Unto them that believe unto the saving of the soul, he is, he always
has been, precious--the sun, the rock, the life, the bread of their
souls--every thing that is good, useful, amiable, desirable, here or
unto eternity. In, from, and by him, is all their spiritual and
eternal life, light, power, growth, consolation, and joy here; with
everlasting salvation hereafter. By him alone do they desire, expect,
and obtain deliverance from that woeful apostasy from God, which is
accompanied with--which containeth in it virtually and meritoriously
whatever is evil, noxious, and destructive unto our nature, and which,
without relief, will issue in eternal misery. By him are they brought
into the nearest cognation, alliance, and friendship with God, the
firmest union unto him, and the most holy communion with him, that our
finite natures are capable of, and so conducted unto the eternal
enjoyment of him. For in him "shall all the seed of Israel be
justified, and shall glory;" (Isa.45:25;) for "Israel shall be saved
in the Lord with an everlasting salvation;" they "shall not be ashamed
nor confounded, world without end:" verse 17.
On these and the like accounts, the principal design of their whole
lives unto whom he is thus precious, is to acquaint themselves with
him--the mystery of the wisdom, grace, and love of God, in his person
and mediation, as revealed unto us in the Scripture, which is "life
eternal;" (John 17:3;)--to trust in him, and unto him, as to all the
everlasting concernments of their souls--to love and honour him with
all their hearts--to endeavour after conformity to him, in all those
characters of divine goodness and holiness which are represented unto
them in him. In these things consist the soul, life, power, beauty,
and efficacy of the Christian religion; without which, whatever
outward ornaments may be put upon its exercise, it is but a useless,
lifeless carcass. The whole of this design is expressed in these
heavenly words of the apostle: (Phil.3:8-12:) "Yea doubtless, and I
count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of
Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things,
and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, and be found in
him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that
which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of
God by faith: that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection,
and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his
death; if by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the
dead. Not as though I had already attained, either were already
perfect; but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which
also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus." This is a divine expression of
that frame of heart of that design--which is predominant and
efficacious in them unto whom Christ is precious
But, on the other hand, (according unto the fore-mentioned
prediction,) as he has been a sure foundation unto all that believe,
so he has in like manner been "a stone of stumbling and a rock of
offense unto them that stumble at the word, being disobedient:
whereunto also they were appointed." There is nothing in him--nothing
wherein he is concerned--nothing of him, his person, his natures, his
office, his grace, his love, his power, his authority, his relation
unto the church--but it has been unto many a stone of stumbling and
rock of offense. Concerning these things have been all the woeful
contests which have fallen out and been managed among those that
outwardly have made profession of the Christian religion. And the
contentions about them do rather increase than abate, unto this very
day; the dismal fruits whereof the world groaneth under, and is no
longer able to bear. For, as the opposition unto the Lord Christ in
these things, by men of perverse minds, has ruined their own souls--as
having dashed themselves in pieces against this everlasting rock--so
in conjunction with other lusts and interests of the carnal minds of
men, it has filled the world itself with blood and confusion.
The re-enthroning of the Person, Spirit, Grace, and authority of
Christ, in the hearts and consciences of men, is the only way whereby
an end may be put unto these woeful conflicts. But this is not to be
expected in any degree of perfection amongst them who stumble at this
stone of offense, whereunto they were appointed; though in the issue
he will herein also send forth judgment unto victory, and all the meek
of the earth shall follow after it. In the meantime, as those unto
whom he is thus a rock of offence--in his person, his spirit, his
grace, his office, and authority--are diligent and restless (in their
various ways and forms, in lesser or higher degrees, in secret
artifices, or open contradictions unto any or all of them, under
various pretences, and for divers ends, even secular advantages some
of them, which the craft of Satan has prepared for the ensnaring of
them) in all ways of opposition unto his glory; so it is the highest
duty of them unto whom he is precious, whose principal design is to be
found built on him as the sure foundation, as to hold the truth
concerning him, this person, spirit, grace, office, and authority,)
and to abound in all duties of faith, love, trust, honour, and delight
in him--so also to declare his excellency, to plead the cause of his
glory, to vindicate his honour, and to witness him the only rest and
reward of the souls of men, as they are called and have opportunity.
This, and no other, is the design of the ensuing treatise; wherein,
as all things fall unspeakably short of the glory, excellency, and
sublimity of the subject treated of, (for no mind can conceive, no
tongue can express, the real substantial glory of them,) so there is
no doubt but that in all the parts of it there is a reflection of
failings and imperfections, from the weakness of its author. But yet I
must say with confidence, that in the whole, that eternal truth of God
concerning the mystery of his wisdom, love, grace, and power, in the
person and mediation of Christ, with our duties towards himself
therein, even the Father, Son, and eternal Spirit, is pleaded and
vindicated, which shall never be shaken by the utmost endeavours and
oppositions of the gates of hell.
And in the acknowledgment of the truth concerning these things
consists, in an especial manner, that faith which was the life and
glory of the primitive church, which they earnestly contended for,
wherein and whereby they were victorious against all the troops of
stumbling adversaries by whom it was assaulted. In giving testimony
hereunto, they loved not their lives unto the death, but poured out
their blood like water, under all the pagan persecutions, which had no
other design but to cast them down and separate them from this
impregnable rock, this precious foundation. In the defence of these
truths did they conflict, in prayers, studies, travels, and writings,
against the swarms of seduces by whom they were opposed. And, for this
cause, I thought to have confirmed the principal passages of the
ensuing discourse with some testimonies from the most ancient writes
of the first ages of the church; but I omitted that cause, as fearing
that the interposition of such passages might obstruct instead of
promoting the edification of the common sort of readers, which I
principally intended. Yet, withal, I thought not good utterly to
neglect that design, but to give at least a specimen of their
sentiments about the principal truths pleaded for, in this preface to
the whole. But herein, also, I met with a disappointment; for the
bookseller having, unexpectedly unto me, finished the printing of the
discourse itself, I must be contented to make use of what lieth
already collected under my hand, not having leisure or time to make
any farther inquiry.
I shall do something of this nature, the rather because I shall have
occasion thereby to give a summary account of some of the principal
parts of the discourse itself, and to clear some passages in it, which
by some may be apprehended obscure.
Chap. I. The foundation of the whole is laid in the indication of
those words of our blessed Saviour, wherein he declares himself to be
the rock whereon the church is built: (Matt.16:18:) "And I say also
unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The
pretended ambiguity of these words has been wrested by the secular
interests of men, to give occasion unto that prodigious controversy
among Christian, with, whether Jesus Christ or the Pope of Rome be the
rock whereon the church is built. Those holy men of old unto whom
Christ was precious, being untainted with the desires of secular
grandeur and power, knew nothing hereof. Testimonies may be--they have
been--multiplied by other unto this purpose. I shall mention some few
of them.
"Houtos estin he pros ton Patera agousa hosos, he petra, he kleis, he
poimen", &c, saith Ignatius: Epist. ad Philadelph.--"He" (that is,
Christ) "is the way leading unto the Father, the rock, the key, the
shepherd"--wherein he has respect unto this testimony. And Origin
expressly denies the words to be spoken of Peter, in Matt.16: (Tract.
1:) "Quod si super unum illum Petrum tantum existimees totam eclesiam
aedificar, quid dicturus es de Johanne, et apostolorum unoquoque? Num
audebimus dicere quod adversus Petrum unum non prevaliturae sunt
portae inferorum?"--"If you shall think that the whole church was
built on Peter alone, what shall we say of John, and each of the
apostles? What! shall we dare to say that the gates of hell shall not
prevail against Peter only?" So he [held,] according unto the common
opinion of the ancients, that there was nothing peculiar in the
confession of Peter, and the answer made thereunto as unto himself,
but that he spake and was spoken unto in the name of all the rest of
the apostles. Euseb. Preparat. Evang., lib. 1 cap. 3: "Ete onomasti
prothespistheisa ekklesia autou hesteke kata bathous erridzoomene, kai
mechris ouranioon hapsidoon euchais hosioon ka theofiloon anoroon
meteooridzomene--dia mian ekeinen, hen autos apefenato lexin, eipoon,
Epi ten petran oikodomesoo mou ten ekklesian, kan pulai haidou ou
katischusousin autes". He proves the verity of divine predictions from
the glorious accomplishment of that word, and the promise of our
Saviour, that he would build his church on the rock, (that is,
himself,) so as that the gates of hell should not prevail against it.
For "Unum hoc est immobile fundamentum, una haec est felix fidei
Petra, Petri ore confessa, Tu es filius Dei vivi," says Hilary de
Trin., lib. 2--"This is the only immovable foundation, this is the
blessed rock of faith confessed by Peter, Thou art the Son of the
living God". And Epiphanius, Haer.29: "Epi tei petri tautei tes
asfalous pisteoos oikodomesoo mou ten ekklesian".--"Upon this rock" of
assured faith "I will build my church". For many thought that faith
itself was metonymically called the Rock, because of its object, or
the person of Christ, which is so.
One or two more out of Augustine shall close these testimonies:
"Super hanc Petram, quam confessus es, super meipsum filium Dei vivi,
aedificabo ecclesiam meam. Super me aedificabo te, non me super te:"
De Verbis Dom., Serm. 13.--"Upon this rock which thou hast confessed--
upon myself, the God of the living God--I will build my church I will
build thee upon myself, and not myself on thee." And he more fully
declareth his mind: (Tract. 124, in Johan.:) "Universam significabat
ecclesiam, quae in hoc seculo diversis tentationibus, velut imbribus,
fluminibus, tempestatibusque quatitur, et non cadit; quoniam fundata
est supra Petram; unde et Petrus nomen accepit. Non enim a Petro
Petra, sed Petrus a Petra; sicut non Christus a Christiano, sed
Christianus a Christo vocatur. Ideo quippe ait Dominus, 'Super hanc
Petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam', quia dixerat Petrus, 'Tu es
Christus filius Dei vivi'. 'Super hanc ergo' (inquit) 'Petram quam
confessus es, aedificabo eccleaism meam'. Petra enim erat Christus,
super quod fundamentum etiam ipse aedificatus est Petrus. Fundamentum
quippe aliud nemo potest ponere, praeter id quod positum est, quod est
Jesus Christus".--"He (Christ) meant the universal church, which in
this world is shaken with divers temptations, as with showers, floods,
and tempests, yet falleth not, because it is built on the rock (Petra)
from whence Peter took his name. For the rock is not called Petra from
Peter, but Peter is so called from Petra the rock; as Christ is not so
called from Christian, but Christian from Christ. Therefore, said the
Lord, 'Upon this rock will I build my church;' because Peter said,
'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' Upon this rock,
which thou hast confessed, will I build my church. For Christ himself
was the rock on which foundation Peter himself was built. For other
foundation can no man lay, save that which is laid which is Jesus
Christ.
Chap. II. Against this rock, this foundation of the church--the
person of Christ, and the faith of the church concerning it--great
opposition has been made by the gates of hell. Not to mention the rage
of the pagan world, endeavouring by all effects of violence and
cruelty to cast the church from this foundation; all the heresies
wherewith from the beginning, and for some centuries of years ensuing,
it was pestered, consisted in direct and immediate oppositions unto
the eternal truth concerning the person of Christ. Some that are so
esteemed, indeed, never pretended unto any sobriety, but were mere
effects of delirant [raving] imaginations; yet did even they also, one
way or other, derive from an hatred unto the person of Christ, and
centred therein. Their beginning was early in the church, even before
the writing of the gospel by John, or of his Revelation, and indeed
before some of Paul's epistles. And although their beginning was but
small, and seemingly contemptible, yet, being full of the poison of
the old serpent, they diffused themselves in various shapes and forms,
until there was nothing left of Christ--nothing that related unto him,
not his natures, divine or human, not their properties nor acting, not
his person, nor the union of his natures therein--that was not opposed
and assaulted by them. Especially so soon as the gospel had subdued
the Roman empire unto Christ, and was owned by the rulers of it, the
whole world was for some ages filled with uproars, confusion, and
scandalous disorders about the person of Christ, through the cursed
oppositions made thereunto by the gates of hell. Neither had the
church any rest from these convicts for about five hundred year. But
near that period of time, the power of truth and religion beginning
universally to decay among the outward professors of them, Satan took
advantage to make that havoc and destruction of the church--by
superstition, false worship, and profaneness of life which he failed
of in his attempt against the person of Christ, or the doctrine of
truth concerning it.
It would be a tedious work, and, it may be, not of much profit unto
them who are utterly unacquainted with things so long past and gone,
wherein they seem to have no concernment, to give a specimen of the
several heresies whereby attempts were made against this rock and
foundation of the church. Unto those who have inquired into the
records of antiquity, it would be altogether useless. For almost every
page of them, at first view, presents the reader with an account of
some one or more of them. Yet do I esteem it useful, that the very
ordinary sort of Christians should, at least in general, be acquainted
with what has passed in this great contest about the person of Christ,
from the beginning. For there are two things relating thereunto
wherein their faith is greatly concerned. First, There is evidence
given therein unto the truth of those predictions of the Scripture,
wherein this fatal apostasy from the truth, and opposition unto the
Lord Christ, are foretold: and, secondly, An eminent instance of his
power and faithfulness, in the appointment and conquest of the gates
of hell in the management of this opposition. But they have been all
reckoned up, and digested into methods of time and matter, by many
learned men, (of old and of late,) so that I shall not in this
occasional discourse represent them unto the reader again. Only I
shall give a brief account of the ways and means whereby they who
retained the profession of the truth contended for it, unto a conquest
over the pernicious heresies wherewith it was opposed.
The defense of the truth, from the beginning, was left in charge
unto, and managed by, the guides and rulers of the church in their
several capacities. And by the Scripture it was that they discharged
their duty confirmed with apostolical tradition consonant thereunto.
This was left in charge unto them by the great apostle, (Acts
20:28-31; 1 Tim.6:13,14; 2 Tim.2:1,2,15,23,24; 4:1-5,) and wherein any
of them failed in this duty, they were reproved by Christ himself:
Rev.2:14,15,20. Nor were private believers (in their places and
capacities) either unable for this duty or exempt from it, but
discharged themselves faithfully therein, according unto commandment
given unto them: 1 John 2:20,27; 4:1-3; 2 John 8,9. All true
believers, in their several stations--by mutual watchfulness,
preaching, or writing, according unto their calls and abilities--
effectually used the outward means for the preservation and
propagation of the faith of the church. And the same means are still
sufficient unto the same ends, were they attended unto with conscience
and diligence. The pretended defense of truth with arts and arms of
another kind has been the bane of religion, and lost the peace of
Christians beyond recovery. And it may be observed, that whilst this
way alone for the preservation of the truth was insisted on and
pursued, although innumerable heresies arose one after another, and
sometimes many together, yet they never made any great progress, nor
arrived unto any such consistency as to make a stated opposition unto
the truth; but the errors themselves and their authors, were as
vagrant meteors, which appeared for a little while, and vanished away.
Afterwards it was not so, when other ways and means for the
suppression of heresies were judged convenient and needful.
For in process of time, when the power of the Roman empire gave
countenance and protection unto the Christian religion, another way
was fixed on for this end, viz., the use of such assemblies of bishops
and others as they called General Councils, armed with a mixed power,
partly civil and partly ecclesiastical--with respect unto the
authority of the emperors and that jurisdiction in the church which
began then to be first talked of. This way was begun in the Council of
Nice, wherein, although there was a determination of the doctrine
concerning the person of Christ--then in agitation, and opposed, as
unto his divine nature therein--according unto the truth, yet sundry
evils and inconveniences ensued thereon. For thenceforth the faith of
Christians began greatly to be resolved into the authority of men, and
as much, if not more weight to be laid on what was decreed by the
fathers there assembled, than on what was clearly taught in the
Scriptures. Besides, being necessitated, as they thought, to explain
their conceptions of the divine nature of Christ in words either not
used in the Scripture, or whose signification unto that purpose was
not determined therein, occasion was given unto endless contentions
about them. The Grecians themselves could not for a long season agree
among themselves whether "ousia" and "hupostatis" were of the same
signification or no, (both of them denoting essence and substance,) or
whether they differed in their signification, or if they did, wherein
that difference lay. Athanasiu6 at first affirmed them to be the same:
Orat. 5 con. Arian., and Epist. ad African. Basil denied them so to
be, or that they were used unto the same purpose in the Council of
Nice: Epist. 78. The like difference immediately fell out between the
Grecians and Latins about "hypostasis" and "persona". For the Latins
rendered "hypostasis" by "substantia," and "prosoopon" by "persona."
Hereof Jerome complains, in his Epistle to Damasus, that they required
of him in the East to confess "tres hypostases," and he would only
acknowledge "tree personas:" Epist. 71. And Augustine gives an account
of the same difference: De Trinitate, lib 5 cap. 8, 9. Athanasius
endeavoured the composing of this difference, and in a good measure
effected it, as Gregory Nazianzen affirms in his oration concerning
his praise. It was done by him in a synod at Alexandria, in the first
year of Julian'6 reign. On this occasion many contests arose even
among them who all pleaded their adherence unto the doctrine of the
Council of Nice. And as the subtle Asians made incredible advantage
hereof at first, pretending that they opposed not the deity of Christ,
but only the expression of it by of "homo-ousios", so afterwards they
countenanced themselves in coining words and terms, to express their
minds with, which utterly reacted it. Hence were their "homoousios,
heterousios, ex ouk ontoon", and the like names of blasphemy, about
which the contests were fierce and endless. And there were yet farther
evils that ensued hereon. For the curious and serpentine wits of men,
finding themselves by this means set at liberty to think and discourse
of those mysteries of the blessed Trinity, and the person of Christ,
without much regard unto plain divine testimonies, (in such ways
wherein cunning and sophistry did much bear sway,) began to multiply
such near, curious, and false notions about them, especially about the
latter, as caused new disturbances, and those of large extent and long
continuance. For their suppression, councils were called on the neck
of one another, whereon commonly new occasions of differences did
arise, and most of them managed with great scandal unto the Christian
religion. For men began much to forego the primitive ways of opposing
errors and extinguishing heresies; retaking themselves unto their
interest, the number of their party, and their prevalence with the
present emperors. And although it so fell out--as in that at
Constantinople, the first at Ephesus, and that at Chalcedon--that the
truth (for the substance of it) did prevail, (for in many others it
happened quite otherwise,) yet did they always give occasions unto new
divisions, animosities, and even mutual hatreds, among the principal
leaders of the Christian people. And great contests there were among
some of those who pretended to believe the same truth, whether such or
such a council should be received--that is, plainly, whether the
church should resolve its faith into their authority. The strifes of
this nature about the first Ephesian Council, and that at Chalcedon,
not to mention those wherein the Asians prevailed, take up a good part
of the ecclesiastical story of those days. And it cannot be denied,
but that some of the principal persons and assemblies who adhered unto
the truth did, in the heat of opposition unto the heresies of other
men, fall into unjustifiable excess themselves.
We may take an instance hereof with respect unto the Nestorian
heresy, condemned in the first Ephesian Council, and afterwards in
that at Chalcedon. Cyril of Alexandria, a man learned and vehement,
designed by all means to be unto it what his predecessor Athanasius
had been to the Arian; but he fell into such excesses in his
undertakings, as gave great occasion unto farther tumults. For it is
evident that he distinguisheth not between "hupostatis" and "fusis",
and therefore affirms, that the divine Word and humanity had "mian
fusin", one nature only. So he does plainly in Epist. ad Successum:
"They are ignorant," saith he, "hoti kath' aletheian esti mia fusis
tou logou sesarkoomene". Hence Eutyches the Archimandrite took
occasion to run into a contrary extreme, being a no less fierce enemy
to Nestorius than Cyril was. For to oppose him who divided the person
of Christ into two, he confounded his natures into one--his delirant
folly being confirmed by that goodly assembly, the second at Ephesus.
Besides, it is confessed that Cyril--through the vehemency of his
spirit, hatred unto Nestorius, and following the conduct of his own
mind in nice and subtle expressions of the great mystery of the person
of Christ--did utter many things exceeding the bounds of sobriety
prescribed unto us by the apostle, (Rom.12:3,) if not those of truth
itself. Hence it is come to passe that many learned men begin to think
and write that Cyril was in the wrong, and Nestorius by his means
condemned undeservedly. However, it is certain to me, that the
doctrine condemned at Ephesus and Chalcedony as the doctrine of
Nestorius, was destructive of the true person of Christ; and that
Cyril, though he missed it in sundry expressions, yet aimed at the
declaration and confirmation of the truth; as he was long since
vindicated by Theorianus: Dialog. con. Armenios.
However, such was the watchful care of Christ over the church, as
unto the preservation of this sacred, fundamental truth, concerning
his divine person, and the union of his natures therein, retaining
their distinct properties and operations, that--notwithstanding all
the faction and disorder that were in those primitive councils, and
the scandalous contests of many of the members of them;
notwithstanding the determination contrary unto it in great and
numerous councils--the faith of it was preserved entire in the hearts
of all that truly believed, and triumphed over the gates of hell.
I have mentioned these few things, which belong unto the promise and
prediction of our blessed Saviour in Matt.16:18, (the place insisted
on,) to show that the church, without any disadvantage to the truth,
may be preserved without such general assemblies, which, in the
following ages, proved the most pernicious engines for the corruption
of the faith, worship, and manners of it. Yea, from the beginning,
they were so far from being the only way of preserving truth, that it
was almost constantly prejudiced by the addition of their authority
unto the confirmation of it. Nor was there any one of them wherein
"the mystery of iniquity" did not work, unto the laying of some
rubbish in the foundation of that fatal apostasy which afterwards
openly ensued. The Lord Christ himself has taken it upon him to build
his church on this rock of his person, by true faith of it and in it.
He sends his Holy Spirit to bear testimony unto him, in all the
blessed effects of his power and grace. He continueth his Word, with
the faithful ministry of it, to reveal, declare, make known, and
vindicate his sacred truth, unto the conviction of gainsayers. He
keeps up that faith in him, that love unto him, in the hearts of all
his elect, as shall not be prevailed against. Wherefore, although the
oppositions unto this sacred truth, this fundamental article of the
church and the Christian religion--concerning his divine person, its
constitution, and use, as the human nature conjoined substantially
unto it, and subsisting in it--are in this Last age increased;
although they are managed under so great a variety of forms, as that
they are not reducible unto any heads of order; although they are
promoted with more subtlety and specious pretences than in former
ages; yet, if we are not wanting unto our duty, with the aids of grace
proposed unto us, we shall finally triumph in this cause, and transmit
this sacred truth inviolate unto them that succeed us in the
profession of it.
Chap. III. This person of Christ, which is the foundation whereon the
church is built, whereunto all sorts of oppositions are endeavoured
and designed, is the most ineffable effect of divine goodness and
wisdom--whereof we treat in the next place. But herein, when I speak
of the constitution of the person of Christ, I intend not his person
absolutely, as he is the eternal Son of God. He was truly, really,
completely, a divine person from eternity, which is included in the
notion of his being the Son, and so distinct from the Father, which is
his complete personality. His being so was not a voluntary contrivance
or effect of divine wisdom and goodness, his eternal generation being
a necessary internal act of the divine nature in the person of the
Father.
Of the eternal generation of the divine person of the Son, the sober
writers of the ancient church did constantly affirm that it was firmly
to be believed, but as unto the manner of it not to be inquired into.
"Scrutator majestatis absorbetur a gloria", was their rule; and the
curious disputes of Alexander and Arius about it, gave occasion unto
that many-headed monster of the Arian heresy which afterwards ensued.
For when once men of subtile heads and unsanctified hearts gave
themselves up to inquire into things infinitely above their
understanding and capacity--being vainly puffed up in their fleshly
minds--they fell into endless divisions among themselves, agreeing
only in an opposition unto the truth. But those who contented
themselves to be wise unto sobriety, repressed this impious boldness.
To this purpose speaks Lactantius:(lib.4, De Vera Sapient.:) "Quomodo
igitur procreavit? Nec sciri a quoquam possunt, nec narrari, opera
divina; sed tamen sacrae literae docent illum Dei filium, Dei esse
sermonem".----"How, therefore, did the Father beget the Son? These
divine works can be known of none, declared by none; but the holy
writings" (wherein it is determined) "teach that he is the Son of God,
that he is the Word of God." And Ambrose: (De Fide, ad Gratianum:)
"Quaero abs te, quando aut quomodo putes filium esse generatum? Mihi
enim impossibile est scire generationis secretum Mens deficit, vox
silet, non mea tantum, sed et angelorum. Supra potestates, supra
angelos, supra cherubim, supra seraphim, supra omnem sensum est. Tu
quoque manum ori admovere; scrutari non licet superna mysteria. Licet
scire quod ntus sit, non licet discutere quomodu ntus sit; illud
negare mihi non licet, hoc quaerere metus est. Nam si Paulus ea quae
audivit, raptus in tertium coelu, ineffabilia dicit, quomodo nos
exprimere possumus paternae generationis arcanum, quod nec sentire
potuimus nec audire? Quid te ista questionum tormenta delectant?"--"I
inquire of you when and how the Son was begotten? Impossible it is to
me to know the mystery of this generation. My mind faileth, my voice
is silent--and not only mine, but of the angels; it is above
principalities, above angels, above the cherubim, above the seraphim,
above all understanding. Lay thy hand on thy mouth; it is not lawful
to search into these heavenly mysteries. It is lawful to know that he
was born--it is not lawful to discuss how he was born; that it is not
lawful for me to deny--this I am afraid to inquire into. For if Paul,
when he was taken into the third heaven, affirms that the things which
he heard could not be uttered; how can we express the mystery of the
divine generation, which we can neither apprehend nor hear? Why do
such tormenting questions delight thee?"
Ephraim Syrus wrote a book to this purpose, against those who would
search out the nature of the Son of God. Among many other things to
the same purpose are his words: (cap. 2:) "Infelix profecto, miser,
atque impudentissimus est, qui scrutari cupot Opificem suum. Millia
millium, et centies millies millena millia angelorum et archangelorum,
cum horrore glorificant, et trementes adorant; et homines lutei, pleni
peccatis, de divinitate intrepide disserunt Non illorum exhorrescit
corpus, non contremescit animus; sed securi et garruli, de Christo Dei
filio, qui pro me indigno peccatore passus est, deque ipsius utraque
generatione loquuntur; nec saltem quod in luce caecutiunt, sentiunt".-
Leo well adds hereunto the consideration of his incarnation, in these
excellent words: (Serm. 9, De Nativit.:) "Quia in Christo Jesus Filio
Dei non solum ad divinam essentiam, sed etiam ad humanan spectat
naturam, quo dictum est per prophetam--'generationem ejus quis
enarrabit?'--(utramque enim substantiam in unam convenisse personam,
nisi fides credat, sermo non explicat; et ideo materia nunquam deficit
laudis; qui nunquam sufficit copia laudatoris)--gaudeamus igitur quod
ad eloquendum tantum, misericordiae sacramentum impares sumus; et cum
salutis nostrae altitudinem promere non valeamus, sentiamus nobis
bonum esse quod vincimur. Nemo enim ad cognitionem veritatis magis
propinquat, quam qui intelligit, in rebus divinis, etiamsi multum
proficiat, semper sibi superesse quod quaerat". See also Fulg., lib. 2
ad Thrasimund.
But I speak of the person of Christ as unto the assumption of the
substantial adjunct of the human nature, not to be a part whereof his
person is composed, but as unto its subsistence therein by virtue of a
substantial union. Some of the ancients, I confess, speak freely of
the composition of the person of Christ in and by the two natures, the
divine and human. That the Son of God after his incarnation had one
nature, composed of the Deity and humanity, was the heresy of
Apollinarius, Eutyches, the Monothelites, or Monophyeites, condemned
by all. But that his most simple divine nature, and the human,
composed properly of soul and body, did compose his one person, or
that it was composed of them, they constantly affirmed. "Ton Theou
mesiten kai enthroopoon, kata tas grafas sunkeisthai famen ek te tes
kath' hemas anthroopotetos teleioos echousas kata ton idion logon, kai
ek tou pefenotos, ek Theou kata fusin huiou", saith Cyril of
Alexandria--"A sanctis patribus adunatione ex divinitate et humanitate
Christus Dominus noster compositus praedicatur:" Pet. Diacon., Lib. De
Incarnat. et Grat. Christi, ad Fulgentium. And the union which they
intended by this composition they called "enoosin fusiken", because it
was of diverse natures, and "enoosin kata sunthesin", a union by
composition.
But because there neither was nor can be any composition, properly so
called, of the divine and human natures, and because the Son of God
was a perfect person before his incarnation, wherein he remained what
he was, and was made what he was not, the expression has been forsaken
and avoided; the union being better expressed by the assumption of a
substantial adjunct, or the human nature into personal subsistence
with the Son of God, as shall be afterwards explained. This they
constantly admire as the most ineffable effect of divine wisdom and
grace: "Ho asarkos tarkoutai, ho logos pachunetai, ho aoratos horatai,
ho anafes pselafatai, ho achronos archetai, ho huios Theou huios
anthroopou ginetai", saith Gregory Nazianzen, (Orat. 12,) in
admiration of this mystery. Hereby God communicates all things unto us
from his own glorious fulness, the near approaches whereof we are not
able to bear. So is it illustrated by Eusebius: (Demonst. Evang.,
lib.4 cap.5, &c.:) "Houtoo de footos heliou mia kai he aute prostole
homou kai kata to auto kataugadzei men aera, footidzei de ofthalmous,
hafen de termainei, piainei de gen, auxei de futa, k. t. l. (cap.6) Ei
goun hoos en hupothesei logou, katheis ouranothen autos heauton
pamfaes helios sun anthroopois epi ges politeuoito, oudena toon epi
tes ges meinai an adiaforon, pantoon sulletden empsuchoon homou kai
apsuchoon athroai tei tou footos prostolei dieaftharesomenoon". The
sense of which words, with some that follow in the same place, is unto
this purpose: By the beams of the sunlight, and life, and heat, unto
the procreation, sustentation, refreshment, and cherishing of all
things, are communicated. But if the sun itself should come down unto
the earth, nothing could bear its heat and lustre; our eyes would not
be enlightened but darkened by its glory, and all things be swallowed
up and consumed by its greatness; whereas, through the beams of it,
every thing is enlightened and kindly refreshed. So is it with this
eternal beam or brightness of the Father's glory. We cannot bear the
immediate approach of the Divine Being; but through him, as incarnate,
are all things communicated unto us, in a way suited unto our
reception and comprehension.
So it is admired by Leo: (Serm. 3, De Nativit.:) "Natura humana in
Creatoris societatem assumpta est, non ut ille habitator, et illa
esset habitaculum; sed ut naturae alteri sic misceretur altera, ut
quamvis alia sit quae suscipitur, alia vero quae suscepit, in tantam
tamen unitatem conveniret utriusque diversitas, ut unus idemque sit
filius, qui se, et secundum quod verus est homo, Patre dicit minorem,
et secundum quod verus est Deus Patrise profitetur aequalem"-- "Human
nature is assumed into the society of the Creator, not that he should
be the inhabitant, and that the habitation," (that is, by an
inhabitation in the effects of his power and grace, for otherwise the
fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily,) "but that one nature
should be so mingled" (that is, conjoined) "with the other, that
although that be of one kind which assumeth, and that of another which
is assumed, yet the diversity of them both should concur in such a
unity or union, as that it is one and the same Son who, as he was a
true man, said that he was less than the Father, or the Father was
greater than he--so as he was true God, professeth himself equal unto
the Father." See also Augustinus De Fide, ad Pet. Diacon., cap. 17;
Justitianus Imperator Epist. ad Hormisdam, Romae Episcop.
And the mystery is well expressed by Maxentius: (Biblioth. Patr. pars
prima:) "Non confundimus naturarum diversitatem; veruntamen Christum
non tu asseris Deum factum, sed Deum factum Christum confitemur. Quia
non cum pauper esset, dives factus est, sed cum dives esset, pauper
factus est, ut nos divites faceret; neque enim cum esset in forma
servi, formam Dei accepit; sed cum esset in forma Dei, formam servi
accepit; similiter etiam nec, cum esset caro, verbum est factum; sed
cum esset verbum, caro factum est".--"We do not confound the diversity
of the natures, howbeit we believe not what you affirm, that Christ
was made God; but we believe that God was made Christ. For he was not
made rich when he was poor; but being rich, he was made poor, that he
might make us rich. He did not take the form of God when he was in the
form of a servant; but being in the form of God, he took on him the
form of a servant. In like meaner, he was not made the Word when he
was flesh; but being the Word, he was made flesh."
And Jerome, speaking of the effects of this mystery: (Comment. in
Ezekiel, cap. 46:) "Ne miretur lector si idem et Princeps est et
Sacerdos, et Vitulus, et Aries, et Agnus; cum in Scripturis sanctis
pro varietate causarum legamus eum Dominum, et Deum, et Hominem, et
Prophetam, et Virgam, et Radicem, et Florem, et Principem, et Regem
justum, et Justitiam, Apostolu, et Episcopu, Brachium, Servum,
Angelum, Pastorem, Filium, et Unigenitum, et Promogenitum, Ostium,
Viam, Sagittam, Sapientiam, et multa alia."--"Let not the reader
wonder if he find one and the same to be the Prince and Priest, the
Bullock, Ram, and Lamb; for in the Scripture, on variety of causes, we
find him called Lord, God, and Man, the Prophet, a Rod, and the Root,
the Flower, Prince, Judge, and Righteous King; Righteousness, the
Apostle and Bishop, the Arm and Servant of God, the Angel, the
Shepherd, the Son, the Only-begotten, the First-begotten, the Door,
the Way, the Arrow, Wisdom, and sundry other things." And Ennodius
has, as it were, turned this passage of Jerome into verse:--
"Corda domat, qui cuncta videt, quem cuncta tramiscunt;
Fons, via, dextra, lapis, vitulus, leo, lucifer, agnus;
Janua, spes, virtus, verbum, sapientia, vates.
Ostia, virgultum, pastor, mons, rete, columba,
Flama, gigas, aquila, sponsus, patientia, nervus,
Filius, excelsus, Dominus, Deus; omnia Christus."
(In natalem Papoe Epiphanii.)
"Quod homo est esse Christus voluit; ut et homo possit esse quod
Christus est", saith Cyprian: De Idolorum Vanitate, cap. 3. And, "Quod
est Christus erimus Christiani, si Christum fuerimus imitati:" Ibid.
And he explains his mind in this expression by way of admiration:
(Lib. de Eleemosyn.:) "Christus hominis filius fieri voluit, ut nos
Dei filios faceret; humiliavit se, ut popolum qui prius jacebat,
erigeret; vulneratus est, ut vulnera nostra curaret".
Chap. IV. That he was the foundation of all the holy counsels of God,
with respect unto the vocation, sanctification, justification, and
eternal salvation of the church, is, in the next place, at large
declared. And he was so on a threefold account. 1. Of the ineffable
mutual delight of the Father and the Son in those counsels from an
eternity. 2. As the only way and means of the accomplishment of all
those counsels, and the communication of their effects, unto the
eternal glory of God. 3. As he was in his own person, as incarnate,
the idea and exemplar in the mind of God of all that grace and glory
in the church which was designed unto it in those eternal counsels. As
the cause of all good unto us, he is on this account acknowledged by
the ancients. "Houtos goun ho logos ho Christos kai tou einai palai
hemas, en gar en Theooi, kai tou eu einai aitios. Nun de etefane
anthroopois, autos houtos ho logos, ho monos amfoo Theos te kai
anthroopos, hapantoon hemin aitios agatoon", saith Clemens, Adhort. ad
Gentes--"He, therefore, is the Word, the Christ, and the cause of old
of our being; for he was in God, and the cause of our well-being. But
now he has appeared unto men, the same eternal Word, who alone is both
God and man, and unto us the cause of all that is good". As he was in
God the cause of our being and well-being from eternity, he was the
foundation of the divine counsels in the way explained; and in his
incarnation, the execution of them all was committed unto him, that
through him all actual good, all the fruits of those counsels, might
be communicated unto us.
Chap. V. He is also declared in the next place, as he is the image
and great representative of God, even the Father, unto the church. On
what various accounts he is so called, is fully declared in the
discourse itself. In his divine person, as he was the only begotten of
the Father from eternity, he is the essential image of the Father, by
the generation of his person, and the communication of the divine
nature unto him therein. As he is incarnate, he is both in his own
entire person God and man, and in the administration of his office,
the image or representative of the nature and will of God unto us, as
is fully proved. So speaks Clem. Alexandrin., Adhort. ad Gentes: "He
men gar tou Theou eikoon ho logos autou, kai huios tou nou gnesios, ho
Teios logos footos erchetupon foos, eikoon de tou logou ho
enthroopos".--"The image of God is his own Word, the natural Son of
the" (eternal) "Mind, the divine Word, the original Light of Light;
and the image of the Word is man." And the same author again, in his
Paedagogus: "Prosoopon tou Theou ho logos hooi footidzetai ho Theos
kai gnooridzetai"--"The Word is the face, the countenance, the
representation of God, in whom he is brought to light and made known."
As he is in his divine person his eternal, essential image; so, in his
incarnation, as the teacher of men, he is the representative image of
God unto the church, as is afterwards declared.
So also Jerome expresseth his mind herein: (Comment. in Psal.66:)
"Illuminet vultum suum super nos; Dei facies quae est? Utique imago
ejus. Dicit enim apostolus imaginem Patris esse filium; ergo imagine
sua nos illuminet; hoc est, imaginem suam filium illuminet super nos;
ut ipse nos illuminet; lux enim Patris lux filii est."--"Let him cause
his face to shine upon us; or lift up the light of his countenance
upon us. What is the face of God? Even his image. For the apostle
says, that the Son is the image of the Father. Wherefore, let him
shine on us with his image; that is, cause his Son, which is his
image, to shine upon us, that he may illuminate us; for the light of
the Father and of the Son are the same." Christ being the image of
God, the face of God, in him is God represented unto us, and through
him are all saving benefits communicated unto them that believe.
Eusebius also speaks often unto this purpose, as: (Demonstratio
Evangelica, lib. 4 cap. 2:) "Hothen eikotoos hoi cresmoi teologountes,
Theon geneton auton apofainousin, hoos an tes anekfrastou kai
aperinoetou theotetos monon en autooi feronta ten eikona di' hen kai
Theon einak te auton kai legesthai tes pros to prooton exomoiooseoos
charin".--"Wherefore, the holy oracles, speaking theologically, or
teaching divine things, do rightly call him God begotten," (of the
Father,) "as he who alone bears in himself the image of the ineffable
and inconceivable Deity. Wherefore, he both is, and is called God,
because of his being the character, similitude, or image of him who is
the first." The divine personality of Christ consists in this, that
the whole divine nature being communicated unto him by eternal
generation, he is the image of God, even the Father, who by him is
represented unto us. See the same book, chap. 7, to the same purpose;
also, De Ecclesiast. Theol. contra Marcell., lib. 2 cap. 17.
Clemens abounds much in the affirmation of this truth concerning the
person of Christ, and we may yet add, from a multitude to the same
purpose, one or more testimonies from him. Treating of Christ as the
teacher of all men, his "paidagoogos", he affirms that he is "Theos en
anthroopou schemati", "God in the figure or form of man;" "achrantos,
patrikooi telemati diakonos, logos, Theos, ho en patri ho ek dexioon
tou patros, sun kai tooi schemati Theou", "impolluted, serving the
will of the Fsther, the Word, God, who is in the Father, on the right
hand of the Father, and in or with the form of God". "Houtos hemin
eikoon he akelidootos, toutooi panti sthenei peirateon exomoioun ten
psuchen".--"He is the image (of God) unto us, wherein there is no
blemish; and with all our strength are we to endeavour to render
ourselves like unto him". This is the great end of his being the
representative image of God unto us And: (Stromat., lib. 4:) "Ho men
oun Theos anapodeiktos oon, ouk estin epistemonikos. Ho de huios sofia
te esti kai episteme, kai aletheia, kai, hosa alla toutooi sungene".--
"As God" (absolutely) "falls not under demonstration," (that is,
cannot perfectly be declared,) "so he does not" (immediately) "effect
or teach us knowledge. But the Son is wisdom, and knowledge, and
truth, unto us, and every thing which is cognate hereunto." For in and
by him does God teach us, and represent himself unto us.
Chap. VII. Upon the glory of this divine person of Christ depends the
efficacy of all his offices; an especial demonstration whereof is
given in his prophetical office. So it is well expressed by Irenaeus,
"qui nil molitur inepte:" lib. 1 cap. 1. "Non enim aliter nos discere
poteramus quae sunt Dei, nisi magister noster verbum existens, homo
ffactus fuisset. Neque enim alius poterat enarrare nobis quae sunt
Patris, nisi proprium ipsius verbum. Quis enim alius cognovit sensum
Domini? Aut quis alius ejus consiliarium factus est? Neque rursus nos
aliter discere poteramus, nisi Magistrum nostrum videntes, et per
auditum nostrum vocem ejus percipientes, uti imitatores quidem operum,
factores autem sermonum ejus facti, communionem habeamus cum ipso".--
"We could not otherwise have learned the things of God, unless our
Master, being and continuing the" (eternal) "Word, had been made man.
For no other could declare unto us the things of God, but his own
proper Word. For who else has known the mind of the Lord? Or who else
has been his counsellor? Neither, on the other side, could we
otherwise have learned, unless we had seen our Master, and heard his
voice," (in his incarnation and ministry,) "whereby, following his
works, and yielding obedience unto his doctrine, we may have communion
with himself."
I do perceive that if I should proceed with the same kind of
attestations unto the doctrine of all the chapters in the ensuing
discourse, this preface would be drawn forth unto a greater length
than was ever designed unto it, or is convenient for it. I shall
therefore choose out one or two instances more, to give a specimen of
the concurrence of the ancient church in the doctrine declared in
them, and so put a close unto it.
Chap. IX. In the ninth chapter and those following, we treat of the
divine honour that is due unto the person of Christ, expressed in
adoration, invocation, and obedience, proceeding from faith and love.
And the foundation of the whole is laid in the discovery of the true
nature and causes of that honour; and three things are designed unto
confirmation herein. 1. That the divine nature, which is individually
the same in each person of the holy Trinity, is the proper formal
object of all divine worship, in adoration and invocation; wherefore,
no one person is or can be worshipped, but in the same individual act
of worship each person is equally worshipped and adored. 2. That it is
lawful to direct divine honour, worship, and invocation unto any
person, in the use of his peculiar name--the Father, Son, or Spirit --
or unto them altogether; but to make any request unto one person, and
immediately the same unto another, is not exemplified in the
Scripture, nor among the ancient writers of the church. 3. That the
person of Christ, as God-man, is the proper object of all divine
honour and worship, on the account of his divine nature; and all that
he did in his human nature are motives thereunto.
The first of these is the constant doctrine of the whole ancient
church, viz, that whether, (for instance,) in our solemn prayers and
invocations, we call expressly on the name of the Father, or of the
Son, or of the Holy Spirit; whether we do it absolutely or relatively,
that is, with respect unto the relation of one person to the others as
calling on God as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, on Christ as
the Son of his love, on the Holy Spirit as proceeding from them both--
we do formally invocate and call on the divine nature, and
consequently the whole Trinity, and each person therein. This truth
they principally confirmed with the form of our initiation into Christ
at baptism: "I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost." For as there is contained therein the sum of
all divine honour, so it is directed unto the same name, (not the
names,) of the Father, Son, and Spirit, which is the same Deity or
divine nature alone.
So speak the Fathers of the second General Council in their letters
unto the bishops of the west; as they are expressed in Theodoret, lib.
5 cap. 9. This form of baptism teacheth us, say they, "Pisteuein eis
to onoma tou patros, kai tou huiou, kai tou hagiou pneumatos, delade,
teotetos te kai dunameoos kai ousias mias tou patros, kai tou huiou,
kai tou hagiou pneumatos pisteuomenes, homotimou tes axias, kai
sunaidiou tes basileias, en trisi teleiais hupostasesi".--"to believe
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;
seeing that the Deity, substance, and power of the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, is one and the same; their dignity equal; their kingdom
coeternal, in three perfect persons." "In nomine dixit, non nominibus,
erog non aliud nomen Patris est,"&c., "quia unus Deus:" Ambrose, De
Spirit. Sanct., lib. 1 cap. 14. "Onoma de koinon toon trioon en, he
teotes".--"The one name common to the three is the Deity:" Gregor.
Nazianzen, Orat. 40. Hence Augustine gives it as a rule, in speaking
of the Holy Trinity: "Quando unus trium in aliquo opere nominatur,
universa operari trinitas intelligitur:" Enchirid., cap. 38.--"When
one person of the three is named in any work, the whole Trinity is to
be understood to effect it." "There is one Lord, one faith, one
baptism," according to the Scriptures. Wherefore, as there is one
faith in Christ, and one baptism of truth, although we are baptized
and believe in the Father, Son, and Spirit, "kata ton outon, oimai,
tropon kai logon, mia proskunesis he patros, kai enanthroopesantos
huiou, kai hagiou pneumatos;"--"so plainly, in my judgment, there is
one and the same adoration, of the Father, the Son incarnate, and the
Holy Spirit:" Cyril. Alex. De Recta Fide, cap. 32.
And this they professed themselves to hold and believe, in that
ancient doxology which was first invented to decry the Arian heresy:
"Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost." The
same glory, in every individual act of its assignation or ascription,
is directed unto each person jointly and distinctly, on the account of
the same divine nature in each of them. I need not produce any
testimonies in the farther confirmation hereof; for, in all their
writings against the Arians, they expressly and constantly contend
that the holy Trinity (that is, the divine nature in three persons) is
the individual object of all divine adoration, invocation, and all
religious worship; and that by whatever personal name--as the Father,
Son, or Spirit--we call on God, it is God absolutely who is adored,
and each person participant of the same nature. See August. Lib. con.
Serm. Arian. cap. 35, and Epist. 66 ad Maximum.
For the second thing, or the invocation of God by any personal name,
or by the conjunction of the distinct names of the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit together, nothing occurs more frequently among them. Yea,
it is common to find in their writings, prayers begun unto one person,
and ended in the name of another; yea, begun unto Christ, and closed
in the name of His only-begotten Son; it being one and the same divine
nature that is called on. Yea, the schoolmen do generally deny that
the persons of the holy Trinity, under the consideration of the formal
reason which is constitutive of their personality, are the formal
object and term of divine worship; but in the worship of one, they are
all worshipped as one God over all, blessed for ever. See Aquin. 22 q.
81, a. 3, ad prim., and q. 84, a. 1, ad tertium; Alexand. Alens. p. 3,
q. 30, m. 1, a. 3.
But yet, although we may call on God in and by the name of any divine
person, or enumerate at once each person, (oo trias hagia
arithmoumene, trias en heni onomati arithmoumene", Epiphan. Ancorat.,
8 22,) it does not follow that we may make a request in our prayers
unto one person, and then immediately repeat it unto another; for it
would thence follow, that the person unto whom we make that request in
the second place, was not invocated, not called on, not equally adored
with him who was so called on in the first place, although the divine
nature is the object of all religious invocation, which is the same in
each person. Wherefore, in our divine invocation, we may name and fix
our thoughts distinctly on any person, according as our souls are
affected with the distinct operations of each person in grace towards
us.
For what concerns, in the third place, the ascription of divine
honour, in adoration and invocation, unto the person of Christ; it is
that which they principally contended for, and argued from, in all
their writings against the Arians.
Evidences of infinite wisdom in the constitution of the person of
Christ, and rational discoveries of the condecencies therein, unto the
exaltation of all the other glorious properties of the divine nature,
are also treated of. Herein we consider the incarnation of the Son of
God, with respect unto the recovery and salvation of the church alone.
Some have contended that he should have been incarnate, had man never
fallen or sinned. Of these are Rupertus, lib. 3, De Gloria et Honore
Filii Hominis; Albertus Magnus, in 3 distinct. 10, a 4; Petrus
Galatinus, lib.3 cap.4; as are Scotus, halensis, and others, whom
Osiander followed. The same is affirmed by Socinus concerning the
birth of that man, which alone he fancied him to be, as I have
elsewhere declared. But I have disproved this figment at large. Many
of the ancients have laboured in this argument, of the necessity of
the incarnation of the eternal Word, and the condecencies unto divine
wisdom therein. See Irenaeus, lib 3, cap. 20, 21; Eusebius, Demonst.
Evangel., lib 4 cap. 1-4, &c.; Cyril. Alexand., lib. 5 cap. 6, lib 1.
De Fide ad Regin.; Chrysostom, Homil. 10 in Johan., et in cap.8, ad
Rom. Serm. 18; Augustine, De Trinit., lib. 13 cap.13-20; Leo, Epist.
13, 18, Sermo. De Nativit. 1, 4, 10; Basil., in Psal. 48; Albinus, lib
1 in Johan. Cap.11; Damascen., lib. 3, De Fide, cap. 15, 19; Anselm.,
quod Deus Homo, lib. duo. Guil. Parisiensis, lib. Cur Deus Homo. Some
especial testimonies we may produce in confirmation of what we have
discoursed, in the places directed unto. There is one of them, one of
the most ancient, the most learned, and most holy of them, who has so
fully delivered his thoughts concerning this mystery, as that I shall
principally make use of his testimony herein.
It belonged unto the wisdom and righteousness of God, that Satan
should be conquered and subdued in and by the same nature which he had
prevailed against, by his suggestion and temptation. To this purpose
that holy writer speaks, (lib. 3 cap. 20,) which, because his words
are cited by Theodore, (Dial. 2,) I shall transcribe them from thence,
as free from the injuries of his barbarous translator: "Henoosen oun
kathoos proefamen ton anthroopon tooi Theooi, ei gar me anthroopos
henikesen ton antipalon tou anthroopou, ouk an dikaioos henikethe ho
echthros, palin te, ei me ho Theos edooresato ten sooterian, ouk an
betaioos echoimen auten, kai ei me sunenoothe ho anthroopos tooi
Theooi ouk an edunethe metaschein tes aftharsias. Edei gar ton mesiten
tou Theou te kai anthroopoon, die tes idias pros hekaterous
oikeiotetos eis filian kai homonoian tous anfoterous sunagagein".
Words plainly divine; an illustrious testimony of the faith of the
ancient church, and expressive of the principal mystery of the gospel!
"Wherefore, as we said before, he united man unto God. For if man had
not overcome the adversary of men, the enemy had not been justly
conquered; and, on the other hand, if God had not given and granted
salvation, we could never have a firm, indefeasible possession of it;
and if man had not been united unto God, he could not have been
partaker of immortality. It behaved, therefore, the Mediator between
God and man, by his own participation of the nature of each of them,
to bring them both into friendship and agreement with each other." And
to the same purpose, speaking of the wisdom of God in our redemption
by Christ, with respect unto the conquest of the devil: (lib 5 cap.
1:) "Potens in omnibus Dei Verbum, et non deficiens in sua justitia,
juste etiam adversus ipsam conversus est apostasiam, ea quae sunt sua
redimens, ab eo, non cum vi, quemadmomdum ille initio dominabatur
nostri, ea quae non erant sua insatiabiliter rapiens ... Suo igitur
sanguine redimente nos Domino, et dante animam suam pro anima nostra,
et carnem suam pro carnibus nostris", &c. Again divinely: "The
all-powerful Word of God, no way defective in righteousness, set
himself against the apostasy justly also; redeeming from him (Satsn,
the head of the apostasy) the things which were his own--not with
force, as he bare rule over us, insatiably making rapine of what was
not his own--but he, the Lord, redeeming us with his own blood, giving
his soul for our soul, and his flesh for ours, wrought out our
deliverance." These things are at large insisted on in the ending
discourse.
It belongs unto this great mystery, and is a fruit of divine wisdom,
that our deliverance should be wrought in and by the me nature wherein
and whereby we were ruined. The reasons hereof, and the glory of God
therein, are at large discoursed in the ensuing treatise. To the same
purpose speaks the same holy writer: (lib 5 cap. 14:) "Non in
semetipso recapitulasset haec Dominus, nisi ipse caro et sanguis
secundum principalem plasmationem factus fuisset; salvans in semetipso
in fine illud quod perierat in principio in Adam. Si autem ob aliam
quandam dispositionem Dominus incarnatus est, et ex altera substantia
carnem attulit, non ergo in semetipso recapitulatus est hominem, adhuc
etiam nec aro quidem dici potest ... Habuit ergo et ipse carnem et
sanguinem, non alteram quindam, sed ipsam principalem Patris
plasmationem in se recapitulans, exquirens id quod perierat". And to
the same purpose: (lib. 5 cap. 1:) "Neque enim vere esset sanguinem et
carnem habens, per quam nos redemit, nisi antiquam plasmationem Adae
in seipsum recapitulasset". That which these passages give testimony
unto, is what we have discoursed concerning the necessity of our
redemption in and by the nature that sinned; and yet withal, that it
should be free from all that contagion which invaded our nature by the
fall. And these things are divinely expressed. "Our Lord," saith he,
"had not gathered up these things in himself, had not he been made
flesh and blood, according unto its original creation." The reader may
observe, that none of the ancient writers do so frequently express the
fall of Adam by our apostasy from God, and our recovery by a
recapitulation in Christ, as Irenaeus--his recapitulation being
nothing but the "anakefalaioosis" mentioned by the apostle, Eph.1:10--
and he here affirms, that, unto this end, the Lord was made flesh;
"secundum principalem plasmationem", as his words are rendered; that
is plainly, the original creation of our nature in innocence,
uprightness, purity, and righteousness.) "So he saved in himself in
the end, what perished in Adam at the beginning." (The same nature, in
and by the same nature.) "For if the Lord had been incarnate for any
other disposition," (i. e., cause, reason, or end,) "and had brought
flesh from any other substance," (i. e., celestial or ethereal, as the
agnostics imagined,) "he had not recovered men, brought our nature
unto a head in himself, nor could he have been said to be flesh. He
therefore himself had flesh and blood not of any other kind; but he
took to himself that which was originally created of the Father,
seeking that which was lost." The same is observed by Augustine: (Lib.
de Fide, ad Petrum Diaconum:) "Sic igitur Christum Dei Filium, id est,
unam ex Trinitate personam, Deum verum crede, ut divinitatem ejus de
natura Patris natam esse non dubites; et sic eum verum hominem crede,
et ejus carnem, non coelestis, non aeriae, non alterius cujusquam
putes esse naturae, sed ejus coujus est omnium caro; id est, quam ipse
Deus, homini primo de terra plasmavit, et caeteris hominibus plasmat."-
It carrieth in it a great condecency unto divine wisdom, that man
should be restored unto the image of God by him who was the essential
image of the Father; (as is declared in our discourse;) and that he
was made like unto us, that we might be made like unto him, and unto
God through him. So speaks the same Irenaeus: (lib. 5 Praefat:)
"Verbum Dei Jesus Christus, qui propter immensam suam dilectionem,
factus est quod sumus nos, ut nos perficeret quod est ipse".--"Jesus
Christ, the Word of God, who, from his own infinite love, was made
what we are, that he might make us what he is;" that is, by the
restoration of the image of God in us. And again: (lib. 3 cap. 20:)
"Filius Dei existens semper apud Patrem, et homo factus, longam
hominum expositionem in seipso recapitulavit; in compendio nobis
salutem praestans, ut quod perdideramus in Adam, id est, secundum
imaginem et similitudinem esse Dei, hoc in Christo Jesus reciperemus.
Quia enim non erat ppossibile, eum hominem, qui semel victus fuerat et
elisus per inobedientiam, replasmare et obtinere brabium (brateion)
victoriae; iterum autem impossibile erat ut salutem perciperet, qui
sub peccato ceciderat. Utraque operatus est filius Verbum Dei
existens, a Patre descendens et incarnatus, et usque ad mortem
descendens, et dispensationem consummans salutis nostrae".--"Being the
Son of God always with the Father, and being made man, he reconciled
or gathered up in himself the long-continued exposing of men," (unto
sin and judgment,) "bringing in salvation in this compendious way, (in
this summary of it,) that what we had lost in Adam--that is, our being
in the image and likeness of God--we should recover in Christ. For it
was not possible that man that had been once conquered and broken by
disobedience, should by himself be reformed, and obtain the crown of
victory; nor, again, was it possible that he should recover salvation
who had fallen under sin. Both were wrought by the Son, the Word of
God, who, descending from the Father, and being incarnate, submitted
himself to death, perfecting the dispensation of our salvation."
And Clemens Alexandrinus to the same purpose: (Adhort. ad Gentes.)
"Nai femi ho logos h tou Theou anthroopos genomenos, hina de kai su
para anthroopou matheis, te pote ara anthroopos genetai Theos".--"The
Word of God was made man, that thou mightest learn of a man how man
may become" (as) "God." And Ambrose, in Ps. 118 Octonar. decim.: [of
the authorized English version, Ps. 119 73:] "Imago, [id est, Verbum
Dei,] ad eum qui est d imaginem, [hoc est, hominem,] venit, et quaerit
imago eum qui est ad similitudinem sui, ut iterum signet, ut iterum
confirmet, quia amiseras quod accepisti."--"The image of God, that is,
the Word of God, came unto him who was after the image of God, that is
man. And this image of God seeks him who was after the image of God,
that he might seal him with it again, and confirm him, because thou
hadst lost that which thou hadst received." And Augustine in one
instance gives a rational account why it was condecent unto divine
wisdom that the Son, and not the Father or the Holy Spirit, should be
incarnate--which we also inquire into: (Lib. de Definitionibus
Orthodoxae Fidei sive de Ecclesiastica Dogmatibus, cap. 2:) "Non Pater
carnem assumpsit, neque Spiritus Sanctus, set Filius tantum; at qui
erat in divinitate Dei Patris Filius, ipse fieret in homine hominis
matris Filius; ne Filii nomen ad alterum transiret, qui non esset
eterna nativitate filius".--"The Father did not assume flesh, nor the
Holy Spirit, but the Son only; that he who in the Deity was the Son of
the Father, should be made the Son of man, in his mother of human
race; that the name of the Son should not pass unto any other, who was
not the Son by an eternal nativity."
I shall close with one meditation of the same author, concerning the
wisdom and righteousness of God in this mystery: (Enchirid. ad
Laurent., cap. 99:) "Vide--universum genus humanum tam justo judicio
Divino in apostatica radice damnatum, ut etiam si nullus inde
liberaretur, nemo recte possit Dei vituperare justitiam; et qui
liberantur, sic oportuisse liberari, ut ex pluribus non liberatis,
atque in damnatione justissima derelictis, ostenderetur, quod
meruisset universa conspersio, et quo etiam istos debitum judicium Dei
duceret, nisi ejus indebita misericordia subveniret."---"Behold, the
whole race of mankind, by the just judgment of God, so condemned in
the apostatical root, that if no one were thence delivered, yet no man
could rightly complain of the justice of God; and that those who are
freed, ought so to be freed, that, from the greater number who are not
freed, but left under most righteous condemnation, it might be
manifest what the whole mass had deserved, and whither the judgment of
God due unto them would lead them, if his mercy, which was not due,
did not relieve them." The reader may see what is discoursed unto
these purposes: and because the great end of the description given of
the person of Christ, is that we may love him, and thereby be
transformed into his image, I shall close this preface with the words
of Jerome, concerning that divine love unto Christ which is at large
declared. "sive legas", says he, "sive scribas, sive vigiles, sive
dormias, amor tibi semper buccina in auribus sonet, hic lituus excitet
animam tuam, hoc amore furibundus; quaere in lectulo tuo, quem
desiderat anima tue:" Epist. 66 ad Pammach., cap. 10.--"Whether thou
readest or writest, whether thou watchest or sleepest, let the voice
of love (to Christ) sound in thine ears; let this trumpet stir up thy
soul: being overpowered (brought into an ecstasy) with this love, seek
Him on thy bed whom thy soul desireth and longeth for."