Tomline on Article II: Of the Word or Son of God, which was made very Man

The second person m the Holy Trinity is dis- tinguished by the name of the Son, that is, *^ the Son of God.” It is sometimes said that the phrase ” Son of God,” admits of various sig- nifications, and is used metaphorically in Scrip- ture; but this observation cannot affect the

H 2 argument

100 ExposUion of the [paet iif.

argument which may be derived from it con- cerning our Saviour, as it cannot be denied that the Jews, in his time, affixed to this expression a determinate and particular meaning applicable only to the Divine nature, and in this sense we shall find it was claimed by Christ, and under- stood to be so both by his disciples and by his enemies : ” Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he had not only broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his (proper) Father, making himself equal with God (a)’\ Upon our Lord’s declaring to the Jews, ” I and my Father are one,” they took up stones to stone him, saying, ” For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man, makest thyself God;” and our Lord’s answer proves this to be only an equiva- lent expression with the assertion that he was the Son of God, ” Say ye, thou blasphemes t, because I said, I nm the Son of God (b)}’” But the con- demnation of our Lord, immediately upon his imswcr to the direct question of the high priest, may alone be considered as conclusive: ” And the high j)riest said to Jesus, I adjure thee by the living (Jod (the judicial form of administering

an

[…]

(li) John, c. 10. V. 30. 33.36.

[…]

an oath according to the Jewish law) that thou teB me whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said : nevertheless I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying. He hath spoken blasphemy, what further need have we of witnesses ? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy, what think ye ? They answered and said. He is guilty of death (c).” St. Luke’s account of this examination places the argument in a still stronger point of view : he mentions two distinct questions as having been put to Jesus in the council, first, ” Art thou the Christ?” and upon our Saviour’s answering, ’* if I tell you, ye will not believe,” and so- lemnly declaring, ” Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of the power of God ;” they further ask, secondly, ” Art thou then the Son of God ?” And when ” he said, unto them, Ye say that I am (d)” they said, ” What need we any further witness? for we

ourselves

(e) Matt. c. 26. V. 63—66.

(d) This, as well as the expression ” thou hast said,” in the parallel passage just now quoted from St. Matthew, was an Eastern mode of answering in the affirmative. Vide Mark, c. 14. v. 62.

H 3

100 HxposUion of the [paet iif.^

argument which may be derived from it con- cerning our Saviour, as it cannot be denied that the Jews, in his time, affixed to this expression a determinate and particular meaning applicable only to the Divine nature, and in this sense we shall find it was claimed by Christ, and under- stood to be so both by his disciples and by his enemies : ” Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he had not only broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his (proper) Father, making himself equal with God (a)’\ Upon our Lord’s declaring to the Jews, ” I and my Father are one,” they took up stones to stone him, saying, ” For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man, makest thyself God;” and our Lord’s answer proves this to be only an equiva- lent expression with the assertion that he was the Son of God, ” Say ye, thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God (b)}’^ But the con- demnation of our Lord, immediately upon his answer to the direct question of the high priest, may alone be considered £is conclusive: ” And the high priest said to Jesus, I adjure thee by the living God (the judicial form of administering

an

[…]

(b) John, c. 10. y. 30. 33.36.

A RT. I r.] Thirty-nine Articles. i o i

an oath according to the Jewish law) that thou teB me whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said : nevertheless I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy, what further need have we of witnesses ? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy, what think ye ? They answered and said, He is guilty of death (c)” St. Luke’s account of this examination places tlie argument in a still stronger point of view : he mentions two distinct questions as having been put to Jesus in the council, first, ” Art thou the Christ?” and upon our Saviour’s answering, *^ if I tell you, ye will not believe,” and so- lemnly declaring, ” Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of the power of God ;” they further ask, secondly, ” Art thou then the Son of God ?” And when ” he said, unto them, Ye say that I am (d)^” they said, ” What need we any further witness? for we

ourselves

(e) Matt. c. 26. V. 63—66.

(d) This, as well as the expression ” thou hast said,” in the parallel passage just now quoted from St. Matthew, was an Eastern mode of answering in the affirmative. Vide Mark, c. 14. v. 62.

H 3

103 EayMsition of the [part hi.

ourselves have heard of his own mouth (e) And when Pilate would have released Jesus, de- daring, ’ he found no fault in him/’ the Jews answered him, ” We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God (f) Thus it appears that our LonL suffered death, according to the Jewish law, as a blasphemer because avowing himself to be the Son of God 9 he was clearly imderstood to repre- sent himself as equal with God (g). This cir- cumstance must, I think, be allowed as alone sufficient to prove that the Jews undstood the title of ” Son of God,” in the sen§c of absolute divinity; but it does not prove that they ex- pected the Messiah to be the Son of God. Hub was the opinion of but those few, who like Simeon and Anna, waited for the promises of God, and adhered to the true and original sense of the Scriptures, unadulterated by the comments and glosses of the scribes, which had produced the general expectation of a tem- poral kingdom under a temporal prince; and

we

(e) Luke, c. 22. v. 67. 69 — 71.

(f) John, c. 19, V. 6 and 7.

(g) It should be observed, that the Jews never thought of punishing with death those imposton who pretended to be the Christ. This claim did not include the crime of blasphemy, according to their idea of the Messiah, any more than the pretensions to be a prophet did.

ART. 11.3 Thirty-mne Ariicks. 105

yft find out Lord and his Apostles constantly appealing to the Scriptuits, as testifying to the truth of thdlr assertions respecting his office and dignity, and combating the common bpinion concerning the Christ on many occasions : ” How say the scribes, that Christ is the Son of David ? for David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I nlake diine enemies thy ifootstool; Divid therefore himself calleth him Lord ; tod whence is he then his son (h) ?” — And when the Jews askM him, ” Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead; and the prophets, which are dead; whomtnakest thou thyself? he ahsieted, Verily, veHfy, t say tmtb you, before Abraham was, I ttm. Then took they up stones to cast at him (ij,” fot they clearly understood tiiis exrtesioh as aieeiiig with the sense in which he had cdiM God his Father.

And we find the converts to the religion of Christ expressty declaiihg thti^ faith in terms, yklddi not tiiAy directly A^knOtiffedged their belief, Aat Jesus ” wds the Cfcrist,” but that he was also ” the Son of God.” Nathaniel, that true Israelite, confessed Jesus to be flie Messiah in these words : ” Rabbi, thou art the Son of God,

thou

fh) Mark, c. 12. v. 35, 36, and 37.- (i) John, c. 8, v. 53. 58, and 59. •

H 4

104 Exposition of the [part iii*

thou art the King of Israel (k)” — And Martha said, I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God f/;.”— ” Then they who were in the ship,” who had seen him walk upon the water and calm the storm, came and wor- shipped him, saying, of a truth thou art the Son of God (m).’ — ” Jesus asked his disciples, saying. Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am ? And they said. Some say that thou art John the Baptist ; some, Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them. But whom say ye that I am ?And Simon Peter answered and said. Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona ; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church f n.”— John the Baptist ” bare record that this is the Son of God,” having received this knowledge by a special revelation (o). — And God himself l)ore witness to thc truth of Christ’s pretensions

by

(k) John, c. 1. v. 49, (I) John, c. 11. V. 27. (m) Matt. c. 14. V. 33. (n) Matt. c. 16. V. 13 — 18. (0) John, c. 1 . V. 33 and 34.

ART. II.] Thirty-nine Asiicles. I05

by a voice from heaven, at the time of his baptism in the river, and when he was trans- figured upon the mount in the presence of three of his apostles, saying, ” This is my bdoved Son : hear him (p). To these quotations from the Gospeb I shall add one from the Acts : When Philip found the Ethiopian eunuch study- ing the prophecies of Isaiah, anxious but unable to understand them, ^’ he b^n at the same Scripture, (chap. 53d) and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water; and the eunuch said, See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized? and Philip said. If thou be- lievest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God(q)” He does not merely pro- fess his faith in Jesus (of whom he probably had never before heard) as a teacher sent from God, or as the Christ expected by the Jews ; but he declares his belief that Jesus Christ, the circum- stances of whose life and resurrection Philip had related, is the Son of God^ the Messiah of whom the prophets wrote, and whom Isaiah in parti- cular had described in terms appropriate to God alone. And when we reflect farther, that this

eunuch

(f) Matt. c. 3. V. 17. Luke^ c. 9* v. 35. f y> Acts^ c. 8. T. 36, 8cc.

[…]

etttauch wis k Jewish pttisdyte, ’* going to wor- ship hi Jerusalem/* we cannot but condudl that this confession of faith contained an ac- knowledgment of die divinity of Christ, sincfe it tA!& been proved that the Jews actually cbn- dtened our Lord to death for assuming the title of San of Godj which they imagined to be blas- phemy. Now, if it be considered that many of this first converts to the Gospel were Jews, who, hen their ttiinds Were opened, by feither natural 6r sUpertiatural means, to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, would tmdferstand from the ancient Scriptures that the Messiah tas to be the Son of God, the belief of the early Christians in the divinity of Christ can hardly be questioned. It resulted immediately from the agreertieiit of his claims (claims for which he was crucified by their blinded nation) and of the circumstances of his Hfe, with the prdJjhecieS conteftiinff hiiti; and accordingly fe find little dispute in thfe first cen- tury concemiiig the dibinity df Christ; it was hii humanity that was chiefly denied (r).

It

[…]

« t’onturv

[…]

, It may further be observed, that ihe relation of Father and Son, the names by which the first and second persons in the Holy Trinity are dis- tinguished, is not only consistent with, but seems to imply, sameness of nature, ” ut ^rsescripait

ipsa

century. Alike contemned by Jews and Christians they formed themselves into a sect, and were called Ebioniteg. Ebion signifies a beggar, or poor, and whether that name was given them for trusting ** to the beggarly elements of the law,” or from a person of that name, is not certainly known. These men ** who called themselves Christians,” says Origen, ” denied the divinity of Christ, and the doctrine of the atonement ” According to Epiphanius thy r jected the authority of all Scripture, except the Pen- tateuch, and received only a spurious Hebrew Gospel, altered from St. Matthew’s to suit theif opinions. \n the fii*st century the Gnostic heresies were the most prevalent; but both those who maintained the simple divinity, and those who maintained the simple hu- manity of Christ, denied the doctrine of the atone- ment, which was evidently considered by the Apostles as the fundamental principle of the Christian religion. St. John; therefore, in many passages of his writings, lays great stress upon the humanity of Christ, from zeal to prove the reaUty of his sufferings and the cer- tainty of the atonement; but at the same time we find that he cautiously guards against the consequences to which these passages might have led by asserting the divinity of Christ in more express trms than are to be found in any the preceding Gospels.

108 Ejcposition of the [part iir.

ipsa natura hominem credendum lesse qui » homine fit, ita eadem natura praescribit et Deum credendum esse, qui ex Deo fit (s).^’

The angel addressed the Virgin Mary in these words : ” The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee : therefore also, that holy thing which shall be bom of thee shall be called the Son of God (ty — ” And the reason,” says bishop Pearson, ” is clear, because that the Holy Ghost is God ; for, were he any creature, and not God himself, by whom our Saviour was thus bom of a virgin, he must have been the son of a creature, not of God (u)”

Christ is also emphatically called ” the Son ” only, in many passages of Scripture: ” No man knoweth the Son, but the Father […] He that believeth in the Son hath everlasting life (y).^ — He is likewise called ” the only begotten Son of […] God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whpsoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life (zy

St. John, in the beginning of his Gospel, speaks

of

(s) Novat. cap. ii. (t) Luke, c. i. v. 35.

(u) Att. 2. (x) Matt. c. 11. v. 27.

(y) John, c. 3. v. 36. (zj John, c. 3. ▼. i&.

[…]

of Christ under the name of ” the WcMrd […] In the be^nning iVas the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made, that was made. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among men ; and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth,” The expres- sion, ” In the beginning was the Word,” must mean that the Word existed from all eternity^

that

(a) This title is not taken, as some have imagined, either from Plato or from Philo, (with whose writings there is no sufficient reason to think that the Evange- lists were acquainted) but from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and from the subsequent style of the ancient Jews in conformity thereto. Vide Parkhurst’s Lexicon, under the word Aeyo(. The divine person, who has accomplished the salvation of mankind, is called the Word, and the Word of God, not only because God at first created, and still governs, all things by him ; but because as men discover their sentiments and designs to one another by the intervention of words, speech, or discourse, so God by his Son discovers his gracious designs in the fullest and clearest manner to men. All the various manifestations which he makes of himself, whether in the works of creation, provi- dence, or redemption, all the revelations he has been pleased to give of his will, are conveyed to us through him, and therefore he is by way of eminence fitly styled the Word of God. Vide Macknight in loc.

[…]

that 16, Tke Word of the Father wa^

BUGOTTBN FROM EVERLASTING OF THE Fa-”

THER, since St. John is referrii to times not onfy prior to the birth of Christ, but also to the eoeation of die world (b). — ” And the Word was with God,” that is, the Word was united with the Father, or was of one substance withi T*HE Father. — ” I and my Father are onefc,” wts a declaration of Christ himself recorded by this same Evangelist: ” And the Word was God,” or, THE very and eternal god. — ” The same was in the beginning with God,” that is, the Word was united with the Father from all eternity. — ” All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made tjiat waa made (dy — This proves that by the Word St. John means Christ (e), since the creation of the world is in Scripture repeatedly attributed tx Christ (f) J and consequently the Word being made flesh was Jesus Christ. It is also a itirther

proof

nai afwH^v^ ilpott, Chiys. Hom. 2. in Joan.

(c) John, c. 10. V. 30.

(d) The creation is also attributed to the Word of God in the following passage, 2 Pet. c.3. v. 5.

(e) St. John also calls Christ the Word of God^ Rev, c. 19. V. 13.

(f) Heb. c. 1. V. 2 and lo. i Cor. c. 8. v. 6» Col. c« 1. V. 16. Eph. c. 3. V. 9.

iRT. n.] Tbiinty-mne Articles. m

[…]

What has been already sta conceiwng the ;ense in which we ai;e to understand the title of he Son of God, and the assertion of St John n the beginning of his Qospel concerning the ord, may be considered as a sicient illustra- ion and proof of the fonder part of this article ; ’ The Son, which is the Wobp of the Fa- thfir, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of

NE SUB&TANCE WITH THE FaTIJER.” But aS

he divinity of our Saviour is the main point upon vhich this article rests, and as it is the prindpal ;ause of separJion to many who dissent from our tablished religion, it may be right to adduce some other passages of Scripture in support of this doctrine, and also to state some testimonies [f the early opinipis of Christians upon this subject

St Paul exhorts the I^hilippians to the prac- tice of humility from the example of Christ

Jesus, (g) Heb. c. 3. V.5.

11^ Exposition of the [pakt uu

Jesus, ” who, being in the form of God, thou^t .it not robbery to be equal with God ; but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men ; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross ; wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (h)” — In this text the divinity of Christ, both before his incarnation and after his ascension, is clearly pointed out : ” Being in the form of God,” signifies being really God, just as, ” took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men,” signifies that he was reaUy a man in a low and mean condi- tion: and the following words, ” thought it not robbery to. be equal with God,” expressly declare Christ’s equality with God. Indeed this passage, taken in this its obvious sense, so deci- sively proves the divinity of Christ, that those who deny that doctrine give a different meaning to one part of it, and assert that another part

is (h) Phil. c. 2. V. 6 — 11.

ABT. II.] Thirty -nine Articles. 113

is wrony translated ; they say, that ” being in the form of God,” refers to his bearing the resemblance of God, by his performance of miracles and delivery of a law in the name of God ; but this description would apply to Moses, who is never said to have been ” in the form of God.” And they further say, that the words, ” hethought it not robbery to be equal with God,” should be rendered, ” he did not catch at, or vehemently desire to be equal with God,” or, ” he did not think that he ought to make an ostentatious display of his resemblance to God (i)y Even if it be allowed that the ‘words themselves would bear these significations, hich I very much doubt, it would be found that “the context will not admit of any such inter- pretation ; for, in the first place, the verse thus understood would be made to refer to our Saviour when he was upon earth, whereas, “whoever reads the whole passage attentively, will perceive that this verse refers to Christ before he appeared in the likeness of men, since he could not make himself of no reputation, unless he had pre-existed in a state of superior dignity and ory. In the next place, according to this inter- pretation,

(i) Cyprian quotes this passage in exact agreement with our translation, Non rapinam arbitratus est esa^ se squalem Deo.

114 ExfMitian of the [pa rt ui.

pretatipn, the Apostle exhorts to humility from die exBBQiple of Christ, who while he ponned inifacles, and preached a religion in the name of ,God, did not aim at or affect equality with God, or make a display of his resemblance to him; that is, St. Paul calls upon the Philip- pians to have tl same mind which was in Christ Jus, who, being a mere man, did not make Inmself equal with God, or boast of his resem- blance to him ; the bare mention of such a sene of the text is sufficient to expose and refnte it But the reasoning, according to the common in terpretation, is clear and strong ; for the Apostle exhorts the Philippians to imitate the example of Christ’s humility, who though a divine per- son, voluntarily condescended to assume die lowest condition of human nature, and to sub- mit to a cruel and ignominious death. The latter part of the passage states, that in conse- quence, and as a reward, of his humiliati(m ’ God highly exalted hkn, and gave him a name which is above every name, that at the name or Jesus every knee should bow, of things in hea- ven, and things in earth, and things under the arth ; and that every tongue shouM confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” This exaltation of Christ, after his ascension into heaven, seems to indicate tbe

glorified

ART. II.] Thirty-mne A rticles. 115

glorified state of his human nature, just as his; appearance and sufil^rings upon esirth were thflf humiliation of his divine nature.

In the Old Testament the prophets constantly, declared, that they had received from God the prophecies which they delivered ; and it is ac- knowledge that none but God pan enable mea. to predict future evOTts. St. Petfer, in his, First Kpistle, represents Christ as enabling the pro- phets to foretel his own coming, with his suf- ferings, and the glory which was to succeed em : ” Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophe- sied of the grace that should come unto you * searching what, or what manner of time th irit of Christ which was in them, did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Qhrist, and .the gto.ry that should follow (k) :” this passage, threfipre, proves both the pre- idstence d divinity of Christ. The saipe p€3tle, in his other Epistle, attributes these prophecies to the influence of the Holy Ghost : ” r Prpphy * came not in old time by the will pf man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Jiply Ghost (1) And thus the pQwr of prophesying is ascribed indifferently to \ . ’ thp

(k) I Piet a. 1 • T. 10 wd 11. (I) a Pet. a. } . t. 21 .

ii6 RrpasUion of the [part in.

&e Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which denotes the incomprdiensible union of the diree persons of the Godhead, asserted in the former article.

The binning of the Epistle to the Hebrews win furnish another strong argument in &vour of the divinity of Christ We shall there find that Christ is not only preferred to the angels, but is described as a Being of a totaOy different order : ” Who being the britness of God’s ory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ; being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee ; or, Sit on my rit hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool? and again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son ; and again when he bringeth in the first-bom into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. And of the angels he saith. Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire ; but unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. And, thou, Lord in the beginning,

hast

AAT. ir.] Thirty-mne Articks. 117

hast laid the fpundation of the earth, and tha heavens are the work of thy hands.” It may be observed that St. Paul, in thus contrasting the nature of Christ with the nature of angels, calls Christ the Son of God, which, as we have already seen, was making him equal with God, according to the interpretation of the Jews, to whom this Episde was addressed. He also attributes to him the creation and preservation of the world, which is a clear assertion of his divinity ; and indeed he represents God the Father addressing Christ as the creator of the imiverse, and moreover as ex- pressly calling him God. This opposition is car- ried on through the whole second chapter, one passage of which plainly declares Christ’s ex- btence previous to his incarnation, and that he was not of the order of angels : ” He took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham.” Lest, however, this as- sertion of Christ’s being of the seed of Abraham should lead the Hebrews to think him a mere man, the Apostle immediately proceeds to point out, in the third chapter, the marked difference between him and Moses the legislator of the Jews, who was always considered by them as ^he greatest of their prophets ; he says, that Moses was faithful as a servant, Christ as a Son ; and that Christ was counted worthy of more glory

I 3 than

[…]

than Mose?, inasmuch as ^* he ^rho has builded the house hath more honour than the house;” that is, the difference between Christ and Mose9 b that which is between him who creates, and ’ Ae thing created ; and then having before ascribed file creation of the world to Christ, he adds, ” he that built all things is God.”

” Without controversy,” says St. Paul, “great h the mystery of Godliness : God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory (tn),” All thesi six propositions, of which God is the subject^ are true of Christ, and of no other person : hi was ” manifest in the flesh ;” Christ appeared upon earth in a human form, with the flesh and all other properties of a m^n, sin only excepted : •^-"" Justified in the Spirit ;” the visible descent of the Holy Ghost upon Christ at the time of his baptism ; the extraordinary powers which he then received and afterwards exercised ; and the performance of his promise by sending the Holy Gho8t to his apostles, and enabling them to work miracles, proved him to be the true Mes- siah, and justified those high pretensions which he asserted during his ministry : ” Seen of angels ; *’ angek worshipped Christ at his first

appearance (m) I Tim. c.3. v. 16.

[…]

appearance upon etirth, announped his birth tp -the shepherds, ministered to him in the defer% and strengthened him in hi3 last agony in th [furden: — ” Preached upto the Gentiles;” the doctrines taught by Christ to the Jws only, were by his command afterwards preached by his apostles to the Gentiles also, who were invited to. embrace the Gospel, thus declared to be the universal religion of all mankind: — Believed on in the world ; ” that many believed JestMi t be the true Messiah is a fact admitted by t ad indeed the rapid propagatiiop of the Qpspel 19 always urged by Christiuos as one of the many evidces by ivhich its divine origi is esta* bfehed: — ” Recved up. into gjory;” Chris having completed his ministry, and continued upon earth forty days after Us resurre(;.tion, was received up into glory by visibly ascending into heaven in the presence of his aposties. Since then these six propositions are applicable to Christ, and tq Christ alone, and since St. Paul affirms tdbem to be true of God, it follows that Christ is God, ” AH these propositions,” says bishop Pearson, ” panROt be understood of any otllTy whiph either is, or is called, God; for though we grant the divine perfections and attri- butes to be the same with the divine essence, yet are they never in the Scriptures called God, nor

I 4 can

1 20 Kvposition of the [part lit*

can any of them, with the least show of probabi^ lity, be pretended as the subject of these proposi- tions, or afford any tolerableinterpretation. When they tell us that God, that is, the will of God, was manifested in the flesh, that is, was revealed by frail and mortal men, and received up into glory, that is, was received gloriously on earth, they teach us a language which the Scriptures know not, and the Holy Ghost never used ; and as no attribute, so no person but the Son can be here understood under the name of God ; not the Holy Ghost, for he is distinguished from him, as being justified in the Spirit ; not the Father, who was not manifested in the flesh, nor received up into glory. It remaineth therefore, that whereas the Son is the only person to whom all these clearly and undoubtedly belong, which are here jointly attributed unto God, as sure as the name of God is universally fw^ expressed in

the

(n) It cannot be strictly said, that the word eto is found in all the MSS. Dr. Whitby says, that there are only two which want it; and even Wetstein, whose So- cinian principlen made him very anxious to controvert thin reading, acknowledges that the authority of MSS. is greatly in favour of the word eio? : after mentioning a very Tew MSS. which have ( or , instead of eio, he •ayM, Reliqui codices nostri (quibus J. Berriman addit ultra (uinquaginta alios)magno consensu habent Bm. With thin preponderance of testimony, admitted by a

•« professed

AKT. II.] Thifty-nine Articles. 121

tue copies of the original language, 80 thus absolutely and subjectively taken must it be understood of Christ.”

Our Saviour did not censure Thomas, when, upon being convinced of his resurrection, he exclaimed, ” My Lord and my God(o)” and therefore by allowing himself to be called God, he admitted that the name was justly applied to him ; and it may be observed, that the answer of our Saviour seems to annex a blessing to this belief of his divinity : ” Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed ; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” It cannot, I think, be said that this declaration of our Lord referred only to the belief in his resurrection, when we consider the words of Thomas, and the circumstances which passed after Christ’s resurrection. The incredulity of Thomas could not proceed from doubting the possibility of restoration to^ life, because he had

seen professed enemy so well versed in MSS. I cannot consider this as a doubtful text ; and whoever will take the trouble of reading Wetstein’s long and la- 1)Oured note upon this verse, will, I think, be con- vinced both of its purity, as it now stands in our Greek Testaments, and of its force in proving the divinity of our Saviour. Vide Mill and Whitby in loc. and Pearson, Art. 2.

(o) John^ c. 20. V. 28.

[…]

seen the dead raised by the power of Jesus ; but

he had been expressly told, that ” as the Fath^

hath life in himself, so hath he given the Son

to have life in himself (p) ; ” and he might

have considered this and similar declarations to

be so inconsistent with the death of Christ, as

to doubt whether he and the other disciples had

hot been deceived in their confidence in hiou

Certain it is that they were not prepared for the

event of hi^ crucifixion, although our Lord had

liepeatedly foretold it. When he was taken before

Pilate, ” they all forsook him and fled ; ” iua4

after his death we hear them expressing theitf

firm belief that ” Jesus of Nazareth was a mi^ty;

prophet in deed and w6rd before G od and di the

people;” but adding, with evident marks of the

disappointment occasioned by his death, ^’ But

we trusted that it had been he which should

have redeemed Israel (q).” Thomas themfYH>e^

who seems to have 4^termined (t)^ after ha^ng

i^eived so severe a disappointment, as he thought,

of tlie expectations he had formed concerning

the Son of God, not to yield his faith again but

to the most positive evidence, is no soon^ ooti-

vinced of the actual existence of his mast^ Jesus

Christ, than all his former confidence in his

assertions (p) John^ c. 5. V. 26.

(q) Luke, c. 24. v. 19 and ti.

(r) John, c. 20. v. 2£.

[…]

ussertions instantly rettinis, atid he exclaims, ’ My Lbrd and my God.” Our Lord does not reply, as wheh St. Peter made an acknowledgment of his belief in his divinity before his crucifixion, ” charging him to tell no man (s).” The time* of necessary conceahrtent was past ; dqd having since his resuiredtion reproved his disciples for the doubts they entertained, ” O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoketi ! Out not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory (t) ? ” and hav- ing ” expounded unto them, in aH the Scripture the things concerning himself,” according to his piomise to pe uhto them plainly upon a sub- ject abbot which they had etpressed so much eager curiosity, he soon after directs them M publish the ttuths he had declared, by ” teaching all nations CX’* and admitting them into his church by a form of baptism expressive of his Divinity, and ascds intoeaven as a demon- strative proof of what he had asserted.

[…]

Old Testament by the appellation of the ” First

^ and the Last,” as a title denoting eternity, and

exclusively belonging to himself : ” I am the First,

and I am the Last, and beside me there is no

God.”

(1) Matt. c. 16. V. 10. (t) Luke, c. 24 v. 25, 8lc. (u) Matt. c. 28. 1^. i&.

124 Exposition of the [part hi.

God (u). In the RevdatioDy Christ describes himself by the same title ; he says to St John, ” Fear not ; I am the’First and the Last (s) : ” — These things saith the First and the Last, .which was dead and is alive (y) : […] I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last (z) ; ” and, ” therefore,” says bishop Pearson, since Christ has so im- mediately, and with so great solemnity and fre- quency, taken the same style upon him, by which the Father did express his Godhead, it follows that he has declared himself to be the Supreme, Almighty, and Eternal God (a)”

And indeed ^^ all the names, the operations, and even the attributes of God, are in full and plain words given to Christ; he is caUed God (b)\ his blood is said to be the blood of God (c) ; God is said to have laid down his life for us (d) ,* Christ is called the true God (e); the great God (f) ; the Lord of Glory (g) ; the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords (h) ; and more particularly the name Jehovah is ascribed to him in the same word in which the seventy

interpreters

(u) Is. C.44. V.6. (x) Rev. c. 1. v. 17.

(y) Rev. c. 2. v. 8. (z) Rev. c. 22. v. 13.

(a) Art. 2. of the Creed, (b) Rom. e.g. v. 5.

(c) Acts, C.20. V. 28. (d) 1 John, c. 3. v. 16.

(e) 1 John, e.g. v. 20. (f) Titus, c, 2. v. 13.

(g) James, c. 2. v. 1. (h) Rev. c. 19. v. 16.

ART. II.] Thrtty-nine Articles. 1 15

interpreters had translated it throughout the whole

Old Testament, so that the constant uniformity

of style between the Greek of the New, and

that translation of the Old Testament, which

was then received, arid was of great authority

among the Jews, and was yet of more authority

among the iirst Christians, is an argument that

carries such a wei^t with it, that this alone

may serve to determine the matter. The creating,

the preserving, and the governing of all things,

is also ascribed to Christ in a variety of places,

but most remarkably when it is said, that by him

were all things created, that are in heaven, and

that are in earth, visible and invisible ; whether

ttiey be thrones or dominions, or principalities,

or powers, all things were created by him, and

for him ; and he is before all things, and by

him all things consist (i) ; he is said to have

known what was in man (k) ; to have known

teens secret thoughts, and to have known all

tilings ; that as the Father was known of none

t>ut of the Son, so none knew the Son, but the

Father (l)\ he pardons sin (m)^ sends the

Spirit (n)^ gives grace and eternal life, and he

shall

(i) Col. c. 1. v. 16 and 17. (k) John, c. 2. v. 25. (I) Matt. c. 1 1. V. 27. (m) Matt. c. 9. v. 6.

(n) , JoIm> c. 15. Vi 26

ia6 EjcjmUhn qf the [part hi.

sholl raise the dead at the last day (o). When all these things are laid together, in that varie^ of expressions in which they lie scattered in tue ^ew Testament, it is not possible to retain any reverence for those books, if we imagine that they are written in a style so full of s^proaches to the deifying of a mere man, that, without fi very criticai studying of languages and phrases, it is not possible to understand them other? wise. Idolatry, and a plurality of gods, seem to be the main things that the Scriptures warn us Against ; and yet here is a pursued thread of passages and discourses that do naturally lead a man to think that Christ is the true God, wlto yet, according to these men, only acted in his PMtie, and has now a high honour conferred on him by God (p)r

It will be acknowledged by all who believe ia jrevealed religion, that the one true Gpd is the only proper object of adoration ; and therefoiey if we Qn show that the New Testament autho rifies the wcurship of Christ, it will he a suffici proof of his divinity. A woman, whose idauj ter was grievously vexed with a devil, came ad worshipped Christ (q)\ and when the eleven

Aposdes

(o) John^ c. «4. V. 23.. c: 5. 25 v. and a6. c, 6. v. 38 and 40.

(p) Burnet. (q) Matt c 15. n. as.

ART, II.] Thirty^nine Articles. l%^

Apostles first saw hiip ftcr his resurrection, Ithey worshipped him (rj. Upon these, and jieveral other occasions, Christ permitted himself to be worshipped ; but whea the same worship was offered to Peter by Cornelius, he forbade it, *and assigned as a reason, that ’ be was a man (s) ;” and if Christ had been a mere map he would have refused the worship offered him upon the MXW principle. There is also a passage in the Revelation, which shows .that the worship spoken of in the New Testaznent, was not barely the prostration common in eastern coun- tries towards superiors, but a spedes of ado- ration which was due’ to God alone: Audi fl t his (that is the angels) feet to worship m : md he afiid mto imy See thou do it not : I am thy fellow servant, and of thy blrethnen that have the ttimony of Jesus; worship jQod f/)/’ And our Saviour hims said tp tan, whei he was tempted in the wilderness, Ioa shalt worship the )Lord thy God, and jhim only shalt thou serve (u).” Ad it is fur- *&ef to be observed, that the Aposdes worshipped Christ when he was no lopger present with -thm : ’ And it came to pjs, while he blessed 4ham, he was parted from them, and carried up

into

[…]

128 Erposition of the [part hi.

into heaven; and they worshipped hun, and returned to Jerasalem with great joy (s).” The worship therefore of Christ is justified by the ex- ample of the Apostles themselves, who thus wor- shipped him after his ascension. St. Paul declares that, ” at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth (yj ;” and St. John, in the account of his vision says, ” Every crea- ture which is in -heaven and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying. Blessing and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the ’ Lamb, for ever and ever (z).” — ” Here the two persons in the Godhead, the Father and the Son, are distinguished from each other, as they have distinct parts in the oeconomy of our salvation ; but the very same degree of religious worship, the same honour and glory, are in the same words ascribed, ^ unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb,’ the partner of his throne and dignity, to signify that their essence b the same, and that they worshipped and ^orified one and the same God, for ever

•

and

. (x) Luke, c. 24. 51 and 52. (y) Phil. c.2. v. 10. (x) Rev.c. fi. v, 13.

ART. II.] Thirty-nine Articles. 1 29

and ever equally divine and equally eter- nal (a).

Our blessed Saviour, when expiring upon the cross, cried out, ” Father, into thy hands I com- mend my spirit (b)\ and he had just before prayed for his murderers in these words, ” Father, forgive them; for th know not what they do (c)” In like manner the first martyr, St. Stephen, at the moment of his being stoned to death, prayed to Christ, ” Lord Jesus, receive my spirit;” and for his murderers he added, ” Lord, lay not this sin to their charge (d) These prayers of Christ, addressed to his Father, and of St Stephen, addressed to Christ, are in substance the same, and are recorded by the same evangelist, St. Luke. ” It seems very evident,” says bishop Burnet, ” that if Christ was not the true God, and equal to the Father, then this Proto-martyr died in two acts that seem not only idolatrous but also blasphemous, since he worshipped Christ in the same acts in which Christ had worshipped 1ms Father.” But to re move doubt concerning the lawfulness of St. Stephen’s worship of Christ, and to give decisive

authority

(a) Knowles’s Primitive Christianity.

(b) Luke, c. 23. v. 46.

(c) Luke, c. 23. V. 34.

(d) Acts, c. 7. V. 59 and 60.

130 Kvposition x>f the [part iir^

authority to his example, St. Luke tells us, that ” Stephen was full of the Holy Ghost fej.”

Paul ” besought the Lord f/),” that is, prayed to Christ, to remove a heavy affliction under which he laboured ; and that it was the general practice of the primitive Christians to pray to Christ, appears from the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which is addressed *^ to all that call upon the name of Christ ;” upon which pas- sage Origen observes, that ” by these words the apostle declares Christ to be God (g) ;” and’ in the Acts it is said, that Paul had authority from the chief priests to bind all “that called upon the name of Christ (h);’” to call upon the name of Christ was therefore the common description of the disciples of Christ in the apostolic age ; and this not only proves that the primitive Christians believed in the divinity of our Sa- viour, but it also aj:counts for the chai^ of blasphemy so frequently urged against them by the Jews in their early persecutions. The worship of Christ would naturally appear in that light to those who did not allow him to be the Messiah^ and who were zealous for the worship of the one true God ; and we learn from the early apologists for Christianity, that the Heathen objected to the

Christians,

(e) ^cts, c. 7. V. 55. (/) 2 Cor. c. 12. v. 8.

(S) Orig. in Rom. 10. B, 8. (h) Acts c. 9. v. 14.

ART. II.] Thirty-nine Articles. ^i

Christians, that they worshipped a crucified man, to which Minutius Felix answers, ” that they were mistaken ;” for that he whom they wor- shipped was God, and not a mere mortal man (i) ; and Tertullian, arguing against the same charge, says ” they worshipped Christ, because they knew him to be the trife natural Son of God by spiritual generation, and there- fore called God; and the Son of God, because he was of one and the same essence or substance: he was begotten of God in such a manner as to be God, and the Son of God, and they were both one (k),’^ We learn from Origen, that Celsus, in his book written against the Christians, ridiculed the idea of the wise men worshipping the infant Christ as God, and represented his flight into Egypt, and other circumstances of his life, as inconsistent with his being a God. ” He objects against us,” says* Origen, ” I know not how often, respecting Jesus, that we con- sider him as God, with a mortal body (ly Indeed the principal objection urged by Celsus against Christianity seems to have been the union of the divine and human natures in the person of Christ. In the parts of his work preserved by Origen, he repeatedly speaks of Christ as the

God

(i) Minut. Dial. p. 88. (k) Tert. Apol. caf . 2 1 . (I) Lib. 3. p. 135. ^

K 2

[…]

God of Christians, alludes to the account df his miraculous conception, observes that he is called the Word, says the place is shewe where Christ, ” who is worshipped by Chris- tians,” was bom, ridicules their inconsistency in blaming the worshippers of Jupiter, whose tomb wa# shewn in Crete, while they worship as God a man who was buried in Palestine. ” If these men,** says he, ” worshipped but one God, they might perhaps have reason to inveigh against others ; but now they act superstitiously towards him who lately appeared, and yet they think that God is not neglected, if his servant also be worshipped/’ He also represents the Christiasft as censuring the Jews for not admitting that Christ was God ; and he every where speaks of the divinity of Christ as the common doctrine of Christians, and the worship of him as their established practice (m) ; and surely such a tes- timony, coming from a professed enemy of the Gospel in the second century, and allowed to be a true statement by a Christian writer in the be- ginning of the third, must be considered as very valuable. Lucian, who was contemporary with Celsus, mentions also the worship of Christ, and in a manner which shews that it ^vas a thing not recently adopted: ” The Christians still ^ worshij>

(tn) Qrig. contra Cels* passim.

A RT, II.] Thirty-mne A rtkles. 133

urorship that great man who was crucified in Palestine (n) ;” and we learn from Socrates, the ecclesiastical historian, that the orator Libanius praised Porphyry and Julian for confuting the folly of a sect which styled a dead man of Pales- tine God, and the Son of God (0)” Amobius, in the year 303, represents the heathe%as saying to the Christians, ’ The gods are not angry with you because you worship the Almighty God, hut because you contend that he was God who was born a man, and, which is infemous even for vile persons, was crucified ; and because you believe that he is still living, and worship him with daily prayers ;” and again he says, ’ That the Christians do really worship Christ, but that it is from their indubitable knowledge that he is the true God ; and they are bound to worship him as the head of their body. And should a Geitile ask, Is Christ God ? •we answer. He is God, and God of the interior powers, that is, the searcher of hearts, which is the sole preroga- tive of God (py The otection urged against Christianity from the worship of Christ is fre- quently noticed by the writers of the first four centuries; and tfie defence uniformly made, is, that they worshipped Christ as God; and at the same time they constanUy assert the unity of

’ God.

[…]

K 3

134 Ejrposition of the [part hi.

God. There cannot be a more decisive proof that the early Christians believed in the divinity of our Saviour (q).

As the opinion of the primitive church is de- servedly considered as carrying great weight with it in this question, I shall add a few other autho- rities fromhe antient fathers. There is an Epistle extant which most learned men ascribe to Bar- nabas (r ), the companion of St. Paul, and all agree that it was written in the apostolic age. In this Epistle we have the following passages, which plainly imply a belief in the divinity of Christ : ” llie Lord submitted to suffer for our soul, although he be the Lord of the whole earth, to whom he said before the formation of the world. Let us make man after our image and liieness.” — For if he had not come in the flesh, how could we men have beets saved […] If then the Soif of God, who is Lord, and hereafter to judge the quick and dead, suffered’

that ((/) Vide Dr. Knowles’s Primitive Christianity, in which it is shewn, in the clearest and most satisfactory manncr, l)y a great variety of quotationfi from the wriiorn ofthe fitHt four centuries, th Jesus Christ was worhipp(d as Ood from the beginning of the Christian church. Vide also Bingham’s Ant. B. 13. c. 2.

(r) TluH Pipistle n the original Greek, and also an antiiiiiii Liitin version of it, which seems to have been iiiiidei from a purer text than that of our present copy, aril both publinhcd^in thiifirst volume of the Patres ApoitoUcii by Cotelerius.

ART. !!•] Thirty-nine Articles. 135

that he might make us alive, let us bebeve that the Son of God could not have suffered but through […] You are informed concerning the majesty of Christ, how all things were made for him and through him.” — Ignatius, another apostolical father, calls Christ ” of the race of David according to the flesh, the Son of God according to divinity and power, truly bom of a virgin — our God Jesus Christ — the Son of man, and the Son of God (s)^ These passages are all quot^ by Theodoret, A. D. 449, which

•

was nearly a century before any interpolation is suspected to have been made in the Epistles of Ignatius. ” We are not senseless,” says Tatian, ** nor trifle with you, O Greeks, when we declare that God was bom in the form of man (t)^ Irenaeus declares, that ” every knee should bow to Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, our Saviour and King, by the will of the inviyble Father (u)''' £usebius says, that the divinity of Christ was asserted in the. writings of Justin, Miltiades, Ta- tian, Clement, Irenceus, andMelito, all of whom lived in the second century, and by many others ; be also says that it was expressly declared in psalms and hymnt. of the earliest date ; and that

in

(s) Ignat. in Theod. Dial. Inpmqiutab. Vide Pearson, Vindic. Part. i.e. i.p. 10.

[…]

K4

136 Eajmitian of the [part hi.

in fact Theodotus, a tanner, in the second cen- tury, was the first person who asserted that Christ was a mere man, for which he was excommuni- cated by Victor (3^).

I shall conclude this subject with a quotation from Novatian, a writer of the third century ; ** Whereas it is the property of none but God to know the isecrets of the heart, and yet Christ knows what is in man; whereas it is in the power of none but God to forgive sins, yet Christ does forgive sins ; wherefis it is of no man to come down from heaven, and yet he descended from thence ; whereas no man could utter that saying, I and my Father are onCj and Christ alone, from a consciousness of his divinity, said it ; and whereas, finally, the apostle Thomas, furnished as he was with every proof of Christ’s divinity, said in an- swer to him, my Lord and my God ; whereas the apostle St. Paul writes in his Epistle, Whose are the father Sy and from whom according to the fleshy Christ cam^j who is over all^ God blessed for evermore; whereas the same apostle declares, that he was made such, not by men^ or through many hut through Jesus Christ ; whereas he contends that he learned the gospel not of men, but by Jesus Christ: upon all these accounts we must conclude

lhatChriatisGod(3^;.”

The (x) Euseb. H. E. lib. 5. cap. 28.

(y) Novat Lili. de Trin. cap. 13.

ABT. II.] 7%irtjf’nine Articles. 137

The importance of the doctrine of the Divi- nity of Christ, has induced me to be thus full in die explanation and proof of it. I now proceed with the Article, which in the next place states, that Christ took man’s nature

HER SUBSTANCE. Isaiah foretold that the Mes- siah should be bom of a virgin ! ’ A virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (z) ; ” and St. Matthew informs US, that when Mary was espoused unto Joseph before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost ; […] and that Joseph, knew not Mary until she had brought forth her first-bom Son, and he called his name Jesus (“flj.”-” When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a wo- man, made under the law (b).” The miraculous conception of Christ is asserted in the passage just now quoted from Ignatius, and it is also mentioned by the following writers, Justin Martyr (cj Ire- naeus (d)y Origen,(eJ, Cyril of Jerusalem (fX

Ambrose,

(z) Is. c. 7. y. 14.

(a) Matt. c. 1. V. 18 and 25. Luke, c. 1. v. 27—35.

(b) Gal. c. 4. V. 4.

(c) Dial. pars. 2. page 354.

(d) Lib. 3. cap. 29. page 258.

(e) In Matt. V. 1. P, 426 & contr. (do. P. 25.)

(f) Cat. 12. P. 166 & 164.

138 Ejcpositionofthc [part.iu.

[…]

It appears from, the History of Christ’s life and ministry, contained in the Goipels, that except his miraculous conception and his freedom from sin, he was in alj things, like unto man ; he was lm and grew up, like other infants ; . he mcreased in. wisdom as he increased in stature ; he was. siipr ported by the usual modes i nutrition, sq that his eifenieB observed .he ; came eating and dnnkiii he slept*;, he was subject to fatigue, hunger, apd. thirst ; he was in all things tempted, like men ; he wept; his soul was exceeding sorrowful ;; be suffered severe agony of mind, and at length expired upon the cross ; and even afi; his reswr rection he convinced his doubting disciples that he had flesh and bones. Forasmuqh then as the children, are partakers of flesh and Uood, he also himself likewise txx)k part of the sma(my […] In all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren (w.”—-” There is one medi- ator between .God and mep, the man. Christ Jesus (0).” The complete nature of man being thus assumed by the Eternal Word of God, it

follows

(g) V. 2, P. 59. (h) Inst. Lib. 4. cap. 12.

(i) De Trin. Lib. 16. (k) Hom* 25. V. 1. P. 507.

(I) ¥.4. P. 536. (m) Heb. c. 3. v. 14.

(n) Heb. c. 2. V. 17. (0) 1 Tim. c. 2. v. 5.

ART. II.] Thirty-mne Articles. 139

[…]

^EBFECT NATURES, THAT 18, THE GODHEAD

ONE PERSON. — ” What a person is,” says bishop Burnet, that results from a close conjunction of two natures, we can only judge of it byoon- sidering mail, in whom there is a material and spiritual nature joined together (j); they are two natures as different as any we can apprehend among all created beings, yet these make but one man. The matter of wMch the body is com- posed does not subsist by itsd is not imder all those lawa of motion to which it would b(t subject, if it were unanimated matter ; but bythe indwng and actuation of the soul, it has an* other spring within it, atid has another course of operations; accoitting to this then, to subsist by another, is, when a being is actingaccording to its natural properties, but yet in a. constant dependence upon another being, so our bodies subsist by the subsisttence of our souls ; this may help us to apprehend how, that as the body is still a body, imd operates as a body, thou it subsist by the indwelling and actuation

of

(p) This mode of explanation, adopted by bishop Burnet, was also used by antient writers, ^icut in ho- mine aliud caro, aliud anima; sedunus idemque homo anima et caro. Ita in uno eodemque Christo duffi sub- stantias sunt, sed una divina, altera humana. Vine.

140 Exposition of the [paet iil

of the soul ; so in the person of Jesus Christ the human nature was entire, and still acted according to its own character, yet there was such an union and inhabitation of the Eternal Word in it, that there did arise out of that a communication of names and characters, as we find in the Scriptures. A man id called tall, &ir, and healthy, from the state of his body, and learned, wise, and good, from the qualities of his mind ; so Christ is called holy, hannless, and undefiled, is said to have died, risen, and ascended up into heaven with relation to )iis human nature ; he is also said to be in the fibrm of God, to hav^ created all things, to be the brightness of his father’s glory, and the express image of his person, with relation to his divine nature. The ideas that we have of what is mate- rial, and what is spiritual, lead us to distinguish in a man those descriptions that belong to his body from those that belong to his mind ; so the different apprehensions that we have, of what is created and uncreated, must be our thread to guide us into the resolution of those various ex- pressions that occur in the Scriptures concerning

Christ.”

This consideration, indeed, of the union of the two natures, divine and human, in Christ, can alone enable us to reconcile many passages in

6 thQ

ART. II.] Thirty-nine Articles. 141

the New Testament, which are apparently con- tradictory. Christ is said to have existed before Abraham, and yet to have been of the seed of Abraham ; he is called the Lord of David, and also his son or descendant ; he is said to know all things, and yet not to know when the day of judgment will be; Christ says, My Father is greater than I; and again. My Father and I are one ; at one time he is said to have been compassed with infirmity; and at another he himself declares. All power is ven me in heaven and in earth ; upon one occasion he is said to have been made a little lower than the angels ; and upon another, thai all the angels of God worship him : these and many other pas- sages of a similar kind, become perfectly con- sistent and intelligible, by referring them respec- tively to the divine and human fiatures of Christ. The essential properties of one nature were not communicated to the other nature: Christ was at once Son of God, and Son of man ; he was at the same time both mortal and eter- ni; mortal as the son of man, in respect of his humanity ; eternal as the Son of God, in respect of his divinity : each kept his respective properties distinct, without the least confusion in their most intimate union. On person was formed by these two natures, ajs the council of Chalcedon expresses it, ariiyMm arpiiTTw?,

142 JEjjiosHum of the [fart in,

[…]

Christ has ascended up into heaven, and is tiiere to remain ” until the times of restitution of all things […] he ever liveth to make inter- cession for us (r) :” — and is ” ordained of God to judge the quick and dead (sf at the last day : he is represented as ” highly exalted (t)y’* and as ” crowned with glory and honour for the suf- ferings of death (u) ;” and there is no ground tt) suppose he will ever be deprived of these rewards, but on the contrary, ” blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, are to be given to the Lamb for ever and ever (s).” And indeed is it reason- able that the personal glory of Christ should cease, when the happiness which he purchased for fallen man by his incarnation and passion is to be eternal ? Upon these grounds the article asserts, that the two natures, the god- head AND MANHOOD, W«EREOF IS ONE

Godhead and manhood of Christ having been both proved, it follows that he was very (GOd AND very man.

That the Messiah was to suffer was foretold in a variety of passages in the Old Testament :

” It

(q) AcU, c. 3. V. 21. (r) Heb. c. 7, v. 25.

($) ActH, c. 10. V. 42. (t) Phil. c. 2. V. 9. (u) Hcb. c. 2. V. 9. (x) Rev. c. 5. v. 13.

ART. II.] Thirty-nine Articles. 143

” It was written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things (y) ;” and ” the S^nrit of God, which was in the prophets, testified before- hand the sufferings of Christ (z) ;” he was to be ” a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; oppressed and afBicted ; wounded and bruised ; brought to the slaughter, and cut off out of the land of the living (a).”^ TTie suflfering of Christ was also typified in the sacrifices of the law, and particularly in the passover. Our Saviour him- self forewarned his disciples of his passion, and St. Paul preached to the Thessalonians, that ” Christ must lieeds have suffered (b),” — ” If hunger and thirst, if reviiings and contempt, if sorrows and agonies, if stripes and buffetings, if condemnation and crucifixion, be. sufferings^ Jesus suffered ; if the infirmities of our nature, if the weight of our sins, if the malice of man, if the machinations of Satan, if the hand of God, could make him suffer, our Saviour suffered ; if the annals of times, if the writings of his apostles, if the death of his martyts, if the confession of the Gentiles, if the scoffs of the Jews be testimo- nies, Jesus suffered (c) […] and therefore those things which God before had shewed by the

motith

(j/) Mark,c. 9. v. 12. (z) 1 Pet. c. l. v. 11.

(a) Is. c. 53. (b) Acts, c. 17. V. 3,

(c) Pearson, Art. 4.

1 44 Expositiofi of the [f a RT 1 1 r ^

mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath fulfilled (d)r

And as Christ truly suffered, so likewise he was crucified and dead. The particular mode of Christ s death was predicted by Zacha- riah, ” They shall look upon me whom they have pierced (e)y’ and again by David, ” they pierced my hands and my feet (f) ;” alluding to the practice of nailing to the cross the hands and the feet of the person crucified. Christ himself also intimated by what death he should die, and at the same time referred to a type of it in the Old Testament : ” As Moses lifted up the ser- pent in tlie wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up (g)” The crucifixion of Jesus is related by all the Evangelists ; and the incre- dulity of Thomas, recorded by St. John, af- forded an oj^portunity of shewing that the pro- phecies of Zachariah and David were literally fulfilled (h). That Jesus really expired upon the cross was evident both to his faithful friends, who out of regard to their Lord and Master were present at his cruci^ion, and also to his imj)lacable enemies, who fancied that they thus saw the accomplishment of their wicked purpose. And even the Roman soldiers, who

probably

(d) Acts, c. 3. V. 18. (e) Zach. c. 12. v. io»

(f ) Psalm 22. V.17. (g) John, c. 3. v. 14.

(h) John, c. 20. y. 27.

ART. ii.y Thirty-nine Articles. 145

probably felt little either of afiection, or of ma- lice, seeing him already dead, forbore to break his legs ; but ” one of these soldiers with a spear pierced his side^ and forthwith came thereout blood and water (nX’* which is a known sign of actual death in human bodies.

The mention of the grave of the Messiah in the following passage of Isaiah, may be con- sidered as a prediction that he was to be buried : * ’ He was cut off out of the land of the living ; and he made his grave with the 4vicked, and -with the rich in his death (0).” And not only the burial of the Messiah, but the time he was to remain interred, was typified in the. person of Jonas, ^’ for as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (p)” It was the cus- tom of the jR^omans, by whose authority our Saviour was put to death, not to allow the bodies of those who were crucified to be taken from the cross and buried; they were left to putrefy, or to be devoured by the fowls of the air. But it was in the power of the magistrate to dispense with this custom ; and accordingly we find that ” when the even was come, th^re

came

’ (n) John, c. 19. v. 34. (0) Is. c. 53. v. 8 & 9. O^ Matt. c. 12, 7.40.

VOL. ir. T.

146 Expasitum of the [part hi.

came a rich man of Arimathea, named Jos^h, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple : he went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate c(Hnmanded the body to be delivered. And when Josq)h had taken the body, he wrap« ped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock : and he rolled a great stone to the door of the se* pulchre, and departed (q) : ” and thus it appears that Christ was buried.

The article concludes widi stating, that the ob- ject of Christ’s passion was to reconcile the

FOR ACTUAL SINS OF MEN. By original guilt is meant that guilt which was incurred by die disobedience of Adam, and transmitted to all his posterity ; and by acttial sins of jnen are meant those sins which individuals actually comaiit^ ’^ for there is no man that sinneth not f r^.” I shall transcrU)e bishop Burnet’s excellent expla- nation and proof of this part of the article, to which it will be unnecessary to make any addi- tion: ” The notion of ml expiatory sacrifice which was then, when the New Testament was written, well understood all the world over, both by Jew and Gentile, was this, that the sin of

one

(q) Matt. c. 27. V. 57—60. (r) 1 Kings, e. 8. v. 46.

ART. II.] Thirty-mm Artkks. I47

one person wad transferred on a man or beast, who was upon that devoted, and offered up to God, and suffered in the room of the offending person ; and by this oblation the punishment of the sin being laid on the sacrifice, an expiation was made for sin^ and the sinner was believed to be reconciled to God. This, as appears through the whole book of Leviticus, was the design and effect of the sin and trespass offerings among the JewB, and more particularly of the goat that was offered up for the sins of the whole people on the day of atonement This was a piece of religion well known both to Jew and Gentile, that had a great many phrases belonging to it, such as the sacrifices being offered for, or instead of sin, and in the name, or pn the account, of the sinner; its bearing of sin, and becoming sin, or the sin- offering; its being the reconciliation, the atone^ ment, and the redemption of the sinner, by which the sin was no more imputed, but forgiven, and for which the sinner was accepted. When, there- fore, Ais whole set of phrases in its utmost ex- tent, is very often, and in a great variety, ap- plied to the death of Christ, it is not possible for Hs to pres^ve any reveroice for the New Testa- ment, or the writers of it, so far as to think them even honest men, not to say inspired men, if we can imagine that in so sacred and important a

L 2 matter

148 Erposition of the [partiii.

matter they could exceed so much as to repre- sent that to be our sacrifice which is not truly so : this is a point which will not bear figures and amplifications ; it must be treated of strictly, and with a just exactness of expression. Christ is called ^ the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world (s) ; ’ he is said to have

• borne our sins in his own body (t)\ to have been * made sin for us (u) ; ’ it is said that ^ he gave his life a ransom for many (x) ; ’ that

• he was the propitiation for the sins of the whole M orld (y) ; ’ and that ’ we have redemp- tion through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins (z) ; ’ it is said, that ’ he has reconciled us to his Father in his cross, and in the body of his flesh through death (a) ; ’ that ’ he, by his own blood, entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us (b);’ that

• once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself (c) ;’ that ^ he was once offered to bear the sins of many (d) ; ’ that ’ we are sanctified by the of- fering of the body of Christ, once for all (e) ; ’

and

($) John, c. 1. V. 29. (t) 1 Pet. c. 2. v. 24.

(u) 2 Cor. c. 5. V. 21 . (x) Matt. c. 20. v. 28.

(y) 1 John, c. 2. v. 2. (z) Col. c. 1. v. 14.

(a) Col. c. 1 . V. 20, &c. (b) Heb. c. 9. v. 12.

(c) Heb- c. 9. V. 26. (d) Heb. c. 9. v. 28. (e) H«b. c. 10. V. 10.

AKT. II.] Thirty-mne Articles. 149

and that ’ after he had offered one sacrifice for sin, he sat down for ever on the right hand of God (fy It is said, that * we enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, that b, the blood of the new covenant, by which we are sancti- fied (g) ;* that * he hath sanctified the people with his own blood (h) ;’ and was * the great shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the everlasting covenant ft J;’ that * we are re- deemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot (k) ; and that ’ Christ suffered once for sin, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God (ly In these, and in a great many more passages that lie spread in all the parts of the New Testament, it is as plain as words can make any thing, that the death of Christ is proposed to 1^ as our sacrifice and reconciliation, our atone- ment and redemption. So it is not possible for any man, who considers all this, to imagine that Christ’s death was only a confirmation of his Gospel, a pattern of a holy and patient suffering of death, and a necessary preparation to his re- surrection, by which he gave us a clear proof of a resurrection, and by consequence of eternal life,

as

(f) Heb. c. 10. V. 12- (g) Heb. c. 10. v. 19.

(h) Heb. c. 13. V. 12. (i) Heb. c. 13. v. 20.

(k) 1 Pet c. 1. V. 19. (I) 1 Pet. c. 3. v. 18.

L 3

150 Exposition of the [paut hi*

as by his doctrine he had shewed us the way to it. By this all the high commendations of his death amount only to this, that he by dying has given a vast credit and authority to his Gospel, which was the powerfiillest mean possible to re- deem us from sin, and to reconcile us to God ; but this is so contrary to the whole design of the New Testament, and to the true import of th^t great variety of phrases in which this matter is set out, that at this rate of expounding Scrip- ture we can never know what we may build upon, especially when the great importance of this thing, and of our having right notions concerning it, is well considered. St. Paul does, in his Epistle to the Romans, state an opposition between the death of Christ and the sin of Adam, the ill effects of the one being removed by the other ; but he plainly carries the death of Christ much farther, than that it had only healed the wound that was given by Adam’s i§in ; for as * the judgment was by one to con- demnation, the free ^ft is of many offences to justification (m).^ But in the other places of the New Testament Christ’s death is set forth so fully as a propitiation for the sins of the whole , world, that it is a very false way of arguing to infer, that because in one place that is set in

opposition

(m) Rom. c. 5, v. 16.

ART. II.] ITdrbf-mne Articles. 151

opposition to Adam’s sin, that therefore the virtae of it was to go no fBurther than to take away that sin; it has, indeed, removed that, but it Ims done a great deal more besides.

’ Thus it is plain that Christ’s death was our sacrifice; the meaning of which is this, that God intending to reconcfle the world to himself, and to encoun sinn to repent and turn to him, thought fit to offer the pardon of sin, together with the other blessings of his Qospel, in such a way as should demonstrate both the guilt of sin and his hatred of it ; and yet with that, his love of sinners, and his compassion towards diem. A free pardon, without a sacrifice, had not been so agreeable dther to tfie majesty of the Great Governor of the wwld, nor the authority of his laws, nor so proper a method to oblige men to diat strictness and holiness of life that he de* signed to bring them to; and therefore he thought fit to offer his pardon, and those other blessings, through a Mediator, who was to deliver to the world this new and holy rule of life, and to confirm it by his own unblemished life : and in conclusion, when the rage of wicked men, who hated him for the holiness both of his life and of his doctrine, did work them up into such a fury as to pursue him to a most violent and ignominious death, he, in compliance with the

L 4 secret

151 EajMsitian of the [part irr-

secret design of his Father, did not . only go through the dismal series of sufferings, with the most entire resignation to his Father’s will, and with the highest charity possible towards those who were his most unjust and malicious mur- derers ; but he at the same time underwent great agonies in his mind, which struck him with such an amazement and sorrow even to the death, that upon it he did sweat great drops of blood, and on the cross he felt a withdrawing of those comforts that till then had ever supported him, when he cried out, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me ? It is not easy for us to apprehend in what that agony consisted, for w^ understand only the agonies of pain or of con- science, which last arise out of the horrors of guilt, or the apprehension of the wrath of God. It is, indeed, certain, that he who had no sin could have no such horror in him ; and yet it is as certain that he could not be put into such an agony only through the apprehension and fear of that violent death which he was to suffer next day ; therefore we ought to conclude that there was an inward suffering in his mind, as well as an outward visible one in his body: we cannot distinctly apprehend what that was, since he was sure of his own spotless innocence, and of his Father’s unchangeable love to him. We can only imagine a vast sense of the heinousness of

sm»

AUT. II.] Thirty-nine Articles. 153

sin, and a deep indignation at. the dishonour done to God by it ; a melting apprehension at the . corruption and miseries of mankind by reason of sin, together with a never-before felt withdraw- ing of those consolations that had always filled his soul ; but what might be farther in his agony and in his last dereliction, we cannot dis- tinctly apprehend ; only this we perceive, that our minds are capable of great pain as well as our bodies are : deep horror, with an inconsolable sharpness of thought, is a very intolerable thing. Notwithstanding the bodily or substantial in- dwelling of the fuhiess of the Godhead in him, yet he was capable of feeling vast pain in his body ; so that he might become a complete sa- crifice, and that we might have from his suffer- ings a very full and ama^ng apprehension of the guilt of sin ; all those emanations of joy with which the indwelling of the Eternal Word had ever till then filled his soul, might then, when he needed them most, be quite withdrawn, and he be left merely to the firmness of his faith, to the patient resignation to the will of his heavenly Father, and to his willing readiness of drinking up that cup which his Father had put in his hand to drink.

. ” There remains but one thing to be remem- bered here, though it will come to be more

specially

154 Ejppositicn of the [part hi.

specially explained when other articles are to be opened ; which is, that this reconciliation, which is made by the death of Christ between God and man, is not absolute and without conditions. He has established the covenant, and has performed all that was incmnbent on him, as both the priest and the sacrifice, to do and to suffer ; and he ofiers this to the world, that it may be closed with by them on the terms on which it is pro- posed ; and if they do not accept of it upon these conditions, and perform what is enjoined them, they ean have no share in it (n).^^

(n) Burnet.

ART. III.] Thirty-fiint Articles. 1 55