Consequence is yet more clear and evident that Christ is one with the Father that he is the most High God the God of Israel The Words being thus cleared if there were no other Place of Scripture to prove this great Truth yet from this alone we have sufficient Ground to believe it But the Divinity of the Blessed Jesus is almost in every Paragraph writ in such large and evident Characters that he that runs may read it Would you see it written by a Sun-Beam What can be more bright and illustrious than that Saying of St. Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. 3.16 Without Controversy great is the Mystery of Godliness God was manifested in the Flesh justified in the Spirit seen of Angels preached to the Gentiles believed on in the World received up into Glory Here the word God is the Subject of six Propositions together and therefore according to the Rule laid down by the Socinians signifieth the supream Power and Majesty excluding all others from that Deity Now that that Text is meant of our Saviour and not of the Will of God revealed by frail mortal Man and gloriously received on Earth as
kind by way of Understanding which in spiritual Beings is Conception or Generation so it 's no contradiction that there be an infinite Act of the Will too by way of infinite Love or Volition which is Procession But saith the Objector if it be necessary that an infinite Good be infinitely communicable how can these two be one as it is indeed the usual Method of our Adversaries to pose us with the manner of the Existence of a Plurality of Persons in one Divine Essence But who knows not that as to argue from the Existence to the manner of existing is no Consequence so to argue we know not the manner of it therefore it is not is very bad Logick We know not how the Loadstone drills and draws the Iron into its close Embraces but we are sure it is so The Wind we know blows but whence it comes and whither it goes we are ignorant In these and a thousand things more is Reason pos'd in Naturals much more in Supernaturals So that it is a sufficient Answer to say Scripture and Reason tell us it is so but how it is so we know not Neither do we desire to know left with the Bethlemites we smart for our peeping into the Ark of the Lord. But we are not altogether in the dark as to this neither There is something in Nature which tho there be no proportion between finite and infinite may yet at the least shadow out something not altogether unlike this Plurality of Persons in one Essence If we lift up our Eyes towards Heaven and look upon the Sun we cannot but perceive some Glimmerings of this great Truth in that beautiful and glorious Body Is it not the Fountain and Cause of natural Light Was it ever destitute of this pleasing Act of Generation Did it not ever since it was a Sun send forth these bright and joyful Emanations Thus the Son of God is the Brightness of his Father's Glory the eternal Son of an eternal Father Are not the Sun and its darling Light distinct Supposites Do they not differ as Cause and Effect Begetter and Begotten It is a poor shift here to say that Light is a Quality for Reason in the best of Antients Democritus Epicurus and generally in all the modern Philosophers speaks the contrary In short the Sun naturally and necessarily produceth Light Thus God who is the most free Agent in this great Act of Generation acts ex necessitate Naturae naturally which is the highest Perfection as I said before because being infinitely Good he is infinitely Communicable Now that the Sun and Light which as Cause and Effect Begetter and Begotten have one and the same individual Essence appears from the tacit Consent of all Men I ever met with for if nothing interposeth between the Rays of the Sun and them they will say they are in the Sun And it is true for the Sun is Light and Light is the Sun they are one in Essence tho distinct as Cause and Effect I could enlarge much upon this Similitude and make it clearer than the Sun it self But Time calls me to answer their other way of arguing which is by Scripture wherein I will be as concise as may be for I fear I have already tired your Patience First say our Adversaries his Divinity was by Donation as appears from Phil. 2.9 And again the Father is called the Head nay the God of Christ I answer All this is in respect of his humane Nature as we may see in the Chapter cited Phil. 2. for he that was in the Form of God and thought it no Robbery to be equal with God took upon him the Form of a Servant submitting to the Death of the Cross the Punishment of Slaves and Servants The Exaltation therefore of the Humane Nature as a Reward of his Death and Suffering could be no prejudice to his Divinity which the Apostle asserts fully in the foregoing Verses But saith the Objector how can the Son be the Father To do nothing of himself not to come of himself or seek his own Glory are Imperfections not suitable to the Divine Nature I answer What he calls Imperfections are the greatest Perfections for since the Divine Nature can be but one Christ if he be the proper natural Son of God as he is said to be in Scripture must have the same individual Essence with the Father and so consequently what the Jews affirmed for Blasphemy the most High God and he doth nothing of himself because the Father that dwelleth in him worketh together with him Opera Dei ad extra sunt indivisa The third sort of Objections are from those Scriptures which deny some Perfections to belong to Christ in some certain Respect But our Adversaries deny them absolutely as not to know the Day of Judgment and the like The fourth Objection is when they attribute some Imperfection to Christ absolutely which is spoken of him in Scripture only in some certain Respect as to be Man to Die to Pray to be Raised again that the Father is greater than he and the like all which are said of him only in respect of his Humanity Lastly saith the Objector Christ gives this as the only Reason why he is said to be God because he was sanctified and sent into the World And here I beg your leave to be more copious and that I may not seem to derogate or take any thing from the strength of the Argument I will repeat the very Words of their Authors as they are set down in the Racovian Catechism pag. 19. Having premised that the word God is taken two ways in Scripture first for the most High secondly for him who hath some sublime Dominion under him they add that in the latter Signification the Word of God is in certain Places dignified with the Title of God And this we prove saith the Racovian Catechism from the very Words of the Son himself John 10.35 If ye call them Gods to whom the Word of God comes and the Scripture cannot be broken Say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the World Thou blasphemest because I said I am the Son of God By this Speech Christ doth clearly intimate both that the word God is sometimes attributed in Scripture to them who are far inferiour to that one God as also that he called himself the Son of God for no other reason than because he had been sanctified by the Father and sent into the World To this I answer 1st That I admit the distinction but that the word God is applied to Christ only in the latter Signification is false as I have before proved And to say only as they do that in certain Places of Scripture the Word when attributed to Christ is taken in the latter Signification for him that hath some derivative Power from the most High God makes nothing against us for in certain other Places of Scripture it is attributed to Christ in the former Signification
opposite Properties should combine into one Person Or that two Natures each whereof is apt to constitute a several Person should be united into one Person I answer First that is neither strange impossible nor as our Adversaries say repugnant to sound Reason that two Substances endued with opposite Properties should combine into one Person for the Soul is immortal and the Body mortal yet these do so combine that they constitute one Person Again the Soul is not only apt to constitute but is really a Person according to the Platonist if a Person be a singular Substance endued with Reason before its Entrance into the Body for if each Soul did subsist by it self many thousand Years before its Body it could not be said to be part of a Man before it was united to the Body And therefore a Nature which is not only apt but really constitutes a Person may be united to another Nature as that both shall constitute one Person There is no Necessity therefore in the Hypostatical Union that there should be two Persons and so consequently two Christs for as the reasonable Soul and Flesh is one Man so God and Man is one Christ And it is false what our Adversaries say that the Similitude holds not because according to us Christ is both God and Man but Soul and Body are so conjoined that a Man is neither Soul nor Body for he is both Thus the Scripture speaking of Men and Women says So many Souls were added to the Faith And the common Speech is thus is there any Body or there is no Body meaning none of Mankind in such or such a Place But if they will not the Platonists Pre-existence of Souls which I as Answerer am not obliged to prove but they to disprove yet according to the common Opinion that two Persons cannot combine there is no Fear there should be two Persons in Christ for nothing can be said to be a Person as your own Definition of a Person intimates by the word Individual unless it actually exist But the humane Nature of Christ never existed but in the second Person of the Trinity It is true if the humane Nature had been individuated and subsisted of it self before it was united to the second Person of the Trinity there might have been some Shew of an Objection but this they know is not admitted How then can Christ be said to be more than one Person since the Son of Man subsists only in the Person of the Son of God What hinders then that a Person may be so united to another Person which if it should subsist of it self would be a Person that they both be one only Person since the one subsists in the other and hath no proper Subsistence of its own But it will be sufficient in short to say Rem scimus Modum nescimus the thing we know the manner we know not And it is no good Consequence as I said before to argue you know not the manner you know not how the thing is therefore it is not Let us therefore admire and adore that infinite Wisdom and Goodness of God which hath revealed so much of that great Mystery to Mankind which the Prophets foretold and the Angels themselves desired to peep into viz. God manifested in the Flesh whereby he that sees Christ seeth the Father sees the invisible God and approacheth to that Light which is inaccessible Would you then see the Father Is your Soul athirst for the living God Do you breath and pant after eternal Life Why then do you any longer gaze and gape after Vanity Look upon Jefus there is no seeing the Father but by the Son View him in his Word view him in his Works in him dwelleth the Fulness of the Godhead bodily He only can shew you the Father He is the Way the Truth and the Life he only can give you the Ante-pasts of Eternity and whilst you are here upon Earth make you touth Heaven with a Finger And though now as the Apostle saith you can see him but as through a Glass darkly yet the time will come when you shall see him as he is Face to Face encircled with all his Rays of Glory Again would you see the Father Doth the Horror of your Sins afright you and the infinite Justice of an angry God terrify you Have you been bitten by the fiery Serpent and would you see the Bowels of Mercy and the tender Compassions of a Father Look upon Jesus view him on the Cross see how he stretcheth forth his Arms to receive thee How can'st thou now chuse but cry out with the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O the Depth and Length and Breadth of the Love of God in Christ Jesus Behold him bleeding there 's Balsam in his Blood The Serpent upon the Pole of the Cross can cure all the venemous Stings of Satan that red Dragon that fiery Serpent Let not the infinite Justice of God any longer terrify you He that seeth Jesus seeth also the Father of Mercies the God of Comfort and all Consolations As there was infinite Punishment due so there is an infinite Satisfaction made for he that sacrificed himself for us was both God and Man By the Blood of God saith the Apostle we are redeemed and Jesus is this God for he is as the Apostle speaks Rom. 9.5 over all God blessed for evermore Amen To him therefore with the Father and the Holy Ghost be ascribed as most due is all Honour Glory Praise Might Majesty and Dominion both now and evermore Amen Glory be to thee O Lord. FINIS