as entire an interest in his death as if what soever he did or suffered in the daies of his humiliation he had done and suffered all for us alone But this last consideration perhaps is more pertinent to the knowledge of Christ and of him Crucified then unto the historicall beliefe of his death or Crosse CHAP. 3. Whether such knowledge of God and of Christ as the Scriptures teach be a science properly so called ADmitting the objects of our beleife might bee as certainely and as evidently knowne at least by some as the subjects of sciences properly so called are Whether this knowledge and our beleife of the same objects may be coincident that is whether it be all one so to know them and to beleeve them I will not dispute for this would occasiō a controversie about the use of words unfitting for a professed Divine to entertaine much more to invite But that there is a knowledge of Christ even in this life which if not for perspicuity or evidence of truth yet for the excellencie of the truths knowne exceeds all other knowledge we have our Apostles peremptory sentence for us For writing to his Converts of Corinth which then abounded with all kinde of knowledge secular he saith I esteemed or determined to know nothing amongst you save Iesus Christ and him crucified 1 Cor. 2. 2. He therefore determined to know nothing besides because he had no other knowledge in any esteeme in comparison to this And what good Christian would desire any other but as it is subservient to this knowledge This comprehends all that wee can desire either to know or to enjoy all that wee can esteeme or love even eternall happinesse it selfe as the author and fountaine of all happinesse instructs us John 17. ver 3. This is life eternall to know thee the onely true God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent But whether our Saviour in this speech or his Apostle in the former do use the word knowledge in a strict or in a vulgar sense may be questioned And this question resolves it selfe into another more generall as whether Theologie that is knowledge of God be a science properly so called or whether many conclusions of faith may bee clearely demonstrated 2. Two sorts of men there be who for the support or securing of their unreasonable conclusions have some reason to deny this Queene of sciences this Mistresse of Arts and supreame Governesse of all good faculties to be a science properly so called The Agents for the Romish Church and their extreame opposites whether mere Enthusiasts such as deny al use of scriptures or mixt Enthusiasts men that acknowledge the use of Scriptures but abuse them more then such as reject them by using them too much or to no good purpose or mingle them with the secret inspirations of their private spirits or wrest them to their owne fancies First if the conclusions controverted betwixt us and the Romane Church may be one way or other demonstrated as either to be altogether true or altogether false or so sublime that in this life they cannot be punctually or absolutely determined then are wee not absolutely bound to beleeve every proposition which that Church shall commend unto us as a doctrine of faith with the same confidence as if it were expresly delivered in Scripture or in the Articles of our Creed Nor should every applauded booke or Sermon albeit their bulke or substance consists for the most part of Scripture sentences be acknowledged to be that word of God to which all owe obedience if once it were acknowledged that there is a facultie or science of Divinitie which hath the same authority to approve or disprove doctrinall conclusions or their uses which other Arts or sciences have to examine the workes of all pretenders to them If Divinity be a science then he which is a Divine or a master of his profession might censure the Professors of other Arts faculties or sciences which take upon them to resolve Theologicall controversies or to teach doctrines which the Church wherein they live never avouched with the selfe same libertie which the Professors of other Arts usually doe Divines if they take upon them to teach or practise within the precincts of their profession Besides these two sects of men and some other men which cannot be comprehended under any sect or faction but have the same temptation to desire that there might be no true knowledge of God or of Christ or no demonstration of the Spirit that the Atheist or desperate sinner hath to wish there were no God or no Judge of quick and dead I cannot conceive what reason any man or any sort of men have to deny Theologie to be a true and proper science Yet to give the ingenuous Reader if not full satisfaction yet some Hints at least whereby hee may satisfie himselfe it will be no digression from our present argument at least no long digression briefely to shew wherein that knowledge of God and of Christ which may in this life be obtained doth differ from sciences properly so called and wherein they doe agree Now all the differences or concordance that can be betwixt any sciences Arts or faculties do either concerne the Maxims and Principles or the conclusions and the subjects of such faculties 3. The Maximes or Principles of all other sciences may be clearely apprehended and firmely assented unto by the industrious search and light of common reason without illuminations supernaturall so cannot the principles or Maxims of Divinity there must be a light or illumination more then naturall before wee can have either a cleare and undoubted apprehension of their truth or a just valuation of their worth Yet this difference is not much materiall neither part of it positive or negative is any way formall or essentiall to the constitution of a science properly so called For by what meanes soever the Principles of any science become manifest and certaine unto us whether by our owne industry or by the teaching of others or whether wee bee taught them immediately from God either by the admirable disposition of his extraordinary Providence or by speciall infused grace is meerely accidentall to the constitution or nature of a science properly so called Hee that sees the deduction of Mathematicall conclusions from the uncontrovers'd Maximes of the same Art as clearely as another doth is never a whit the lesse skilfull Mathematitian although perhaps he learned the Principles by the helpe of an Extraordinary teacher which the other attained unto by the industrious exercise of his owne wit Now if it be meerely accidentall to the nature of a science whether a man be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his owne Master or anothers Scholar whether in learning the principles or conclusions it can be no prejudice either to his knowledge or proficiency in such knowledge that he hath beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immediatly taught by God at least for the Maximes And I make no
dare not either peremptorily affirme or deny The point more questionable and more usefull for our edification will bee to inquire what the Apostle meanes by these words Know yee not that Iesus Christ is in you The branches of the enquiry are two the first what manner of Christs being in them is here to be understood The second what kinde of knowledge they were to have of his being in them or whether for Christ to be in them be all one as for them to be in Christ by the spirit of regeneration and adoption or all one as to be elected that is irreversibly ordained unto glory and whether they were bound to beleeve all this certitudine fidei by the certainty of faith 2. To this wee answer that neither all nor any of those points were necessarily to be beleeved by these Corinthians much lesse by ordinary Christians at this day albeit we grant the word Reprobates to be taken in the strictest sense that is for men irreversibly fitted for destruction For so it may be taken and in my opinion ought to be taken in that place if in any But so taking it wee must rate our Apostles meaning in the words precedent Know yee not that Christ is in you by that peculiar reference which the present estate of those Corinthians had unto the estate of the rebellious Israelites who after so many wonders and manifest documents of Gods peculiar providence over them did tempt him and require further signes whether God were among them or no. Exod. 17. 7. And he called the name of the place Massah and Meribah because of the Children of Israel and because they tempted the Lord saying Is the Lord among us or not Unto the same height of iniquitie those Pharisees were come who after they had seene so many miracles done by our Saviour as did fully testifie that he was that very God whom their Fathers had thus tempted in the wildernesse yet came forth unto him and beganne to question with him seeking of him a signe from heaven tempting him Marke 8. 11. And hence it was that this Heavenly Physitian of their soules upon this desperate Crisis sighed deeply in his spirit and said Why doth this generation seeke after a signe Verily I say unto you there shall be no signe given to this generation and he left them ver 12 13. Now these Corinthians after unquestionable experiments of many miraculous effects of Christs power wrought amongst them by the ministry of Paul did seeke after a further proofe or signe of Christs speaking in him 2 Cor. 13. 3. and for their satisfaction he exhorts them to examine themselves whether Christ were not in them not in him alone and this they might know unlesse they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is such Reprobates as the forementioned rebellious Israelites were For it could be no other then a Symptome or Crisis of a Reprobate minde or of men rejected by God and left of Christ to murmur doubt or question whether the gift of tongues of healing and other wonderfull effects of Christs power manifested by Pauls ministerie did not truly testifie that his Commission was from heaven or that Christ was amongst them to wit in that Church For so the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in his place to be taken as it is elsewhere in the New Testament as when cur Saviour saith to the Pharisees Luke 17. 21. The Kingdome of Heaven is within you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the power of it is manifested amongst you but he meant not that the Kingdome of heaven was in the hearts of all them to whom he spake And so the Septuagint whom the Evangelists and Apostles follow renders the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the forcited place Ex. 17. 7 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is the Lord in us or no So that neither our Saviours expression nor that of the Apostle 2 Cor. 9. doth inferre any more then we have said 3 It is not all one for any amongst us to doubt or question whether the doctrine conteyned in the Apostles Creede or in the new Testament be the doctrine of life and salvation as to doubt or be uncertaine whether he himselfe be personally in the estate of life or a chosen vessell To doubt of the former generall is infidelity a sinne not incident to a true Christian But many amongst us may doubt of the later point and yet be as good Christians as those who think they have assurance of faith that they are predestinated and condemne all others as Reprobates in the worst sense who doe not as certainely beleeve that they live in Christ as that Christ died for sinners But this was no part of our Apostles meaning in that passage to the Corinthians The question betweene him and them was not about speciall beleife of personall election but about this generall whether he were a true Apostle or no Or whether the miracles which had beene manifested amongst them by his ministery were wrought by the power of Christ or no. If they cōtinued in this doubt or tempting of God they would as he forewarnes them hereby prove themselves to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is such as the murmuring Israelites had beene or such as the present generation of the Jews for the most part were that is cast off from being Gods Church or people So that if we take the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the strictest and severest sense it rather imports a nationall or provinciall rejection of that people from being his people or from his residency amongst them by his publique Spirit than a personall Reprobation of every particular or individuall For to pronounce thus much of every Jew that hath not adjoyned himselfe to Christs body the Church since the generall rejection of that Nation is beyond my Commission altogether without the praecincts of this present inquisition which was onely to shew the true use of sacred Philologie for finding out the just extent and value of many passages aswell in the old Testament as in the New whose grammaticall sense is for the substance usually plaine but indeterminable for quantity without observance of their peculiar references either to some speciall matter of fact recorded in Scripture or to some sacred passages more ancient 4. What place of Scripture is there lesse controversible for grammaticall signification of the words then that of S. Paul Rom. 9. 19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou wilt say unto me Why doth he yet finde fault or chide for who hath resisted his will To this effect an ordinary Scholar in any extraordinary Grammar Schoole in this Kingdome would at first sight render the originall But concerning the extent of the same words takē in this unquestionable sense there is and hath beene much controversie amongst great professors of Divinity Many extend them to Reprobates in generall as if our Apostle had said Why doth he finde fault with Reprobates seeing he
manifestation of the sonnes of God Rom. 8. 19. That of the Psalmist Psal 97. 1. fals under the same line of observation The Lord reigneth let the earth rejoyce let the multitude of the Isles rejoyce This literally implies that the earth whether generally taken or restrained to the Land of Jewry should have better cause to rejoyce and the multitude of the Iles new occasions of greater gladnesse then in former times they had knowne When then was this new matter of joy and gladnesse there promised to all the earth and her inhabitants to begin to beare date or bee in esse From that point of time wherein the Lord began to raigne after another manner then before he had done The raigne of the Lord over all the earth and over all the Ilands of the earth if wee consider him only as God was from the beginning of the world and so shall continue without change or alteration World without end The raigne of the Lord then in this place foretold must be the raigne of God incarnate or of Gods being made King And those holy men of God which thus speake did by the spirit of prophecie foresee those dayes which Abraham saw and rejoyced to see Now the beginning of these joyfull dayes was from the time wherein the Lord did loose the Prisoners did deale his bread unto the hungry did open the eyes of the blinde and raysed them that were bowed downe with his owne hands or with his owne voice For so the Author of the 146. Psalme a little before paraphrased doth conclude that admirable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or triumphant song of the God of Israel The Lord shall raigne for ever even thy God O Sion unto all generations All the former workes of mercy and piety towards miserable men were but praeludia or portending documents of his future raigne or oecumenicall Kingdome shortly after to be established CHAP. 25. That the former Testimonies do concludently inferre a pluralitie of persons in the unitie of the Godhead and that God in the person of the sonne was to be incarnate and to be made Lord and King BUt if the Lord God of Israel were to serve under the sins of this people or to bee made a servant for their sinnes if he were to be annointed King not over them only but over all the earth besides it will bee demanded unto whom he was to be a servant and who after this his service was to make or Crowne him King Surely being God he was not to be a servant unto man or Angell if he that was God must be a servant he must be a servant to him who is and truly was God If he that was truly God were to be annointed King and to be enthronized hee must be annointed by him alone who was as truly God These considerations enforce us and when God shall give them hearts to take these and the like into serious consideration will perswade the Jews that however the God of Israel be one yet in this unity of the Godhead or divine Majestie they and wee must acknowledge more then an unity or identity of persons What it is to be a person and what manner of distinction is betweene the persons in the blessed Trinity are points which I never had minde to dispute More Scholarum since I first knew the Schooles or bent my studies to know Christ but was alwayes ready to admire what I knew not to expresse Nor could I ever well understand the language of such as thought themselves able to instampe these high mysteries with Scholastick formes of words but have taken more delight and comfort for these thirtie yeares and more in rehearsing daily as I am bound by oath evening and morning the Collect appointed by our Church for Trinity sunday with the Hymne annexed unto it in the ancient liturgies then in all the varietie whether of Schoolemen or of such polite writers as seeke to adorne and beautifie their ruder expressions of this great mystery And I have ingaged my selfe not to meddle with this point untill by Gods assistance I have finished the rest of these Comments and then by way of meditation or devotions only Thus much notwithstanding the former considerations and the very fundamental grounds of true Christianity inforce us to grant that in the divine nature though most indivisibly one there is an eminent ideall paterne of such a distinction as we call betweene party and party a capacity to give a capacity to receive a capacity to demand and a capacity to satisfie Capacities sufficiently different for the exercise of justice and love not ad extra only but within the divine nature it selfe If there were but one party or person in the divine nature the remission of mens sinnes without satisfaction had beene more proper and pertinent then remitting of them upon satisfaction For one and the selfe same party to demand satisfaction of himselfe and to make it to himselfe especially by way of punishment or disgracefull affliction is so unconceivable to reason it selfe that it is altogether uncapable of admiration to reason sanctified or enlightned by grace 2. But this is that which some moderne heretiques labour to prove to wit That God did not exact satisfaction for our sinnes of our Saviour Christ Iesus that it had beene exact cruelty in God to have laid the burthen of all our sinnes upon him who knew no sinne But how then is Christ said to have taken away our sinnes God say these man did freely remit them without satisfaction and Christ did take them away by setting us a paterne of holinesse and of patience in affliction That is in such sort as a Physitian might be said to have taken away an epidemicall disease by prescribing a recipe which every one after might make for himselfe and be his owne Apothecary Briefly they thinke that God cannot be excused from cruelty but by denying all true and proper satisfaction made to him by Christ But it is an oversight usually incident to men enclouded in grosser errours to object that unto their Adversaries as an inconvenience or absurd consequence which is such only according to the objecters owne tenets but most true and consonant to their principles whom they oppugne if these might be taken into due consideration Thus some greate Clearks in the Romish Church but none of their wisest men object against us that we make God a Tyâ—anâ— by teaching that he hath given us a Law which is impossible for us to fulfill The objection is unanswerable according to their principles who teach that a man cannot be justified or absolved from the sentence of death denounced by the Law without perfect inherent righteousnesse or fulfilling of the Law But the same objection no way toucheth us who teach that albeit we must still be doing that which is good yet after we have done all we can suppose much better then either they or we doe we must still deny our selves and renounce not the works
dwelleth in him is the expresse image of him as he is man he is the Tabernacle or Temple of the living God The inference is our Apostles 2 Cor. 6. 16. Yee are the Tēples of the living God at God hath said I will dwel in thē and walk in thē and I will be their God and they shall be my people Our Evangelist S. Iohn Revel 21. 3. exegetically dilates the former testimonies of Moses and the Prophets a great deale further thē S. Paul here doth I heard a great voice out of Heaven saying Behold the Tabernacle of God is with men and he will dwell with them and they shall be his people and God himselfe shall be with them and be their God and God shall wipe away all teares from their eyes And there shall be no more death neither sorrow nor crying neither shal there be any more paine for the former things are passed away But this mortalitie must put on immortality and our corruptible flesh become incorruptible before this last clause of S. Iohns prophecy can be literally fulfilled in us or begin to beare date in esse And before this happy change of our mortall bodies none of those other prophecies Exod. 29. Levit. 26. Ezek. 37. shall be finally accomplished albeit all of them have beene already fulfilled in differēt measure manner both according to the literall and mysticall sense For God hath dwelt and doth dwel more properly in the man Christ Iesus then at any time he did in the Tabernacle or Temple These were in their times the seats of Gods peculiar presence of the manifest appearances of his divine Maiestie from which all the blessings upon Israell or Abrahams posteritie by bodily descent were derived after such a manner as the visible light in this inferiour world is derived from the body or sphaere of the sunne Yet such as were partakers of these blessings all the particular Synagogues through the land of Iury did not by this participation of his presence in the Temple or Tabernacle become Temples or Tabernacles of the God of Israel these were never conceived to be or instyled the seat of his rest or of his peculiar presence But since the Word was made flesh since the seed of Abraham was made the Temple of the living God every particular Church truely Christian becomes a more proper seat of Gods peculiar presence then the materiall Temple in its glory and splendour was and farre more communicative of all blessings spirituall to every true particular member of them Every individuall or particular man who is incorporated into this Church and made a living member of it doth by the participation of that Spirit which dwelleth in it become a true Temple or Tabernacle of the living God Whosoever truely beleeves in Christ whosoever eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood Christ who is the prototypon and true temple of God doth dwell in him and he in Christ he is in God and God in him after a more peculiar manner then either the patriarks or Prophets were in God or God in them But this peculiar manner of Gods dwelling in us by faith and wee in him hath his peculiar place in other principall Articles of the Creed or in the Treatise of the Sacrament concerning the mysticall union betwixt Christ and his members The next Quaere which in this Section offers it selfe to be discussed and must be the Title of the next Chapter is briefly this CHAP. 27. Why S. John doth rather say the word was made flesh then the sonne of God was made flesh albeit the sonne of God and the word denote one and the same person TO this Quaere some judicious Divines make answer that the second person in Trinitie was at least implicitely knowne unto some heathen Philosophers under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 long before his incarnation and longer before S. Iohn wrote his Gospell Now it is not improbable that those heretiques which did call the Divinity of Christ in question against whose heresie the Evangelist did put in that Caveat in the beginning of his Gospell at the least such as were in danger to be seduced by them were to his knowledge better versed in the writings of Plato and Trismegist then in Moses and the Prophets And men naturally both conceive and imbrace the truth with more facility when it is delivered unto them in termes whereunto they have been inured Now such as were well read in Plato or Trismegist or would be willing to read them could not be ignorant of an eternall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they called the sonne of the eternall minde or essence And this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word or image of the eternall minde was not in their apprehension meerly notionall or representative only but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Word or reason or however we expresse it truly operative the invisible cause or maker of all things visible Unto these the like prenotions which the heathen Philosophers had of an eternall Father in his eternall sonne S. Iohn in the judgement of some great Divines did purposely apply himselfe and frame his expressions to their capacity whom he sought to reclaime or to instruct Nor is it either unusuall or unbeseeming the Apostles themselves to alter both the matter and forme of speech according to the diversity of the parties whom they seeke to reforme S. Paul did not dispute with the Athenians after the same manner he did with the Jews nor did he instruct the Hebrew converts in the same language or forme of catechisme which he used amongst the Gentiles S. Iohn then in the conjecture of the former ancient Divines did make the 〈◊〉 advantage of the prenotions which the heathens had of this truth which S. Paul did from the inscription of the Athenian Altar that God saith hee whom yee ignorant by worship him declare I unto you But did these harmelesse speculations of these Philosophers require any such reformation from S. Iohn as the Athenians superstitious worship did from S. Paul Sure their followers were to bee better catechized in this truth then they had been or could be by any Philosophy their best speculations though in themselves true were to their Professors altogether fruitlesse and as I take it without any prenotion or expectance that this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that word by which they acknowledge all things were made should be made visible in our flesh should exhibit a more exquisite representation of the divine nature and essence in the microcosme or little modell of mans body then had beene exhibited in the making and governing this great universe They knew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was truly God without beginning but they did not either adore him as God neither did they adore their eternall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as God or by him All this they were to learne from S. Iohn for this is a mystery which farre surpasseth the capacitie of man to conceive or comprehend without
was to be partaker of flesh and bloud as we sonnes of men are So the Apostle teacheth Heb. 2. 14. For asmuch theâ— as the children are partakers of flesh and blood hee also himselfe likewise tooke part of the same that through death hee might destroy him that had the power of death that is the Devill This participation of flesh bloud with his brethren is but an expression of the assumption Verely saith the Apostle ver 16 he tooke not hold of the Angels but he tooke hold of the seede of Abraham The meaning of these expressions as likewise of the originall word is that albeit the Angels were created by him yet were they not so assumed or so united to his person as the seede of Abraham was and is Nor is he partaker of their nature or of any other nature besides after such a peculiar manner as he is of the humane nature by assuming the seed of Abraham Some Schoole Divines and followers of Aquinas will have the former similitude of Athanasius to consist especially in this that as the reasonable soule doth use the body of man so the divine nature of Christ doth use the manhood as its proper united instrument Every other man besides the man Christ Jesus every other creature is the instrument of God but al of them such instruments of the divine nature as the axe or hammer is to the artificer which worketh by them The most puissant Princes the mightiest Conquerors which the world hath seene or felt could grow no higher in titles then Attilas or Nebuchadnezzar did Malleus orbis et flagellum Dei hammers or scourges of God to chastise or bruise the Nations But the humanity of Christ is such an instrument of the divine nature in his person as the hand of man is to the person or partie whose hand it is And it is well observed whether by Aquinas himselfe or no I remember not but by Viguerius an accurate summist of Aquinas summes that albeit the intellectuall part of man bee a spirituall substance and separated from the matter or bodily part yet is the union betwixt the hand and intellectuall part of man no lesse firme no lesse proper then the union betweene the feet or other organicall parts of sensitive Creatures and their sensitive soules or mere Physicall formes For the intellectuall part of man whether it be the forme of man truely though not merely physicall or rather his essence not his forme at all doth uâ—e his owne hand not as the Carpenter doth use his axe that is not as an externall or separated but as his proper united instrument Nor is the union betweene the hand as the instrument and intellective part at the Artificer or Commander of it an union of matter and forme but an union personall or at the least such an union as resembles the hypostaticall union betweene the divine and humane nature of Christ much better then any materiall union wherein Philosophers or Schoole Divines can make instance 9. These and the like speculations are neither unpleasant nor unprofitable if so the Reader will not restraine the former similitude of Athanasius only to this kinde of union But after what manner to what speciall purposes or what peculiar services the manhood of Christ is the instrument of his divine nature as the ancient for the most part unanimously affirme by Gods assistance in other Articles following or in the mysticall union betwixt Christ and his members Thus much in this place and for the present may suffice that the personall union betweene the divinity and manhood of Christ though it be in it selfe more admirable then comprehensible or expressible is more proper and firme then any union which can be made by mixture by confusion by composition or compaction of severall natures into one But what Athanasius meant in that expression of taking the manhood into God may if I mistake not to my present purpose which is only to lay the general grounds of these communications of properties which Divines whether antient or moderne obserue betweene the divine and humane nature of Christ be yet further explicated by answering the maine objection that can be made against Athanasius his similitude or these illustrations of it 10. Some haply will object and it is all I think that can be objected against us that as wee are such is our flesh such is our bloud We are by nature men and our flesh and bloud is by nature only humane or the flesh and bloud of men but if the flesh and bloud whereof the sonne of God is partaker bee as truely his as our flesh and bloud is ours shall they not be such as he is that is flesh and bloud truely divine not humane This must in no wise be granted otherwise the sonne of God should not be as the Apostle avoucheth hee is partaker with us of the same flesh and bloud The flesh and bloud which he assumed and was partaker of are as truely humane as mans flesh bloud are and of the selfe same nature that mans flesh and bloud are of And of such flesh he was to be as truely as properly partaker as we are And yet it is necessary that the same flesh and bloud which he assumed be as truely and as properly the flesh and bloud of the sonne of God who is by nature God blessed for ever as our flesh is the flesh or our bloud the bloud of the sonnes of men Otherwise albeit the flesh and bloud assumed by him had been as truely and as properly humane flesh and bloud as ours is yet could not the son of God have beene as true and proper a partaker of humane flesh and bloud as wee sonnes of men are For no party or person can as truely and really participate with another in that which is not his owne by as perfect right as it is the others who is partaker of it with him So then the flesh and bloud of our Saviour Christ was truely and properly Caro humana non divina sanguis humanus non divinus not divine but humane flesh and bloud and yet withall as truely and properly Caro Dei and Sanguis Dei the flesh and bloud of God as it was caro humana sanguis humanus humane flesh and humane bloud more properly the flesh and bloud of God then the flesh bloud of man For eveÌ„ the whole humanity of Christ aswell the reasonable soule as the flesh was and is the humanity of the son of God God saith the Apostle Acts 20. 28. hath purchased the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with his owne proper bloud Now if the Church be Gods owne not by creation only but by true purchase then the bloud by which hee purchased it was as truely his owne as our bloud or any thing within us or without us which we can owne is ours But was it Gods owne bloud after the selfesame manner or measure that our bloud is ours It was not in every respect or