not the same pâ—rson with his father but he is the Ioh. 10. 30. 1. Ioh. 5. 7. samâ— God The distinction betwixt thâ—m is not in râ—spect of nature essâ—ce or time for so they are one but in respect of their manner of subsisting in that one natâ—re Ob. 8. Eightly Christ is man and if hâ— be God also â—f he haue the nature both of God and Man then he is two distinct persons but this Gods word will not admit therfore he must needs want one of them Ans Indeed Cerinthus maketh Christ and Iesus two distinct persons Nestorius taught that there are two persons in Christ but without warrant from the word For although Eph. 4. 10. Christ haue two distinct natures the Dâ—itie and the Humanitie yet is he but one person For the person of the Son of God existing a true person from all eternitie did assume the humane nature being no person of it selfe into the vnitie of his person did appropriate it vnto himself without coÌ„founding or defacing the properties of either of the two natures so that albeit there be two distinct natures the diuine humane â—et there is but one person as a man is but one true person though two distinct natures concurre in him one of the soule and the other of the body It is true I graunt that the Word is a person but I denie that the soule and body of Christ being vnited to make a perfect man do make a distinct and perfect person For a persoÌ„ must not onely be sâ—me particular and singular thing but it must also subsist and consist by it selfe and must not be susteined of any other But Christs humane nature froÌ„ the first beginning therof was susteined by the person of the Word For it was at once both formed assumed of the Word into the vnity of his person made proper to the Word without this assumption or personal vnion it neither was nor had been nor should be Plin. Histo nat lib. 16. c. 44. A resemblance whereof wee finde in the plant called Misselto which grows not but in a tree of another kinde and thence receiues his sap Neither is this any disgrace but rather an honour to his humanitie because it doth subsist by the person of the Word And albeit all the faithfull be vnited to the Word yet it is onely in a lower degree to wit by communication of grace and not by communication of personall subsistence So theÌ„ we see that though there be two distinct natures in our Lord yet it doth not followe that he is two distinct persons because his manhood is not a person as other men are but Iohn is a person but so is not Chrâ—st as he is man Vse 1. a naâ—urâ— Thus much for the Doctrine the vses â—ollow First the consideration oâ— Christs God-head teacheth vs to respect and honor him with all diuine worship in humilitie and sinceritie of heart He is God therefore we must honour him as God and being God he is omniscient and all-seeing his â—ies are a flame of fiâ—e not more terrible then peircing All things are nâ—â—ed before him and no thâ—â—gâ—â— is hid from his vnderstanding It is not fig-leaues that can couer vs nor the hils that can hide vs from his eye sight Secondly it should terrifie the wicked that dishonour him that reiect his Vse 2 lawes cast off his gouernment and disgrace his seruants For being God he is able with ease to be reuenged of theÌ„ All creatures in heauen and earth are at his becke His authoritie is absolute and his power infinite All power in heauen and earth is giuen him and he Is 〈◊〉 6. Math. 28. 18 shall regine till he hath put all his eneâ—â—â—â— vnder hâ—â— feet Tâ—ose that will not that he reigne ouer theÌ„ shal be brought and 〈◊〉 before him Nâ—â—preces 〈◊〉 〈…〉 m neither price nor praying will perswade him if once he take in hand to iudge them to condemne them It is good for them therefore to take the â—â—â—e and to repent before it be too late Thirdly this doctâ—iâ—e maketh much Vse 3 for our comfort For seeing Christ is God we may assure our selues that he is as wel able as wilâ—â—ng to do vs good and to deliuer vâ— from euill and doth liue euer to defend and protect vs. For beeing God he is immortall and immutable Therefore we which are hiâ— may boldly say I will not feaâ—â— what mâ—◠〈◊〉 what man can do vnto me For he 〈◊〉 is our friend and fâ—uourer is God omnipotent and he will not leaue vs nâ—r forsake vs Art thou assâ—ulted by Satan fâ—ie to Christ thy God he can as easily â—mite him to the ground as Dâ—â—â—d did Golâ—ah Art thou vexed with sinne then go to him for he is able to saue thee from it He can drowne thy sinnes in his bloud as he drowned the Egâ—ptiâ—â—s in the sea Do the terrors of death arrest thee Do the pangs of hell seaze vpon thee Be not dismayd thy Suertie is God he can take away sinne which is the sting of death and can refâ—eâ—h tâ—y soule with the ioyes of 1. Cor. 15. 56. heauen Art thou poore or afflicted with sicknesse Comfort thy selfe and faint not For thy Lord is God he can either release thee from thine afflictioÌ„ or relieue thee in it as he did Daniel in the deâ—â—e of Lyons and the three children in the fierie furnace that thou shalt rather receiue good then susteine harme If he please not to deliuer thee yet he can and will if thou wilt not â—linch but depend vpon him vouch safe to giue thee fortitude patieÌ„ce to endure it And for the thorny crowne in this world he is able to honour thee with a crowne of gold of golden glorie glorious eternitie in the world to come Finally doe thine enemies presâ—e thee and seeke to deâ—oure thee Feare not For thy king is God and therefore able to conuert or subâ—eâ—t them He can either destroy them himselfe or make them to slay one an other as the enemies of good 2. Chro 20. 23. â—ehoshaphat sometimâ—s did Fourthly this doctrine serueth to Vse 4 conâ—ute the opinion of Eunomius who held that Christ was a mere man also the errour of the Monothelites who thought that Christ had one wil only but seeing that he is not only man buâ— God it followeth that he hath both an â—umane and a diuine will according to his two distinct natures which are not confounded in that one person by reason of the personall vnion but do truly â—â—separably and indiuisibly continue without confusion conuersion or transmutation So much for this second doctrine CHAP. IIII. The true members of Christ cannot be cut off and perish this conclusion is proued THirdly in that the Apostle here Doct. 3 saith that Christ hath washed vs in his Bloud we see how little reason there is for any to thinke that any of his true members can be cut off from
Lord in righteousnes Wee are as the sons of Leui Priests I meane but spirituall let vs pray vnto Christ that hee would refine â—z 36. 25. vs and power the cleane water of his Spirit vpon vs that we may be cleane from our filthinesse that so wee might sacrifice vnto the Lord in righteousnes For as hee requireth the sacâ—ifices of righteousnesse so hee looketh that they Ps 4. 5. should be offered in righteousnes that is after a righteous and holy manner The fifâ—thing to be considered is the manner how all our sacrifices should be offered First wee must offer them in faith For whatsoeuer is not of saith is sinne We RoÌ„ 14. 23. must bee assured of our offeâ—ings that God will accept them By faith Abel offered Hâ—b 11. 4. vnto God a greater sacrifice theÌ„ Cain A sacrifice without faith is as a bodie wâ—â—hout a sâ—ule a tree without pyth and therefore the sacrifice of the wicked who are destitute of true faith and not within the couâ—nant is as Salomon Pro. 15. 8. teacheth an abomination to the Lord. Secondly we must ofâ—er vp all our sacrifices sincerely with an honest heart and in consâ—ence of Gods câ—â—mandement For God tryeth the hearâ—â— and the Ps 9. râ—ines and counterfet sanctâ—ty is double iniquitie When wee giue almes which is one sacrifice the left haÌ„d shuld not knowe what the right hand doth And when wee pray to God which is another sacrifice we must not desâ—â—â— to Math. 6. be seene of men but ought to goe into our closets By which our Sauâ—â—â— meaneth that we should performe theâ—e dutâ—es sincerely without hypocriâ—â—â— For the hypocrite shall not come before God but Iob. 13. 16. Pro. 1. 20. those whtch are vpright in their way are his delight And therefore must our sacrifice bee entierly offered as Dauids was when he said I will praise thee O Lord my God with All mine heart Ps â—6 12. The Law appointed a sacrifice in Leu. 1. 8. 9. which all the members were offered And the meate offering which the â—euit 6. 23. Priestes offered was burnt altogether and no part therof was reserued So we that are made Priestes by Christ our High-priest should offer vnto God an entire sacrifice our whole heart all the members of our bodie and all the faculties of our soule For he made them all and he will either haue them all or none he wil not part stakes with the Diuell Thirdly we must offer vp our sacrifices willingly chearefully with delight Therefore the Psalmâ—st saith Let them offer sacrifices of praise and declare Ps 107. 22. his workes with reâ—oycing God loueth free-will offerings and a cheerefull giuer Siracides saith In all thy gifts 2. Coâ— 9 7. Eccle. 35. 9. 10. shem a toyfull countenance and looke what thâ—ne hand is able giue with a cheerefull eye Giue the Lord his honour with a liberall eye For he that soweth liberally shall reapalso liberally Dauid and his people 2. Cor. 9. 6. offered willingly with a perfect heart 1. Chron. 90. 9. 14. vnto the Lord for the building of a temple â—d his name euen so should we offer vp all our sacrifices willingly and with alacrity for the glory of his name Fourthly we must offer vp all our sacrifices beeing in charitie with our This also must be oblerued in the prepauation Math. 5. 23. 24. neighbours Christ saith If thou bring thy gift to the altar and there remembrest that thy brother hath ought against thee leaue there thine offering before the altar and go thy way first be reconciled to thy brother and then come and offer thy gift Our sacrifices must not be mixed with wrongs But whatsoeuer gooddutie we do to God let vs be in charitie with our brother For how can we thinke that he will accept â—t if we hate our brother whome he hath made And whatsoeuer good worke we do to man let vs do it in loue vnto him For as Paul sheweth though we 1. Cor. 13. 3. should giue al our goods to the poore and haue not loue it would profit nothing Fiftly we mâ—st offer vp all our sacrifices in the name oâ— Christ Whatsoeuer ye do in word or deâ—d do all in the Col. 3. 17. Name of the Lord Iesus giâ—ing thankes to God euen the father by him The Apostle Heb. 13. 15. exhorteth vs to offer the sacrifice of praise vnto God by him For if we would haue our offerings accepted we must not trust to their owne dignitie which deserueth nothing but rely only vpon his merits and most meritorious intercession And therefore Peter 1. Pet. 2. 5. saith our sacrifices are acceptable to God by Iesus Christ. And so much of the manner The end followeth and it is either supreme or subordinate greater or lesser The maine ende of all our sacrifices is the glory of God which ought of all men in their actions to be sought for aboue all thing else and therfore Paul saith whether ye cate or drinke or whatsoeuer 1. Cor. 10. 31. ye doe doe all to the glorie of God The subordinate inferiour ends are 1. That men might beholde our faith 2. commende our profession 3. and glorifie our heauenly Father for vs 4. that wee may adorne our calling 5. and allure others to the liking both of it and vs 6. that wee may edisie and excite our brethren by our good example 7. that we may stop the mouthes of Atheists papists Pagans 8. and that wee may gather certaine assurance of our election and effectuall vocation and at length attaine to the ende of our faith the saluation of our soules And this shall suffice for the foure first generall points CHAP. VII All our Sacrifices must bee offered vnto God THe fist and last is the Person to whome wee are made Kings and Priests and that is to God the Father of Christ and in him also ours The word God in the Scriptures is taken two wayes properly improperly Properly either for the nature or God-head as where it is said God is Ioh. 4. 24. a Spirit Or for any of the three persons subsisting in that nature or Godâ—ead And so it is taken in this place for the Father Improperly this word God is giuen to Angels and to Magistrates Ps 8. 5. Heb. 2. 7. Ps 82. â— vnto Idols to the Diuel himselfe Now the father is called God not because he is more God then the Son and Holy Ghost For they are equal to him But because he is first in order from him the Godhead is communicated to the Sonne and holy Ghost He is called the father of Christ nor by the grace of creation as he was the father of the Angels and of Adam before â—ob â— 6. Luke 3 38. his fall nor by the grace of Adoption as Eunomius and the Bonosians did imagine but by Nature though the Marcellians say otherwise The Father
not to the perfect assurance of it but by degrees Pâ—â— Sanctification is imperfect in this life not accomplished 〈◊〉 the liâ—â— t 〈…〉 me Holines dotâ— not growe vp like Ioâ—â— Ioh. 4. his gourd in one night A vesâ—â—li with a narrow neckeâ—s not filled all at once The C 〈…〉 of God is not at his â—ull growth thâ— first day of his birth God 〈◊〉 not 〈…〉 ne stark dead â—â—th or 〈…〉 did G 〈…〉 〈…〉 wouÌ„d â—s the 1. 〈…〉 1. 〈◊〉 â—e 34. â—o◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 king 〈◊〉 The Moâ—â—â— we see i 〈…〉 at tâ—e 〈◊〉 first day of 〈◊〉 increase 〈◊〉 waxâ—th by little and 〈…〉 is wrought in vs by degâ—â—â—s no man is fully perfect For Who can say I am cleane So long as we Pro. 20. 9. Quamdiu â—â—uis necesse est peccatum eâ—â—e in mâ—brâ—â— tuis August â—â—â—e sin shall not die though it shall not damne vs because it is forgiuen vs. Sixtly remission oâ— sins is a part of iustâ—fication but sanctification is no part therof but rather an effect fruit 〈◊〉 argument thereof Lastly the washing away of sin in Iustification goes in nature before the â—â—olution of sanctification doth next 〈◊〉 nature succeede effectuall vocation For whoÌ„ God calleth them he doth in Rom. 8. 30. 〈◊〉 next place iustifie then sanctifie And I say in nature not 〈◊〉 time if we respect the first degree of saÌ„ctification Fâ—r when God doth actually 〈…〉 a man his sinnes when Christ doth actually bâ—â—h a man in his bloud and proâ—â—â—e the remission of his sins when God doth apply the merit of Christs bloud vnto a man then doth he also begin to refine and melt him then doth he cast him into a new mould and giueth him a new heart And as that woman with a peece of a mâ—â—stoÌ„e did brâ—ak the braine-pan of that vsurping tyrant Iudg. 9. 53. Abimelech euen so when God remits sinne he doth also as it were crack the brain-pan thereof with the milstone of his power and the strength of his Spirit and so in one article of time he doth dismount that vsurping Tyrannesse from her Throne he takes the crowne from her head and her scepter out of her hand and doth so disarme weaken her that she can neither damne vs nor domineâ—e within vs. And this being the sense let vs see what doctrines follow hereeof CHAP. II. The Man-head of Christ is proued Fiue reasons rendered why hee was to bee man FIrst in that the Apostle doth attribute Doct. 1 bloud vnto Christ I conclude that Christ was true man like other men sinne onely excepted This the Hebr. 2. 16. 17. holy scriptures do very plentifully manifest For hee is that Seede of the woman which should break the Serpents Gen. 3. 15. head And he is that Son which a virgin Is 7. 14. should conceiue and bring foorth He is sayd to be borne and circumcised to hunger thirst die and rise again all which do sufficiently proue the truth of his humanity Now it was requisite that Christ should be a man First that the prophecies that went long before of his humane nature might be truly fulfilled Secondly the iustice of God required that that nature should be punished which had offeÌ„ded Thirdly it seemed most equall in Gods eye that satisfaction for the sinne of man should be made in the nature of man Fourthly that he might be a mercifull Heb. 1. 17. high Priest able to be touched with the feeling of our infirmities Lastly that he might be able to suffer and die for vs. For the God head cannot possibly suffer beeing an impassible pure absolute 1. Tim. 6. 16. immortall vnchangeable nature Now as it was fiâ— that he should Iam. 1. 17. bee a man so it was also necessary that he should be sinlesse and holy First that his thoughts words and workes might be holy SecoÌ„dly that he might make vs holie and couer the impurity of our nature with the perfect purity of his Thirdly that he might offer vp a pure and spotlesse sacrifice Fourthly he was to be a preacher of holines a taxer of iniquity therfore it was fittest that he should be holy lest his practise should crosse his preaching and so marre his Ministerie Lastly that his humane nature might be aâ—â—omed into the vnity of the person of the Sonne of God who is most holie euen Holinesse it selfe If it be damanded why the Sonne should rather become man then either the Father or the Holy Ghost I answere it was most beseeming that the world should be redeemed and that all things should be restored by him by Ioh. 1. 〈◊〉 Col. 〈◊〉 16. Hâ—b 1 2. whome all things were created It was most fiâ—ting that he should saue man from death and procure him life who did at first vouch safe him life that as by him we receiued being so we might also by him receâ—â—e our welbeing Of this doctrine thâ—se vses may be made First we may behold the loue of Vse 1 Christ vnto vs who being the image of Col. 1 15. 16. God and the grand Creator of all things in heauen and earth did neuerthelesse for our good assume vnto himselfe the nature of man and not the nature of â—he Angels which notwithstanding is far more excellent far more diuine Heb. 2. 16. noble Secondly seeing Christ who is e 〈…〉 ll Vse 2 Phil. 2. 6. Reâ— 1. 5. to God Prince of all the kings of the earth did so farre debase himselfe for vs base wretches as voluntarily to take vpon him the forme of a Phil. 2. 7. seruant the shape and nature of man let vs arme our selues with the same mind neuer thinking any thing too base for vs to beare or doe which may serue for his glorie and the good of his Church Iâ— the Sonne of God did so humble himselfe why should we be proud and hautie If God thought not skorne to be made man for vs why should we thinke much to performe any seruice vnto him for the honour of his name how base or vile soeuer it maâ— seeme in the eve of man Thirdly seeing Christ is truly man Vse 3 made of the seed of the wo 〈…〉 hence is confuted ouerthrowne the errour of Gal. 44. the Maâ—tchâ—â—s whâ— held that Christs bodie was but imaginaâ—ie A sâ—igned bodie hath blood no more then a painted fire hath heate But Christ had true blood or else our redemption by his blood is a forged fiction and vntrue The errour of Macedonius and Valentinus who taught that Christ brought with him a celesticall bodie out of heauen But the Lord promised Abraham that in his seede all nations should be blessed Gen. 22. 18 The errour of Apelles who said that Christs body was of the ayre and that it passed through the virgin Mary as water through the pipe or chanell Whereas notwithstanding Dauid had a promise made him that his son should 2. Sam. 7. 12. 14.
shal be Iâ—houah our righteousnes Ioh saith In the Ier. 23. 6. beginning was the Word the word was God By the word we are to vnderstand Ioh. 1. 1. Christ who is the substaÌ„tiall word of his Father so called because he is the Interpreter Image of his father eueÌ„ as our Rom. 9. 3. speecâ— is the interpreter and image of the mind In like manner Paul calleth Tit. 2. 13. Christ God ouer all and the Great God And Thomas speaking vnto Christ Ioh. 20. 28. saith My Lord and my God Secondly it is also manifest by reasoÌ„s grounded vpon the word that Christ was true God and not man onely I will propound two First he is true God to whome the proper works of God are â—ightly attributed but those workes â—re ascribed rightly vnto Christ which none can do but God as to â—reate redeeme quicken iudge to â—earch the heart to put away iniquities all which the sacred scriptures attribute to Christ therefore he must needs be God Secondly diâ—â—â—e worship is performed and ought to be giuen Ps 72. 11. Rom. 15. 12 vnto Christ therefore â—e is 〈◊〉 God and not meâ—e man Dauid 〈◊〉 Blessed 〈…〉 y thâ— th 〈…〉 in 〈◊〉 Christ Ps 2. 1â— Ioh. 14. 1. himselfe saith â—e belâ—â—ue Gâ—◠〈…〉 leeue in me alâ—o And Saint S 〈…〉 n praying saith Lord Iesus receâ—â—e my spirit By which it Act. 7. 59. appeareth that dâ—â—â—ne honour belongeth to him and consequently that he is more then a 〈◊〉 And it was requâ—site that Christ should be not onely man but God First that he might remoue those eâ—ills wherewith Man-kind was oppressed to witâ— the guilt and punisâ— of â—â—nne thâ—â—y 〈…〉 of the D 〈…〉 the infinite and intolâ—â—â—â—le burthen of Gods wrath which things noâ—â— could remoue but God Man maâ— sâ—sâ—â—r but none by suffring was able to ouercome them but God alone It is God as Paul teacheth vs that hath purchased Act. 20. 28. the Church with his blood SecoÌ„dly Christ must be God that he might make vs accompted as righteous in the sight of God and that defacing sin â—e might likwise restore the image of God consisting in true righteousnes Eph. 4. 24. and holines which we lost by our fall in Adam Thirdly that he might be a 〈◊〉 Mediator betwixt God and Man to reconcile and make them one by reason of his cognation affinitie and â—â—militude to them both For in reason he is most meet to reconcile God to man and to bring man to God who is himselfe both God and man Now although the trueth doth both Veritas est index sui 〈◊〉 obliquâ— declare it selfe and shew the contrary yet because it hath bin so much opposed euen in this article of our sayth and for that the weaknes of many is very great and this point not voyd of all obscurity I will briefly â—ake away those cauillâ— that are made against it â—haâ— so our â—ayth might be further strengthened when the knottiest doubts shal be dâ—solued and the blocks remoued It may be thus obiected against the God-head of Christ First that which hath a beginning is not God for God is Alpha and â—mega as well Eternall as Omnipotent But Christ hath a beginning therefore Christ is not God Ans There is a threâ—fold beginning of nature time and order Now that which hath a beginning of nature substance and time is not God in that respect But if we consider Christ as he is the Word or Wisdome of the Father laying aside his humane nature he hath no beginning of Essence or Time hauing one diuine nature with the Father existing from all Eternity but onely a beginning in regard of order or the manner of subâ—â—sting This he testifieth of himselfe where he sayth I was â—et vp Pro. 8. 23. 24. 25 from euerlasting from the beginning and before the â—arth when there were no dâ—pâ—â—â— was I begotten before the mountaines were setled and before the â—â—ls was I begotten Secondly God is of himselfe Christ is not of himselfe therfore Christ is not God Ans Christ is God of himselfe though he be not the Sonne of himselfe â—erson begetteth is begotteÌ„ but the Essence neither begetteth noâ— is begotten but is communicated Ob. 3. Thirdly One and the same thing cannot be said to haue a beginning and not a beginning but if Christ bee not onely man but God he shall both haue a beginning and no beginning Ans One and the same thing cannot both haue a beginning and yet be without a beginning in one and the same respect but this may be if the respect be diuerse A man may be said to be mortall and immortall mortall in respect of his body immortall in regard of the soule dead because he is dissolued and aliue because his same doth last or because his soule doth liue So Christ may be said to bee without beginning in respect of his Godhead and to haue a beâ—inning in regard of his mâ—n head Thus also he may be said to be before and after 〈…〉 and to be without Father and Mother without father as man without mother as God Ob. 4. Fourthly The Mediatour Proposition betwixt God and Man is not God but Christ is Mediatour betwixt God and Man therefore Christ is not God Ans The proposition is apparently false for by the same reason it may be proued that he is not a man But the proposition may be thus confirmed God cannot be lesse then himselfe or inâ—eriour to himselfe but the Assumption Mediatour with God is inferiour vnto God therefore he is not God Ans The assumption is true onely in respect of the Mediatourship in regard whereof Christ is minor patre inferiour vnto God and nothing as concerning his Diuinitie For the inequalitie of office doth not proue any inferioritie or inequalitie of nature Ob. 5. Fiftly No man is God but Christ is a man therefore Christ is not God Ans No mâ—â—e man or no man as man is God now Christ is not merely a man but Maâ—â— god or God-man Neither doe wee say that the 〈…〉 hood of Christ is God but that Christ oâ— the man Christ is God Ob. 6. Sixtly Paul makes a â—lat distinction betwixt God 〈◊〉 Christ whâ—â— 1. Tim. 5. 21. 〈◊〉 â—ait◠〈◊〉 charge thee 〈…〉 re God the Lord Ieâ—us Christ Therefore Câ—r 〈…〉 not God Aâ—s By God the Apostle vnderstandeth the father as in 〈◊〉 Cor. 1â— 1â— For the word God is vsed somtime essentially and sometimes also pâ—rsonally and so it is taken in that place Secâ—ndly if this reasâ—n were good theâ— the Holy Ghost should not be Rom. 9. 5. God Thirdly Paul else-where affirmeth that Christ is God But Paul being directed by the speciall and immediate assistance of the Spirit could not possibly contradict himselfe Ob. 7. Seuenthly Iâ— Christ be God 〈◊〉 there are mâ—â— Gods theâ—â—â—ne For Christs is not the same with the â—â—ther Aâ—s Christ 〈◊〉 diâ—