this obiection may then haue some place If absurdities or errors be yeelded vnto then they will be infinit no measure of them if by communicating or partaking we vnderstand a reall applieng or mixture of Christes bodie with ours whether it be of the whole with the whole or of the parts with the parts that so the church might in deed be a bodie as it were souldered and glewed togither of innumerable bodies of beleeuers being indeed molten togither as it were with Christes bodie But fie vpon this monster and let vs learne alwaies to driue it far from vs for who perceiueth not that the bodie arising or flowing from this felowship or communicating and belonging altogether to a spirituall life is mysticall Wherfore we are truelie but yet after a spirituall sort and mysticallie become one with Christ himselfe through faith that so from him there may flow into vs true life A similitude And euen as these our members being naturallie ioined with the soule doo receiue from it sence and moouing so should we after a spirituall and vndeclarable maner for great is the mysterie of that spirituall mariage that is betweene Christ and his church Ephes 5.32 as the apostle largelie and lowdlie declareth liue in Christ being ledde and gouerned by his spirit and he againe manifest and declare his powerfull working in vs. Now tell me is this the abolishing of that partaking that wee haue with Christ himselfe or doo we not rather make it a diuine and heauenlie partaking But if with these men we would make it a cōmunicating with the mouth then this partaking or communicating should be no woonderful or excellent matter We cannot approoue of a bodilie communicating or partaking with the mouth because that were to spoile our faith and rob God of his almightie power truth For what I pray you is more naturall and vsuall than if anie thing that is in deed present be deliuered vs to eat we take it in our hands and swallow it down thorow our mouth But that we though as now poore wretches we be placed on the earth not els where should notwithstanding truelie and in deed become the verie members of the flesh and bloud of Christ himselfe who now according to his flesh remaineth in heauen and no where else and should fetch from thence the verie iuice in deed of eternall life notwithstanding that woonderfull great distance of place that is betweene him and vs this I say passeth all mans vnderstanding and is a most euident testimonie both of Gods truth and also of his almightie power And let this suffice also for answer to these slanderers who crie out that wee transforme this holie mysterie into an imaginarie ghost or conceit in that we do attribute all this wholie to our mindes faith If the aduersaries conclusion be true then there will insue therevpon two grosse errors for if they doo trulie conclude this against vs what remaineth then but that we affirme likewise the baptisme of christians to be a certeine vaine fantasie or apparition and their saluation also to be in imagination and not in truth Two similitudes conteining in them arguments from the lesse to the more who die before they can come to be present at or partakers of the Lords supper Now if naturall vnderstanding it selfe and apprehension be so powerfull and effectuall that we being holpē by these faculties become skilfull in so manie things shall not faith that excellent gift of the Holie ghost worke this in vs that wee shall through faith trulie and in deed apprehend take hold of that verie thing which God offereth vs to be receiued by faith though it be neuer so far remooued from vs And sith by the heat of the sun though it be neuer so far distant from vs the whole world is after a sort quickened and made liuelie and strong shall not Christ be able though his flesh and his bloud remaine in heauen so to become in deed our mysticall head that he may powre into vs the iuice of eternall life The conclusion of all But of these matters wee haue spoken thus far My purpose was brethren largelie to discourse of these points because of the slanders of certeine ilwillers that so by this meanes the true and sound doctrine of our churches being made knowne none of them that repaire to this church shuld refuse our assemblies speciallie the holie supper which we mind God willing within few daies to administer but rather that we should euery one of vs religiouslie celebrate this holie banket earnestlie intreating the Lord to restreine troublesome spirits to confirme right beleeuers A godlie praier and to be short to grant vs all this grace that being of one minde in him we may in this world lead an innocent and vnblamable life and at the last be receiued into eternall life and blessednesse by our Lord Iesus Christ to whom with the Father and the Holie ghost be all praise and glorie for euer and euer So be it A SHORT SVMME OF sound doctrine touching the matter of the Sacrament of the Lords supper We haue to consider in Christ our onely Mediatour Foure things to be speciallie regarded in Christ especiallie fowre things that is to saie 1 Christes person 2 His office 3 The gift 〈◊〉 graces which we receiue from him 4 Lastlie by what meanes wee are made partakers of those gifts 1 Concerning Christes person Christ consisting of two natures is yet but one person WE teach affirme that Christ dooth consist of two natures the one the nature of God the other the nature of man making yet notwithstanding but one person of both natures and that so also as the proprieties both in the nature of God and also of man remaine safe and sound and are rightlie distinguished one of them from another Wherein the glorification of Christes bodie standeth And though we confesse the mans nature of Christ to be glorified and that in the cheefest degree one and that no lesse truelie and straitlie than the members are ioined to a naturall body but yet in that maner and after that sort which we will heereafter declare Neither do they please satisfie or content vs wherfore this our ioining with Christ vnto that great mysterie of his incarnation for this is a generall communicating or partaking of his nature with ours but heere we intreat of a particular or peculiar coniunction by which it commeth to passe Ephes 4.13 that his church and congregation groweth vp togither with him And we affirme this coniunction and ioining of vs togither to be the welspring of all the benefits which afterwards are conueied ouer from Christ vnto vs Matth. 3.17 Iohn 17.11 for seeing that the father is well pleased in him alone it is meet that we be truelie made one with him that in him also we may please the father Hense then insueth another sort of giftes and graces that is to
eternall arise to such a huge number in the seueral sorts and great varietie of them that are not able to thinke of them or anie one of them according to their woorthinesse muche lesse to account or number them and thirdlie to consider our selues receiuing them to whome the Lorde freelie and of his owne goodnesse giueth these great mercies not onelie when wee had not deserued the least of them but euen then when euery one of vs had deserued eternall death and condemnation to be poured foorth vpon vs and ours 3 And lastlie in care and conscience of a most holie and christian conuersation that seeing wee are in the holie Supper made partakers by faith of Christs death and resurrection and that wee fullie perswade our selues by the truth of the word Roman 4.25 that he did not onlie die for our sinnes and rise for our righteousnesse but also performed that excellent and great worke to teach vs Roman 6.1 Coloss 3.1 by his death to die to vngodlinesse and by his resurrection to rise vp to that holinesse that may bee acceptable before God profitable to our brethren and comfortable to our selues wee hauing by that meanes and to that end our spiritual life and being from him that therefore we should liue soberlie righteouslie Titus 2.12 and godlie in this present euill world and that in the sound affections of our harts before God and in words and deeds before men that when it shall please him to finish the daies of our wearisome pilgrimage we stedfastlie looking for that blessed hope and full-fruition of eternall life may be glorified with him in eternall blessednes which thing the Lord grant vs euen for his crucified Christes sake to whom with the Father and the Holie ghost three persons and one eternall God be giuen all honor praise power glorie both of vs and of all people euen now and at all times for euer and euer So be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 TO THE READER AT the motion and request of sundrie my deere friends in the Lord I haue thought good to put downe these two praiers following not thereby minding either to tie anie person to the vse of these onelie for they may according to their seuerall necessities conceiue some other of their owne or practise some better forme alredie set foorth by men of greater gifts or feeling nor yet so to busie their minds and to occupie their heads as that they should be imploied in these when the publike praiers and exercises of the church performed by the ministers are in hand for be it farre from vs when the minister Gods mouth speaketh from the Lord to vs or when he as our mouth speaketh to the Lord for vs to haue either our hearts or our mouthes occupied about any other thing than the reuerend hearing and consenting vnto of such things as hee vttereth But that aiding the infirmitie of our brethren such as haue not the gift to conceiue praier and shall thinke this fit for themselues might haue a forme to exercise themselues in both before they repaire to the publike exercises of the church and also after the celebration and partaking of these reuerend mysteries shall be finished A PRAIER TO BE SAID BEFORE a man repaire to the partaking of the Lords supper O Eternall God and most mercifull father I thy poore and vnwoorthie seruant doo humblie beseech thee in Iesus Christ thy deere sons name and for his sake gratiouslie through his death and obedience to pardon and forgiue me all my sinnes whatsoeuer which at anie time by thought word or deed I haue through negligence ignorance or knowledge committed against thy diuine maiestie or anie other And because both by reason of the curssed corruption of mine owne nature and the infinit multitude of my sinnes also I am slow dull of heart to beleeue seale vp in my soule I pray thee O Lord this great benefit of the free pardon full forgiuenesse of all my sinnes by the assured testimonie of thy blessed spirit bearing record vnto my spirit that I am thy childe and by vnfeined parddoning and forgiuing of others which anie maner of way haue offended against me Yea make the death and resurrection of thy sonne so powerfull effectuall in me that I may not onelie feele and finde in the same the forgiuenesse of all my sinnes both generall and particular and the hope of eternall saluation but also that I may be instructed thereby all the daies of my life more and more to die vnto sin and dailie more more to liue vnto righteousnes of life and holie conuersation And forasmuch as through thy goodnesse I haue purposed this day to communicat in the vse of thy blessed word and sacraments I beseech thee good father to pearse mine eares to prepare my heart yea and so to direct all the parts and powers of my body and soule that I may not onelie reuerentlie and profitablie hearken to thy voice speaking vnto me out of thy word laboring all the daies of my life to conforme my selfe to the knowledge faith and obedience of the same but also that I may assuredlie be made partaker of the frutes and effects of the death and passion of thy deere sonne which it pleaseth thee in that holie sacrament to offer vnto me To this end and purpose I beseech thee to grant that I be not carried away in the contemplation and consideration of the earthly and corruptible things obiected therein to my sences but that my faith may be set vp raised to the spirituall beholding assured feeling and full fruition of these graces which it pleaseth thee by the same to offer vnto me Giue me grace good Lord to bring with me a stedfast faith in the truth of thy promises that by it as by an eie I may looke vpon and by the same as by a hand I may apprehend Iesus Christ thy sonne sitting at thy right hand to be my onelie and continuall iustifier sanctifier and redeemer Grant me grace also to bring with me as an earnest hatred of all my former euils whatsoeuer so a sincere loue of all righteousnesse and well dooing that I by the power of thy spirit crucifieng the old man with the lusts and concupiscences therof speciallie such as beare the greatest sway in me may be strengthened in the new man dailie to thinke speake and doo those things which may be acceptable and well pleasing in thy godlie presence And I beseech thee further to giue me grace to bring with me sound sincere loue towards all men yea euen towards mine enimies that I may not onelie forget and forgiue all the iniuries wrongs that they haue deuised said or doone against me but also pray earnestlie vnto thy maiestie for them and purchase and procure
that God dwelleth in vs Iohn 4.12 and yet we beleeue and confes that he dwelleth not in his saints by his vnion or vniting 1. Corinth 6.19 For our bodies are so the tēples of the holy ghost that yet they make not one subsistēce or being with the holy ghost sith that the sanctified party is seuerally by himselfe a certaine thing so likewise the holy ghost to wit god eternall So a wicked spirit and some one possessed with the same wicked spirit are ioined togither yet the vncleane spirite is not in man as the soule is in the bodie For the wicked spirit remaineth by it self a certain thing much like as the ghest is in his inne and againe the possessed with the wicked spirit is so become the inne or lodging place of the wicked spirite that yet the ghest is another from him As for vs we affirme the person of the word or son of God so to dwell in that manhood that he hath taken vnto him that hee hath vnited himselfe thereto by a personall vnion so I say that the nature taken or assumed being sustained and vpheld in the nature taking or assuming maketh yet notwithstanding but one person which is the eternall worde of God Hereupon it foloweth that there are not two sonnes of God much lesse two Christs one the son of Marie the other the son of God Matth. 1.21.23 but one Immanuel and sauior onelie And this is the very true description of the personall vnion as wil yet much more plainelie appeare if we compare with this truth touching the personal vnion Sundrie sorts of errors the descriptions that are partlie felt from the olde heresies and partlie anew deuised by the fresh furbushing of the aforesaid heresies First there are some that feare not openly to say that the habitation or dwelling of God in Christ is not otherwise to be considered in Christ or that he doth no otherwise dwell in him than in other men yea than in other creatures Iacobus Andreas assertion and the same confuted Iacobus Andreas in those his Thesis or propositions by which he blowed to the field or bade the battel wrote the same euen in so many words as you would saie to wit that the habitation or dwelling of the son of God in Christ is not otherwise to be considered than in all other creaturs whatsoeuer as in respect of his essentiall habitation or dwelling for God is euerie where If a man demaund what shall be the difference of the personall vnion this shall be their answeare that it consisteth herein that into all other things the godhead hath powred forth some properties or qualities but into Christes humanity or manhoode hee hath powred all properties A wonderfull thing that after that these opinions haue nowe a long while since bin tossed and by the solemne and most iust iudgements of Christes church condemned and confounded by so many darts as haue come from heauen it selfe against the authors and fautors of these vngodlie blasphemies a maruellous thing I say that there should now spring vp some as dare be bolde both by worde and writing to maintaine and defend the same and that with so great reioicing and commendation of most vnskilfull men for who is he vnles hee be altogither blinde that seeth not that if the word be no other wise present in christ thā in many things that is to say beingly presently powerfully as in schools they were woont to say that then Christs person is destroied His heresie is declared before as Nestorius taught And that if wee grant an effusion or powring forth of all the proprieties of the godhead into the flesh assumed or taken that then the other part of the vngodlie assertion of Eutyches Concerning him and his heresie see before shall be erceted and set vp A wonderful wound indeed flowing from such diuers matters to wit the seperating of the naturs on the one side the effusion or powring forth of the properties of the one nature into the other on the other side first in our memory time most impudently fried and most vnskilfully by our vbiquitaries defended But let vs I pray you somwhat more narrowlie looke into the matter that we may see what it meaneth This I say that if the personall vnion be to be defined and determined by the effusion or powring foorth of all properties that then this Hee ouerthroweth the error by absurdities insuming vpon it The first absurditie which of al things is most false vngodly will follow therevpon to wit that God is in some sorte personallie vnited vnto all things created Why so Because the effusiō or powring forth of all some properties alone doo not differ genere as they say that is in the general or cōmon kind but according to more or lesse only wherfore either Christ was not otherwise God than any other thing though perhaps hee were somewhat more perfect than other things or else other things were diuine and god-like but Christs flesh most diuine and god-like The second absurditie Againe if the definition of the personall vnion were true it woulde followe therevpon that the three persons wer vnited to that flesh that was assumed or taken for the essentiall proprietie of the verie godhead it selfe are common to the three persons in one the self-same essence or being therfore to be infinite almighty knowing al things present euery wher c as they themselues now speak be not proprieties either of the father or of the son or of the holy ghost but onely of that alone and altogither singular godhead Wherevpon it foloweth that if we grant that definition of the personall vnion that then the 3 persons of the godhead were incarnat They were so called bicause they affirmed that God the father suffered Isiodor Orig. libr. 8. The third absurditie tooke flesh vpon them and so we shall proceede further than the patropassian heretiks Moreouer by this means the godhead it self shold be spoiled of his most essential proprieties euē this I say which are most proper therto or which do belōg vnto the same after the fourth maner or sort as the logicians speake that is to say doo belong vnto the whole Godhead alone vnto the Godhead and alwaies vnto the same for verilie if they be in deed communicated vnto the nature of man that was assured or taken then I say they doo now cease to be proper to the Godhead vnlesse we minde to make these termes proper common all one But the Lord speaketh otherwise in the prophet saieng I will not giue my glorie vnto another Isaiah 48.11 The fourth absurditie What more Him whome these men in the first part of their Nestorian opinion had made of him that was God man togither in one person but one that carried or bare God these now in another part of their Eutychian opinion conceit transforme him I say and his flesh hauing
say Christ and his graces cannot be sundered such as when we haue Christ giuen vs are thē in and with him also bestowed vpon vs. Two sorts of graces in Christ Of which there are likewise two speciall sorts First the imputation or accoūting vnto vs of Christs holinesse righteousnes obedience that so in him we may be the righteousnes of God through the forgiuenesse of our sinnes Secondlie a spirituall life it selfe flowing vnto vs his members from the flesh of Christ God and man by the force and power whereof we are new borne and nourished into euerlasting life euen as by meat and drinke this fraile life is fostred and mainteined in vs. 4 How Christ togither with his gifts and graces may be receiued of vs. THat we receiue Christ togither with all his gifts and graces What the Holie ghost is this must be attributed as we freelie confesse to the free working of the Holie spirit alone which is the essentiall power of the father and the sonne 1. Cor. 2.13.14 for he alone maketh vs meet to vnderstand these things which are of God yea and that in such sort that we doo not onelie confesse all Gods promises generallie to be true What faith is but also euerie one of vs in our hearts doo certeinelie persuade our selues that these promises doo belong vnto vs Rom. 8.15 Galath 4.6 and therefore may with boldnesse crie Abba O father This same most excellent worke of the Holie ghost we call faith Ephes 2.8 which is the free gift of GOD alotted speciallie to the elect and is as in respect of vs the onelie fit and meet instrument to perceiue Christ by and to receiue all his graces Therefore we teach with Paule Rom. 3.28 that we are iustified and saued by faith alone we meaning thereby nothing else but this that by that onelie instrument of faith wee lay holde vpon all thinges necessarie to saluation to wit Christ with all his giftes Furthermore the Holie ghost to the end that this faith may be begotten in vs by his secret power as also for the fostering and strengthening thereof after that it is wrought dooth vse likewise outward meanes because wee consist of a rude and grosse nature to wit the worde written and preached The outward meanes of faith which hee by his power maketh effectuall in vs that so he may worke in vs these thinges of which wee haue before spoken The word considred two waies to wit as it is preached without the sacraments and as the sacraments are annexed thereto And this word sometime is simple and by it selfe or alone as you would saye not accompanied with other of whiche sort is the dailie preaching of the same woorde And sometimes againe it hath visible signes ioyned to it togither with certeine ceremonies which signes the Greekes call mysteries and the Latines sacraments for God verilie regarding our weaknesse went to assure vs of that his goodwill towards vs not by the eares onelie but also by other sences and so more and more to establish and seale vnto vs our coniunction with Christ his sonne These things being put downe and these ground-works and fountions laid it shal be an easie matter to gather our mind touching the questions following which respect or concerne the matter of the sacrament Q 1 Wherfore and to what purpose are sacraments ordeined Sacraments ordeined to three ends A First that we might so much the more effectuallie possesse Christ himselfe Secondlie that look how much the more strait our growing vp with Christ himselfe is so much more and more should that life of Christ bee deriued and conueied ouer vnto vs with other his gifts and graces Thirdlie that we might so much the more effectuallie remember that holie loue which ought to be of force amongst such as are members of the same bodie and to which loue we by solemne protestation bind our selues as it were Q 2 From whense floweth that force of the sacraments A Wholie and altogither from the working of the Holie ghust The force of the sacraments is from the Holie ghost onelie and not from the signes otherwise than as by these outward obiects the inward sences are mooued And the Holie ghost vsing those meanes aids for our infirmities sake dooth make these motions effectuall and powerfull in what measure and at what time soeuer it pleaseth him Q 3 Which is the formall cause of the sacraments A The ordinance of God conteined in his word The formall cause of the sacraments and set out or declared by his minister according to his commandement and not the bare pronunciation of those same words nor any force lieng hid in the words themselues Q 4 What is the power of this formall cause A That the signes not in their verie nature or substance The elements are changed i◠the sacrament but that is in respect of vse onelie and not of substance but as in respect of their vse onelie should be changed that so long as the action whervnto they serue is of force or in hand For in the holy mysteries we esteeme not water as water simplie or bread as bread alone or wine as wine onelie but as certeine signes and true pledges of those thinges which the Lord though in another manner in deed as we shall by and by declare yet notwithstanding most certeinlie and trulie dooth giue vnto vs that is to say of Christ himselfe with all his giftes and graces The matter of the sacraments is two fold Q 5 What is the matter of the sacraments The outward matter are the elements A The outward matter we count the signes themselues to wit water in baptisme bread and wine in the Lords supper togither with the ceremonies ordeined by Christ as his word testifieth which also themselues doo truelie signifie matters of great weight and altogither heauenlie We haue alreadie often times said Christ and his graces are the inward matter that not that onelie is termed of vs the inward matter or matter it selfe of the sacrament whatsoeuer is deriued to vs from Christ but principallie Christ himselfe with whom it is meet that we be made one before we can draw or fetch anie thing from him Baptisme what it signifieth And in deed in baptisme there is set out vnto vs the true and verie bloud of the Lord as a lauer or founteine with which bloud being washed we are more and more ingrafted into Christ and buried with him The supper what it signifieth And in the supper the bodie and bloud of the same Christ is giuen to vs and that in seuerall signes as our true meat and true drinke into life euerlasting Christ offered in the word and in the sacraments but yet in two respects more liuelie plainlie in the sacraments There is then one inward matter of the word alone or by it selfe and the sacraments also annected thereto that is to
aunsweared as which indeede if it bee well weighed is not onelie vntrue as in respect of it selfe because though glorification implie a most excellent and heauenlie estate dooth not yet for all that destroye the essentiall properties of bodies glorified but most absurde and false also as in regard of vs. For if the glorification of Christs bodie haue remooued or taken awaye that essentiall propertie to witte that it shoulde truelie and indeede bee tied vnto a place then the like shall bee perfourmed and the same effect followe in all the glorified bodies of the faithfull after the resurrection because our Sauiour hath not onelie glorified his owne bodie for himselfe hee rising therein a mightie conquerour ouer death and hell and nowe triumphantlie ruling and raigning in the heauens in all maiestie but for our sakes also hath atchieued that greate honour wee hauing from him this assured promise in his worde Philip. 3.21 that God shal chaunge our base and vile bodies that they may bee fashioned like vnto his glorious bodie according vnto the mightie working whereby hee is able to subdue all things vnto himselfe But to saye that our bodies glorified after the rising againe of the same in the generall day of iudgement shall be euery where a rashe and vncertaine yea a beastlie and blasphemous assertion because it ascribeth that vnto vs which is proper and peculiar onelie to GOD for vnto hym alone it perteineth to fill heauen earth and all places alwayes and at one tyme as infinite places of Scripture doo plainelie prooue therefore this opinion also concerning Christes glorified bodie beeing euerie where or in infinite places at one time must of necessitie be suche likewise 4 Fourthlie it dooth directlye destroy and as it were at one blowe blotte out and deface all those Articles of our moste pretious Faith and Christian religion whych doo concerne Christes assured ascension into Heauen hys maiesticall sitting at the right hande of the Father and his glorious comming agayne from thence together wyth that infinite number of moste playne places of GODS holie woorde that out of the writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles may bee drawen for the proofe of those moste comfortable and necessarie pointes To deale wyth euerye one of these by themselues shortely and in fewe woordes I woulde faine knowe if our Sauiour Christ be here vpon earth in respect of his bodilye power and presence howe hee can iustlie as in regarde of the same hys bodye bee sayde to haue ascended into Heauen Or let them tel vs if hee remaine wyth vs in hys flesh how hee can bee truelye saide in hys manhoode to sitte at the right hande of hys Father in Heauen Or howe it can bee in religion or reason affirmed that our Sauiour shall come from Heauen with great power and glorie to iudge the quick and the dead seeing he is here on earth already The Scripture telleth vs for his ascension Actes 1.9 that in the sight and beholding of the blessed Apostles yea whiles they looked stedfastly towards heauen he was taken vp Let them shew so much for his bodilie abode vpon earth and proue it by such substantiall witnesse and wee are readie to yeelde Besides we knowe by the worde and therefore beleeue it that as he was seene go into heauen Actes 1.10 so shall he come againe but hee was seene to ascend thither bodilie and therefore so shall hee returne from thence againe I suppose they will not saye that our Sauiour had two bodies one that hee tooke wyth him an other that hee left heere for that were to make him altogether monstrous and men scrupulous none knowing in whether of them hee perfourmed the work of their redemption And to saye that that one blessed bodie of his was diuided is as absurde and erronious because it can not be so but that the whole bodie it selfe must be impaired and mangled at the least if not destroyed and so the woorke of saluation ouerthrowne To stand vpon anie naked interpretation touching the right hand of God will not serue their turne for there being nothing meant thereby in this article of our beleefe but the great glorie that is in heauen prepared for the saints and that most excellent blessednesse that belongeth to them whereof our sauior Christ was in a most full measure made by his ascention into heauen as in respect of his humanity absolute partaker what could they gaine Doo they imagine that it would heervpon insue that Christ should be euerie where and by consequent on earth but they are deceiued for why doo they not as well consider the word sitting which implieth locall residence in a place or doo they not know and beleeue that heauen it selfe is not euerie where but locall rather or will they not see that without warrant of the word yea contrarie to the same which in sundrie places opposeth heauen and earth one of them against another or sence of humane iudgement they iumble and confound them togither Reason will lead vs to this that none can be said to goe vp into the place where he is or to come downe from it when he remaineth there And though wee minde not to subiect our sauior speciallie as in respect of his eternall Godhead to humane sence yet by the same we may and ought to be ledde not to destroy the essentiall properties of his manhood Now then whether shall wee beleeue this trueth of the Lord or mens fantasies that go about to peruert our persuasions and deceiue our vnderstandings Let men of the worlde deeme what they lust this is the truth that God hath sanctified vnto vs in his word and I doo stedfastlie beleeue it in my heart and will throgh Gods goodnesse and strength alwaies confesse the same with my mouth that from the very time of Christes ascension into Heauen Acts. 3 2â— The Heauens must conteine his naturall bodie vntill the time that all things be restored that is euen to the worlds end 5 Fiftlie I say that this opinion dooth vniustlie depriue vs of all such spirituall graces and comforts for our consciences as God the father in his sonne Christ by sending the Holie ghost the third person in the deitie hath not onelie promised but in good time wil performe and bestow vpon the whole church generallie and euerie sound particular member of the same yea if we wey it well we shall finde that it is the ruine and bane of the church it selfe both in the whole bodie of it and in the seuerall parts Our sauior himselfe in most plaine and expresse terms faith Iohn 16.7 I tel you the truth it is expedient for you that I go away for if I go not away the comforter will not come vnto you but if I depart I will send him vnto you Hee that knoweth anie thing of truth is well acquainted with this that generallie all the word but most especiallie the comfortable promises conteined in the same be as it were the life
Eutyches affirmed that Christ had but one nature that is to say diuine or of God like as hee was but one person Hee was about the yeere 450 as some think His error was condemned in the Ephesine councell Nestorius deemed our sauior to be God Hee was as some suppose about the yeere 419. so we also say and affirme that Christ consisteth of two natures of which one is the Godhead and the other is the manhood By the way I will speake this thing that we are constreined to vse new speeches that we may auoid new errors or els old ones new polished and trimmed with which manie men at this daie do intangle snare themselues for as in proper place heerafter we will shew there haue risen sprong vp within our remembrance certeine men who renewing partlie the error of Eutyches partlie of Nestorius haue in stead of the word Godhead brought in diuinitie and therfore we are inforced to distinguish Godhead from diuinitie And verilie Paule spake not rashlie where hee saith that the fulnes of the godhead dwelleth in Christ where he vseth also Colloss 2.9 not the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is diuinitie but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is deitie or Godhead The Gretians do in their termes more fitlie expresse religion than the Latinists for the Gretians I know not by what meane do much better and more effectuallie expresse these things than the Latins doo as also in this argument or matter I would more gladlie willingly for plainnesse sake say and vse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is hominitas if it be lawfull to speake so in Latine or as you would say mans nature or the verie state and condition of mans nature rather than humanitie or manhood Then we perceiue vnderstand that in Christes person there are two substances to wit the Godhead and the manhood Athanasius as we say So speaketh Athanasius in that famous confession of his saieng that he was consubstantiall that is of the selfe same substance with the father and as he himselfe expoundeth it God of the substance of the father and man of the substance of his mother that is of the same substance that we are Afterwards the church vsed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synodus Chalcedonensis that is nature We confesse saith the Chalcedon synod that the sonne consisteth of two natures Neither in deed was the terme nature vnaduisedlie vsed or rashlie taken vp albeit it if we would narrowlie consider the propertie of the word the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is nature dooth not agree to the diuinitie for it is deriued or commeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is The reasons moouing the fathers to vse the word Nature to be borne or sprong vp which agreeth well to a thing created but not to God himselfe the creator Wherefore this seemeth to be the reason which led and mooued the fathers to vse this word because they reasoned and disputed against Eutyches by whome not onelie the verie natures themselues but also the proprieties of the natures were confounded and shuffled togither Now because Eutyches did mainteine and defend both these errors and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dooth beside the substance comprehend and set out the proprieties also by which proprieties that nature is defined and made to differ from others therefore it seemeth that the fathers vsed the word nature In summe let vs resolue vpon this and set it downe as an vndoubted truth that when we say Christ consisteth of two natures we mean his deitie and humanitie that is his Godhead and mans nature Let vs now come to the word Person Touching the terme person The later writers haue called that person which the former called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latine writers haue reteined and kept in vse this word person Now amongst diuines and in their writings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is substance and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is person are distinguished after this sort Substance and person distinguished vnder the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plurall number are meant the persons which are in the cōmon essence or being hauing the proprietie ioined therevnto whereby one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a person is separated or distinguished from the other and by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is substance God or the Godhead it selfe is signified and meant but the Father the sonne and the Holie spirit are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is persons Neither was it rashlie or vnaduisedlie doone that the church hath vsed the name of person Boetius which Boêtius hath defined thus saieng that it is the communicate propertie of a reasonable substāce because many did throgh very great error freelie indifferentlie vse these two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for one and the selfe same thing So the Latine writers for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or person vsed and said substance euen as the logitians are woont so to call it wherfore that this doubtfulnesse might be auoided the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 began to be vsed Now let vs speake more plainlie what we call person or meane by that name when we intreat of Christ whether that which is as it were compounded of the Godhead taking and of the flesh taken so that if it might be lawfull for vs to diuide Christ into his parts one part of his person should be his Godhead and the other part his manhood Christes manhood cannot properlie be called a person and the cause therof Not so at anie hand for Christ is not said or called a person properlie in respect of his humanitie or manhood but of his diuine nature onelie and yet that not to be separated from his manhood This is the cause or reason thereof If Christes humane nature had beene before it was taken of the diuine nature that is to say of the word there should then be an vnton of two persons and not of two natures and therfore Christ should be a person compact of two persons whervpon would insue manie absurd vnprofitable yea altogither wicked vngodlie matters whereof nowe there is neyther time nor place to speake Therefore thus it must be determined that the diuine nature tooke on it the humane nature forming and fashioning it and euen whiles it was formed and fashioned to haue taken it vnto it selfe that is to saie that Christes humane nature was neuer extant or had beeing but in the Godhead wherfore the humane nature in Christ Christ as hee is God is a person his godhead is a nature as also his manhood is not a person but the humanitie subsisteth and hath his being in this person of the word and therfore Christ is not either in imagination or in deede a double person but one person consisting of two natures For the word is
both a nature a person but the manhood is not of it selfe anie other thing than a nature which as they speake in the scholes is become a person There is but one sonne of God as there is but one Christ and is vpholden in the godhead taking it vnto it selfe so that now there are not two sonnes to wit one eternall and naturall or of the substance and being of the father and another created and adopted but that onelie eternall sonne of GOD sustaining and vpholding the nature vnited to himself so that also there are not two Christs but one onelie God and man together from the time that he knitte or vnited to himselfe the nature which he tooke Now we learne what we may call the person of Christ What the person of Christ is to wit the son of God manifested in the flesh Let vs come nowe to the word vnion for vniting is that whereby these two natures to wit the godhead or the person of the word and the humanitie or manhood are coupled together The Grecians call this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What vnion or vniting is that is the coupling or ioyning together of two thinges or more in such sort that of those many things commyng together some one certaine thing is compounded or made There are diuers sorts of vniting And there are diuers kinds of vnitings for sometimes nature is vnited with the forme or shape sometime an accident with the subiect sometime parts are vnited and knit vnto parts to establish or make a whole matter Vniting and vnion or vnitie differ much Wherefore vniting is one thing and vnitie or onenesse as a man might saye is an other thing For one or onenesse is not a number neither dooth it necessarily presuppose a number◠except in things compounded but is the beginning of a number Therefore we hold that there is in christ a vnitie or onenesse indeede of the person and an vniting of the natures These words are diligently to be marked so much the more bicause the neglect thereof bringeth forth great confusions troubles in these disputations matters Certainely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is vniting and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is vnitie or onenesse are altogither diuers matters For in the mysterie of the Trinitie there is vnitie or onenesse of the essence and a Trinitie in the persons Againe on the other side there is in Christ an vniting of the natures and an vnitie or onenesse of the person Wherefore the Fathers saide well that in the diuinitie there is not an other thing and an other thing that is to say In the godhead there is but one simple being two thinges for in the diuinitie there is but one onely and most simple essence or being but an other and an other meaning persons For the Father is one an other is the Son and the Holie-ghost is an other The reason is because when we say another we mean the person when wee saye an other thing wee meane the nature Wherefore there is not an other thing in the diuinity for so there should be multiplication or multitude of Gods In Christ on the other side there is an other thing In Christ there is two natures but not two persons and an other thing because the godhead is an other thing than the manhood and not an other and an other bicause Christ is but one subsistence or being consisting not of two persons but of mans nature being taken which hath his subsisting and being in the diuine nature Let vs nowe come to a more full and large declaration of the word vnion or vniting This kinde and maner of vnion or vniting Errors cannot be wel confūted til the personall vnion bee well knowne is called personall vppon the true definition of which personall vnion dependeth the confutation of most great errors wherewith too manie at this present are sicke and infected as we shall wel perceiue when we shall come to the matter it selfe wherefore wee must describe the personall vnion out of the verie worde of God Isaiah 7.14 Matth. 1.23 First Isaiah saieth that this our sauiour is Immanuell that is God with vs. Iohn 1.14 Iohn expounding the fulfilling of this prophecie saith that the word became or was made flesh Nowe because a thing may be said to be made manie waies that manner of being made is declared by the Apostle in the epistle to the Hebrewes Hebr. 2 1◠when hee saith that the sonne tooke the seed of Abraham Therefore the word taking openeth and declareth this saieng of Iohn And the word was made flesh and both these laid togither doo also declare how Christ is God with vs and all these things laid or ioined togither doo shew and determine what the personall vnion is They which haue not interpreted that place of Iohn Three errors by misinterpreting the words of Iohn out of the place in the epistle to the Hebrues haue fallen into diuerse errors for some haue expounded it thus the word was made flesh because the word was in sted of the soule vnto the bodie taken that is to say that as the soule ioined with the bodie shapeth or fashioneth the man so the person of the sonne tooke vnto it that bodie that by that meanes he might become Christ So that they depriued Christ of a humane soule in the sted thereof did substitute the Godhead Apollinaris taught that the sonne of God tooke onelie the bodie of a man and not a reasonable soule Tripartit hist lib. 5. cap. 44. lib. 9. cap. 3. Basil epist 74. August lib. Hier lib. 9. He was about the yeere 380. But beside that this opinion of Apollinaris is by almost infinit plaine testimonies of scripture refuted this also necessarilie foloweth that except the word had taken the soule vnto it likewise our soules should of necessitie be lost bicause that onlie shal be saued which Christ restored in his own person neither could Christ properlie haue suffered that I may let slippe many other most absurd points seeing that the soule properlie is troubled and afflicted Others haue framed and deuised for true flesh a ghost or fantasie and to that purpose haue wrested and writhen the worde similitude or likenes Roman 8.3 in these wordes of Paule God sending his own son in the similitude of sinful flesh c whom the old fathers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They had a double name Docitae or Docetae and sprung indeede as some suppose from Simon Magus who helde that Christ came not in the flesh but that hee was Christ They held as the Marcionites did that Christ suffered in a fantasie or ghost See homil 2. following If these mens opiniōs were true christ shold not be in verie deede Iesus or a Sauiour as indeed one that had not bin born or had suffered for vs. There are othersome who forsaking these errors do notwithstāding fall into others no lesse
absurde and detestable bicause as the Poet saieth while fooles auoid some vices or faults they ru◠into others Nestorius whose heresie what it was is opened before For Nestorius interpreted these wordes the word became flesh after this manner that is to saie the godhead of the Sonne of God did most plentifullie and fullie powre foorth the power and force therof into that flesh which it tooke The absurditie of the former interpretation Which interpretation if it be true Christ is not God but diuine or as you woulde say god-like or heauenlie and though he be the most excellent amongest saints and holie ones yet hee is not to be worshipped neither to be accounted as a Sauiour Whereas notwithstanding Paule attributeth vnto Christ Coloss 2. ◠not the fulnesse of the diuinitie but the fulnesse of the deitie or godhead and to be both GOD and man which is a proper title to our sauiour Christ is far different from this to be one that beareth or carrieth God So that Nestorius maketh Christ God not by the vnion of the very hypostasis or person of the word but accounts him as most diuine onely by the presence comming force or by the effusion or spreding abrode of gifts and beside that loosing or destroying Christs person he maketh him a mere or only man he placeth also the person in his flesh a manhood whereas on the other side the fleshe taken is sustained and vpholden in and by the godhead taking it Eutyches heresie confuted Eutyches falling into the contrarie error thought that by these words Three most grosse errors flowing from Eutyches his heresie the word was made or became flesh this was meant that the person or hypostasis of the word was changed into flesh and for the vniting of the natures he substituted or established the abolishing of the Godhead that is to say darknesse for light in which matter he was most foulie deceiued for beside that the Godhead is vnchangable it would follow if that were true which Eutyches affirmeth that the word ceased to be God so soone as it was made or became flesh because that that which was changed ceased to be that which it was as when Moses rod was changed into a serpent it ceased to be a rod Exod. 4.2 and began to be a serpent Aristotle euen as Aristotle teacheth that by the depriuing or taking away of one forme another is brought in But if the abolishing or taking away be denied that a mingling a mixture may be established whether it be of the natures themselues it is of the Godhead and the manhood or of the properties of either nature then will insue that which is more absurd than the former to wit that Christ is neither God nor man but a certeine third thing compacted of both as the drinke called Mulsum made of wine and honie sodden together is neither wine nor honie alone but a certaine matter compounded or made of them both and what can be imagined more woonderfull and monstrous than these errors The right interpretation of some words profitable to confute sundrie errours But all these errours are both most shortlie and also most soundlie confuted if the worde of assuming or taking bee rightlie expounded that is by the comparing or conferring of other places of the Scripture Wherefore declare at the length will some saie The personall vnion what it is what is the hypostaticall or personall vnion in Christ It is the taking of mans nature which is susteined or vpholden of the diuine nature that is to say such a taking or vniting that there proceedeth or commeth out of that vniting but one subsistence or being onelie in which subsistence that diuine nature that is to saie the person of the worde beareth swaie or ruleth I repeate this againe The hypostaticall or personall vnion is that from which reboundeth or proceedeth our hypostasies or person for the more plaine manifesting and declaring whereof the fathers haue vsed the similitude of the bodie and the soule Athanasius Athanasius who was a most constant defender and stout maintainer of this truth being chiefly the author thereof A similitude Wherefore as a certaine soule beeing ioyned to a certain bodie maketh one certaine person as Peter Paule Iohn So that eternall worde of the Father tooke vnto it that flesh of the virgine that is to saye made the same so proper vnto it selfe that from hence commeth and proceedeth that person whiche is called Christ It appeareth plainelie vnto vs out of the wordes of Christ in the tenth chapiter of the gospel according to Iohn Iohn 10.18 that we must needes consider this mystery or sectet after this sort Christ there saith I haue power to lay downe my soule or life and to take it againe For necessary is it that Christ shoulde so speake either secretlie in respect of his bodie The place of Iohn 10. expounded which cannot be vnderstood either of the or in respect of his soule or else in respect of his bodie and soule together or else distinctly and plainely in respect of his godhead Christ coulde not so saye in respect of the bodie considered by it selfe Bodie alone because the body is not said to laie downe a soule or to take it againe because so excellent an action cannot be attributed to an instrumēt that which is rather subiect to the soule or Soule alon◠But is it in respect of the soule it self considered by it selfe No indeede for then Christ shoulde rather haue saide I haue power to lay downe my selfe a soule and to take vp againe my selfe a soule Verily in the resurrection the soule is not taken vp againe but the bodie therefore these words cannot be ascribed to Christ either in respect of his bodie onelie or in respect of his soule onely or of them both togither What then is it in respect of them both together No rather necessarie is it that wee referre it to some third thing which may be saide to laie downe and to take vp his soule Wherefore Christ so spake according to his deitie and when hee saieth but of the godhead that he hath power to laie downe his life and to take it againe he dooth againe open that mysterie or secret which wee handle For the verie natures indeede so ioyned together are in suche sorte sette out that not two things but one alone is established and that without confusion yet so that the one nature beareth rule And it is meete to be marked that Christ saieth I haue power to laie downe not euery soule but mine owne Wherefore this cannot so be taken nor referred to this end that God should be the lord of all being things but he sheweth that that soule of his which he would lay down take again was otherwise his soule than other mens soules are theirs How then is it Christes soule will some men say Verily by personall vnion The scripture saith
For though the artificer or handicrafts man doo nothing but by his instrument or toole An apt similitude yet for all that the artificer and his toole are not vnited into one subsistence or being this is my meaning that that it dooth or worketh is not therefore vnited with that by which he dooth or worketh for the dooer and the instrument of doing are two seuerall and distinct things So the smith or carpenter is not vnited with his hammer or mallet Iohn 1.3 Hebr. 1.1 The father created all things through the sonne as the holie scripture witnesseth Now because the father created all things through the sonne shall it therevpon follow that the father and the sonne are personallie vnited togither No verilie For they are and that in deed distinct persons Wherfore neither in the effusion or powring out of powerfull graces nor in the communicating of their powerfull working togither can the personall vnion be well described Let that rather remaine sure that I haue said to wit that that vnion may rightlie be called personall Personall vnion what it is by which it commeth to passe that one person of two natures the natures properties of either nature remaining safe sound becommeth one subsistence or being of which two natures one that is to say the nature assumed or taken hath his being in the assuming or taking nature because if either of them did subsist or had it being of it selfe they should be two persons Moreouer before we take in hand to handle the matter it selfe we must also declare how from this personall vnion insueth that which the old writers and fathers were woont to call communicating of the properties for if both the natures themselues and the properties thereof doo remaine safe and sound then there remaineth likewise vnto either nature these proper attributes or things ascribed vnto them and therefore it should seeme that it cannot be attributed to one nature which is proper and peculiar to the other And yet the scripture so speaketh as when it saith that God suffered Acts. 20.28 yea and we our selues are taught so to speake in the apostles symbole or creed when we say I beleeue in Iesus Christ the onlie sonne of God who was conceiued borne suffered cruâ—ified buried c. Certeine rules are to be obserued for the right vnderstanding of the communicating of proprieties That we may well know and vnderstand this matter we must earne to distinguish the things attribuâ—â— to either nature If we will speake â—â—â—perlie and truelie we say that things attributed to either of the natures must most properlie and in deed be attributed to be same The first rule And this is the first rule Wherefore we affirme that Christ as in respect of his Godhead is the eternall sonne of God is infinite is euerie where is eternall is the creator of all things cannot die is inuisible c. All which things are truelie and properlie attributed tâ— that nature of the son of God which is vâ—ited to flesh Now these things are proper to his humane nature or manhood that it had a beginning that it was conceiued by the Holie ghost that it suffered and at the last rose againe Now from whence commeth this difference Verilie from this that the natures remaine safe sound and vnconfounded least if in the personall vnion they were confounded that which were spoken of ones nature should be attributed to the other And the second rule is this The second rule Certeine things are attributed to or spoken of Christ according to his person and not as in respect of his natures thaâ— is to say such thinges in deede as respâ—ct the person and are attributed to his aâ—d person which cannot yet be spoken sâ—uerallie of either of his natures as for example if I say Christ is the mediator thâ—t word mediator neither to the Godheâ—d by it selfe nor to the manhood by it selâ—e or apart from the Godhead but to that whole person of Christ for he is a mediator according to either nature and â—hese things attributed togither to Christ are personall that is to say respect his whole person which vnlesse we confesse we shall fall into the heresie of Nestorius and his partakers And yet in the meane while this such like are so the works of the whole person Leo. One sort of heretiks had both these names because they held that Christ had but one will one nature and not two wils or two natures answering to his two natures that notwithstanding either of the natures doth distinctlie bring with it his proper peculiar worke to this common deed of redemption mediation c. as Leo teacheth in that his famous and woorthie epistle which also we must know and beleeue least we should fall into that other heresie of the Monothâ—â—its or Monophysits And yet the knoâ— is not vntied nor the matâ—er dispatched Therefore we are principalie to marke yet a certeine other maner oâ— speech touching Christ which as it is tâ—ue in respect of the whole person These darcke termes are expounded afterwards by the author himselfe denâ—minated either of the concrets so it cannâ—t without great impietie be attributed 〈◊〉 either of the natures considered by themselues or in the abstract as for example when we say God to wit the word 〈◊〉 sonne redeemed the church by his bloâ—d so we doo rightlie beleeue and say thâ—t God suffered and died Acts. 20.28 which that vngodâ—ie man Nestorius denied For vnlesse God had beene he that suffered for vs his sufâ—ering could not haue brought saluation vnto vs. Wherefore we say that God was â—â—rne suffered dead and rose againe And againe on the other side we say that the sonne of man was in heauen when he spaâ—e on the earth with Nicodemus Iohn 3.13 And â—his we affirme euen by this rule following to wit The third rule that whatsoeuer words or termes are proper to either of the natures that is to say the Godhead or the manhood they may be changed in the concret but not in the abstract Abstract and what he meaneth thereby But some man will say What is it that you call the abstract We call the very forme it selfe being by thought seuereâ— from the matter an abstract as for example If I doo in my mind comprehend no some iust man or other but some iustice or righteousnesse of a man which also hath place in other predications Iusticâ— therefore or righteousnesse shall be a câ—rteine abstract that is to say a thing câ—â—sidered by it selfe and not in the subiect or particular partie wherein it is Concret and what he meaneth therby And â—he concret shall be the matter or man hiâ—selfe as a iust man to wit he that is â—ndued with that iustice or righteousnes Sâ— in Christ we consider in the abstract tâ—o natures the manhood and the Godheaâ— but in the concret we comprehend him God man Therefore let Godhead
and â—anhood be the abstracts and God and â—an the concrets And then I say that the thinges attributed to the humanitie nay be attributed to God or spoken of â—im though they cannot be attributed to the Godhead or spoken thereof and on thâ— other side I affirme that such things as be proper to the Godhead may be attributed to man though not to the manhood Wherefore this proposition is true This man is God or this The eternall word of the father is man but these are vngodlie and blasphemous the Godhead is the manhood or the manhood is the Godhead So we must say and beleeue God that is to say the sonne was borne of the virgine suffered dead c. but not the Godhead for he in deed that is God suffered but not his Godhead 1. Pet. 3 18. Therefore when Peter saith that Christ suffered he added in the flesh So Paule Rom. 1. Rom. 1.4 He was mightilie declared to be the son of God according to the spirit The cause of this predication or speech in the abstract is the verie personall vnion it selfe to wit because that that subsistence or being or that person Christ is by the figure Synecdoche That is 〈…〉 put for the whole so denominated of either of his natures Wherfore whether he be called man he is yet notwithstanding vnderstood to be God or whether he be called God he is like wise vnderstood to be man But when wee speake of the natures themselues to wit either the manhood or the Godhead by these abstracted names ther is nothing els signified or meant but the seuerall natures in and by themselues And least these maner of speeches might seeme to anie man darke and strange He preuenteth an obiection as though christian religion were conteined in certeine hiddeÌ„ mysteries and secrets far remooued from common vse vnderstanding whereas rather on the other side the Holie ghost instructing the church touching these most darke hidden matters hath kept a most grosse as you would say and common mamer of teaching Theodoretus Two similitudes to explaine the point by Theodoret doth rightlie and trulie tell vs that euen the common people are hardlie accustomed to speake anie otherwise for if Peter speake who would not rather say that Peter speaketh than say that Peters bodie or toong speaketh and yet notwithstanding neither dooth Peters minde nor his foot nor anie other member speake but his toong or mouth But because these things haue euen personallie growne vp as it were togither and are come into one subsistence or being that is truelie in the concret attributed to and spoken of the whole which if it were vttered of the parts of the whole considered seuerallie and by themselues should be falslie spoken What more By reason of this personall vnion though now it be dissolued through death Peter shal be said to haue died and sat at Rome whose soule yet notwithstanding neither â—s dead neither anie where placed vpon â—he earth So when I say the eternall â—onne of God died I consider and meane him as he is whole Christ although I denominate him after one of his natures to wit his mortall or humane nature So againe I say This man forgiueth sinnes and yet not as he is man of himselfe for it belongeth onelie to God to forgiue sinnes but because he is God and man in one person togither Marke 2.7 And this is the manner of speaking which the ancient diuines haue called the communicating of proprieties Communicating of proprieties and what it is which some do not rightlie distinguish from making common and other some disputing whether it be reall yea or no haue bewraied most grosse ignorance And this may easilie be decided and determined by the vnmoouable foundations abouesaid if we haue not a contentious spirit wherevnto if we should not yeeld doubtlesse the old sophisters and naturall philosophers if they were aliue at this day wold laugh vs to scorne Religion alloweth no falshood Diuinitie christian religion admitteth no false matter or point therefore that trope or maner of spech touching the communicating of the proprieties is altogither true in the concret that is in Christs person being weighed as if some whole thing should be considered iointlie and togither neither was it woont otherwise to be vsed in the church But in the abstract that is in the appellatiue or common name or name whereby either of the natures be called it can neuer be vsed without vngodlinesse much lesse can it be taken for true that the proprieties of the Godhead may be spoken of the manhood or the proprieties of the manhood spoken of the Godhead And these be the points which we being about to speake of the Lords supper haue thought needfull to be propounded and deliuered that therefore remaining behind may be the better vnderstood of which we will by Gods grace speake at large in the next reading or lecture THE SECOND HOMILIE or Sermon made the eight of Aprill 1574. THis is the sum of the thinges that wee spake in the former Sermon to wit The summe of the former Sermon consisting of foure particular points that 1 al the knowledge of our saluation did depend of the knowlege of Christ and that wee 2 had in Christ principally two things to be considered that is to saye such as did concerne the knowledge of his person and such also as did concerne the knowledge of his offices We haue heard 3 that vnder the name or worde of person there was meant Christ himselfe further that that person consisted of two natures that is the godhead the manhoode both of these being so vnited and ioyned together that the very natures themselues their properties also remaining sound and vnconfounded Christ by that meanes is become but one subsistence or being For wee haue alreadie affirmed the godhead so to haue assumed and taken the manhood vnto it that they are not now two persoÌ„s but two natures of which two natures the one that is to say the nature assumed or taken is sustained and vpheld or as I may so say made a persoÌ„ with the nature assuming that is to say the godhead from 4 this wee proceeded to speake of suche things as were attributed to or spoken of either of the natures or the whole person and wee affirmed that they were so to be vsed as that we alwaies preserued the vnion of the person and continuallie auoided the confounding of the natures For seeing these two natures Synodus Chalcedonensis are as the Synode of Chalcedon saieth vndiuidedlie vnseparablie and vnconfoundedlie coupled together in the personall vnion necessarie is it that either of these natures should haue their owne proper thinges attributed vnto them and therfore not communicated vnto others Wherfore some things attributed to the godhead and somthings also attributed vnto the manhood were so proper and peculiar to the Godhead and the manhoode that those that were attributed to the one
very growing vp with christ himself from which we haue affirmed the same to flowe This is the lawe of righteousnes to haue that doone to our selues that we woulde do to others euen as it were from a fountaine because afterwardes wee fetch from him both true life and also all thinges necessarie to saluation Neither would I iudge it to be refused that a like interpretation may againe be ioyned to this our manner of speaking that Christ is spirituallie in the supper least any man shoulde thinke that we separate Christs power from the very flesh of Christ or imagine vnto him a speciall bodie Q 9 What is to bee iudged of this manner of sayeng That Christ is present in the supper and is distributed also by an incomprehensible manner or after a sorte that can not bee vnderstoode A We vse this manner of speech but yet in a far other sense and meaning than some are woonte A corrupt interpretation For vnlesse peraduenture wee be deceiued they seeme to take this saying after this sort as though by a certaine diuine and heauenlie power by reason also of the personall vnion of the flesh with the godhead Christs flesh should be really at one time and together both in heauen and in earth But though we neither deny the omnipotencie of GOD neither the true coniunction of the thing A true interpretation with the signes and of the faithfull with Christ himselfe we do yet notwithstanding by reason of the truth of Christs flesh and his ascension likewise plainly affirme that the body of Christ is nowe verily absent from the world Actes 3.21 shal remaine absent vntill he come to iudge the quick and the dead Neuertheles we confes this mysterie of god to be incompreheÌ„sible beyond our vnderstanding Faith ioyneth things together that be as farre asunder as heauen and earth whereby it falleth out that that which is and remaineth in heauen not els-where that so we may draw life and saluation from him who is trulie offered vnto vs and in deede communicated of vs. For albeit wee knowe first that the Holie-ghost that is to say gods power doth worke this The power of the spirite and of the force of faith and then that as in regarde of our selues all this is to be receiued of vs by the onelye instrument or meane of faith yet the power of the spirit and the force of faith doo exceede all our vnderstanding whereby it commeth to passe also that euen this whole action is verie properly called a mysterie or secret as the Greeks vsed to terme it Q 10 How is the matter or thing of the Sacrament communicated or partaken of vs A The matter of the Sacrament that is to say Christ himselfe is receiued of vs by a spirituall manner thorow faith And wee call that a Spirituall manner of receiuing or communicating Spirituall receiuing what it is not onelie in which Christ his spirite is communicated with vs but also that which is not earthlie or naturall but dependeth of the incomprehensible power of the Holie-ghost by which most straight bond indeede the members are more and more ioyned wyth their head For we exclude and shutte out all powring abroade and mingling of substaunces and also all fitnesse of ioyning together of naturall partes and yet can holde and mainâ—â—ine a true growing vppe of the faithfull with Christ which can not bee hindered by anie distaunce of places for our faith cleaueth vnto the worde of God who indeede performeth that which he promiseth Q 11 In what sense are these speeches To eate the Lords body and to drinke his bloud and other such like to be admitted A We say Eating and drinking referred to Christs bodie and bloud must be figuratiuelie vnderstoode that these manner of speeches do also beloÌ„g to that communicating or partaking whereby wee laye holde of Christ euen in the simple word or in the worde it selfe alone yea wee affirme that they are verye effectuall and significant but so that the wordes of eating and drinking when they are spoken of the taking of the body and bloud of Christ are no lesse figuratiuely to be vnderstoode than if a man should attribute to faith a mouth and teeth Two causes why the holie-ghost vseth borrowed speeches The first Now we alleadge two chiefe causes why the holy-ghost speaketh after that manner one cause is that hee may shew how strait our coniunction with christ is by the meanes of faith for nothing more groweth vp and increaseth with vs than meate and drinke without which no man caâ—â—â—asse ouer his time or spend this life â—he other cause which also properly hath place in the Sacraments is The second that by this way and meanes it may be declared how true the Lorde is in deliuering the matter it selfe which he promiseth by signes as it were by certaine pledges giuen for thereby it commeth to passe that though the onely signes are taken wyth the hand and receiued wyth the mouth yet that also which beside the signes is truely offered and by faith onely spiritually receiued is said to be taken eaten drunken c And for this cause we acknowledge Why we vse not the fathers phrases in the â—upper that the holie Fathers haue vsed manie other forms of speaking not vnlike these which wee notwithstanding will not at this day heedelesly vse but suppose rather that the same are to be mitigated by some profitable and fitte interpretations and the rather bicause of many errors spread abrode by Sathan and many controuersies also by this occasion stirred vp in the church of God Q 12 How are these wordes This is my bodie and this is my bloud to bee expounded A Euen after this maner This The wordes of the institution expounded particularlie and as it were one after an other that is to say this bread this wine is to wit sacramentally for not whatsoeuer is anie thing is by one onely way a thing Nowe the question is heere concerning the Sacraments And wee plainly say sacramentally bicause the Lorde did indeede offer not bare breadâ— and wine only but the true signes of his bodie and bloud neither onely these signes but besides them also his body and bloud to be enioyed possessed of vs euen into euerlasting life which life euerlasting also we drawe from him being communicated vnto vs. Luke 22.19 20. My body and my bloud that is not an imagined bodie or fained bloud but that selfe-same body which was giueÌ„ for vs and that self-same bloud whiche was shead for vs of both which wee are indeede by faith made partakers as the signes doo truely witnes Q 13 What do the wicked or vnbeleeâ—ers receiue The institution of the supper dependeth vpon Gods trueth A We hold and teach that by an agreeing iudgement and holy consent that the institution of the sacrament doth hang vpon the trueth of God therefore that in the
and soule of the church it selfe The veritie and certeintie wherof though it lie in Christ 1. Cor. 1.20 because in him al Gods promises are yea and amen yet the particular applications of the same to our owne harts must come from the powerfull working of the holie spirit But how shall we come to the effectuall feeling of these if the force of the spirit be not shed abrode into our hearts or how can the holie spirit be called the pledge of Gods promises Ephes 1.13 and the earnest penie of our adoption and saluation if that promise of our sauior Christ be not accomplished or how can we find comfort against the feare of death or peace in our consciences against the sight of sinne and iudgement due vnto vs for the same without this Of a truth the remembrance of our dissolution and departure hense this being remooued shall be greeuous and the horrour of hell the iust punishment of our iniquitie will be readie euery houre to ouerwhelme vs. Wee need not stand long vpon this point either this must be true that wee haue the Holie ghost in most abundant measure by the bodilie absence of our sauior Christ giuen to the church as before is said and proued and so a spirituall supplie bestowed vpon vs for a bodiely want that being more excellent than this because the apostle saith that hensefoorth we know no man after the flesh 2. Corinth 5.16 yea though we had knowne Christ after the flesh yet now henseforth know we him no more or else if Christ be heere bodilie present the Holy ghost is not yet come nor the apostles indued with miraculous graces nor the fulnesse of the Gentils gathered in nor the comfort and peace of the church prouided for all which are fearefull to thinke vpon but much more horrible to feele and in deed are quite cleane contrarie to the truth of the word and if we had no more but onlie the second chapter of the Acts of the apostles it were sufficient to ouerthrow the same 6 Sixtlie this assertion dooth not onelie closelie but openlie accuse Christ himselfe of manifest lieng vntrueth who as both the prophets and apostles doo beare witnesse did no sinne Isaiah 53.9 1. Peter 2.22 neither was there any guile found in his mouth He himselfe hath plainlie told vs The poore ye haue alwaies with you Marke 14.7 and when yee will ye may doo them good but me yee shall not haue alwaies And againe elswhere Iohn 14.2 I go to prepare a place for you If this be not blasphemie to doo what we can to taint him with falshood that is both truth it selfe and the author of all truth I know not what is blasphemie And yet this iniquitie staieth not heere for it depriueth vs first of the comfort of the forgiuenesse of sinnes because if our sauiour haue beene tainted with anie manner of iniquitie though neuer so small he cannot be a price and ransome for sin because he that must recommit sinners to God must of necessitie be free from transgression Secondlie it dooth as it were violentlie take and pull from vs the hope that we haue of the heauenlie inheritance For why hath our sauior Christ sundred himselfe for a space from vs as in respect of his bodilie presence not yet leauing vs comfortlesse for he hath giuen vs his spirit to supplie as it were his absence but to the end that we might heereafter in time to come most comfortablie enioye him bothe in bodie and soule for euermore Dooth not hee himselfe say Iohn 16.16 Yet a little while and yee shall not see me and againe a little while and ye shall see me for I go to my father And in another place Though I go to prepare a place for you Iohn 14 3. yet will I come againe and receiue you vnto my selfe that where I am there may yee be also And yet all this notwithstanding superstitious and brainesicke people dare with open mouth affirme that we haue him continuallie with vs here vpon earth and that not in respect of his spirituall power and presence onelie wherevnto we our selues most gladlie yeeld as a verie principall comfort vnto vs in the daies of all our distresses because in that respect as God eternall with his father we beleeue that he filleth all places both in heauen and in earth and is said to be with the beleeuers euen vnto the end of the world Matth. â—3 20 but as in respect of his corporall and bodilie presence also than the which nothing vndoubtedlie can be more false and absurd as hath beene sufficientlie shewed alreadie and plainelie prooued before Now hauing waded thus farre in the trueth and certeinetie of the matter it selfe wee might safelie shut vp and conclude this point but that there remaine sundrie of the aduersaries obiections to be answered wherin I cannot but let the godlie reader vnderstand that I minde not to answer either all of them or manie of them because the most in trueth be friuolous and vaine and it would be ouer tedious to wade into such idle and vnprofitable matter Three there are in deede which because they seeme to be of speciall strength and ordinarie vse I can not let passe Two of them are taken from the words of the text of holie scripture and the third from the omnipotencie and almightie power of our sauiour Christ which though they be common things in deed and such as might as easilie be reiected as obiected because the controuersie is not touching the plaine wordes of the text and the almightie power of Christ as God for be it far from vs to be so absurd as to draw things of such euidency and excellencie into question but we striue rather as for the true sence naturall meaning of the wordes so for the veritie of Christes person and the essentiall properties of either his distincted natures yet we cannot but both for the strengthening of them that be weake and ignorant in the same as also for the discharge of our conscience before God and man but in a word or two as it were make a short but withal a sound sufficient and true answer I hope to euery one of these three seuerallie and by themselues 1 The first place obiected is these words of our sauiour in the gospell after Iohn Except ye eat the flesh of the sonne of man Iohn 6.13 and drinke his bloud ye haue no life in you Weerevnto I answer first that neither these words neither the rest of the chapter can in anie probabilitie or shew of reason properlie be vnderstood of the Lords supper And if we had no more for it but this yet were this sufficient because at that time the supper it selfe was not instituted and ordeined but a long while after as in the euangelists writings dooth plainelie appeare but must rather be referred to our spirituall communicating or partaking with Christ by the meanes of a liuelie
and stedfast faith apprehending the word generallie and applieng particularlie vnto our selues all the gracious and sweet promises that the Lord hath made and offered vnto vs therein which may plainelie appeare to be most true partlie because he persisteth by a continuall thread of speech as it were in the metaphor of bread or meat mentioned before vers 26.27 vsing also for that purpose as euerie man may easilie perceiue sundrie borrowed speeches agreeing well to the circumstance of the matter wherein he was to deale which he would not or needed not to haue doone if he had meane so groslie or carnallie as these men fantasie and partlie because he speaketh so often not of eating onelie but also of beleeuing as verse 35.40 which can not be properlie attributed to anie outward or materiall thing such as the bodie and flesh of Christ then was and is but to inward and spirituall matters which as it may be gathered by sundrie places of holie scripture Rom. 8.24 the apostle affirming that hope that is seene is no hope for how can a man hope for that which hee seeth 2. Cor. 5.7 and that we walke by faith and not by sight Hebr. 11.1 yea and that faith it selfe is the ground of things which are hoped for and the euidence of thinges which are not seene so also may it be prooued euen by the verie nature of faith which being a spirituall and inward qualitie giuen vs of God Philip. 1.29 Iohn 4.24 who is nothing else but spirit trueth and wrought in vs by spirituall meanes as the word sacraments outwardlie and the Holie ghost inwardly in our hearts must also of necessitie be directed to spirituall inward things But let vs for reasoning sake grant that the place were to be vnderstood of the holie supper yet doth it not for all that establish anie grosse and carnall eating of the naturall flesh or bodie of our sauiour Christ because if that were so then had not our sauiour sufficientlie answered the Capernatts or Iewes of Capernaum who vainelie dreaming and doting of such a grosse and carnall manducation or eating Iohn 6.52 said How can this man giue vs his flesh meaning thereby that it was altogither impossible and vnnaturall both in respect of himselfe and in regard of them also because it was seldome or neuer heard of except it were amongst the Anthropophagi that men did willinglie giue their flesh to be food vnto others or that others did eat the same but had rather yeelded vnto them in that their conceipt which besides that it conteineth an errour in religion and nature as before hath beene shewed is quite and cleane contrarie to the purpose of Christ in that place and closelie accuseth him as though either in ignorance he could not or in an euill minde he would not haue instructed them in their blindnesse all which are horrible to heare blasphemous to speake and beastlie to thinke Besides if that corrupt sence should be allowed marke what a Sea of absurdities woulde insue therevpon As first in what a miserable estate shoulde wee leaue the holie Fathers of the olde couenaunts who were longe before the time of Christes taking our flesh vpon him therefore could not eat it and so by consequent could not be saued Matth. 8.11 And yet our sauiour in plaine termes affirmeth that they were in the kingdome of heauen And S. Paule also saith 1. Cor. 20.3.4 that they did all eat the same spirituall meat that wee doo and did all drinke the same spirituall drinke that we doo which word spirituall would be marked as directlie opposite to grosse carnall or bodilie eating plainelie also proouing that betwixt their sacraments and ours there was no difference at all as in respect of substance and effect sauing only that theirs were in time before ours euen as they themselues also were and instituted in other outward elements than ours Secondlie in what a miserable case condition should we put poore infants speciallie of the beleeuers if they should be taken away by death before that cōming to the yeers of discretion they could communicat or partake in that holie sacrament One of these two grosse absurdities must needs follow therevpon yea be granted also vnlesse men wil be stifnecked in error to wit either that infants must haue the holie communion ministred vnto them which thing in deed Augustine did once fantasticallie imagine as appeareth by manie places of his works notwithstanding all that papists say to cleere him therof But S. Paule is flatlie against it who will haue none admitted thereto 1. Corinth 11.28 2. Corinth 13. but such as can examine trie themselues whether they be in the faith or no which infants cannot doo as all men may plainlie perceiue not onlie because they want reason as in the practise therof but speciallie because they be void of faith which ordinarilie commonlie is bestowed vpon the faithfull Rom. 10.17 by hearing the woord preached as the apostle saith or els that with out it they are all condēned already which is verie absurd beastlie not onlie because it tieth grace yea the grace of saluation to the sacrament by the worke wrought than the which what can be more vnresonable for so good and bad hauing the outward signe shall also haue the thing it selfe to wit eternall life but also because it abolisheth as Gods eternall election whereby he hath chosen those that be his in Christ to life euerlasting before the foundations of the world were laied so his gratious and continuall couenant made to vs that he will be a louing God and mercifull father to vs and to our seed for euer Genesis 17.7 by which couenant also we are assured euen of his good will and fauor towards vs in Christ By all this we may see that euen for the auoiding of these absurdities and manie such like the place of the sixt of Iohn can at no hand he vnderstood either of the sacrament or of the carnall eating of Christes bodie in the same or of anie such grosse thing whatsoeuer but of the apprehension or laieng holde of him togither with the particular application of him to our selues by the hand or instrument of faith who euen for that purpose is propounded and set foorth vnto vs by the ministerie of his word and Gospell or if the aduersaries will needs haue it so offered vnto vs in the vse of the supper because that though the thinges bee diuerse representing him vnto vs as the word and sacraments yet there is in that respect but one meane giuen vs to take holde of him by euen as he himselfe is but one Christ that in these sundrie things is exhibited vnto vs and that is that great grace and gift of faith which we must vse in in the word and sacraments as men doo in the apprehending of Christes righteousnesse which righteousnesse of his though it be not essentiallie dwelling in vs yet it
such odde deuises and that his â—ustice shall be answered with the works â—f our owne inuention causing vs also â—o thinke that sinne is no heinous thing â—hat can be expiated and doone away by â—he offering vp a poore thinne cake as â—hough that spirituall and innumerable offenses might be taken away with bodiâ—ie exercises and that not of a holie and innocent man but manie times of one of the woorst amongst the people but vtterlie also euacuat by that means and make of no force the eternall preesthood and sacrifice of our sauiour Christ which consisteth speciallie in this that he hath once for all vpon the altar of the crosse offered vp himselfe vnto God the father a full and sufficient sacrifice for the sinnes of the people as the apostle plainelie prooueth in manie places of his Epistle to the Hebrues But no maruell that they should annihilat and deface Christes offices which destroy his natures and by consequent his whole person also as these men doo by confounding the proprieties of either nature as hath beene before declared yea and ouerthrow all their own religion for if the sacrifice of the massâ— as they call it will doo away all sinne what neede wee regard praier to deadâ— saints auricular confession the popes supremacie and a thousand more such abhominations seeing that by setting a soulâ— preest on worke they may haue full forgiuenes and why should we esteeme pardons indulgences and such like trash and trumperie nay rather why should they not liue as they lust not onlie as epicures but as brute beasts seeing he may be assured for mony that that which another performeth for him shall be auailable both to bodie and soule and that to eternall saluation but fie vpon all such beastlie blasphemous dotages 2 Secondlie there is but a little lesse leauen in that matter that they hold of vncomitancie by which they haue not onelie spoiled the people of the vse of the cuppe which both by Christes owne institution by his expresse commandement saieng Drinke ye all of this doth in all truth and vprightnes belong vnto them and by consequent also robbed them of the frutes effects of his bloud as the forgiuenesse of their sinnes and their full reconcilement to almightie God but also accused our â—auior Christ of follie and rashnesse instiâ—uting more signes in the sacrament of his supper than he needed And all this they â—aue done vnder this shadow that because â—o bodie is without bloud and they haue â—efore presupposing that the bread is turâ—ed into the bodie as in deed if men will â—resuppose either vnpossible or vntrue â—hings euerie thing will follow of it eaâ—en the bodie therefore must it needs folâ—ow that they haue drunke also his bloud Tell vs I pray you why might not we as â—ell say respecting alwaies the sacrameÌ„t â—hat when men haue drunke of the cuppe â—hey haue eaten his flesh for if the parâ—aking of the one include the other or if â—hole Christ as they say be in euery part â—f the visible elements then why doo not â—en receiuing the wine as well receiue â—e bodie as the bloud or why may not we â—y that eating is drinking or drinking is â—ting or why doo not they themselues â—minister it in the element of wine oueâ—e as well as in the bread alone or why â—ay not we euen beating them with their owne assertions of an vnbloudie sacrifice and of the reall presence of Christes naturall bodie in the same say and affirme that the bodie may be there without the bloud or the bloud without the bodie for if the sacrifice conteine the naturall and fleshiâ— bodie of our sauior and yet of it selfe it is vnbloudie we see no reason why we may not saflie conclude that the bodie is therâ— without bloud But I know not whetheâ— heerin I should blame theÌ„ for their beastlinesse or reprooue them for their pride that dare thus presumptuouslie alter thâ— Lords very ordinance and institution 3 Thirdlie their adoration is as corrupâ— and filthie whilest they cause men tâ—â— commit grosse and palpable idolatrie iâ— falling downe before a peece of bread what doo I say I know not whether I may call it by that name or no for it maâ— be disputed of whether their masse caâ—â— be bread and worshipping a wafer cake the worke of mens hands And if it werâ— a foule fault in the Gentils to turne thâ— glorie of the incorruptible God intâ— the similitude of the image of a coâ—ruptible man Rom. 1.23 and of birds and four footed beasts and of creeping thinge all which notwithstanding had life in theÌ„ and were in deed the creatures of GOD what must it be in the papists who transforme his wonderfull maiesty into a mustie or whory cake which though it be kept but a small while is yet notwithstanding subiect to putrifaction and wormes But suppose it were Christes body as they say it is yet I affirme that they may not adore Christes bodie alone yea and that they cannot worship the same of it selfe without horrible idolatrie wherof also the reason is plaine and euident namelie because it is a creature to which it is not lawfull to giue that honor that is due vnto the creator alone because he being ielous ouer his owne glory will not haue it giuen to anie other For though it be true that Christ as he is god is to be worshipped as his father yea Christ God man in one person is to be adored yet we cannot without great sin and greeuous offense against God his word worship the humanity or manhood of our sauior Christ onlie And if they will say as I my selfe haue heard some of theÌ„ ignorantly affirme that if Christ God man may be worshipped therefore christ also as he is maÌ„ may be worshipped I answer that besides it is a fallacie or deceit in reasoning called in schooles Fallacia diuisionis it is a flat contrarie to the truth of christian religion which teacheth vs that many things may be spoken of the person of our sauior Christ which can not rightlie or truelie be said of either nature and the reason is because as the vnitie of the person must be maineteined vpheld so must godlie men haue an especiall regard that they confound not the seuerall proprieties of either nature To make this plaine by a point or two A man may saflie say that Christ God and man in one person was crucified on the crosse died for our sinnes whereof also this is the verie true and sufficient reason because in his whole person he performed the worke of our redemption and not in either of the natures alone or by it selfe but nowe if heerevpon a man should say and conclude therfore Christ God was crucified for our sinnes besides that he should vtter an errour or heresie in christian religion hee should speake blasphemie against God whose nature as we haue said heertofore is altogither impossible Likewise a man may